# VII. Criteria for Assessing the Development Programme’s Performance

The criterion for assessing the performance of the Development Programme shall include the achievement of core results as specified in the plan for the Programme’s implementation, as detailed in Annex No. 1 hereto (hereinafter the “plan”), as well as targets (indicators) of the Programme.

Assessment of the programme’s performance shall be carried out annually through the presentation of a report on its execution to the University’s founder (no later than April 30 of the year following the reporting year), with a section called “Analysis of the Development Programme’s Performance”. This section shall outline the following:

• analysis of the implementation of activities specified in the plan, e.g., a review of the relevance for said efforts, e.g., the specification of the University’s contributions to the national development goals and priorities in regards to the S&T development of the Russian Federation;
• analysis of achievement of targets (indicators) specified in Annex No. 3 to the Development Programme (for every year of its implementation), as well as data on the outcomes for Programme’s planned indicators, e.g., analysis of any deviations (if applicable), indicating the reasons thereof and any measures that could help to attain the initial targets of the Development Programme;
• analysis of the use of resources, specified for the implementation of the Programme in line with Section VI herein.

The report should also include proposals for the inclusion of new activities in the Programme, in line with the national development goals and priority areas of Russia’s S&T development, as well as proposals for amending outdated aspects of the programme.

Ongoing monitoring of the performance of the Programme shall be carried on the basis of the Programme’s own roadmap, as developed by HSE University independently and specifying the plan’s details.

Assessments of the Programme’s implementation shall be carried out every year on the basis of a report on its execution in line with the integral performance indicator (I), calculated as per the following formula:

$\fn_phv&space;\large&space;I=\frac{M+P+R}{3}\times&space;100%$

whereby:

M — assessment of the plan’s performance;

P — assessment of performance in achieving the Programme’s targets (indicators);

R — assessment of performance in the use of resources, allocated for the Programme’s implementation.

Value of the integral performance indicator (I):

over 75 % — indicates a high assessment of the programme’s performance;

between 50% and 75% — meets the assessment criteria for the programme’s effective performance;

under 50% — programme requires amendment.

The assessment of the plan performance (M) shall be calculated on the basis of the plan’s implementation as per the formula:

$\fn_phv&space;\large&space;M=\Sigma_{i}m_{i}/8$

whereby mi — assessment of the performance in carrying out the activities of the i-th plan’s section;

The assessment of the performance in carrying out the activities of the i-th plan’s section (mi), shall be calculated according to the formula:

$\fn_phv&space;\large&space;m_{i}=\Sigma_{j}k_{j}^{i}/maxj$

whereby:

i — number of plan’s section;

j — number of activity under the i-th plan section;

$\inline&space;\fn_phv&space;k_{j}^{i}$ — indicator/target value, whereby:

1 — if the j-th activity of the i-th plan section was implemented in line with the plan;

0.5 — if the j-th activity of the i-th plan section is being implemented in line with the plan;

0.25 — if the j-th activity of the i-th plan section is being implemented with deviation from the plan;

0 — if the j-th activity of the i-th plan’s section is not being implemented in line with the plan.

The assessment of the achievement of the programme’s targets (P) shall be calculated on the basis of the attainment of the planned indicators specified in Annex No. 3 to the Development Programme as per the following formula:

$\fn_phv&space;\large&space;P=\Sigma_{i}p_{i}/7$

whereby pi — assessment of the achievement of targets (indicators), specified by the i-th section in Annex No. 3 to the Programme.

The assessment of the achievement of targets (indicators), as specified in the i-th section of Annex No. 3 to the Programme (pi), shall be calculated as per the following formula:

$\fn_phv&space;\large&space;p_{i}=\Sigma_{j}n_{j}^{i}/maxj$

whereby:

i — number of section of the plan;

j — number of activity of the i-th section of the plan;

$\inline&space;\fn_phv&space;n_{j}^{i}$ — indicator value, whereby:

1 — if the j-th indicator of the i-th section, specified in Annex № 3 to the Programme, has been achieved as per the planned figure;

0.75 — if the j-th indicator of the i-th section, specified in Annex № 3 to the Programme, has deviated from the planned figure by no more than 10%;

0.5 — if the j-th indicator of the i-th section, specified in Annex № 3 to the Programme, has deviated from the planned figure by no more than 25%;

0.25 — if the j-th indicator of the i-th section, specified in Annex № 3 to the Programme, has deviated from the planned figure by no more than 50%

0 — if the j-th indicator of the i-th section, specified in Annex № 3 to the Programme, has deviated from the planned figure by more than 50%.

Assessment of the use of resources, put towards the implementation of the Programme (R), shall be calculated according to the following formula:

$\fn_phv&space;\large&space;R=\left&space;(&space;r_{1}+r_{2}&space;\right&space;)/2$

whereby:

r1 — assessment of the performance in achieving the indicator “share of extra-budgetary revenues in the University’s total revenue”;

r2 — assessment of the performance in achieving the indicator “share of the total revenue of the University (excluding target subsidies)”, earmarked for the execution of the project component of the programme” in line with Section VI of the Programme;

r1, r2 — indicator values, where each of which is equal to:

1 — if the indicator has been achieved in line with the planned figure;

0.75 — if the indicator has deviated from the planned figure by no more than 10%;

0.5 — if the indicator has deviated from the planned figure by no more than 25%;

0.25 — if the indicator has deviated from the planned figure by no more than 50%;

0 — if the indicator has deviated from the planned figure by more than 50%.