Governing principles
- Assessment and approval are separate controls.
- Every indexed journal must have a complete administrative application record.
- A successful website crawl is not, by itself, a completed assessment.
- Identity must be verified using several identifiers, not title alone.
- Existing records should be updated rather than duplicated.
- Actions, notes, links, statuses and decisions must remain traceable.
Roles in the indexing process
| Role | Principal responsibility |
|---|---|
| Applicant or journal representative | Submits the formal application and supplies accurate journal and ownership information. |
| NAPiD-65 assessor | Examines the journal, records evidence, completes the assessment criteria and records the assessment outcome. |
| NAPiD Administrator | Reviews applications, confirms assessment linkage, conducts Controlled Administrative Intake where appropriate, resolves administrative issues and completes the indexing decision. |
| Quality Assurance Reviewer | Reviews completed work, investigates complaints or irregularities and undertakes corrective action within assigned authority. |
Workflow at a glance
- A formal application is submitted, or a journal URL is entered directly in NAPiD-65.
- The correct journal is identified and opened for assessment.
- The assessment is completed and its evidence and scores are retained.
- The assessment is linked to an existing, future or administratively created application.
- The NAPiD Administrator reviews the application, assessment and journal identity.
- The application is approved, returned for more information or rejected.
- An approved journal record is created or updated, and its public listing is verified.
Route One — formal journal application
A journal editor, publisher, institution or authorised representative registers or logs in, opens the journal application service and selects the appropriate application type.
Information to supply
- Journal title, acronym, alternative title, description, aims and scope.
- Publisher, owner or institution, country and location.
- Official website and manuscript-submission URL.
- Print ISSN, online ISSN and DOI prefix where available.
- Frequency, first publication year, language, access and peer-review models.
- Publication format, subject keywords, applicant capacity and declaration.
Submission outcome
NAPiD assigns an application reference and records the submission for review. The appearance of an application in Journal Applications does not mean that the journal has been approved or indexed.
Route Two — Direct URL Assessment
An authorised assessor may enter a journal website directly into NAPiD-65. If no formal application is associated with it, the assessment is classified as Direct URL Assessment (Awaits Formal Journal Application).
Verify likely matches and explicitly connect the assessment to the correct application.
Retain the completed assessment and link it when the journal later applies.
The NAPiD Administrator supplies the required information and creates the administrative application record.
Controlled Administrative Intake
This is the approved alternative where a directly assessed journal does not yet have an applicant-submitted record. It enables the NAPiD Administrator to provide the required information without treating the assessment itself as an application.
Procedure
- Confirm that the Direct URL Assessment is complete.
- Search existing applications and approved journals to prevent duplication.
- Compare domain, print ISSN, online ISSN, DOI prefix and normalised title.
- If an application exists, link it rather than creating another record.
- If none exists, select Controlled Administrative Intake.
- Enter and verify the journal, publisher, ownership, contact and publication information.
- Record the assessment origin and reason for the administrative intake.
- Save the application, obtain its reference and link the assessment.
- Recheck the linked identity fields and proceed to normal final review.
Minimum information
| Information group | Minimum requirement |
|---|---|
| Identity | Journal title, normalised title and official website. |
| Identifiers | Available print ISSN, online ISSN and DOI prefix. |
| Ownership | Publisher, institution or organisation and country. |
| Publication profile | Aims and scope, subject, language, frequency, access, peer review and format. |
| Administrative provenance | Assessment reference, intake reason, responsible administrator and date. |
NAPiD-65 assessment procedure
Select the correct journal
- Open NAPiD-65 Assessments.
- Choose a journal from the main database or enter a direct URL.
- Search by reference, title, website, ISSN or DOI prefix.
- Select only a candidate whose identity has been verified.
- For direct entry, use the canonical journal website rather than an article or third-party page.
Review the evidence
- Identity, ownership and publisher transparency.
- Website availability, editorial governance and peer review.
- Publication ethics, conflicts, corrections and retractions.
- Archiving, access, copyright, issues and publication continuity.
- ISSNs, DOI information, charges and other material disclosures.
Complete the assessment
- Review every applicable criterion and its evidence.
- Enter the appropriate value or conclusion and explanatory notes.
- Review the overall and integrity scores.
- Resolve material omissions or inconsistencies.
- Record the final assessment outcome and complete the lifecycle.
Linking and identity verification
The assessment and application must refer to the same journal. Linking must be explicit and based on several identifiers.
| Identifier | Verification question |
|---|---|
| Website domain | Does the canonical domain match after harmless protocol and www variations are removed? |
| Print and online ISSNs | Do the available ISSNs match the journal and application? |
| DOI prefix | Is the prefix used by the same journal or publisher? |
| Journal title | Do the normalised titles correspond despite punctuation differences? |
| Publisher or owner | Is the named publisher or institution consistent across the records? |
Where identifiers conflict materially, do not link the records until the discrepancy has been resolved and documented.
Final administrative review
The NAPiD Administrator opens Journal Management, selects Journal Applications and reviews the submitted or administratively entered information together with the associated NAPiD-65 result.
Confirm the assessment
- A completed NAPiD-65 assessment exists.
- It is linked to this application.
- The website and identifiers correspond.
- The outcome supports further consideration for indexing.
- Material concerns have been resolved or properly considered.
Review the application
- Confirm its reference, type, status and history.
- Verify the journal title, publisher, website, ISSNs and DOI prefix.
- Review its aims, scope, language, frequency and publication format.
- Check access and peer-review models against the website.
- Complete the duplicate check.
- Read the NAPiD-65 scores, evidence and notes.
- Request clarification where required and record the decision reasons.
Decisions and application statuses
| Decision | When appropriate | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Approve | The application is complete, identity is verified and the assessment supports indexing. | Create or update the approved journal record. |
| Request information | Important details are absent, unclear or inconsistent but correctable. | Return the application for clarification. |
| Continue review | Further assessment or administrative examination is necessary. | Keep the application in review and assign the next action. |
| Reject | Requirements are not met or unresolved identity or assessment concerns remain. | Record a clear reason and close the application. |
Creation of the approved journal record
Following approval, NAPiD creates a new approved journal record or updates the correct existing record. Verify the title, publisher, website, submission URL, ISSNs, DOI prefix, location, scope, classifications, frequency, language, access model, format and peer-review model.
Prevent duplication
Search existing journals by domain, both ISSNs, DOI prefix and normalised title. If the journal already exists, update or reactivate the correct record rather than creating a second listing.
Public listing and verification
- Open the public NAPiD journal directory.
- Search by journal title and ISSN.
- Confirm the title, publisher and identifiers.
- Open the detail page and test the official website link.
- Check the subject, access, peer-review and publication classifications.
- Confirm that no duplicate entry has appeared.
- If the record is not immediately visible, check the decision, journal linkage and cache before repeating approval.
Exceptions and common problem cases
Direct assessment has no application
Use Controlled Administrative Intake where appropriate, or retain the assessment while awaiting a formal application.
Application exists but no assessment is visible
Search NAPiD-65 by reference, domain, ISSN, DOI prefix and normalised title. Link the correct assessment or send the journal for assessment.
Several likely applications appear
Compare several identifiers. Never select a record solely because its title resembles the assessed journal.
Journal title or domain has changed
Establish whether it is the same continuing journal, a formal title change, a transfer of ownership or a different publication.
Incomplete or failed crawl
Review the URLs reached and complete the remaining evidence manually. A technical crawl failure is not an automatic negative decision.
Audit, security and record integrity
- Use only authorised accounts and assigned permissions.
- Keep applications, evidence, notes, decisions and lifecycle history intact.
- Record reasons for Controlled Administrative Intake, corrections and decisions.
- Avoid silent replacement of identifiers or ownership information.
- Protect applicant contacts and non-public administrative notes.
- Use the normal workflow for corrections so changes remain auditable.
Operational checklists
Assessor checklist
- Correct journal and canonical website selected
- Application linked where one exists
- Relevant pages and policies examined
- Applicable criteria completed
- Evidence, notes and scores reviewed
- Final outcome recorded
Controlled Administrative Intake checklist
- No suitable application or approved record exists
- Direct URL Assessment is complete
- Required journal information is verified
- Source and reason are recorded
- Application reference is generated
- Assessment is linked and identity rechecked
Final approval checklist
- Complete application record exists
- Completed assessment is correctly linked
- Identifiers and publisher are consistent
- Findings and scores have been reviewed
- Clarifications and duplicate checks are complete
- Decision, approved record and public listing are verified
Final operating principle
NAPiD indexing is the conclusion of a documented process, not the consequence of a single form, crawl or score. Controlled Administrative Intake provides an auditable alternative for directly assessed journals, but it does not remove any assessment, review or approval control.
Return to the top ↑