Uladiev Ulady Suleimanovich Biography

Try the literature selection service. You can always turn off the advertisement. According to the Author, it is Necessary to Introduce A Differentiated System of Criteria for Evaluating Constitution Entities, Combining Primary Evaluation Indications and Specific Regional Criteria. These Criteria Shoup Be Formed Based on the Priority of the Current Tasks of the Subject, As Well As the Specifics of the Particular Region.

To determine the strategic directions of development, it is necessary to introdural coefficients, Which, in Turn, Requires a Thorough Analysis of the Socio-Economic Development and Potential of the Region. This Requires Relying on the Indicators of the Regional Gross Product. Assessment of the Growth Rate in the Region, Considering Its Characteristics and Avalable Resources, Willow To Determine the Necessary Resources to Achiev Objectives and the Degree of Control over the Use of Resources.

The issue of the absence of evaluation criteria in the regulatory framework related to the response of regional authorities to emergency situations, as well as criteria aimed at assessing the effectiveness of the interaction of state authorities and local self -government and the general effectiveness of the implementation of national projects and state programs.

Forecasts are given on the further transformation of the criterion "Digital Maturity". From the point of view of the author, it is necessary to introduce a differentiated system of criteria for evaluating subjects, combining basic evaluation criteria and specific regional criteria. These criteria should be formed based on the priority of the current operational tasks of the subject, as well as the specifics of the territory of a particular region.

The introduction of individual coefficients is possible only after a thorough analysis of socio-economic development and the potential of the regions in order to determine strategic development points. It is advisable to rely on the indicators of the regional gross product. Assessment of the growth rate of the region, taking into account its individual characteristics, the available resources will determine: whether the subject has the resources necessary to achieve his managerial goals; Whether resources are used in the best way and taking into account the individual characteristics of the subject.

Keywords: executive authorities, local governments, national projects, state programs, emergency situations, quality management, key efficiency criteria, public services date for the article on the editorial office: February 9 of the year. Current Problems and Further Reformation of the Institute for Assessing the Effectivence of Executive Authorites of the Constituents of the Russian Federal Uladi S.

The Author Gives a Prediction for Further Transformation of the "Digital MatURITY" Indicator. Keywords: Executive Authorites, Local Governments, National Projects, Government Programs, Emergencies, Quality Management, Key Performance Indications Kpis, KPIS, KPIS. Public Services Receved: February 9, the introduction of the direction of evaluating and monitoring the activities of state authorities of regions has always been considered one of the priority in the public administration system, since for the regions the implementation of the main tasks facing the state is of fundamental importance.

At each stage of the development of this system, the state set itself different tasks and tested various mechanisms of interaction with local organs. However, the main thing has always remained unchanged - the development and implementation of such effective methods of evaluation and control was necessary, which, on the one hand, would contribute to the increase in the accounting of the executive branch, transparency of budget processes, and on the other hand, so that this process was comprehensive and objective, and criteria for balanced and responding pressing problems of both regions and the country as a whole.

In this regard, the effectiveness criteria are constantly being revised, the methods of their definition are also changing. Key criteria for the effectiveness of state authorities of the regions is the current state of the above Institute of Public Administration is characterized by the following features. N ". Secondly, for the first time, the legislation in this direction began to correlate with the national goals of the development of the state and key indicators of the implementation of national projects.

This was due to the determination of the strategic goals of the development of the Russian Federation for the period of up to a year, and subsequently - and up to a year1. Thirdly, the pandemic caused by the new coronavian-Russian infection Covid set new tasks to the federal center and regional authorities, which different subjects solved differently. The expansion of the powers of subjects in many areas now requires to change the system of criteria for assessing the effectiveness of their activities, taking into account the current situation.Fourth, the rapid development of the digitalization of public administration required to reconsider some methods for assessing key performance indicators and introduce an indicator of assessing the level of digitalization itself “digital maturity”, since modern conditions form fundamentally new technologies for the work of the state and municipal service, and this should be taken into account.

Digital transformation and digital inequality 0 The latter would like to mention separately. Obviously, the introduction of digital efficiency criteria into the system for evaluating the criteria is a global tendency, and we will most likely see the transformation of this criterion in subsequent generations of regulatory legal acts governing the institution of assessing the effectiveness of state bodies.

Why is the process of evaluating digitalization so important? The growth of technology and their introduction into all spheres of society inevitably generates digital inequality, which is constantly progressing if you do not take the appropriate measures. In this regard, the digital transformation was proposed by the President of the Russian Federation as one of the key goals of the national development of the Russian Federation for the period up to a year.

The understanding came that the state is digitally a state that is a state that best uses digital technologies and the sphere and network associated with them in everything that it implements, and in all areas of activity. Over the past two years, significant progress has been outlined in this direction, which for the most part was caused by objective circumstances - the spread of the new coronavirus infection of Covid, Pandemia.

The state began to introduce various digital technologies in the sphere of management and interaction with citizens with an increased pace. Despite the fact that the material and technical base of digital transformation was provided in advance, not all regions were able to actively join this work. This was due to the fact that such a transition, of course, demanded changes in the general concept of public administration and developed practices of interaction with citizens who have remained unchanged for decades.

But those subjects who built the correct policy in this direction received obvious advantages: the efficiency of work, a decrease in paper document management, cost optimization and quick results. As an example, one can cite the Lipetsk region, which in the year took first place in Russia in terms of “digital maturity”. The material and technical base for the rapid transition to digital management technologies in the field was the developed telecommunication infrastructure, as well as the developed IT education support program.

The region has created the Ministry of Digital Development, a separate division of which - the “Region Management Center” - is engaged exclusively with the processing of citizens' requests on many issues: housing and communal services, removal of solid waste, cleaning of roads, and prevention of offenses. Only in years, 59 information resources were created and launched into the work.

The formation of a digital personality is obvious that the formation of a digital person who has a certain legal status will be another promising direction of the development of digitalization. As citizens are connected to a wide range of Internet resources, they simultaneously become subjects of rights and obligations requiring the adoption of regulatory acts at local or more global levels.

Currently, there is still no clear understanding of the composition of digital rights and who provides and protects them. Obviously, in the future component of assessing the criterion for the effectiveness of “Digital Maturity”, an assessment of the degree of ensuring and protecting these very digital rights in the field will also be an assessment. The pandemic, as a spotlight, illuminated another problem of the regions - the unpreparedness of the general public administration system to rapid response to emergency challenges of different orders.

In turn, the urgent problem of the institution of assessment was also identified - the absence of a separate indicator of assessing the effectiveness of the executive authorities of the subject in emergency situations, which have recently become more and more floods, earthquakes, forest fires, epidemics. Previously, no criterion has been applied that would reflect the degree of readiness of the subject for emergency situations and response to them.

There is a need to introduce such a criterion into the system for evaluating such a criterion. It is proposed to designate it as follows: "The readiness of the response systems to threats and facts of emergency situations." The introduction of such a criterion is objectively necessary, already due to the fact that, according to Art. He also determines the composition and direction of the main measures to prevent emergency situations, determines the circle of persons participating in them and carrying personal personal responsibility for the results.

From how quickly the tasks of eliminating the consequences of situations have been prevented, how quickly injured and those in need, assistance was provided, of course, can be judged by the effectiveness of the head of the subject.The new criterion should reflect primarily the efforts of the executive authority of the subject to build a system of preventing and eliminating extreme threats.

Close attention should be paid to how the region’s leadership organized the work of the regional emergency service of the RSCHS. The introduction of this criterion will require work on the formation of a methodology for calculating the corresponding indicator, taking into account both the number of emergency situations and the response of the response to them, the amount of the damage caused and prevented.

The effectiveness of interaction with local authorities, the assessment in this direction should also reveal how effectively the regional authorities interact with local authorities. The problem of such interaction in many areas takes place in most entities. Obviously, not all regions realize that it is precisely local authorities, as those close to the problems of the population and operationally interacting with it, that significantly affect key indicators of the effectiveness of the subject as a whole.

It is difficult for ordinary citizens who have no idea about the legal intricacies of distinguishing between powers of different levels to divide the results of managerial efforts of regional and local authorities. For the majority, this is simply “power”, and the assessment of the activities of these bodies significantly affects the assessment of the effectiveness of the head of any subject, in particular, in terms of the “level of confidence in power”.

In this regard, it is necessary to introduce into the next generation of regulatory legal acts governing the assessment of the effectiveness of the executive authorities of the subjects, the indicator "The effectiveness of interaction with local authorities." Among the significant data of the formation of this criterion should be attributed: providing the leadership of the subject of the financial and economic basis of local self-government; adoption of the regulatory acts of the subject in this area, the number of concluded agreements and agreements; The number of joint events, etc.

Improving is also required by the system of assessing the effectiveness of local authorities. Despite the fact that the last edition of this decree of the President of the Russian Federation was adopted on June 11, in the field to the system, they have long been adapted and it is obvious that not all criteria reflect modern management features. Thus, one of the areas of further work should be the adoption of a fundamentally new regulatory act on the assessment of the effectiveness of the activities of local authorities.

Of course, new criteria should be correlated with the corresponding criteria for assessing the executive authorities of the subject. Both power systems at their levels should be aimed at achieving strategic goals of state development. As already noted, the existing system for evaluating effectiveness is built in such a way that it correlates with the main indicators of the implementation of national projects and state programs.

At the same time, at present there is no one key indicator that would reflect the degree of effectiveness of a region in matters of the effectiveness of the implementation of national projects in their aggregate. From our point of view, it is necessary to include the indicated criterion of effectiveness among the new generation evaluative criteria. As for the methodology of its assessment, it would be advisable to learn both the degree of development of budget funds and the number and quality of measures for the implementation of on-processes and state programs in the region.

Currently, in regions, for the most part, regional methods for assessing the effectiveness of state programs have been adopted, so the work on transforming the above criteria into the general Federal criterion should not cause difficulties. The differentiated system of criteria for evaluating subjects is still urgent is the problem of accounting for regional factors and features in the evaluation process.

In science for a long time, disputes about the introduction of individual assessment coefficients do not subside. Some authors believe that an individual approach is simply necessary. According to the fair statement of D. Zaretskaya, “the existing assessment is complicated by the extreme inequality of geographical, climatic, social, material and financial, personnel and other conditions.

Certain constituent entities of the Federation have rich natural resources oil, gas, diamonds, etc. Other authors do not agree, indicating that under the new system of assessment of the regions, the chances of the regions are equalized, since not static indicators are evaluated, but the dynamics as a whole. However, the dynamics does not always reflect real indicators of managerial efforts.

The lack of differentiation also gives rise to the problem of the unfair distribution of rewards, does not allow the fullest to use the stimulating function of these measures. By fair opinion, E. Fedorova, L. Chernikova and S.Musenko, “The current procedure for allocating grant support to the most effective regions helps to increase differentiation in the level of development between regions, in which the state of economically prosperous regions continues to improve, and the state of economically dysfunctional regions, on the contrary, becomes worse” [Fedorova, Chernikova, Musienko, in our opinion, introduce a differentiated system of evaluating subjects, combining the basic basic Evaluation criteria and specific regional criteria are necessary.

One of the options may be the introduction of corrective coefficients that align the starting and final positions of the regions in the ranking for the subsequent fair distribution of inter -budget allocations and grants. Assessment of the growth rate of the region, taking into account its individual characteristics, the available resources will determine: whether the subject has the resources necessary to achieve his managerial goals; Whether resources are used in the best way and taking into account the individual characteristics of the subject [Kislitsyn, Cheglakov, Karaulov, Chikishev, there are other directions of improving the institution of evaluation.

Thus, the issue of transforming general federal evaluative criteria to the level of territorial executive bodies has not yet been resolved and then - to the level of individual civil servants. Each of these entities of the assessment has its own competence, and the issue of establishing criteria for evaluating their activities Dol- Literature D. Zaretskaya D.

The effectiveness of the governments of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation: concept, criteria, and ways of increasing. Izvestia of the Baikal State University. DOI: The formation of an integrated approach to the assessment of the socio-economic development of the regions.