Assuring Quality at the University

The University adopts the P-D-C-A (Plan-Do-Check-Act) logic, also known as the Deming Cycle, to optimize processes and develop effective activities. This approach is structured into four fundamental phases:

• Plan (Planning): Clearly defining the objectives to be achieved, starting from student needs and in alignment with the five priority areas of the Strategic Plan: teaching, research, social impact, well-being, and environment.
• Do (Implementation): Executing the planned activities through meticulous design and process management based on the principles of sustainability, inclusion, and accountability.
• Check (Monitoring): Rigorously verifying the results obtained by benchmarking them against preset targets and analyzing data collected through the University’s various digital dashboards.
• Act (Review and Improvement): Adopting the necessary corrective and enhancement measures to stabilize new performance levels and to inform the subsequent programming cycle.

In every phase, the University closely monitors the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) defined by the MUR (Ministry of University and Research), ANVUR, and the University itself. The Deming Cycle represents the logical framework for self-evaluation and review followed across all organizational levels (Governance, Departments, Schools, Degree Programmes, and Ph.D. Programmes) to ensure the suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness of all institutional activities.

The University is led by a governance system comprising the rector, the vice-rectors, and the delegates. Together, they define policies and strategies through a three-year Strategic Plan.

This Plan is the result of a participatory process that integrates contributions from the political leadership, administrative management areas, and Departments. It incorporates context and positioning analyses, alongside the needs and priorities identified during consultations with relevant stakeholders.

• Plan (Planning): The Strategic Plan identifies objectives, performance indicators, and expected targets, allocating the necessary resources for their achievement. These strategic goals are subsequently operationalized through the Integrated Activity and Organization Plan (PIAO) and within Departmental Development Plans.
• Do (Implementation): Significant emphasis is placed on the quality of internal regulations to ensure effective and efficient processes. To implement institutional missions and objectives, the University defines a functional organizational structure aligned with its strategies and executive project frameworks.
• Check (Monitoring): The outcomes of strategic and operational actions are monitored and evaluated annually against expected results, with a specific focus on the impacts generated. Results are reported to stakeholders through integrated documents such as the Annual Financial Report, the Social and Gender Balance Report, and the Performance Report. A consistent approach is adopted at the departmental level through dedicated annual reports.
• Act (Review and Improvement): Finally, the University conducts an annual review of its organizational structure and operational programming, taking into account the achieved results and any deviations from planned targets. This process, informed by feedback from the Quality Assurance Board (PQA) and the Independent Evaluation Unit (NdV), aims to identify new actions for the continuous improvement of processes and services.

The University of Florence aims to offer a cutting‑edge educational pathway, in line with the guidelines of the Strategic Plan, the Integrated Plan of Activities and Organization (PIAO), and the Policies for Teaching Quality. This vision takes shape in the ‘Teaching of the Future’, a flexible and interdisciplinary educational model that places students at the center as active participants in the learning process.

The Quality Assurance system involves all levels of university education — from First (bachelor’s), Single Cycle and Second (Master’s) Degrees to Advanced Training — and promotes integration between teaching, research, well‑being, and inclusion. The process follows a dynamic model structured into four phases:

• Plan (Planning): the University and its Degree Programmes (CdS) and Ph.D. Programmes (CdDR) annually plan the educational offer. This design process incorporates systematic feedback from students and stakeholders, while continuously monitoring innovation in teaching methodologies.
• Do (Implementation): the learning environment is structured to ensure high standards through the provision of quality teaching resources, infrastructures, technologies, and services. Particular emphasis is placed on the quality of physical and digital spaces, the sustainability of infrastructures, and the creation of an inclusive, barrier‑free environment.
• Check (Monitoring): the process includes a systematic analysis of annual reports (SMA forms), University dashboards, and the indicators defined by the ANVUR model. In this context, the Joint Student‑Teacher Committees (CPDS) act as a permanent observatory on the quality of the educational experience.
• Act (Review and Improvement): based on the feedback provided by the Quality Assurance Unit and the Evaluation Board, the Governing Bodies define intervention priorities and resource allocation. These actions feed into the revision of the PIAO, rewarding innovation and the enhancement of public value.

The functioning of the system is ensured through the collaboration of several institutional actors: the Quality Assurance Unit, the Evaluation Board, the Departments with their Degree Programmes and Doctoral Programmes, supported by their respective Review Groups (GdR), the Schools, and the Joint Student‑Teacher Committees (CPDS).

The University defines its vision and objectives for Quality in Research and Knowledge Valorization through the Strategic Plan and the Integrated Plan of Activities and Organization (PIAO). The primary goal is to achieve scientific excellence and to strengthen social, economic, and cultural impact on the territory.

The Research Quality cycle is structured into coordinated phases that involve the entire organizational system:

• Plan (Planning): the Departments interpret and translate the University’s strategic objectives through the development of their respective Departmental Development Plans. The planning process requires a clear definition of tasks and responsibilities between the central administration and the departmental structures, which is essential for promoting scientific integrity, Open Science, and internationalization. The University’s Quality Assurance Unit actively contributes to defining information flows and coordination methods among the actors involved;
• Do (Implementation): research and knowledge‑valorization policies are implemented through technical and advisory bodies. The Industrial and Intellectual Property Committee provides guidance on the patent life cycle — from management to licensing and revenue sharing — and supports the implementation of strategic objectives by assessing investments and monitoring rights management and technology transfers. The Spin‑off and Start‑up Committee evaluates and monitors entrepreneurial projects arising from research and academic expertise, examining their sustainability, scalability, and impact on the University, and follows the outcomes of approved projects throughout the entire period in which they are recognized as spin‑offs or start‑ups. The Public Engagement Committee is responsible for raising awareness, informing, and involving University structures on public engagement, overseeing all phases from design to implementation, including mapping and evaluation. It serves as a forum for sharing actions, regulations, and best practices related to public engagement;
• Check (Monitoring): the verification and monitoring phase is entrusted to specialized bodies that continuously analyze the quality and quantity of scientific output. The Research Observatory monitors parameters related to scientific production, participation in competitive projects, and the impact of Open Science, producing detailed semi‑annual reports for each Department. The Knowledge Valorization Observatory, which also includes external members from industry and public institutions, assesses the tangible impact of academic research on the territory and identifies the needs of the socio‑economic context. Technical committees monitor Technology Transfers, oversee the sustainability of spin‑off business plans, and evaluate the effectiveness of industrial property rights management;
• Act (Review and Improvement): based on the outcomes of monitoring activities and the feedback provided by the Quality Assurance Unit and the Evaluation Board, the University identifies areas for improvement. The Governing Bodies determine the actions to be undertaken, the priorities, and the possible allocation of resources. Monitoring and evaluating results are essential activities for revising policies and setting new strategic and operational objectives. In the Quality Assurance processes for Research and Knowledge Valorization, a central role is played by the Vice‑Rectors and Delegates, who define the guidelines for the various areas, as well as by the Departments, through the CIA and any relevant Committees.