The General Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council have issued the "Opinions on Deepening the Reform of Project Evaluation, Talent Evaluation, and Institutional Evaluation"
Beijing, July 3 (Xinhua) -- Recently, the General Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the General Office of the State Council issued the "Opinions on Deepening the Reform of Project Evaluation, Talent Evaluation, and Institutional Evaluation", and issued a notice requiring all regions and departments to conscientiously implement them based on their actual situation.
The full text of the "Opinions on Deepening the Reform of Project Evaluation, Talent Evaluation, and Institutional Evaluation" is as follows.
The reform of project review, talent evaluation, and institutional evaluation (hereinafter referred to as "three evaluations") is an important measure to promote the reform of the scientific and technological evaluation system. In order to fully implement the spirit of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, implement the deployment of the National Science and Technology Innovation Conference and the requirements of the National Innovation Driven Development Strategy Outline, deepen the "three evaluations" reform, further optimize the evaluation and management mechanism of scientific research projects, improve the evaluation method of scientific and technological talents, perfect the evaluation system of scientific research institutions, strengthen supervision and evaluation, and build a scientific research integrity system, the following opinions are proposed.
1、 Overall requirements
（一）指导思想。全面贯彻党的十九大和十九届二中、三中全会精神，以习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想为指导，按照党中央、国务院决策部署，坚定实施创新驱动发展战略，深化科技体制改革，以激发科研人员的积极性创造性为核心，以构建科学、规范、高效、诚信的科技评价体系为目标，以改革科研项目评审、人才评价、机构评估为关键，统筹自然科学和哲学社会科学等不同学科门类，推进分类评价制度建设，发挥好评价指挥棒和风向标作用，营造潜心研究、追求卓越、风清气正的科研环境，形成中国特色科技评价体系，为提升我国科技创新能力、加快建设创新型国家和世界科技强国提供有力的制度保障。
（2） Basic principles
——Adhere to respecting rules. Following the development of scientific and technological talents and the laws of scientific research, scientifically setting evaluation goals, indicators, and methods, guiding researchers to devote themselves to research and pursue excellence. Strengthen top-level design, coordinate and streamline the "three evaluations" work, simplify and optimize the process, loosen the burden on researchers and institutions, and form a long-term mechanism.
——Adhere to a problem oriented approach. Focusing on the prominent problems in the "three evaluations" work, starting from breaking down institutional and mechanism barriers, identifying breakthroughs, paying more attention to quality, contribution, and performance, establishing a correct evaluation orientation, enhancing pertinence, highlighting practical and hard skills, and improving the value and effectiveness of reform.
——Persist in classified evaluation. Establish a classification evaluation index system and evaluation procedure standards based on the characteristics of different disciplines such as natural sciences, philosophy and social sciences, and military sciences. Basic cutting-edge research emphasizes originality orientation, with peer review as the main approach; Social welfare research emphasizes demand orientation, with industry users and social evaluations as the main focus; The development of application technology and the evaluation of achievement transformation highlight the enterprise subject and market orientation, with user evaluation, third-party evaluation, and market performance as the main focus.
——Adhere to objectivity and fairness. Objectively, truthfully, and accurately reflect the actual situation of different evaluation objects, promote peer evaluation, introduce international evaluation, further improve the openness and openness of scientific and technological evaluation activities, ensure the independence and impartiality of evaluation work, and ensure the scientific and objective nature of evaluation results.
（3） Main objective. During the 13th Five Year Plan period, greater breakthroughs will be made in optimizing the layout of the "three evaluations" work, reducing the number of "three evaluations" projects, improving the evaluation mechanism, and enhancing quality and efficiency. A classification evaluation system that adapts to the requirements of innovation driven development, conforms to the laws of scientific and technological innovation, and highlights the performance orientation of quality contributions will be basically formed. The allocation of scientific and technological resources will be more efficient, and the innovation and entrepreneurship potential of scientific research institutions and personnel will be stimulated. The ability of scientific and technological innovation and supply will be greatly improved, and scientific and technological progress will make greater contributions to economic and social development.
2、 Optimize the management of scientific research project review
（1） Improve the mechanism for compiling and publishing project guidelines. The preparation of the National Science and Technology Plan Project Guidelines should adopt effective methods to fully involve relevant departments, industries, localities, as well as the industry, science and technology associations, and the general public. The content of the project guide should widely incorporate opinions from all parties, better reflect the will of the country, and reflect the needs of all parties. If conditions permit, opinions can be solicited and reviewed online to improve the scientificity of the guide. The project volume should be moderate in size, with clear and focused objectives. The number of topics and participating units should be reasonably set to ensure that the tasks of each topic are closely related and form an organic whole, avoiding fragmentation during assembly and execution. Various national science and technology plans are gradually implementing an annual guide and regular release system. Guidelines for natural science projects should focus on significant originality, disruptive nature, and interdisciplinary innovation. The guidelines for philosophy and social science projects should focus on the political direction of research, academic innovation, social benefits, practical value, etc.
The project guide should clarify the organizational and implementation methods for different types of projects based on classification principles. National science and technology plan projects generally adopt an open competition method to select the best units to undertake. For major scientific and technological projects with clear national goals, clear technical routes, high organizational level, and concentrated advantageous undertaking units, targeted selection or targeted commissioning can be adopted to determine the undertaking units; For technology innovation projects led by enterprises, clear requirements should be put forward for their qualifications, technological innovation capabilities, and financial situation, and enterprises should be encouraged to jointly invest and organize implementation. Deepen the implementation of the military civilian integration development strategy, accelerate the construction of an innovative system for military civilian integration, and promote the demonstration and implementation of major science and technology projects integrating military and civilian areas.
（2） Ensure that project reviews are open, fair, and impartial. Establish fair, scientific, and clear rules for project review work, and publish them before the review. According to different project initiation methods, adopt corresponding evaluation procedures and methods, and implement the same evaluation method in the same round to avoid ambiguity in the evaluation results. Implement measures such as video review, telephone recording, feedback on review results, and project announcement to achieve appealability, searchability, and traceability throughout the entire review process. Allow project applicants to recuse themselves from units and individuals before the review. Establish a system for verifying the research background of project leaders, and conduct investigations on the research performance, experience, and integrity of project leaders who have objections during the public announcement period to ensure compliance with project requirements. Different categories of national science and technology plans should take into account the actual situation, the actual abilities of the responsible person and team, as well as project requirements, in project application and evaluation. Publishing papers, obtaining patents, honorary titles, undertaking projects, and winning awards should not be used as restrictive conditions. Explore the establishment of unconventional evaluation mechanisms for major original, disruptive, and interdisciplinary innovation projects. The review and management of confidential projects shall be carried out in accordance with relevant national regulations on scientific and technological confidentiality.
（3） Improve the selection and use of review experts. Further promote the construction of a centralized, standardized, safe, reliable, open and shared national science and technology expert database, timely supplement high-level experts, refine expert fields and research directions, and better meet project evaluation requirements. Improve the standards for entering the national science and technology expert database and the selection criteria for reviewing experts, clarify the rights and responsibilities of recommending units in expert recommendation and management, strengthen the responsibility of recommending units to review and control expert information, and establish a mechanism for regularly updating expert information in the database. Based on the characteristics of the project type, the selection criteria for evaluation experts and the principles for expert group composition should be reasonably determined. In principle, experts who are active in the forefront of scientific research and truly understand this topic should be selected to participate in the evaluation, fully considering their professional level and knowledge structure. Projects closely integrated with industrial applications should also select experts active in the production line to participate in the review. Establish and improve the integrity records, dynamic adjustments, and accountability system for expert review, and strictly regulate the behavior of expert review. Improve the relevant systems of expert rotation, random selection, recusal, and public disclosure, conduct background investigations on experts who have objections during the public disclosure period, and ensure that the selection and use of experts are scientific and fair. In the initial evaluation stage, small peer reviews will be implemented, and international peer reviews will be gradually introduced in appropriate proportions in some cutting-edge and basic science fields. Professional project management organizations should strengthen the management of the selection and confidentiality of expert review lists, and further promote the separation of expert selection and usage positions. For conducting conference reviews, the list of review experts should be announced in principle before the review; For communication reviews, the list of review experts should be strictly kept confidential before the review is completed, and if conditions permit, it should be made public to the public after the review is completed. Review experts should strengthen academic self-discipline, and academic communities should strengthen academic supervision.
（4） Improve the quality and efficiency of project reviews. Reasonably determine the number and total duration of expert review projects, organize experts to review the application materials in a timely manner before the meeting review, and ensure that experts fully understand the situation of the application projects; Reasonably determine the project report and inquiry defense time. In principle, the project leader should personally report the defense, and personnel who are not part of the project application team are not allowed to participate in the defense. Further optimize budget evaluation work, conduct budget evaluation only for proposed projects, standardize and optimize the selection and evaluation methods of budget evaluation experts, improve evaluation quality, and provide timely feedback on evaluation results.
（5） Strict project outcome evaluation and acceptance. The project undertaking unit bears the main responsibility for the management of scientific research achievements in the unit and shall organize a authenticity review of the results to be published by the scientific research personnel in the unit. The industry regulatory authorities shall conduct random checks on the scientific research achievements of their affiliated research units at a certain proportion every year. Before the acceptance of non confidential national science and technology plan project achievements, they should be included in the national science and technology reporting system, made public to the society, and subject to supervision, on the premise of complying with intellectual property protection laws and regulations. Professional project management institutions should organize the acceptance of national science and technology plan projects in accordance with the prescribed time limit and procedures, and conduct assessment and evaluation strictly based on the goals, indicators, and acceptance work standards and specifications determined in the task book. For those with clear application requirements, on-site spot checks and post evaluations of the application of the results shall be organized irregularly after project acceptance.
（六）加强国家科技计划绩效评估。针对科技计划整体情况组织开展绩效评估，重点评估计划目标完成、管理、产出、效果、影响等绩效。绩效评估通过公开竞争等方式择优委托第三方开展，以独立、专业、负责为基本要求，充分发挥第三方评估机构作用，根据需要引入国际评估。加强对第三方评估机构的规范和监督，逐步建立第三方评估机构评估结果负责制和信用评价机制。
（七）落实国家科技奖励改革方案。改革现行由政府下达指标、科技人员申报、单位推荐的方式，实行由专家学者、组织机构、相关部门提名的制度。提名者承担推荐、答辩、异议答复等责任，对相关材料的真实性和准确性负责。实行定标定额评审制度，自然科学奖、技术发明奖、科技进步奖实行按等级标准提名、独立评审表决的机制，一等奖评审落选项目不再降格参评二等奖。提高奖励工作的公开透明度，向全社会公开评奖规则、流程、指标数量，全程公示自然科学奖、技术发明奖、科技进步奖候选项目及其提名者。
三、改进科技人才评价方式
（一）统筹科技人才计划。加强部门、地方的协调，建立人才项目申报查重及处理机制，防止人才申报违规行为，避免多个类似人才项目同时支持同一人才。指导部门、地方针对不同支持对象科学设置科技人才计划，优化人才计划结构。
（二）科学设立人才评价指标。突出品德、能力、业绩导向，克服唯论文、唯职称、唯学历、唯奖项倾向，推行代表作评价制度，注重标志性成果的质量、贡献、影响。把学科领域活跃度和影响力、重要学术组织或期刊任职、研发成果原创性、成果转化效益、科技服务满意度等作为重要评价指标。在对社会公益性研究、应用技术开发等类型科研人才的评价中，SCI（科学引文索引）和核心期刊论文发表数量、论文引用榜单和影响因子排名等仅作为评价参考。注重个人评价与团队评价相结合，尊重和认可团队所有参与者的实际贡献。引进海外人才要加强对其海外教育和科研经历的调查验证，不把教育、工作背景简单等同于科研水平。注重发挥同行评议机制在人才评价过程中的作用。探索对特殊人才采取特殊评价标准。对承担国防重大工程任务的人才可采用针对性评价措施，对国防科技涉密领域人才评价开辟特殊通道。
（三）树立正确的人才评价使用导向。坚持正确价值导向，不把人才荣誉性称号作为承担各类国家科技计划项目、获得国家科技奖励、职称评定、岗位聘用、薪酬待遇确定的限制性条件，使人才称号回归学术性、荣誉性本质，避免与物质利益简单、直接挂钩。鼓励人才合理流动，引导人才良性竞争和有序流动，探索人才共享机制。中西部、东北老工业基地及欠发达地区的科研人员因政策倾斜因素获得的国家级人才称号、人才项目等支持，在支持周期内原则上不得跟随人员向东部、发达地区流转。合理发挥市场机制作用，逐步建立高层次人才流动的培养补偿机制。
（四）强化用人单位人才评价主体地位。坚持评用结合，支持用人单位健全科技人才评价组织管理，根据单位实际建立人才分类评价指标体系，突出岗位履职评价，完善内部监督机制，使人才发展与单位使命更好协调统一。按照深化职称制度改革方向要求，分类完善职称评价标准，不将论文、外语、专利、计算机水平作为应用型人才、基层一线人才职称评审的限制性条件。落实职称评审权限下放改革措施，支持符合条件的高校、科研院所、医院、大型企业等单位自主开展职称评审。选择部分国家临床医学研究中心试点开展临床医生科研评价改革工作。不简单以学术头衔、人才称号确定薪酬待遇、配置学术资源。
（五）加大对优秀人才和团队的稳定支持力度。国家实验室等的全职科研人员及团队不参与申请除国家人才计划之外的竞争性科研经费，由中央财政给予中长期目标导向的持续稳定经费支持。推动中央部委所属高校、科研院所完善基本科研业务费的内部管理机制，切实加强对青年科研人员的倾斜支持。
四、完善科研机构评估制度
（一）实行章程管理。推动中央级科研事业单位制定实施章程，确立章程在单位管理运行中的基础性制度地位，实现“一院（所）一章程”和依章程管理。章程要明确规定单位的宗旨目标、功能定位、业务范围、领导体制、运行管理机制等，确保机构运行各项事务有章可循。
（二）落实法人自主权。中央级科研事业单位主管部门要加快推进政事分开、管办分离，赋予科研事业单位充分自主权，对章程明确赋予科研事业单位管理权限的事务，由单位自主独立决策、科学有效管理，少干预或不干预。坚持权责一致原则，细化自主权的行使规则与监督制度，明确重大管理决策事项的基本规则、决策程序、监督机制、责任机制，形成完善的内控机制，保障科研事业单位依法合规管理运行。切实发挥单位党委（党组）把方向、管大局、保落实的重要作用，坚决防止党的领导弱化、党的建设缺失。
（三）建立中长期绩效评价制度。根据科研机构从事的科研活动类型，分类建立相应的评价指标和评价方式，避免简单以高层次人才数量评价科研事业单位。建立综合评价与年度抽查评价相结合的中央级科研事业单位绩效评价长效机制。以5年为评价周期，对科研事业单位开展综合评价，涵盖职责定位、科技产出、创新效益等方面。5年期间，每年按一定比例，聚焦年度绩效完成情况等重点方面，开展年度抽查评价。加强绩效评价结果与科研管理机制的衔接，充分发挥绩效评价的激励约束作用，在科技创新政策规划制定、财政拨款、国家科技计划项目承担、国家级科技人才推荐、国家科技创新基地建设、学科专业设置、研究生和博士后招收、科研事业单位领导人员考核评价、科研事业单位人事管理、绩效工资总量核定等工作中，将绩效评价结果作为重要依据。按照程序办理科研事业单位编制调整事项时，应参考绩效评价结果。
（四）完善国家科技创新基地评价考核体系。根据优化整合后的各类国家科技创新基地功能定位、任务目标、运行机制等不同特点，确定合理的评价方式和标准。科学与工程研究类基地重点评价原始创新能力、国际科学前沿竞争力、满足国家重大需求的能力；技术创新与成果转化类基地重点评价行业共性关键技术研发、成果转化应用能力、对行业技术进步的带动作用；基础支撑与条件保障类基地重点评价科技创新条件资源支撑保障和服务能力。对各类基地的评价要有利于人才队伍建设、能力提升和可持续发展。建立与评价结果挂钩的动态管理机制，坚持优胜劣汰、有进有出，实现国家科技创新基地建设运行的良性循环。
五、加强监督评估和科研诚信体系建设
（一）建立覆盖“三评”全过程的监督评估机制。将监督和评估嵌入“三评”活动事前、事中、事后全过程，确保科学、规范、高效。事前，实行诚信承诺制度，申报人员、评审专家、工作人员均应签订诚信承诺书，明确行为规范并划定负面行为的底线。事中，实行重点监督和随机抽查相结合，强化重点环节监督，加强对各类主体履职尽责和任务完成情况的监督评估。事后，强化绩效评估和动态调整，按照合同（委托书、协议书）约定开展绩效评估，评估结果作为对相关主体今后监督管理和动态调整的重要参考。建立学术期刊预警监测制度，定期发布学术期刊预警名单和黑名单。加强与纪检监察机关等的信息沟通，自觉接受监督。
（二）加强科研诚信建设。对科研不端行为零容忍，完善调查核实、公开公示、惩戒处理等制度。建设完善严重失信行为记录信息系统，对纳入系统的严重失信行为责任主体实行“一票否决”，一定期限、一定范围内禁止其获得政府奖励和申报政府科技项目等。推进科研信用与其他社会领域诚信信息共享，实施联合惩戒。逐步建立科研领域守信激励机制。将诚信监管关口前移，推动高校、科研院所、医院等单位建立完善学术管理制度，对科研人员学术成长轨迹和学术水平进行跟踪评价，加强对科研人员和青年学生的科研诚信教育，引导其树立正确的科研价值观，潜心科研、淡泊名利。强化导师对学生发表论文的主要内容和研究数据的真实性及实验的可重复性等的审核把关。引导学术共同体建立符合本领域特点的科研诚信规范。
六、加强组织实施，确保政策措施落地见效
（一）加强组织领导。国家科技体制改革和创新体系建设领导小组负责“三评”改革工作的组织领导和统筹协调。各有关部门要根据职责分工，细化任务举措，加强协调配合，抓好本领域“三评”改革的组织实施。各地区要结合实际制定具体方案，推进本地区“三评”改革工作。
（二）强化责任担当。各相关评价主体要强化责任意识，敢于担当，切实推进“三评”改革政策措施落实落地。各有关部门要深化“放管服”改革，进一步减少“三评”项目数量，加强监管，优化服务。各项目管理专业机构要切实履行监督管理职责，各法人单位、学（协）会要完善内部管理，广大科研人员要强化学术自律。各方面要齐心协力，共同营造良好科研环境。
（三）加大推进力度。加强政府部门、用人单位、学术共同体、第三方评估机构等各类评价主体间的相互配合和协同联动，强化“三评”之间的统筹协调。强化政策解读和宣传引导，加强对科研单位干部教育培训，提升科研管理水平，让广大科研人员知晓、掌握、用好改革政策。持续跟踪调研，加强总结评估，及时推广先进经验，发现和解决问题。加强督查督办，推动“三评”改革政策措施落实和动态完善，形成长效机制。
（四）开展试点示范。对一些关联度高、探索性强、暂时不具备全面推行条件的改革举措，可以结合实际情况选择部分地方和单位先期开展试点。鼓励试点地方和单位大胆探索实践，发挥示范突破和带动作用。对基层因地制宜的改革要探索建立容错纠错机制，激发改革动力，保护改革积极性。
（来源：新华社 本网编辑 寒亦）
