NAAC assessment covers seven criteria: curricular aspects, teaching-learning and evaluation, research and extension, infrastructure, student support and progression, governance and leadership, and institutional values. Institutions lose marks most often on documentation gaps rather than on quality.
The NAAC framework is revised periodically and the manual differs by institution type. Verify against the current manual for your category before acting on any checklist.
The month before a NAAC visit is spent assembling data. The year before is when the score is actually decided, because most of what is assessed cannot be created retrospectively — feedback that was never collected, research that was never recorded, progression data that was never captured.
Weightings differ between universities, autonomous colleges and affiliated colleges, so check the manual for your category.
| Criterion | Broadly covers | What has to exist year-round |
|---|---|---|
| I — Curricular aspects | Curriculum design, delivery and feedback | Feedback collected on a schedule, with response rates |
| II — Teaching-learning | Student diversity, teaching methods, evaluation, outcomes | Enrolment by category, results, attainment data |
| III — Research & extension | Publications, projects, consultancy, outreach | Research entered against faculty as published |
| IV — Infrastructure | Physical facilities, library, IT, maintenance | Asset records and utilisation, not a one-time inventory |
| V — Student support | Scholarships, guidance, placement, progression, alumni | Progression and placement captured at graduation |
| VI — Governance | Leadership, strategy, faculty development, finance | Minutes, appraisals, audited accounts |
| VII — Institutional values | Inclusion, environment, best practices | Documented practice, not a statement written for the visit |
Not on teaching quality, which is hard to move quickly. On documentation: numbers that do not reconcile between criteria, claims without supporting records, and feedback with a response rate low enough that an assessor discounts it.
The most common single failure is enrolment reported differently in two criteria, because one was taken from the registrar’s roll and the other from accounts. That is a data-consistency problem the institution can fix in a week if it notices, and cannot explain away if it does not.
In order. Each step assumes the one before it is finished.
Phrased the way they arrive, answered so each one stands on its own.
Curricular aspects; teaching-learning and evaluation; research, innovation and extension; infrastructure and learning resources; student support and progression; governance, leadership and management; and institutional values and best practices. Weightings vary by institution type.
A year, because most metrics cannot be created retrospectively. Feedback, research records and progression data have to have been collected at the time to be credible.
It can make your data accurate, consistent and available, which removes a common source of avoidable loss. It cannot improve what the data shows, and any vendor promising a grade should be treated with suspicion.
Checked by the Implementations desk on 1 September 2026. Corrections go in the page, dated, rather than quietly.
Pricing is on the page, in the open, with the counting rule written next to it. Nobody has to book a call to find out what it costs.
See pricingForty minutes with an implementation engineer — your classes, your fee heads, your grading scheme, entered as we go. No slides, no sample school.