Monitoring of state municipal services. Nedelko S.I.

Topic 4 The system of indicators for assessing quality and accessibility public services

The introduction of a system for assessing the quality and accessibility of public services provided by consumers is effective method study state of the art in the area of ​​service delivery and developing ways to further improve these services, taking into account the needs and expectations of the recipients of the services themselves. Monitoring can be based on the system of indicators proposed below, detailing the criteria for the quality and accessibility of public services.

Indicators, distributed according to criteria characterizing the quality and comfort of public services can be divided into two main groups: 1) general; 2) specific.

Compound overall indicators is an compulsory for all services, as it reflects the main problems faced by consumers of public services. In addition to general indicators, specific indicators should also be developed that reflect the specific features of the process of providing a certain type of service. Specific indicators for each type of service are determined individually, based on its specific features and existing problems in the delivery process.

Indicators for assessing the quality and accessibility of public (municipal) services:

1. Timeliness and efficiency

In general, timeliness is the time spent by the consumer to receive the service from the moment of request.

Timeliness provides that the authorized bodies, institutions and individual officials fulfill their obligations to provide services and perform related procedures within the time limits established by regulatory legal acts.

Composition of general indicators:

% (share) of cases when services were provided within the established period from the date of submission of documents. The indicator is defined as the ratio of the number of cases of providing a service within a specified period to the total number of consumers served for a particular service X100%.

% (share) of consumers who waited in line for a service for no more than 40 minutes. The indicator is defined as the ratio of the number of cases of waiting in the queue for no more than 40 minutes to the total number of consumers served for a particular service X100%.

Examples of specific indicators used in world practice: 1) % (share) of applications for determining the amount of pension provision, considered within 60 days from the date of receipt of the application; 2) % (share) of visitors received within the established 20 minutes from their scheduled appointment time; 3) % (share) of benefit payments within 10 working days from the date of receipt of the application; 4) % (share) of ambulance arrivals medical care within 15 minutes of the call.

2. Quality of public service delivery

Indicators of the quality of services, depending on the nature of the service provided, may include: indicators of the accuracy of data processing, the correctness of paperwork, the quality of the service process.

Composition of general indicators.

% (share) of consumers satisfied with the quality of the service delivery process. The indicator is determined as the ratio of the number of consumers satisfied with the quality of the process of providing the service (the number of ratings is good and very good) to the total number of customers served for a particular service X100%.

% (share) of cases of correctly executed documents (correctly made accruals, calculations, etc.) - The indicator is determined as the ratio of the number of cases of correctly executed documents to the total number of documents issued for a particular service X 100.

Examples of specific indicators used in world practice: 1)% (share) of cases of accurate calculation of pension accruals; 4) % (share) of correctly issued passports; 3) % (share) of consumers satisfied with the conditions of expectation; 4) % (share) of compliance with sanitary requirements.

3. Availability of public services

Accessibility consists in assessing the simplicity and rationality of the process of providing services, the clarity and quality of information explaining the procedure and procedures for providing services. In world practice, accessibility is determined by the quality of documents governing the process of providing services and the effectiveness of the current information system, creating conditions for people with handicapped. Accessibility is determined by various spatio-temporal parameters. The main indicators that allow it to be assessed are: the number and remoteness of public service points, the work schedule.

Composition of general indicators.

% (share) of consumers who are satisfied with the quality of information about the procedure for providing services. The indicator is determined as the ratio of the number of consumers satisfied with the quality of information about the procedure for providing a service (the number of ratings is good and very good) to the total number of customers served for a particular service X100%.

% (share) of cases of documents correctly filled out by the consumer and submitted on the first try. The indicator is determined as the ratio of the number of cases of documents correctly filled out by the consumer and submitted the first time, to the total number of clients served for a particular service X100%.

% (share) of services information about which is available via the Internet. The indicator is determined as the ratio of the number of services, information about which is available via the Internet, to the total number of services provided X100%.

Examples of specific indicators used in world practice: 1) %(percentage) of service applications completed correctly on first contact; 2) % (share) of services for which it is possible to fill out an application via the Internet or send it by mail; 3) the average distance of consumers from the place of service provision.

4. Appeal process

Important role in the process of serving the population belongs to clear and well-established procedures for appealing against actions (inaction) officials in direct contact with consumers. To assess their actions and establish feedback it is necessary to provide appropriate indicators that characterize: the effectiveness and efficiency of the process of consideration and satisfaction of complaints, the level of consumer satisfaction with the existing procedure and the timing of consideration of complaints.

Composition of general indicators.

% (share) of justified complaints to the total number of served consumers by this species services. The indicator is determined as the ratio of the number of justified complaints to the total number of served consumers for this type of service X 100%.

% (share) of justified complaints considered and satisfied in a timely manner. The indicator is determined as the ratio of the number of cases of consideration of a complaint within the prescribed period to the total number of complaints filed X100%.

% (share) of consumers satisfied with the existing appeal procedure. The indicator is determined as the ratio of the number of consumers satisfied with the existing complaints procedure (number of ratings good and very good) to the total number of customers who filed complaints X 100%.

% (share) of consumers satisfied with the terms of appeal. The indicator is determined as the ratio of the number of consumers satisfied with the established deadlines for appealing (the number of ratings are good and very good) to the total number of consumers surveyed who filed complaints X 100%.

1) % (share) of complaints considered and satisfied within 10 days; 2) % (share) of justified complaints, as a result of which actions were taken and service recipients were informed; 3) % (share) of complaints that, after consideration, were found to be unfounded.

5. Service culture

Politeness reflects the satisfaction of consumers with the attitude of the staff in the process of providing the service, the readiness to provide effective assistance in case of difficulties.

Composition of general indicators.

% (share) of consumers satisfied with the politeness of the staff. The indicator is defined as the ratio of the number of consumers satisfied with the courtesy of the staff (number of ratings good and very good) to the total number of consumers surveyed X 100%.

Examples of specific indicators used in world practice:% (share) of consumers who noted the rude attitude of the staff of a state body, institution.

The issues of assessing the quality of public (municipal) services provided have both economic and political, and social aspect. The transfer of the provision of state (municipal) services to outsourcing requires the use and effective methodology evaluation of the quality of services provided. On the other hand, in the process of selecting an assignment performer, the application of a methodology for assessing the quality and effectiveness of the performer is required. To date, there is no single and effective methodology for assessing the quality of outsourcing services. Nevertheless, it is the category of "quality" that does not come out on top when concluding an outsourcing agreement.

To ensure the improvement of the quality and accessibility of mass and socially significant public services to citizens, the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia conducts an annual monitoring of the quality and accessibility of public services, as well as studies of the degree of satisfaction of citizens with the quality of activities state power and bodies local government in terms of the provision of state, municipal services and the implementation of control and supervisory functions. In accordance with the Decree of the President Russian Federation dated May 7, 2012 No. 601 "On the main directions of improving the public administration system" by 2018, the level of satisfaction of citizens of the Russian Federation with the quality of the provision of state and municipal services should be at least 90%.

Monitoring and evaluation of the quality of services provided is obligatory element in outsourcing processes.

A study conducted by the Outsourcing.ru portal revealed that “price is no longer the primary factor influencing the final decision. 52% of respondents answered that the cost of services is acceptable and corresponds to the declared level of quality. 31% said that the prices are high, but the quality of services justifies expectations. Thus, only 21% of those surveyed decided that savings were higher on their priority list than quality.” According to another study (Kuzbass Business Portal), 46% of respondents (26 respondents out of 57) had to change outsourcing for the following reasons: 60% were not satisfied with the quality or level of service requests, 30% were looking for more low price, 10% were for other reasons.

The Ministry of Economic Development of Russia analyzed the results of monitoring the quality and accessibility of public (municipal) services in 2011. Let us present some results of this analysis. Answers to the question "How do you assess the quality of the state (municipal) service?" showed the following picture (Fig.)

Figure 4.1 - Evaluation of the quality of services provided by entrepreneurs and citizens as a result of the survey

In the process of research, the Higher School of Economics assessed the level of satisfaction with the quality of public (municipal) services in two options

The first option - The proportion of citizens who rate the quality of state (municipal) services as “Good” and “Rather good” is calculated (% of respondents). According to this method, 74.6%, including 65.7% of those surveyed, who applied for a service from organizations, and 75.7% of citizens who applied for a service in their personal capacity. This is good indicator. The advantage of this technique is its simplicity, the disadvantage is that the opinion of many respondents who were not included in the survey was not taken into account.

The second technique is based on the calculation of a formula that takes into account the distribution of responses.

R \u003d D 1 + D 2 + 0.75 D 3 + 0.25 D 4

Where D 1 - the proportion of those who rated "good",

D 2 - the proportion of those who rated "rather good",

D 3 - the proportion of those who found it difficult to answer,

D 4 - the proportion of those who rated “rather badly”.

The results of the assessment of the submitted method are as follows: the level of satisfaction in general - 67.2 points out of 100, the level of satisfaction of entrepreneurs - 61.1 points, citizens - 68.0 points out of 100.

Figure 4.2 – Bodies of state power (local self-government) to which the respondents applied

Figure 4.3 - Assessment of the influence of individual factors on the satisfaction of citizens with the quality of public (municipal) services.

The concept of outsourcing comes down to three main principles: the first is that everyone should do their own thing and be able to concentrate only on it. The second is the solution of related

Tasks should be assigned to someone who can handle them better. Third, such a distribution of work saves the customer's money and brings income to the contractor.

To date, most public authorities have carried out some work to identify redundant and duplicative activities, the advantages and disadvantages of the outsourcing model have been assessed, however, some tasks continue to be performed inefficiently and not always at a high quality level. This is due to the fact that due to the lack of a methodology for assessing the effectiveness of third-party organizations and the imperfection of Russian legislation, public institutions and the performance of economic functions under outsourcing agreements are allowed "unscrupulous contractors"

The main approaches to the choice of criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of third-party organizations in determining better conditions execution of a contract for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services are set out in Federal Law No. 94-FZ. The criteria for evaluating and comparing bids here are the price of the contract (price per unit of goods, services, etc.); functional characteristics(consumer properties) or quality characteristics goods; the quality of works, services and (or) the qualifications of the bidder when placing an order for the performance of works, the provision of services; the cost of operating the goods; expenses for Maintenance goods; terms (periods) of delivery of goods, performance of work, provision of services; term for providing a guarantee of quality, works, services; the volume of guarantees for the quality of goods, works, services. Developed instead of 94-FZ, Law N 44-FZ establishes new requirements for the description of the object of procurement, justification of the initial price of the contract, securing an application for participation in the procurement, evaluation of applications, as well as for procurement participants. These requirements will apply to all methods of determining suppliers (contractors, performers).

Justification of the initial (maximum) contract price by Law N 44-FZ is regulated in much more detail than by Law N 94-FZ. Note that the provisions on such justification will also apply to the price of a contract concluded with a single supplier (contractor, performer). Customers will be required to be guided by one or more of the following methods to justify the initial price of the contract:

Comparable market prices method (market analysis);

Normative method;

Tariff method;

design estimate method;

Cost method.

The priority is the method of comparing market prices, the rest can be applied only in cases specified in parts 7 - 11 of Art. 22 of Law N 44-FZ. When using the method of comparing market prices, the customer sets the initial (maximum) price of the contract based on information about the market prices of identical goods, works and services planned for procurement, and in the absence of identical goods, works and services - homogeneous goods, works and services.

Law N 44-FZ has changed the criteria by which applications of participants in procurement procedures are evaluated. According to the law 94-FZ, only one criterion is mandatory - the price of the contract. Now, when conducting a tender, in addition to the price of the contract, the customer must use at least one more evaluation criterion established by Law N 94-FZ: the quality of work, the cost of operating the goods, the timing of the provision of quality assurance, etc. (Part 4, Article 28 of Law N 94-FZ, clause 6 of the Rules for evaluating applications for participation in a tender for the right to conclude a state or municipal contract (civil law contract budget institution) for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for the needs of customers, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of September 10, 2009 N 722).

Law N 44-FZ contains a rule according to which the customer, when determining a supplier (contractor, performer) by any means other than an auction, will be obliged to apply at least two criteria, one of which must be price.

So, in addition to the contract price, Law N 44-FZ specifies the following criteria:

Expenses for the operation and repair of goods, for the use of the results of work;

Qualitative, functional and environmental characteristics of the procurement object;

Qualifications of procurement participants, including whether they have financial resources, equipment and other material resources necessary for the performance of the contract, specialists and other employees of a certain skill level.

Such evaluation criteria as the period (periods) of delivery of goods, performance of work, provision of services, the period and scope of providing a guarantee of the quality of goods, works, services, are not specified in Law N 44-FZ, unlike Law N 94-FZ.

With regard to the price of the contract, it was established that the significance of this criterion should not be lower than the significance of the criterion of expenses for the operation and repair of goods and for the use of the results of work (part 5 of article 32 of Law N 44-FZ). If the state establishes fixed prices for goods, works, services, then the customer has the right not to use the criteria for prices and costs for the operation and repair of goods, for the use of the results of work (part 8 of article 32 of Law N 44-FZ).

However, this interpretation also has a number of shortcomings and inconsistencies, which we will analyze after considering the procedure for evaluating the effectiveness of performers (outside organizations) according to the criteria outlined above.

According to the current law, for the main types of orders (except for R&D), the significance of the two criteria "Procurement quality" and "Qualification of the performer" should not exceed 20%, and according to Decree No.

cycle", "Terms ...", "Guarantee conditions" cannot also exceed 20%. Hence, the minimum significance of the "Contract Price" criterion cannot be less than 60%. Since the last three criteria vary slightly among different performers, the main "struggle" for highest level effectiveness goes between the “Price” (the significance of which increases) and the “Quality of performers” (the significance of which cannot exceed 20%).

The new law changed the significance of the criteria. So, the sum of significance

two criteria "Contract price" and "Expenses for life cycle» must be at least 50%, since the second component (according to Decree No. 722) cannot be estimated at more than 10%, then the share

The “contract price” remains 40% (instead of 60% under Law 94-FZ). 50% remains for the rest of the components, but the total significance of the terms of order fulfillment and warranty obligations cannot be more than 10%. Thus, the total significance of the criteria "Quality of the order" and "Qualification of performers" increases to 40% against 20% under 94-FZ and equalizes with the significance of the criterion "Contract price".

Neither Law 94-FZ nor the new Law 44-FZ defines the methodological basis for calculating a comprehensive indicator for evaluating the effectiveness of a contractor (outside organization) when fulfilling an order.

Another disadvantage should be noted. The legislative and accompanying documents do not establish the maximum quality levels of criteria, below the values ​​of which the performer should be recognized

unable to perform the functions of the order, even if the overall rating of this contractor in a comprehensive assessment of its effectiveness will be the highest.

In the special scientific literature, various methods for assessing the effectiveness of the performer are proposed. The process of calculating a complex indicator for evaluating the effectiveness of an executor (outside organization) can be represented as a multi-level hierarchical system. The places of the performers are placed according to the value of the complex indicator, the one with the highest value of this indicator takes the first place.

Evaluation of indicators in accordance with the Concept for reducing administrative barriers and increasing the availability of state and municipal services for 2011-2013, approved by the order of the Government of the Russian Federation dated June 10, 2011 No. 1021-r, including:

the number of applications of a citizen of the Russian Federation to the state (municipal) authority of the Russian Federation to receive one state (municipal) service;

the number of applications of business representatives to the state (municipal) authorities of the Russian Federation to receive one state (municipal) service related to the sphere entrepreneurial activity;

· average waiting time in the queue when citizens of the Russian Federation apply to the state (municipal) body of the Russian Federation (minutes);

level of exceeding the established regulatory deadlines provision of state (municipal) services related to the field of entrepreneurial activity (interest);

· the level of satisfaction of citizens with the quality and availability of state and municipal services provided directly in state authorities and local governments (percentage);

· the level of satisfaction of citizens with the quality and availability of state and municipal services provided in the MFC (percentage);

other indicators formed on the basis of regular monitoring of the quality of the provision of state (municipal) services and the performance of state and municipal functions;

· Comparison of received data with international ratings.

The quality of the services provided can also be indicated by such information as the valuation of the losses of citizens from the poor quality of the provision of state (municipal) services (Table)

To assess the quality of the provision of state (municipal) services, scores can be used to determine the rating of service providers. Let us present the results of the analysis of the quality of the provision of such a service as “Registration legal entity. When conducting this analysis, a rating was determined by the cost of the service and by time, and then a consolidated rating for the subjects of the federation (Table 4.1)

Table 4.1 - Cost assessment of citizens' losses from poor-quality provision of public (municipal) services

ANNOTATION

The training manual discusses the main approaches to determining the quality of the provision of state and municipal services and public administration in general, used in world practice and implemented in public authorities modern Russia. The activities carried out within the framework of the Administrative Reform on the regulation and standardization of state and municipal services as the basis for the formation of a system regulatory requirements to the quality, accessibility of public services and the comfort of their provision. Based on the results of an experimental study, the authors proposed a model for organizing the monitoring of state and municipal services.
Tutorial may be of interest to everyone interested in the problems of the efficiency of public administration.

The tutorial is an electronic version of the book:
Monitoring of state and municipal services in the region as a strategic tool for improving the quality of regional governance: experience, problems, recommendations. Textbook / S.I. Nedelko, A.V. Ostashkov, S.V. Matyukin, V.N. Retinskaya, I.A. Murzina, I.G. Krevsky, A.V. Lukanin, O.S. Koshevoy. Under total ed. V.V. Markina, A.V. Ostashkov. - Moscow, 2008. - 321 p.

INTRODUCTION
1. The concept of new public administration and administrative reform in modern Russia
1.1. Theoretical and methodological foundations of the concept of modern public administration
1.2. Administrative reform in the Russian Federation: prerequisites and methodological basis for transformations
1.3. System formation strategic management as the basis for the long-term development of public administration in modern Russia
2. The effectiveness of public and municipal government: concept and approaches, domestic practice of assessment
2.1. The problem of determining the effectiveness of state and municipal government
2.2. International methods for determining the effectiveness of state and municipal government
2.3. Assessment of the quality of public administration in modern Russia at the federal level
2.4. Assessment of the quality of governance in modern Russia at the regional and municipal levels
3. The concept and classification of state and municipal services
3.1. The problem of the definition of "public service"
3.2. Classification of state and municipal services
4. Regulation and standardization of state and municipal services
4.1. The concept of standards and regulations of state and municipal services
4.2. Problems of developing standards and regulations for state and municipal services in modern Russia.
5. The quality of state and municipal services and the problem of its assessment
5.1. The concept and approaches to determining the quality of state (municipal) services.
5.2. System of indicators for assessing the quality and accessibility of state and municipal services.
5.3. The system of factors that provide Negative influence on the quality and availability of state and municipal services.
5.4. Methodology for assessing consumer satisfaction with the quality and comfort (accessibility) of the state (municipal) service provided (on the example of a pilot study).
6. Monitoring as a tool for ensuring the quality of state and municipal services.
6.1. The concept and directions of monitoring the effectiveness of the provision of state and municipal services.
6.2. Approaches to building a model for monitoring state and municipal services.
7. Information in the system of state and municipal administration and provision of services
7.1. The concept, classifications and requirements for information used in decision-making in the field of state and municipal government and the provision of services
7.2. The concept and content of secondary information: general information
7.3. The concept of documentary information
7.4. Analysis of secondary (documentary) information
8. Working with primary information
8.1. Collection of primary information: general information
8.2. Selective research of primary information: sample design
8.3. Random sampling methods
8.4. Staggered sampling
8.5. Non-random sampling methods
8.6. Sample sizes.
9. Methods for obtaining primary information about external and internal environment
9.1. Approach to the classification of sociological methods for obtaining primary information
9.2. The concept and types of surveys
9.3. Questionnaire survey (Questioning)
9.4. Sociological surveys on the Internet
9.5. Focus group method
9.6. In-Depth Interview
9.7. Expert assessments
9.8. Experiment
9.9. Observation
9.10. Modeling
10. Processing of primary data
10.1. Tools to support the analysis of monitoring materials and their presentation
10.2. The use of information and communication technologies to automate work in the field of monitoring and assessing the quality of the provision of state and municipal services
10.3. Presentation of the results of the analysis (requirements for the report, presentation and visualization of information)
CONCLUSION
LIST OF USED SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Introduction
AT modern conditions functioning of the public administration system in various countries the urgency of the problem of increasing the efficiency of public administration is growing significantly. This problem cannot be solved without the introduction of effective modern management methods into the work of public authorities, adequate in complexity to new conditions and requiring openness, efficiency and adequacy from the public administration system in relation to the demands of the external environment.
Increasing the efficiency of state and municipal administration is the main goal of the administrative reform being carried out in modern Russia. An important direction in achieving this goal is to improve the quality and accessibility of state and municipal services as the main aspect of the effectiveness of public administration. Thus, according to the concept of the New Public Administration, which is methodological basis administrative reform in modern countries, the essence of modern public administration reforms is the transition to a client-oriented orientation of bodies executive power which implies, first of all, the focus of their work on meeting the needs of their consumers - citizens
given and organizations.
Wherein necessary element organization of management in the system of executive authorities is monitoring the effectiveness of the work of government bodies, which is a system of regular monitoring and evaluation of the results of the activities of government bodies related to the achievement of the goals of their work, the implementation of tasks and programs, as well as the timely identification and elimination of errors and deviations in work , control of the reliability of the obtained results. The most important component of the public administration monitoring system is the monitoring of state and municipal services provided by executive authorities.
As the practice of administrative reforms demonstrates recent years in modern Russia, one of the difficulties of the ongoing reforms is the lack of a unified methodological support for the activities being implemented. For example, the federal legislation does not formulate a clear definition of the quality of public services. In science, there are several approaches that evaluate the quality of services from different positions. The authors of this manual substantiate the approach to determining the quality of a state (municipal) service from the point of view of two the most important parameters: 1) the quality of the content of its final result; 2) the quality of receiving the service associated with the comfort of its provision and accessibility for the consumer. However, these parameters
should be clearly spelled out in the administrative regulations and standards of state and municipal services and serve as the basis for the formation of a system of regulatory requirements for the quality, accessibility of public services and the comfort of their provision.
As the analysis of domestic experience in organizing the provision of state and municipal services by executive authorities shows, today the problem of building integrated system evaluating the effectiveness of public services is relevant due to the lack of established generally accepted monitoring models at the federal and regional levels.
The team of authors based on the results of implementation in 2006-2007.
pilot projects "Development and implementation of public service standards, administrative regulations for the performance of public functions and the provision of public services in the executive bodies of state power Penza region"and" Development and implementation of a system for monitoring the availability and quality of public services in the Penza region based on the implementation of administrative regulations and standards of comfort and quality "as part of the implementation of the FTP" Administrative Reform ", a model for organizing monitoring of public and municipal services in the region based on a comprehensive analysis of information from primary and secondary sources using software for its processing, analysis, and presentation of results.

Electronic version of the book: [Download, PDF, 2.14 MB].

Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view the book in PDF format. new version which can be downloaded for free from the Adobe website.

Improving the quality of public services is one of the four main directions of the reform of the public administration system being carried out in the country. The main goal of this reform is to increase the level and quality of life of the population, the transition to the standards of a new generation of public services based on the position of the consumer of these services.

The transition to new generation standards for our sphere is especially relevant. After all, as a rule, the most vulnerable part of the population turns to the labor and social protection authorities for state services. And in terms of the number of services provided to the population, the system of social assistance and support, perhaps, surpasses other areas of life.

Information accessibility is also provided for the population, that is, the opportunity to receive necessary information about a particular public service in the field of social protection, without having special knowledge or acquaintances working in the social sector.

Now directly about the quality of services provided. According to the May Decree of the President, the main evaluation criterion is the level of satisfaction of citizens with the quality of services provided.

At the same time, by 2018, the level of satisfaction with the quality of services should be at least 90 percent.

It should be noted that an important factor affecting the degree of satisfaction of citizens with the quality of public services is the development of a system of interdepartmental electronic interaction. This system allows minimizing the number of documents submitted by a citizen and promptly receiving Required documents from state and municipal authorities.

At present, the degree of organization of interdepartmental electronic interaction can be called satisfactory. Social security agencies everywhere have the opportunity to use federal, regional or municipal electronic services.

According to the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Stavropol Territory, the most actively used service today is pension fund"Insurance number request" - more than 120 thousand requests for seven months of this year. There are many requests - about 30 thousand - for the Rosreestr service "Extract on the rights of a person to a real estate object." In addition, the service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs "Information on a criminal record" and the service of the Pension Fund "Information on the amount of pension" are quite actively used.

At the same time, the work of services is still imperfect, often it is necessary to duplicate requests in order to get the desired result. But, you need to understand that these are difficulties initial stage. And if they are not overcome, then the exchange process will remain at an embryonic level.

It is necessary to work more actively with the system of interdepartmental interaction, especially since this is a direct obligation provided for by the Federal Law "On the organization of the provision of state and municipal services."

The first step to ensure the quality of public services is their standardization.

Standardization makes it possible to eliminate conflicting multiple instructions and departmental orders, eliminate duplication of employee actions, automate relevant administrative processes, and create the most comfortable conditions receiving them. In accordance with approved standards regulation of state and municipal services.

To date, work on the regulation of public services in the field of social protection has been fully completed.

According to requirement federal law"On the organization of the provision of state and municipal services" executive bodies the state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, when providing public services, are not entitled to demand documents and information that are at the disposal of other state bodies and local governments, as well as organizations subordinate to them.

The bodies of social protection of the population provide the most popular public services in the field of assigning various social payments, providing social support.

Currently, all subjects of the Russian Federation are connected to a unified system of interdepartmental electronic interaction (hereinafter - SMEV) and carry out information exchange using it with federal authorities executive power.

When providing public services in the field of social protection of the population, the authorities of the subjects require information that is at the disposal of Rosreestr, the Pension Fund of Russia, the Federal Migration Service of Russia, the Federal Tax Service of Russia, and various law enforcement agencies.

Along with this, information is needed that is available to regional authorities. For example, employment service authorities, registry offices, as well as authorities of other constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

A significant problem, to a certain extent, preventing an increase in the share of public services provided in electronic form, there remains the need for applicants to submit original documents, including identity documents, to the public authority providing the relevant service.

This is due to the need for the applicant to confirm the fact of applying for a public service.

In accordance with Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 28, 2011 No. 977, the federal state information system "Unified Identification and Authentication System in the Infrastructure Providing Information Technology Interaction" was created. information systems providing the provision of state and municipal services in electronic form" (hereinafter referred to as the ESIA).

ESIA (among other things) is designed to provide users with access to various information systems without the need for re-registration based on common identification parameters using various media.

At the same time, the identification parameters used are partly the factors hindering the further development of information and communication technologies in the provision of public services.

The main identification parameters in the ESIA are SNILS (insurance number of an individual personal account citizen in the compulsory pension insurance) and a password. However, due to the limited level of security that these parameters provide, the ESIA, as a tool for identifying and authenticating recipients of public services, is periodically criticized.

Meanwhile, these parameters are not the only identification parameters used by the system.

As an identification parameter in the ESIA, the applicant uses an electronic signature (simple or enhanced qualified). However, in practice, this also causes a number of difficulties for service recipients.

Firstly, according to the Rules for determining the types of electronic signature, the use of which is allowed when applying for state and municipal services, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of June 25, 2012 No. 634, the use of a simple electronic signature is allowed only in cases:

• if the content of the service does not provide for the issuance of documents and consists in providing information;
• · if the established procedure for the provision of services requires the obligatory presence of the applicant and the presentation of the main identity document. In all other cases, an enhanced qualified electronic signature must be used.

Secondly, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of January 25, 2013 No. 33 "On the use of a simple electronic signature in the provision of state and municipal services" provides for the creation in the ESIA of a register of bodies and organizations that have the right to create (replace) and issue a simple electronic signature key in for the provision of state and municipal services. However, such functionality have not yet appeared in the ESIA.

In fact, these factors have a negative impact on the popularization of the receipt of public services in electronic form. Applicants, finding out that in order to receive significant services accompanied by the issuance of documents, they will still have to personally apply to the relevant authorities, having evaluated all the pros and cons (and you still need to familiarize yourself with how to work in the relevant information system), do it again choice in favor of their traditional form of receiving services.

The introduction in the ESIA of the possibility of automatic verification of the passport data of Russian citizens using the resources of the Federal Migration Service could significantly simplify the procedure (without damaging its security).

In addition, the widespread use of electronically signed SIM cards, which allow users of mobile devices to be authenticated in the system, can serve to increase the degree of mass participation in the issue of obtaining public services in electronic form.

Conducted analysis of the introduction into practice of public authorities information technologies revealed the following Problems, both technical and organizational in nature:

• 1. Difficulties in obtaining access to the service from federal executive authorities, since federal executive authorities often pay little attention to the regulatory framework of the region
• 2. Not all power federal executive authorities today are participants in electronic interaction (Ministry of Defense, Prosecutor's Office)
• 3. For a number of information required for submission to in electronic format from federal executive authorities, electronic services of interdepartmental interaction are not implemented
• 4. Disunity of information systems in the authorities - each has its own system with its own peculiarities of work
• 5. The provision of information through the SMEV channels within the framework of interregional cooperation is not provided
• 6. The complexity in the organization of SMEV as a whole is not clear. What is the difficulty?
• 7. Some information belongs to the category of "pocket" documents, but it is possible to provide them in electronic form. And for this it is also necessary to implement special electronic services (registry offices, archives)

All this complicates the work of the social protection authorities. It delays the provision of public services, which reduces their quality and negatively affects the satisfaction of citizens with the activities of state bodies.

The conclusions from the analysis should be formulated in such a way that they are related to your proposals. Approximately as you did in the annotation, only more detailed. Otherwise, it is not clear why you formulate these particular proposals for improving the system.

In order to assess the quality and accessibility of state and municipal services, determine priorities for their optimization, as well as to evaluate the results of ongoing reforms, it is necessary to continue the practice of monitoring the quality and accessibility of state and municipal services.

The purpose of monitoring is to determine the real number of applications, the scale of time and material costs when the applicant receives the final result of applying to government bodies and organizations (as a whole for the public service and for each appeal).

When conducting monitoring, all the applicant's appeals to all authorities, including appeals to subordinate, affiliated and other organizations necessary to obtain the final result of interaction with the state, should be taken into account.

The essence of monitoring is to collect information about the studied parameters in the course of surveys, in-depth interviews, surveys of recipients of state and municipal services and conducting “control calls”.

public services included in the monitoring on an ongoing basis (the most popular public services for citizens and businesses);

public services included in monitoring in accordance with current priorities.

For each service for which optimization is being or will be carried out, it is advisable to assess the change in the applicant's cost level - before and after optimization.

It is necessary to introduce a system of intradepartmental monitoring of the quality of the provision of state and municipal services with the involvement of members of the public. For these purposes, it is proposed to develop a standard methodology for conducting intradepartmental monitoring of the quality of the provision of state and municipal services.

Methodological support is organized at the federal level for regular monitoring at the regional and local levels.

The basis for monitoring the quality of regional and municipal services should be the programs adopted at the level of the highest executive body of state power of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation to reduce administrative barriers and improve the quality and accessibility of public and municipal services.

8. Organization of the provision of state and municipal services on the principle of "one window" in multifunctional centers

The provision of a state or municipal service on the principle of "one stop shop" involves a single application by the applicant with a request to the multifunctional center.

The multifunctional center represents the interests of applicants in interaction with bodies providing state and municipal services, and organizations involved in the provision of state and municipal services. The multifunctional center also represents the interests of public service providers and municipal service providers when interacting with applicants.

The provision of state and municipal services on the principle of "one stop shop" should provide a significant reduction in the costs of applicants when interacting with state authorities and local self-government. The principle of "one window" should be implemented by a multifunctional center by organizing interaction with bodies providing public services, or bodies providing municipal services, without the participation of the applicant in accordance with regulatory legal acts and an agreement on interaction.

In this regard, it is necessary to significantly optimize state and municipal services and ensure interdepartmental interaction. The implementation of uniform quality standards for the provision of state and municipal services in multifunctional centers throughout the Russian Federation.

Lists of state and municipal services provided in multifunctional centers must be approved at the federal, regional and local levels.

In the subjects of the Russian Federation, programs should be approved to optimize and improve the quality of the provision of state and municipal services, including on the basis of multifunctional centers, providing for the provision of the possibility of obtaining state and municipal services on the principle of "one window" in each municipality in the subject of the Russian Federation. The development of requirements for the structure and content of these programs, as well as control over their compliance with the established requirements, is carried out by the federal executive body authorized by the Government of the Russian Federation, which provides methodological support in the creation of a multifunctional center. At the same time, quality control of the provision of state and municipal services at all levels of public authority should be ensured, all state and municipal services in the multifunctional center should be provided on the principle of "one window".

It is necessary to define the requirements for multifunctional centers by categories depending on the settlements. Access points to the services of a multifunctional center, including services provided in electronic form, can be organized by equipping small rooms (for 1-2 windows) that meet comfort standards and are provided with information and technical means, including in local administrations, post offices, bank branches, as well as by organizing field (mobile) groups of the multifunctional center. It is necessary to conduct regular monitoring of the activities of the multifunctional center for compliance with established requirements, as well as the quality of the provision of state and municipal services based on the multifunctional center.

The procedure for the provision of state and municipal services, the list of documents required for obtaining the service, required from the applicant, and their form are contained, as a rule, in by-laws of the federal, regional and municipal levels. The requirements established in them place the main burden on the collection of documents, confirmation of one or another status on the applicant, which contradicts the requirements of the Federal Law "On the organization of the provision of state and municipal services" and does not allow the "one stop" principle to be fully implemented. In order to remove the existing regulatory restrictions on the possibility of providing state and municipal services in the “one stop shop” mode, it is necessary to make appropriate changes to the acts of the Russian Federation, acts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments.

The development of multifunctional centers is a prerequisite for the formation of an information society, since a multifunctional center should provide access to portals of state and municipal services and thereby help to increase the level of computer and legal literacy of the population, overcome the digital divide between the subjects of the Russian Federation. Multifunctional centers should become an access point for the population to electronic state and municipal services. Mechanisms should be provided to stimulate the implementation by the constituent entities of the Russian Federation of measures to create multifunctional centers, including encouragement for achieving results in improving the quality of the provision of state and municipal services.

Information systems for supporting the activities of all multifunctional centers existing on the territory of the Russian Federation should be combined into a single all-Russian information system for supporting the activities of multifunctional centers, providing:

integration with automated systems public authorities, local governments and organizations involved in the process of providing state and municipal services;

integration with information resources, including a single portal;

formation of reports on the activities of multifunctional centers, necessary for the analysis and development of proposals for further improvement of the activities of multifunctional centers.

In order to stimulate the process of providing state and municipal services on the basis of multifunctional centers, it is necessary to make a transition to reimbursement of the costs of a multifunctional center for the provision of services to authorities at various levels at the expense of the relevant budgets by providing interbudgetary transfers. It is necessary to develop mechanisms for providing funds from the budgets of all levels to reimburse the costs of multifunctional centers, form an appropriate regulatory legal framework, remove regulatory restrictions, and introduce new financing mechanisms into practice.

In order to implement uniform approaches to ensuring the quality of the provision of state and municipal services in multifunctional centers throughout the Russian Federation, the legislation should clearly establish the powers of executive authorities and local governments to ensure the creation and operation of multifunctional centers.

At the same time, at the federal level, it is necessary to adopt documents providing for:

the procedure for assessing the compliance of the multifunctional center with the established requirements;

a list of services that must be provided without fail in multifunctional centers;

requirements for concluding agreements, guidelines for the creation of multifunctional centers and requirements for concluding agreements on interaction between multifunctional centers and federal executive authorities, state non-budgetary funds, state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments;

unified rules, requirements and norms in the field of quality of provision of state and municipal services in multifunctional centers;

the procedure for maintaining the register of multifunctional centers.

Subjects of the Russian Federation, in case of interest in the creation of multifunctional centers on their territory:

develop regional programs in this area, organize their implementation and financing;

create (establish) and ensure the operation of multifunctional centers;

interact with local governments on the issues of placing multifunctional centers on the territory of municipalities, the participation of local governments in the creation and maintenance of the activities of multifunctional centers, the provision of municipal services on the basis of multifunctional centers;

monitor the quality of the provision of state and municipal services, implement the “one stop shop” principle in multifunctional centers on the territory of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation.

At the end of 2013, at least 1,500 multifunctional centers should operate in cities (urban districts) and municipal districts on the territory of the Russian Federation.