CoARA — the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment — is a research-sector coalition, launched in Brussels on 1 December 2022, that commits signatory universities, funders and academies to reform how research and researchers are evaluated. Signatories agree to move away from journal-based metrics such as the Journal Impact Factor and h-index, and toward qualitative peer review supported by responsible use of quantitative indicators, under a ten-commitment Agreement and a mandatory one-year action plan.
CoARA is coara — the coalition’s name is almost always written and searched as the acronym. It is distinct from, though philosophically aligned with, the earlier US-originated DORA declaration. This guide sets out CoARA’s founding, its principles, how it differs from DORA, and the practical steps an institution takes to join and report progress.
- What is CoARA and why was it created?
- How does CoARA differ from DORA?
- What are CoARA’s core commitments and principles?
- How do institutions join CoARA and report progress?
- Who are CoARA’s members and working groups?
- Frequently asked questions
- What this means for research administrators
- Outlook: where CoARA reform goes next
What is CoARA and why was it created?
CoARA is a coalition of research funders, universities, national academies, and assessment authorities that have agreed a common Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment. The Agreement text was finalised in July 2022 by a working group convened under the impetus of the European Commission, Science Europe and the European University Association, and the coalition was formally launched at a founding event in Brussels on 1 December 2022, with an initial cohort of over 350 signatories.
CoARA’s stated purpose is to correct research assessment practice that over-relies on publication counts and citation-based metrics, at the expense of recognising open science practices, data stewardship, mentoring, and other contributions. Its secretariat is hosted by the European Science Foundation (ESF), which manages the coalition’s day-to-day operations and coordinates the CoARA Boost Horizon Europe capacity-building project.
How does CoARA differ from DORA?
CoARA and DORA share a target — inappropriate use of journal-level metrics in research evaluation — but they are separate initiatives with different origins, scope and mechanisms. DORA (the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment) was launched in 2013 by the American Society for Cell Biology and asks signatories to stop using Journal Impact Factor as a proxy for the quality of individual articles or researchers. CoARA was launched nearly a decade later, in December 2022, out of a European Commission-adjacent policy process, and goes further by requiring a written, time-bound action plan.
| Feature | CoARA | DORA |
|---|---|---|
| Launched | 1 December 2022 | 2013 |
| Origin | European Commission / Science Europe / EUA policy process | American Society for Cell Biology (San Francisco) |
| Secretariat | European Science Foundation | Independent DORA organisation |
| Formal commitments | 10 commitments in a signed Agreement | Declaration principles, no numbered commitment list |
| Action plan required | Yes — within 1 year of signing | No formal action plan requirement |
| Governance tiers | Signatory and Member (Member votes in General Assembly) | Single signatory tier |
In practice, most CoARA signatories are also DORA signatories — the two agreements are treated as complementary rather than competing, and institutions frequently cite both when describing their responsible-metrics policy.
What are CoARA’s core commitments and principles?
The Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment sets out ten commitments that every signatory and member accepts. The headline commitments require signatories to:
- Recognise the diversity of contributions to, and careers in, research in accordance with the needs and nature of the research.
- Base research assessment primarily on qualitative evaluation, for which peer review is central, supported by responsible use of quantitative indicators.
- Abandon inappropriate uses in research assessment of journal- and publication-based metrics, in particular the Journal Impact Factor and h-index.
- Avoid the use of rankings of research organisations in research assessment.
CoARA describes its overarching vision as recognising diverse outputs, practices and activities that maximise the quality and impact of research, with peer review as the essential mechanism, rather than treating metrics as a substitute for judgement.
How do institutions join CoARA and report progress?
Joining CoARA has two tiers, and the distinction matters for governance rights. An organisation first becomes a signatory by signing the Agreement, publicly endorsing the ten commitments. A signatory can then apply to upgrade to full Member status, which brings the right to participate in the General Assembly, vote on Steering Board candidates, and take part in collective decision-making. There are no membership fees at either tier.
Both signatories and members are required to submit an action plan within one year of signing, setting out concrete, time-bound steps to implement the ten commitments locally. Progress is then reported through periodic updates to that action plan rather than a single one-off filing — for example, founding member DARIAH ERIC published a progress report covering 2022–2024 alongside an updated action plan for 2025–2027, documenting achievements against its original milestones.
- Review the Agreement text and confirm institutional sign-off.
- Sign as a signatory (or apply for Member status if governance participation is needed).
- Publish an action plan within 12 months, mapped to the ten commitments.
- Join a relevant Working Group or National Chapter to share implementation practice.
- Update the action plan periodically and publish progress reports.
Who are CoARA’s members and working groups?
CoARA’s signatory base has grown substantially since the December 2022 launch: from an initial cohort of roughly 350 organisations to more than 800 research-performing organisations, funders, assessment authorities, professional societies and their associations by 2026, according to the coalition’s own signatory listing. UNESCO’s Open Science programme separately describes CoARA as convening a comparable population of research-performing entities, research funding institutions, and research infrastructure bodies working on reform in the context of open science.
Substantive reform work happens through Working Groups (covering topics such as narrative CVs and responsible use of metrics) and National Chapters, regional networks — including a UK National Chapter — that let organisations contextualise reform to local academic systems. CoARA’s first Working Groups and National Chapters were formed in autumn 2023, following an open call to members.
Frequently asked questions
What does CoARA stand for?
CoARA stands for the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment. It is a coalition of research funders, universities, and assessment bodies that have signed an Agreement committing them to reform how research and researchers are evaluated, moving away from metrics-only assessment.
Is CoARA the same as DORA?
No. CoARA and DORA are separate initiatives with shared aims. DORA launched in 2013 in the United States and targets journal-metric misuse; CoARA launched in December 2022 from a European policy process and additionally requires signatories to publish a formal action plan.
What is a CoARA action plan?
A CoARA action plan is a written, time-bound document that a signatory or member must publish within one year of signing, setting out the concrete steps it will take to implement the Agreement’s ten commitments, followed by periodic progress updates.
How many organisations have signed the CoARA agreement?
CoARA’s signatory base has grown from roughly 350 organisations at its December 2022 launch to more than 800 by 2026, spanning universities, funders, national academies and research infrastructure bodies across dozens of countries.
What this means for research administrators
For research administration, library, and grants-office teams, CoARA membership is not a symbolic gesture — it is a governance commitment with a deadline. The one-year action-plan requirement forces institutions to audit hiring, promotion, and grant-review criteria for inappropriate metric use, and to document a credible replacement process built on qualitative peer review.
Institutions already engaged in responsible-metrics work through research administration policy reviews are well placed to convert existing DORA commitments into a CoARA-compliant action plan, since the two frameworks are complementary rather than contradictory. Where an institution has no prior DORA history, the CoARA action plan effectively becomes the first formal audit of assessment criteria across the research lifecycle.
Outlook: where CoARA reform goes next
CoARA’s growth from a 350-signatory launch coalition to a body of more than 800 organisations within roughly three and a half years signals that action-plan-based reform, not declaration-only signing, is becoming the expected model for European and internationally-linked research assessment reform. National Chapters and Working Groups are the mechanism through which this scales beyond individual institutional pledges into shared, auditable practice — and institutions evaluating research administration reform should treat the CoARA action plan cycle as a recurring governance obligation, not a one-time compliance exercise.
