Skip to main content
Home / Sectors / Public Sector

Eureka Public Sector

Executing the budget is not changing the outcome. Decision simulations for people who allocate a public resource and have to answer for the effect, not the spend.

Who this is for

For municipal and regional directorates, procurement, policy planning and evaluation, and NGOs and the social economy. What gets practised here is the moment you choose who gets compensated and who does not, on incomplete evidence and against the calendar.

The decisions that go wrong

Six conversations you have already had

Each one is a simulation with an economic model behind it, not a discussion case.

The budget gets executed and the outcome does not change.

Allocating a finite line across competing programmes, with the execution indicator rewarding spend rather than effect. You see it when the next financial year arrives.

The tender document decided the result before the tender.

Prior studies and selection design: the criteria you set determine who can win. Competition opens or closes in the document, not at the opening of bids.

Cash or in kind: we chose on ideology, not evidence.

Cash transfer against in-kind aid, with different effects on consumption, dignity, the local market and administrative cost. All four move at once.

Everybody wants the park and nobody pays for it.

Public goods and free-riding: voluntary contribution collapses even when everyone gains, and understanding why is what lets you design the alternative.

We designed the incentive and people optimised the incentive.

Mechanism design: the rule produces the behaviour, not the intention the rule was written with. You practise it by watching people play your own design.

The evaluation arrived when nothing could be changed.

Impact evaluation around an eligibility cutoff: designing the measurement before the programme rather than after is the difference between learning and justifying.

And if your case is not on the list

What we build

On the Universal Simulation Framework we reframe framework, procedure and indicators in a 1-to-2-week cycle, and we also write a simulation from scratch on your own case. In this sector the legal reframe is almost never optional, and we budget it as part of the work.

Who buys this

Four buyers, four different reasons

Municipal and regional directorates

The person splitting a budget across services that are all necessary, who has to defend the split in public.

Procurement

Teams drafting tender documents and prior studies, where bias enters the document long before the evaluation panel.

Policy planning and evaluation

Whoever designs the programme and the measurement at the same time, and needs their team to understand why the order matters.

NGOs and the social economy

Organisations where the social mandate and financial sustainability get decided in the same meeting, with a funder watching.

Honest about the fit

Three limits we would rather state before a demo than after one:

  • We are not a fiscal microsimulation platform. We do not model your country's real population or accounts; we work with a stylised model in which the decision can be practised and got wrong at no cost.
  • We give no legal advice and certify nobody in public procurement. We teach the reasoning behind a tender, not the current text of the statute — and the statute changes faster than any training material.
  • The procurement and administration block is heavily shaped by the Colombian framework — SECOP, pliegos, estudios previos, Consejo de Estado, post-conflict. In LATAM that is an advantage; for a European or US body, add the reframe cycle, and we say so before selling it.

Frequently asked questions

Is this a policy microsimulation platform?

No. We do not model your country's real population or its fiscal accounts: that is EUROMOD-shaped work and we do not do it. We model the decision under a stylised model — who you compensate, which incentive you design, what you stop funding — with consequences that show up in later rounds.

Does it cover procurement?

Yes, and it is one of the most concrete blocks: prior studies, tender design and the selection process. The reference framework is Colombian, so for a European or US body you need to add the 1-to-2-week reframe cycle.

Is this legal advice or regulatory training?

No. It teaches the reasoning — what a tender document actually decides, where bias creeps in, what stays out of the file — not the current text of the statute, which changes. We issue no public-procurement certification.

Does it work for NGOs and the social economy?

Yes: NGO and social-enterprise management, impact, and the public-goods and free-riding block, which is the one that best explains why something everybody wants gets paid for by nobody.

Can you adapt it to our legal framework?

Yes, and in this sector it is almost always necessary. On the Universal Simulation Framework we reframe framework, procedure and indicators in a 1-to-2-week cycle, and we write a simulation from scratch on your own case.

Tell us which decision keeps jamming

One short call: you tell us the function, the profile of the participants and how much time you have. We tell you what exists today, what would have to be reframed, and what we will not be able to do.

Talk to the team

Last reviewed: 2026-09

Let's talk?
Contact