Published April 24, 2023 | Version v1
Dataset Open

Quality evaluation criteria, best practices, and assessment systems for Institutional Publishing Service Providers (IPSPs): dataset


  • 1. DOAJ, United Kingdom
  • 2. FECYT, Spain
  • 3. Jisc, United Kingdom
  • 4. Göttingen State and University Library, Germany
  • 5. University of Zagreb Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Croatia
  • 6. EIFL, Lithuania
  • 7. Institute of Legal Information Theory and Techniques, Italy
  • 8. OASPA, Netherlands
  • 9. University of Zadar, Croatia
  • 10. OPERAS, Belgium


The dataset contains tabular information on the elements of best practice in scholarly publishing found in a set of documents (high-level recommendations and principles, indexation criteria and specific assessment guidelines used on the national and institutional levels). The set of documents subject to analysis (58 items) were identified by the DIAMAS project team members (bibliographic metadata are provided in IPSP-best-practice-documents.xml and IPSP-best-practice-documents.ris).

The dataset was compiled by the DIAMAS project team using an analysis matrix that included the general information about the documents (title, issuing entity, scope and purpose, etc.) and the the seven core components of scholarly publishing identified in the Diamond Open Access Action Plan (2022) and revised by the DIAMAS project team.

More information about the data collection methodology can be found in the report D3.1 IPSP Best Practices Quality evaluation criteria, best practices, and assessment systems for Institutional Publishing Service Providers (IPSPs) (, which is based on this dataset.


****Dataset contents****







****Column headers and field types***

Title (original) (text)

Title (English) (text)

Publication date (date, DD/MM/YY)

Last accessed (date, DD/MM/YY)

URL (text-web address)

Scope (text, controlled)

Type of document (text, controlled)

Original language (text)

Other languages (text)

Entity issuing the document (text)

Entity responsible for the assessment (text)

Scope of the assessment (text, controlled)

Scope of assessment: region or country (text)

Disciplines’ coverage (text)

Periodicity of the assessment (text)

Reassessment frequency? If yes: periodicity (text)

Benefits linked to the assessment (text)

(1) Funding (text)

(2) Ownership and governance (text)

(3) Open science practices (text)

(4) Editorial quality, editorial management and research integrity (text)

(5) Technical service efficiency (text)

(6) Visibility (including indexation), communication, marketing and impact (text)

(7) Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (text)



Files (476.4 kB)

Name Size Download all
44.7 kB Download
70.3 kB Preview Download
262.9 kB Preview Download
96.0 kB Download
2.5 kB Preview Download

Additional details

Related works

Is supplement to
Project deliverable: 10.5281/zenodo.7859172 (DOI)


DIAMAS – Developing Institutional open Access publishing Models to Advance Scholarly communication 101058007
European Commission