top of page

GOVERNANCE AT HERA

HERA Rankings are governed by written rules, separated functions and a public appeals process. This page explains who decides what, how data is checked, and how to challenge a result. Driven by the core five principles:

​

  • Independence: rankings are separated from every paid service.

  • Transparency: methodology, changes and corrections are published.

  • Integrity: every submission is verified the same way.

  • Fairness: one methodology, applied equally to all.

  • Accountability: decisions can be reviewed and appealed.

The Governance Structure

Ranking work is carried out by separate functions, each with a defined remit. Paid Advisory sits outside an information barrier.

​

  • Governing Body:  Sets HERA's policies, budget and strategy, and approves methodology changes. It cannot see, request or change any institution's score before publication.

​

  • Methodology Committee: Owns the indicators, weights and calculations for each ranking. Members are chosen for expertise in higher education research, statistics and institutional data, and may not work for HERA Advisory.

​

  • Data Validation Team: Checks every submission against evidence and public sources, using the same checks for every institution.

​

  • Scoring and Publication: Calculates results with the published methodology and releases them on announced dates.

​

  • Appeals Review Panel: Hears appeals. Its members had no part in scoring the institution concerned.

​

  • Rankings Integrity function: Runs conflict-of-interest declarations, records step-asides, handles complaints and checks compliance with the Independence Policy. It reports to the governing body, never to Advisory.

​

  • HERA Advisory: Paid services, run separately behind an information barrier.

Governance Pillars

Methodology Governance

  • Each cycle's methodology is published on the Rankings page at least four weeks before submissions open.

  • Changes are announced with reasons before the cycle they affect. The methodology never changes during an open cycle.

  • Earlier versions stay available on the Rankings page.

​

Data Governance

  • Data comes from institutional submissions, surveys and public sources.

  • An authorised representative signs a data-accuracy declaration with every submission.

  • HERA may request evidence, correct clear errors after consulting the institution, or exclude data it cannot verify.

  • Deliberately false data leads to exclusion from the cycle and a public note.

​

Conflicts of Interest

  • Everyone working on methodology, validation, scoring or appeals files a declaration each year and before each cycle.

  • No one scores or reviews an institution they work for or advise commercially.

  • Gifts or hospitality from ranked institutions are declined, apart from items of token value, and recorded.

  • Rules for paid services are set out in the Rankings Independence Policy.

​

Operational Governance

How HERA is funded

HERA's income comes from HERA Advisory, events and sponsorship, HERA Nexus memberships, Student Services and, where applicable, ranking participation fees. Ranking positions, scores and publication are never sold.

​

Appealing results and Corrections

  1. Appeal: Within 30 days of publication, on grounds of a calculation or data-processing error.

  2. Decision: The Appeals Review Panel replies with reasons within 30 days.

  3. Correction: Confirmed errors are fixed and logged on the Rankings page with the date and change.

 

Raising a concern

Email integrity@hera-global.org; reports can be anonymous. HERA takes no action against anyone who raises a concern in good faith.

​

Data protection

Personal and institutional data are handled under HERA's Privacy Policy.

bottom of page