What faculty KPI and rating software does a university in Uzbekistan need?
Short answer. Faculty KPI software runs the university's own KPI regulation: a teacher uploads evidence, a reviewer accepts or rejects it with a reason and points, and the total and bonus follow the regulation, which the university approves itself. Universities keep KPI in Excel, their own portal or a developer-built system; Zarmed University's Teachers' KPI is an Avada project.
The law and the university's regulation: who sets what
The law sets a yearly evaluation on 110-point criteria (Cabinet of Ministers resolution No. 20, point 3 and the annex).
| Question | The law (lex.uz) | Common in universities' own regulations (examples, not a legal requirement) |
|---|---|---|
| Is a KPI mandatory? | Not under that name for every university. The work of each teacher hired by competition is reviewed at the end of every academic year on criteria worth 110 points (Cabinet resolution No. 20, point 3). Accreditation checks whether a KPI system and incentives based on it are in place (criterion 27). It is a general, not a mandatory, criterion; but if criterion 27 is rated "not met" (fewer than half of its five indicators met), the whole "human resources" direction is rated "not met" (Cabinet resolution No. 498, point 43). | a separate KPI regulation; an annex of indicators for each post |
| Who approves it? | In the 41 financially independent state universities, the university itself approves its KPI criteria (PQ-61, point 2; since 13 April 2026, before that a power of the supervisory board). The scientific council approves the yearly review procedure (Cabinet resolution No. 20, point 3). | a decision of the university council or scientific council, a rector's order |
| Which indicators? | The annex to resolution No. 20: 5 blocks, 19 indicators, 110 points at most — teaching and methods 40, educational work 20, research 30, contribution to the university 10, personal qualifications 10; the university distributes points within the indicators. Accreditation: teaching, academic-methodical, research, spiritual and educational, and social work must be covered. | separate lists for teachers, heads of department, deans and staff; discipline, initiative; extra points from the line manager |
| How often? | At the end of every academic year (resolution No. 20, point 3). The KPI period (a semester, a year) and how the bonus is paid (monthly, for example) are set by the university's regulation (our reading). | a half-year or an academic year |
| Who checks the evidence? | A commission approved by the rector's order; the scientific council reviews the results (resolution No. 20, point 3). PQ-60 (point 6) provides for a research-management part in HEMIS holding a database of research output. | a KPI commission chaired by a vice-rector; evidence is the employee's report, the manager's submission and data in the university's electronic system |
| What is it tied to? | In the 41 universities, the university sets pay and the KPI-based incentive procedure (PQ-61, point 2). The rector may put a teacher's fitness for the post to the scientific council; a commission reviews the teacher's work first; if found unfit (a low level of methodical and educational work, lectures and seminars), the contract ends in the set procedure (resolution No. 20, point 29). This is a separate step, not the yearly score itself. Accreditation: material and non-material incentives on KPI results. | a bonus from the incentive fund; for a low score, a review of the contract or a higher department plan |
| Appeal | The acts we read set no internal appeal against a KPI result; disputes over ending a contract are settled as the law provides (resolution No. 20, point 30). | a short written appeal window (one day is seen too); results kept in the personnel file for several years |
The right column is what several state universities' public documents we read have in common; no university is named, and it is not a legal requirement. The state gives universities no ready-made "model KPI regulation": we found none on lex.uz (25 October 2026). The nearest models are the annex to Cabinet resolution No. 20 and accreditation criterion 27.
How a KPI regulation is built
- The basis. Which acts you rely on (resolution No. 20; PQ-61 if you are among the 41; accreditation criterion 27), who is evaluated (which posts), for what period.
- Criteria and weights (the rating points). Start from the five blocks of resolution No. 20. For each criterion: what counts, how many points, for which period. A separate annex for each post.
- Evidence. For each criterion, which document is the evidence: an order, a certificate, a link to a paper, a record in HEMIS. Do not ask teachers again for what HEMIS already holds (our reading).
- Who checks. The commission is approved by the rector's order and the scientific council reviews the results (resolution No. 20, point 3). Set who looks first (head of department, dean) and that a rejection always records its reason.
- Appeal. The deadline, who hears it, how the decision is recorded. The law does not require this; accreditation asks for an evaluation that is open, objective and fair, and an appeal procedure is one way to show it (our reading).
- The link to pay. The 41 universities set their KPI-based incentive procedure themselves (PQ-61, point 2). In other universities the rector sets supplements and additional payments as the law provides (Regulation on higher education, point 60): write down how points become a supplement. Bonus and supplement systems are set in agreement with the trade-union committee, and incentive pay in budget-funded bodies follows the law (Labour Code, article 252). Settle the source of the money (budget or own income) with your finance office.
- A yearly review. Accreditation expects the KPI system's effectiveness to be analysed periodically, with proposals from the analysis (criterion 27).
A detailed article on writing a KPI regulation and tying it to pay is in preparation.
Excel or a system
Excel is enough for one department and one period: the sheet is quick to make and everyone knows it. With more teachers and reviewers the trouble starts: evidence spreads across folders and messengers; nobody can see who changed what and when; reasons for rejection go unwritten; an appeal leaves no trace; when the regulation changes, the formulas are rewritten by hand; and at accreditation it is hard to show that the evaluation was open and objective.
A system keeps, for each piece of evidence, its status (new, under review, accepted, rejected), the reviewer, the reason and the date; the total is calculated by the regulation's rule; deans and the commission get a report. A system has its own demands: rolling it out takes time; if the regulation changes every year, the criteria must be changeable without a programmer; and linking it to HEMIS is separate work.
Three questions decide it: how many teachers and reviewers; is there an appeal; are points tied to a supplement. If the answers are "many, yes, yes", a spreadsheet stops being enough (our reading).
What the law says
The ministry is the Ministry of Education and Science, created by Presidential decree PF-213 of 3 October 2026 from the Ministry of Preschool and School Education and the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Innovation (it is their legal successor). The acts below still use the old name. PF-213 (point 4) gives two months for proposed amendments, so the acts below may change soon. lex.uz/docs/-8519155 (official texts in Uzbek and Russian)
- Presidential resolution PQ-61 of 24 December 2021 on giving state higher-education institutions financial independence (as worded by decree PF-58 of 10 April 2026), point 2: a financially independent state university decides itself on approving "criteria for evaluating the effectiveness (KPI)" of its head, staff and teachers, and on setting pay and the KPI-based incentive procedure (our translation). Until 13 April 2026 these powers belonged to the supervisory board (point 6). Annex 1: 41 universities; the ministry may add more. lex.uz/docs/-5793251 (official text in Uzbek) Note: PQ-61 of 14 February 2025 is a different act (graduate employment), not about KPI.
- Regulation on hiring teaching staff of higher-education institutions by competition, approved by Cabinet of Ministers resolution No. 20 of 10 February 2006, point 3 (as worded by resolution No. 353 of 30 June 2026): the work of teaching staff hired by competition is reviewed in full by a university commission approved by the rector's order "at the end of every academic year" on the annex's criteria (our translation); the scientific council approves the procedure and reviews the results. Point 29: the rector puts fitness for the post to the scientific council, after a commission reviews the teacher's work; if found unfit, the contract ends in the set procedure. Point 30: such disputes are settled as the law provides. Annex: 19 indicators, 110 points at most; the university sets how points are distributed. lex.uz/docs/-973497 (official text in Uzbek)
- Order No. 5 of 2 December 2025 of the director of the National Agency for Education Quality Assurance under the Presidential Administration (registered by the Ministry of Justice on 23 December 2025 as No. 3732), the indicators for comprehensive state accreditation of higher-education institutions, criterion 27: a system for evaluating the effectiveness of managers and teaching staff (KPI) is in place and staff receive material and non-material incentives on it. Five indicators: a procedure developed and approved; teaching, academic-methodical, research, spiritual and educational, and social work covered; clear indicators and criteria, an open, objective and fair evaluation; periodic analysis of its effectiveness; incentives on the results. A criterion is met when at least 70 % of its indicators are met; 50 to 70 % is "partly met", under 50 % "not met". lex.uz/docs/-7937311 (official text in Uzbek)
- Cabinet of Ministers resolution No. 498 of 6 August 2025, the Regulation on the accreditation procedure it approves, annex 2, section III: the KPI criterion sits in the "human resources" direction and is not among the mandatory criteria; point 43: a direction is met only if no criterion is rated "not met" and at most two general criteria are "partly met". lex.uz/docs/-7671324 (official text in Uzbek)
- Presidential resolution PQ-60 of 24 December 2021, point 6 (as worded by decree PF-107 of 3 July 2023): the ministry is to introduce HEMIS's research-management part, which is to hold a database of teachers' research projects, papers and academic-methodical publications and cover the assessment of teachers' and departments' research potential. For institutions with other software managing education processes, integrating it with HEMIS on the ministry's requirements is mandatory; whether KPI software counts as such software, the act does not say. lex.uz/docs/-5793261 (official texts in Uzbek and Russian)
- Regulation on higher education (ministry order No. 99 of 10 March 2026, registered by the Ministry of Justice on 3 April 2026 as No. 3807): a teacher receives pay, supplements and incentive payments as the law provides (point 50) and passes periodic attestation (point 51); the rector sets supplements and other additional payments as the law provides (point 60). The word "KPI" does not appear in it. lex.uz/docs/-8117474 (official text in Uzbek)
- Labour Code of 28 October 2022, article 252: systems of bonuses, supplements to the basic pay and other incentive payments are set by the employer in agreement with the trade-union committee; in budget-funded bodies the order and conditions of incentive payments are set by legislation (our translation). lex.uz/docs/-6257288 (official texts in Uzbek and Russian)
Checked: 25 October 2026.
Example: Zarmed University
A medical university in Samarkand and Bukhara, an Avada project, six systems on one base. Under "Before", the project page says: "Lessons, exams, teachers' scores, teaching load and assets lived in separate spreadsheets, folders and programs." Teachers' KPI — status: in operation.
What the KPI card on the Demo page shows: a teacher uploads evidence by their university's own rules; a reviewer accepts or rejects, with a reason and points; the teacher's total in points and their monthly bonus. Not yet: importing papers from Scopus and ORCID, a link to HEMIS; the dean's report as a PDF — CSV only for now.
Questions and answers
Is a KPI regulation required by law? Not under the name "KPI" for every university. Every university has a commission review the work of teachers hired by competition at the end of each academic year on 110-point criteria (Cabinet resolution No. 20, point 3). The 41 financially independent state universities approve their own KPI criteria (PQ-61, point 2). Accreditation checks that a KPI system exists (criterion 27). It is a general, not a mandatory, criterion; but if criterion 27 is rated "not met" (fewer than half of its five indicators met), the whole "human resources" direction is rated "not met" (Cabinet resolution No. 498, point 43).
Can KPI be tied to pay? In the 41 universities, yes: the university sets pay and the KPI-based incentive procedure (PQ-61 of 24 December 2021, point 2). In other universities the rector sets supplements as the law provides (Regulation on higher education, point 60). Either way, bonus and supplement systems are agreed with the trade-union committee (Labour Code, article 252). Accreditation looks at whether incentives follow KPI results.
Who checks the evidence? By law, a commission approved by the rector's order; the scientific council reviews the results (resolution No. 20, point 3). Universities usually give the first check to the head of department or the dean and require a reason for every rejection.
Is Excel enough? For one department and one period, yes. With many teachers, several reviewers, an appeal and points tied to a supplement, a spreadsheet loses who accepted or rejected what, when and why; and that record is what shows at accreditation that the evaluation was open and objective.
Must KPI software be linked to HEMIS? PQ-60 (point 6) requires a university with other software managing education processes to integrate it with HEMIS; whether KPI software counts, the act does not say, so confirm your own case with the ministry. If your university's HEMIS already holds the research output, do not ask for it again for KPI.
Is there a model KPI regulation? We found none for universities on lex.uz (25 October 2026). The nearest are the annex to Cabinet resolution No. 20 (19 indicators, 110 points) and accreditation criterion 27 (five indicators).