32 Survey Results: Survey Questions and Responses
32. Do your guidelines require that journals be peer-reviewed to be eligible for APC funding? N=33
Yes 23 70%
No 10 30%
33. What other criteria are used to evaluate publications for funding APCs? Check all that apply. N=20
Beall’s List 6 30%
Journal Impact Factor 1 5%
Other criteria 18 90%
Please briefly describe the other criteria. N=18
All journals that meet DOAJ’s criteria
All the above criteria were considered, but none were formally required. Another informal factor
was staff assessment of the merit and need of the particular researcher and his or her access to other
funds. For example, post-docs and assistant professors were more likely to receive funding than full
professors. A requestor who had received funding in the previous year would be less likely to receive
funding again in the near future.
Articles may not still be under review they must be accepted. The journal is published in a fully open
access format based on a published schedule of article processing fees.
Articles or books for which alternative funding is available are not eligible for reimbursement from
this fund. This includes articles reporting research funded by a gift or a grant from a granting agency,
foundation, or other institution (including the university itself) that allows grant funds to be used
for open access publishing fees (whether or not the particular grant had budgeted for such fees), and
articles funded by an institution that itself pays article processing fees on behalf of the author. An
author must have exhausted all other grant and other funding sources to be eligible for this fund.
Beall’s List isn’t listed publicly as one of the criteria, but it’s something we check if there’s a question
about legitimacy of a journal. Journal/publisher on Beall’s List doesn’t necessarily lead to denial, but if
we can independently verify why a journal is included there, that will lead to denial of funding.
COPE, Directory of Open Access Books
DOAJ inclusion OR published by an OASPA member
Eligible journals must provide free, immediate, online access to the full text of research articles
upon publication without restrictions. Eligible journals include those listed in the Directory of Open
Access Journals, or publishers that are generally compliant with the Open Access Scholarly Publishers
Association’s Code of Conduct. Journals must be peer-reviewed. Journals must make their standard
fee schedules publicly accessible. “Hybrid” open-access publishing, such as subscription-based journals
that make some articles available after an author pays fees are not eligible for funding. Any journals or
publishers listed in Beall’s List of predatory scholarly open-access publishers require greater scrutiny
by authors and the University Libraries.
Favorable author agreements in which authors retain the copyright to their work.
If we think the publisher may be predatory based on comments from Beall or other sources, we may
advise the author to review their choice to publish with that journal.
Must allow posting in repositories without embargo also review process, reputation, presentation,
marketing techniques, acceptance rate, and other factors as needed.
New draft guidelines require that the journal be vetted by author’s department chair.
32. Do your guidelines require that journals be peer-reviewed to be eligible for APC funding? N=33
Yes 23 70%
No 10 30%
33. What other criteria are used to evaluate publications for funding APCs? Check all that apply. N=20
Beall’s List 6 30%
Journal Impact Factor 1 5%
Other criteria 18 90%
Please briefly describe the other criteria. N=18
All journals that meet DOAJ’s criteria
All the above criteria were considered, but none were formally required. Another informal factor
was staff assessment of the merit and need of the particular researcher and his or her access to other
funds. For example, post-docs and assistant professors were more likely to receive funding than full
professors. A requestor who had received funding in the previous year would be less likely to receive
funding again in the near future.
Articles may not still be under review they must be accepted. The journal is published in a fully open
access format based on a published schedule of article processing fees.
Articles or books for which alternative funding is available are not eligible for reimbursement from
this fund. This includes articles reporting research funded by a gift or a grant from a granting agency,
foundation, or other institution (including the university itself) that allows grant funds to be used
for open access publishing fees (whether or not the particular grant had budgeted for such fees), and
articles funded by an institution that itself pays article processing fees on behalf of the author. An
author must have exhausted all other grant and other funding sources to be eligible for this fund.
Beall’s List isn’t listed publicly as one of the criteria, but it’s something we check if there’s a question
about legitimacy of a journal. Journal/publisher on Beall’s List doesn’t necessarily lead to denial, but if
we can independently verify why a journal is included there, that will lead to denial of funding.
COPE, Directory of Open Access Books
DOAJ inclusion OR published by an OASPA member
Eligible journals must provide free, immediate, online access to the full text of research articles
upon publication without restrictions. Eligible journals include those listed in the Directory of Open
Access Journals, or publishers that are generally compliant with the Open Access Scholarly Publishers
Association’s Code of Conduct. Journals must be peer-reviewed. Journals must make their standard
fee schedules publicly accessible. “Hybrid” open-access publishing, such as subscription-based journals
that make some articles available after an author pays fees are not eligible for funding. Any journals or
publishers listed in Beall’s List of predatory scholarly open-access publishers require greater scrutiny
by authors and the University Libraries.
Favorable author agreements in which authors retain the copyright to their work.
If we think the publisher may be predatory based on comments from Beall or other sources, we may
advise the author to review their choice to publish with that journal.
Must allow posting in repositories without embargo also review process, reputation, presentation,
marketing techniques, acceptance rate, and other factors as needed.
New draft guidelines require that the journal be vetted by author’s department chair.
