Skip to content
SIH Buddyby Ganeev Singh
Dev
All problem statements
SIH26239Worth consideringacceptance 3/5

AI-Enabled Scholarship and Fellowship Management System for Scheduled Tribes

Ministry of Tribal Affairs · Smart Education · Software

Reliably buildable and useful but a familiar administrative-workflow shape — win it by genuinely demonstrating the configurability engine across two different schemes and effective deficiency detection, and distinguish it clearly from its student-facing sibling SIH26238.

What it actually is

Running the tribal scholarship and fellowship schemes (like NFST and the overseas NOS) involves many manual stages — registration, document submission, eligibility verification, scrutiny, screening, selection, post-selection management — causing delays, repeated correspondence and errors. The ask is a single configurable administrative platform that streamlines the end-to-end process across schemes, using automation and AI to reduce manual verification and flag deficient applications.

What to build

An end-to-end scholarship/fellowship management platform (the administrator's side, versus SIH26238's student app) that brings application, eligibility verification, document scrutiny, selection, communication and post-selection management onto one system, with a configurable engine so each scheme's distinct eligibility criteria, documents and selection processes are handled within a common framework, using automation and AI to reduce manual verification, identify incomplete or deficient applications, support faster processing, and improve verification accuracy and workflow visibility.

Smallest thing that wins the room

Configure two schemes with different eligibility rules in the same system, submit applications, and show the platform auto-flagging a deficient application, running the configured eligibility check, and moving valid ones through scrutiny to selection with full status visibility for the administrator.

How crowded this one gets

A guess, projected from the 2025 statements — the last year where both the submission counts and the winners were published.

Moderate150–360 teams expectedroughly 1 in 130–301 wins it

Quieter than 28% of the 240 · #174 of 240 by expected field

A normal-sized field. Your idea has to be good, not miraculous.

Why: central ministry statements sat below the average.

This is a guess, not a fact

Nobody has published 2026’s numbers yet. This is an analysed estimate from last year’s pattern, so please do not take it as the truth — check the live counter on the SIH portal before you decide anything. The range covers the middle half of likely outcomes, so one statement in two lands outside it. Entry closes at 500 ideas per statement, so no range goes past that — a statement that reaches the cap fills and shuts rather than drawing an unlimited crowd. The model reads only three things a team can see before choosing — software or hardware, the theme, and what kind of body posted it — and those explain about a quarter of the variation in last year’s field sizes (R² 0.25 on held-out statements). Trust the band more than the number, and the ordering more than either. It cannot see how good your idea is, which is the part that actually decides it.

The scores

The number is the shorthand. The line under it is the reason.

What you will be writing

  • Configurable workflow engine (state machine / BPMN)
  • Rule-based per-scheme eligibility configuration
  • Document scrutiny + deficiency detection (ML/NLP)
  • Selection and post-selection management
  • Role-based admin dashboard
  • Status visibility and audit
  • Scholarship administration
  • Workflow automation
  • Government process digitisation

Prior art to read before you start

configurable scheme management platform · application deficiency detection · end-to-end selection workflow

Analysed by Claude Opus. Every score above is a judgment call with its reasoning attached — kindly cross-check this against the official statement on the SIH portal before your team commits to it.