This article recapitulates the course and results of the overall assessment of publication results, both for the science itself and research, in the discipline of "history" in the Czech Republic from the period 2013-2015. Based on the data acquired in this manner, the re-distribution of financial means for further development of individual research organisations was carried out. On average, the discipline of "history" annually presented about 1800 separate results (academic volumes, chapters in books and articles in scholarly periodicals). The author outlines the methodology of assessment and states the names of actual historians who were members of the panel of assessors. In conclusion he lists the main pros and cons, which this model of assessment brought compared to other systems of assessment. The points system, which directly generates finances for further research, influenced the discipline of "history" considerably in terms of quantity during the period concerned. However, it was possible to eliminate this phenomenon thanks to the physical verification of all submitted results and their allocation on a qualitative scale.