STATUTE AND THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE INTERNATIONAL
EVALUATION PANEL
PART I
Introductory Provisions
Article 1
The International Evaluation Panel is set up for the purpose of evaluation of Masaryk University
(hereinafter referred as „MU“ or “University”) in the M3-M5 modules according to the document The
Methodology for Evaluating Research Organisations in the universities segment which is Annex 5 of
the Methodology for Evaluating Research Organisations and Research, Development and Innovation
Purpose-tied Aid Programmes.
PART II
Statute of the International Evaluation Panel
Article 2
Subject of activities of the International Evaluation Panel
(1) The International Evaluation Panel (hereinafter referred as “IEP” or “Panel”) evaluates a selfevaluation
report of a university submitted in accordance with the Methodology for Evaluating
Research Organisations in the university segment which is Annex 5 of the Methodology for
Evaluating Research Organisations and Research, Development and Innovation Purpose-tied Aid
Programmes. Alternatively, IEP evaluates the other documentation requested by IEP or by the
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (hereinafter referred as “MEYS” or “Ministry”) as a
provider of the institutional support for long-term conceptual development of universities.
(2) The IEP provides an objective and impartial assessment of the self-evaluation report and other
submitted documentation.
(3) Furthermore, the IEP, on request of the MEYS or MU, gives an ad hoc commentary on some
questions that may arise during the evaluation.
Article 3
Composition of the International Evaluation Panel
(1) The IEP members are appointed and removed by the Rector of MU. The MEYS nominates one
member of the IEP. The other members are nominated by MU so that they are external generally
recognized professional experts in the respective Fields of Research and Development
(hereinafter referred as “FORD”) relevant to MU.
(2) The IEP consists of a chairperson and 6 other members at least. An absolute majority of the
members (hereinafter referred as “evaluators”) must be composed of foreign experts. While
following this principle, the number of evaluators may be changed as needed during the evaluation
process, but it is not allowed to drop below 7 (including the chairperson and a representative of the
MEYS).
(3) A secretary is assigned to the panel by MU. The secretary does not vote or participate in the
evaluation.
(4) A sole IEP is established for MU; the size and heterogeneity of faculties or fields could be taken
into consideration by appointing a higher number of IEP members.
(5) The professional qualities and impartiality of the nominated voting evaluators will be assessed by
the Results Evaluation Commission (hereinafter referred as “REC”) on the basis of their
professional CVs. The REC, as an advisory body to the Research, Development and Innovation
Council coordinating research evaluation, submits its comments on the composition of the IEP to
the Ministry. This statement has a non-binding, recommending character. The MEYS may request
changes in the composition of the IEP in justified cases.
(6) The IEP membership terminates by resignation, removal or death of the evaluator. The Rector of
MU can remove the evaluator due to a conflict of interest or for other serious reasons which need
to be justified and agreed with the MEYS.
(7) The IEP takes no account of the evaluator´s assessment if the evaluator has any verifiable conflict
of interest during the evaluation.
(8) If, during the evaluation process, membership is terminated in accordance with Article 3 (6) by one
or more IEP members and the number of IEP members falls below a minimum number as laid
down in Article 3 (2), the IEP will be supplemented according to the proposal of Rector in
accordance with the Article 3 (1) with the possibility of additional verification of qualitative and
other assumptions in accordance with Article 3 (5). The evaluation of results made by IEP member
appointed in this manner will be valid only after this verification.
Article 4
Rights and Obligations of the International Evaluation Panel Members
(1) The evaluators are obliged to carry out activities in the IEP personally, independently and in
their own name to express their professional opinion.
(2) The IEP membership is irreplaceable.
(3) The evaluator must not be in conflict of interest in relation to MU and must not have a personal
interest in the outcome of the evaluation. The criteria for avoidance of conflict of interests of
the evaluators are set out in the document “International Evaluation Panel Member Form”
prepared by the Ministry. The evaluators confirm the absence of a conflict of interest by
signing this form. The member of IEP may also be a member of the permanent expert
advisory body of the University (for example International Scientific Advisory Board)
(4) The evaluators are obliged to maintain confidentiality of all facts they become acquainted with
during their IEP membership and not to allow third parties to become acquainted with the data
and information thus obtained.
(5) The financial remuneration for work in the IEP belongs to the evaluator who is not a
representative of the MEYS. The financial remuneration is based on an agreement held
outside the employment (or other legal form used for similar purposes concluded between the
evaluator and the University).
(6) The evaluators are entitled to reimbursement of travel expenses incurred in connection with
their activities in the IEP. The provision of travel expenses is governed by the internal
regulation of MU.
(7) The MEYS representative does not vote and does not participate directly in the evaluation.
The MEYS representative arranges communication between the IEP and the MEYS and
provides an interpretation of potential uncertainties in relation to The Methodology for
Evaluating Research Organisations in the universities segment.
Article 5
Organization of the International Evaluation Panel Activities
(1) The chairperson manages the activities of the IEP. The chairperson is appointed and removed
by Rector of the MU.
(2) The secretary provides the preparation and distribution of documents and other organizational
matters.
(3) The MU administratively ensures the IEP activities including the establishment and operation
of an adequate electronic information system or structured email communication for the
purposes of the evaluation.
Article 6
Evaluation Procedure of Universities in Modules M3-M5
(1) All evaluators are acquainted with all the supporting documentation submitted to the IEP for
the evaluation. They inform University about the eligibility of all documentation or ask them
(with appropriate justification) for completion, if necessary.
(2) The IEP chairperson calls for completion of the self-evaluation report as appropriate.
(3) The IEP members use the document “The Methodology for Evaluating Research
Organisations in the university segment which is Annex 5 of the Methodology for Evaluating
Research Organisations and Research, Development and Innovation Purpose-tied Aid
Programmes” individually as needed.
(4) The result of the IEP´s work is an approved evaluation report on the university.
Article 7
International Evaluation Panel on-site Visit
(1) At least one IEP on-site visit at MU is an essential part of the evaluation.
PART III
Rules of Procedure of the International Evaluation Panel
Article 8
Preparation of the International Evaluation Panel Proceeding
(1) The IEP may act accordingly personally or with the exception of the on-site visit at the
particular university also via electronic mail or via other kind of remote communication
(hereinafter referred as "per rollam").
(2) The IEP Chairman may arrange the IEP meeting through the secretary at least 30 working
days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
(3) The written documents for the meetings are available in the electronic information system
established for the evaluation purpose or sent out by electronic mail at least 20 working days
before the date of the meeting.
Article 9
Rules for the International Evaluation Panel Proceeding
(1) The chairperson or the evaluator authorized by the chairperson leads the IEP meeting.
(2) The meetings of the IEP are confidential and may be attended only by the IEP members
and the secretary and guests invited by the chairperson of IEP.
(3) The IEP has a quorum in meetings if an absolute majority of voting members is present at
the meeting.
(4) The decisions of IEP are made by voting; an approval of an absolute majority of the present
members is required to adopt the resolution. In case of equal votes, the chairperson´s vote
will decide.
(5) The secretary or authorized evaluator takes the minutes of the meetings, including the
results of voting and attendance list signed by the members. The minutes are approved by
the chairperson or by the authorised person who conducted the meeting. The minutes are
then archived.
(6) If the evaluator has participated in scientific cooperation at least five times in the last five
years or has co-authored the outputs or results MU, it is his / her duty to inform the
chairperson of IEP who will also inform the rector. The Rector of MU will terminate the
membership of the evaluator due to a conflict of interest in accordance with the Article 3 (6).
(7) In case of per rollam vote of IEP the secretary circulates the relevant documentation and
the standpoint draft electronically to all evaluators stating the date by which they should
send their comments or votes by e-mail to the secretary and the chairperson of the IEP. The
deadline must be at least 10 working days. A standpoint draft of IEP is approved per rollam
if more than half of IEP voting members agree within the deadline. The conclusion of per
rollam vote is recorded and submitted without undue delay for signature to the chairperson
or authorized IEP member. The secretary will send thus approved minutes to all evaluators
by e-mail until 3 working days after the signature at the latest and minutes will be archived.