Aplicação de recursos públicos: um estudo comparativo entre as compras públicas e as compras em fundações de apoio à tecnologia e ciência

Abstract

This research seeks to compare purchases made by public agencies with purchases made by support foundations. More specifically, find out how the prices paid behave of permanent material made by the Federal University of Santa Maria and the Support Foundation for Technology and Science, which are comparable. the period of analysis was 2018. To this end, the study was based on a theoretical framework that addressed market theories and transaction costs, and the law applicable to public purchases. The research is characterized as descriptive in relation to the objectives and quantitative in relation to the approach of the problem, using secondary data, besides being characterized as a documentar research. The research used the comparative and inferential methods for the analyzes. The population consisted of 303 permanent material items purchased by the foundation, which were categorized, resulting in a total of 57 comparable items, which were analyzed in the light of the theory and current legislation. The main results pointed out that in 5 items the value obtained by UFSM was higher in its acquisitions; in 3 the value was the same; and in 49 items the price paid by FATEC was higher on acquisitions compared to the prices paid by UFSM. So, in relative terms, it can be stated that in 85.96% of the items that could be compared, during the analysis period, the amount paid by FATEC was higher than the amounts paid by UFSM. The price fluctuations in the items the university paid the most were between 3% and 22%, or between 44.39 and 600.01 in absolute terms. In the items in which the foundation paid higher amounts, the relative differences were concentrated up to 50% of difference, but they were up to 200% of the amount paid by UFSM. In absolute terms, the difference ranged from R $ 9,00 to R $ 2,398,12 per analyzed item. The main conclusions of the study are that purchases made at the foundation are not in line with theory. Still, that the processes of acquisition of permanent materials in the foundation are not generating purchases with lower values than the university. Finally, it is concluded that there is no adequate procurement planning at the foundation, which is different from university planning in terms of processes developed.