Faculty deciding where to publish for promotion often ask about impact factor and indexing, yet the mechanism that actually turns a publication into career progress, the API score, is explained much less clearly. This is the practical version. Understanding it early helps you plan which papers to write and where to send them.
What Is API Score?
The Academic Performance Indicator (API) is a point-based UGC Parameters system that gauges a faculty member's activity in areas such as teaching and learning and co-curricular, extension and professional development work, along with research output. It features in promotion decisions and, in some cases, direct recruitment, where faculty must collect a minimum score in each category during a set assessment period.
The Usual Way Research Papers Are Scored
Typical API frameworks assign a score to a published paper based on the recognised impact factor of its journal:
| Impact Factor Range of the Journal | Typical Points |
|---|---|
| Refereed journal, no recognised impact factor | 5 |
| Impact factor below 1 | 10 |
| Impact factor 1–2 | 15 |
| Impact factor 2–5 | 20 |
| Impact factor 5–10 | 25 |
| Impact factor above 10 | 30 |
These bands are widely cited but not universal. Always check the exact figures your own institution currently applies, because interpretations and point values have been revised over time and can vary between universities.
How Credit Is Split Among Co-Authors
One widely used framework allocates the following: in a two-author paper, each author gets 70% of the paper's total value. When there are more than two authors, the principal or corresponding author gets 70% and each joint author receives 30%. Check how your institution interprets this, since some apply it differently depending on author position and number.
Upper Limits on Certain Categories
Certain frameworks put a ceiling on research-related activities such as invited lectures, resource-person roles or conference paper presentations (for example 30% of a faculty member's total research score), so these lighter activities cannot replace genuine peer-reviewed publication. Knowing the cap beforehand helps you balance your publishing and presentation plans.
An Important Note on How Impact Factors Are Recognised
The same caution holds for any journal that quotes an Impact Factor based on Google Scholar or Semantic Scholar: the figure is real and can be calculated, but how API scoring treats it depends on your institution's rules, not on the journal's marketing. Ask for the written rule instead of relying on a colleague's recollection.
Confirming What Really Counts
- Read your institution's current CAS (Career Advancement Scheme) documentation itself instead of depending on general online summaries
- Find out how your institution handles impact factor figures that do not come from Scopus or JCR
- Speak to your HR or academic affairs office before submitting, not afterwards, whenever a specific journal's API implications could affect your timeline
At-a-Glance Checklist
- Rules obtainedCurrent version, in writing
- Category checkedFor each paper
- Co-author split knownYour position
- Evidence filedCertificates and links
- Metric claims carefulName the source
Maintaining Records to Support Your API/CAS Claims
- Keep a publication register — note the citation, the journal's ISSN, the date, the co-authors and what your own part was
- Save evidence for each paper — the PDF, the acceptance letter and proof of the journal’s policies or indexing
- Record co-author positions — whether you were first, corresponding or joint author, since credit rules rely on this
- Note the version of rules — which circular or regulation of your institution you are applying
- Update annually — instead of piecing together years of records when promotion falls due
Frequent Errors in API Claims
Claiming items that do not qualify
Certain items earn no points or are capped, so verify before you claim them.
Double counting
Claiming a single piece of work in two categories.
Missing evidence
Unsupported claims are frequently turned down.
Outdated rules
Relying on an outdated points table rather than the present regulation.
Practical Tips for Documenting Faculty Appraisal Claims
Appraisal forms reward accuracy and punish carelessness. These suggestions help faculty members keep clean evidence for publications, so their claims survive scrutiny from verification committees.
- Obtain the current regulations. Download the latest official document your institution follows, and read the exact wording for each category. Colleagues' summaries are often out of date.
- Keep evidence alongside each claim. For every publication, store the final paper, a screenshot of the journal page and the identifier lookup in one folder. Assembling proof later is slow and error prone.
- Record authorship roles clearly. Note your position among authors and whether you are the corresponding author. Credit rules often depend on that detail, so confirm it before filling the form.
- Do not inflate categories. Place each item in the category that honestly describes it. Overstated claims can lead to rejection of the whole file and damage your professional reputation.
- Ask the verification office early. If a rule is ambiguous, email the responsible office and keep the written answer. A documented reply is more reliable than a corridor conversation.
Work from the latest official rules, keep proof for every item, and claim only what you can honestly support.
Questions Researchers Often Ask
How JMVRA Measures Up to UGC’s 35 Suggested Parameters
In the final Annexure-I to UGC’s 16 July 2025 notice, the parameters number 35 and fall into 8 categories; the February 2025 draft had 36. Counting for itself, JMVRA records 28 as met, 2 as partly met, 3 as not published and 2 as not applicable, a reason accompanying each.
Taken from the UGC public notice on CARE journals (PDF) · JMVRA & UGC parameters goes into more depth.
Ready to Publish? Submit to JMVRA
JMVRA is aligned with UGC's Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.
JMVRA is a Transparent, Peer-Reviewed, Open Access Journal (Refereed Journal). Following the discontinuation of the UGC and UGC-CARE journal listing, and in alignment with the latest UGC-CARE recommendations and guidelines, JMVRA is aligned with UGC’s Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.
Quick links across jmvra.org
Key Terms
Subjects and search phrases this article addresses.
Related Reading
Further reading on the same theme from the JMVRA blog.
Why JMVRA Is Considered UGC Status & Parameters Journal Publication
Read the guide RelatedUGC-CARE Criteria and How JMVRA Addresses Them
Read the guide RelatedUGC Parameters New Policy for Peer-Reviewed Journals: Parameters Explained
Read the guide RelatedThe Difference Between UGC Parameters, Scopus, Web of Science and DOAJ
Read the guide RelatedVerifying UGC-CARE, Scopus & Web of Science Claims
Read the guide RelatedLow Cost Journal Publication ₹971 INR — UGC Status & Parameters, Peer Review, Crossref DOI, International publishing practice
Read the guideKeep Reading on the JMVRA Blog
Our JMVRA journal blog carries this guide along with other practical advice on publishing, indexing, metrics and research integrity, all written so that claims can be verified and nothing is promotional.