In 2003, Quality Assurance Scientific Research outlined a new national evaluation system for publicly funded research in the Netherlands. The Standard Evaluation Protocol would be reviewed once every six years. Three main Dutch organizations that were responsible for publicly funded research put the new system to practical use and required it for all future research evaluations conducted under them.
These evaluations were designed to achieve at least two basic goals: 1. Improve research quality based on external peer review, research policy and research management; and 2. Ensure accountability to the board of the research organization and to funding agencies, government and society at large.
Some criteria in the assessments considered quality, productivity, feasibility and societal relevance. Some evaluations suggested that more emphasis should be placed on societal relevance and benchmarking.
Once in practice, the scope of the Standard Evaluation Protocol may be too broad. Traditionally, evaluation focuses on the quality of work according to scientific disciplines. SEC evaluations are not limited to research results and take on a far greater reach by including research facilities, Ph.D training and societal relevance of the research. According to Jean-Francois Dhainaut, the 2009 President of AERES Biomedical, the undertaking of research evaluation is complex and the means to achieve it are a constant matter of debate in most countries.