Fair examination of bids

Every year hundreds of various scientific and technical contests are held in Russia, in which very decent money is spent. Of course, the leaders at the request of scientific technical products are the various Federal Target Programs (FTP) and budgetary Funds, in which there is fierce competition and no less corruption in making decisions about winners. In this article, I propose to discuss the specifics of holding such competitions and analyze the original ways of organizing a fair examination of applications. Without corruption and the cost of the so-called experts.

Competition contest strife

In accordance with 94-FZ ( expired, new from 04/05/2013 N 44-FZ, author's note, thanks to MiXaiL27 ) any expenditure of the Federal budget must be accompanied by competitive procedures. Of course, in this article I will not talk about competitions for the creation of a space satellite or the construction of a nuclear power plant. I consider the fact that contests for such works are sometimes announced as simple idiocy, but the law is the law. Competition must take place! Also, I'm not talking about “custom-made” (in a good sense) competitions, where R & D or R & D is focused on a specific customer, there is a very detailed and specific technical task. I propose to talk about contests, where the request for projects in certain areas of knowledge. For example, competitions for the support of scientific research groups, competitions of federal target programs on the topics of exploratory research or competitions of the same Bortnik Fund, where there are no clear technical tasks, but projects are being organized in certain areas of grantees, for example, IT, biotechnology, medicine, etc. . You can also consider the so-called cluster projects in the framework of the activities of national clusters and technology platforms, as well as smaller contests, which evaluate the originality of the idea, the authority of the contractor or the approach to implementation. All such contests are characterized by clear signs.
1. There is no clear formalized TK
2. A large number of applications are collected in the competition (sometimes hundreds)
3. The number of winners is limited (huge competition)
I think the readers understand these starting limits. Talk about competitions, where the criterion for evaluation is the price and terms of delivery (for example, tops for janitors or soap), we will not. In this particular case, the provisions of 94-FZ are quite suitable!

How to hold such contests?

Consider an example. The algorithm is quite simple. A budget is formed, the maximum number of winners is determined, tender documentation is compiled. Competitive documentation - the first place to start all confusing. God forbid, the application will not be numbered, somewhere the impression of a rubber seal has not been delivered or there is a slight tax arrears or an envelope has been drawn up incorrectly. All - goodbye. Second place - the formation of the project budget. There is the concept of the requested amount of the grant and its own contribution. There is a tricky wording. In one place - the cost of the project, i.e. the sum of the requested money from the Federal Target Program and own contribution, and there are places where only the requested money should be indicated, i.e money federal program. Can not be confused. You can immediately fly. Another trick is co-financing. Requirement of tender documentation - at least 50% of project funds. For example, the maximum requested grant is 45 million. An inexperienced applicant declares co-financing of just over half, for example, 22.6 million. It would seem that the amount is more than 50% of the grant amount of 45 million. But the calculation shows otherwise. In these figures, the project amount is 45 + 22.6 = 67.6 million. And now we will calculate our own contribution. (22.6 / 67.6) * 100% = 33.4%! The applicant takes off! The formal criterion is not fulfilled. And now the task is how to fulfill the criterion? Exercise!
The second mysterious place - the criteria for evaluating applications. Of course, there is a deadline, the share of co-financing and a number of formal criteria. But the most important are the qualification and experience of the applicant, the presence of the groundwork and the quality content of the work. This is the most important place for terry corruption. Estimates are given by experts. The names of the experts are not known. Ostensibly for a fair assessment. There are several experts. Typically 3-5. Even if they are conscientious - they must be extremely competent and fill all applications. And if the applications are one hundred or five hundred? Wow! That is why the tricky move was found. Applications for examination and support of other FTP projects began to appear in the FTP lots. As a rule, the Moscow consulting firm bag (registered a year ago) wins the competition for the examination and support of projects, receive tens of millions of rubles of budget money and "master" them ... How are you? Wonderful!

Great Roman Law

In fact, all the most sensible in the legislation was invented a thousand years ago. In Rome. If there was a need to make an assessment of something, they simply acted. This assessment was done on the basis of the rating. Put yourself in the first place, a friend in the second, others, as your conscience tells you, and put the enemy in last place. Let those whom you value do the same, but they will also appreciate you. Remember this. Be fair. All ratings are passed to the arbitrator. The arbitrator removes the first and the last place from each rating. Each position ranking is given a descending score. The winner is the one who scored more points.
The question is, why not apply the same principle in the examination of applications for grants? What good is this approach? Firstly, since you are an applicant, in fact, a specialist and an expert in the field of application of fellow competitors. Nothing is required from you, only to adjust the list rating in descending order. No need to write reviews, comments, etc. For example, based on the results of the collection for the competition received 150 applications. It is necessary to support 10 applications. All participants are sent randomly 10 applications from 150 to build a rating. At the same time, the case when your application gets you to build a rating is limited. Thus, after a while, 150 are going to the competition committee! ratings, in which each application has passed ten examinations! Everything! Subtract the maximum and minimum rating of each application. For the eight remaining positions in the ranking, build the corresponding place in the final ranking. Win the top ten bids! No experts are needed - the community itself conducts self-examination, all quickly, no additional expenses. Of course, in this case, each Applicant must be obliged to conduct a corresponding rating of ten random requests that will be generated randomly, where, for generating a random number, use is made, for example, of a script on the FTP site, where initial data for entering and ensuring randomness is used by the applicant's TIN or something something like that.
All this, of course, is hardly possible, but still, what do you think about this?
Have a nice day, everyone!!!