REPORT ON COMPLIANCE CHECKS UNDERTAKEN ON 120 PROCURING AND DISPOSING ENTITIES
18 th September 2008
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acronyms 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 8
1.1 Background 8 1.2 Scope of the Complian ce Checks 8 1.3 Methodology used for the Compliance Checks 8 1.4 Time Frame 9 1.5 Limitations 10
2.0 MAIN FINDINGS 11
2.1 Entity Performance by Compliance Area 11 2.1.1 Procurement Structures 11 2.1.2 Procurement Planning 14 2.1.3 Solicitation and Bidding Procedures 16 2.1.4 Evaluation Procedures 18 2.1.5 Contract Award and Management 19 2.1.6 Reporting 21 2.1.7 Perf or mance of Contracts Committee s 24 2.1.8 Record Keeping 25 2.2 Overall Performance of Entities 28 2.2.1 Performance of Central Government PDEs 28 2.2.2 Performance of Local Government PDEs 28 2. 2. 3 Comparison of Performance of CG PDEs and LG PDEs under 29 Compliance Areas
3.0 COMPLIANCE RATINGS OF ENTITIES 32
3.1 Central Government Entities 32 3.1.1 Ministries 32 Ministry of Defence 32 Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development 36 Ministry of Finance, Planning & Economic Development 39 Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development 42 Ministry of Information and Communications Technology 45 Ministry of Internal Affairs 48 Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs 52 Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development 55 Ministry of Public Service 58 Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Industry 61 Ministry of Water and Environment 65 Ministry of Works and Transport 68
2 3.1.2 Government D epartments / Agencies 71 Auditor General 71 Co urts of Judicature 75 Directorate of Public Prosecutions 78 Inspectorate of Government 81 Internal Security Organisation 84 National Curriculum Development Centre 87 Office of the Prime Minister 90 Parliament of Uganda 93 Population Secretariat 97 Privatization Unit 101 Rural Electrification Agency 104 State House 107 Uganda Police 111 Uganda Prisons Service 114
3.1.3 Statutory Bodies 117 Capital Markets Authority 117 Cotton Development Organisation 120 Diary Development Authority 123 Electricity Regulatory Authority 126 National Environment Management Authority 129 National Forest Authority 132 National Planning Authority 135 Uganda Coffee Development Authority 138 Uganda Investment Authority 141 Uganda Revenue Authority 145
3.1.4 State Enterprises 148 Micro Finance Support Centre Ltd 148 National Housing and Construction Company Ltd 152 National Water and Sewerage Corporation Ltd 156 Post Bank (U) Ltd 159 Posta Uganda Ltd 162 Uganda Develop ment Bank 165 Uganda Electricity Distribution Company 169 Uganda Electricity Generation Company 172 Uganda Electricity Transmission Company 175 Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation 178 Uganda Property Holdings Ltd 181
3.1.5 Commissions 185 Education Service Commission 185 Health Service Commission 188 Local Government Finance Commission 191 Public Service Commission 194 Uganda AIDS Commission 198 Uganda Communications Commission 201
3 Uganda Human Rights Commission 204 Uganda Insurance Commission 207
3.1.6 Regional Referral Hospitals 210 Arua Hospital 210 Gulu Hospital 213 Masaka Hospital 216 Mbale Hospital 220 Mulago Hospital 224 Soroti Hospital 227
3.1.7 Training Institution s 231 Gulu University 231 Kyambogo University 234 Law Development Centre 237 Makerere University Business School 241 Management Training and Advisory Centre 244 Uganda Management Institute 247
3.1.8 Councils 251 National Council for Children 251 National Council for Higher Education 254 National Council for Science and Technology 258
3.1.9 Boards 261 Uganda Export Promotion Board 261 Uganda National Examination Board 265
3.2 Local Government Entities 268
3.2.1 Districts 268 Adjumani District 268 Apac District 271 Budaka District 275 Bundibugyo District 279 Bushenyi District 282 Busia District 286 Gulu District 289 Hoima District 292 Iganga District 296 Isi ngiro District 300 Kabale District 30 4 Kalangala District 307 Kamwenge District 310 Kanungu District 313 Kapchorwa District 317 Kasese District 321 Kayunga District 32 5
4 Kibaale District 32 8 Kiboga District 332 Kiruhura District 33 6 Kisoro District 339 Luwero District 342 Masaka District 345 Mbale District 349 Moyo District 35 3 Mpigi District 35 6 Mubende District 359 Mukono District 363 Nakasongola District 366 Namutamba District 370 Nebbi District 374 Oyam District 37 8 Pader District 381 Pallisa District 384 Rukungiri District 388 Sembabule District 392 Wakiso District 395
3.2.2 Municipalities 39 9 Arua Municipality 399 Entebbe Municipality 402 Fort Portal Municipality 406 Gulu Municipality 409 Jinja Municipality 413 Kabale Municipality 417 Kampala City Council 420 Lira Municipality 42 4 Mbarara Municipality 42 7 Soroti Municipality 431 Tororo Municipality 434
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND WAY FORWARD 43 8
4.1 Procurement Structures 438 4.2 Procurement and Disposal Planning 438 4.3 Solicitation and Bidding Procedures 439 4.4 Evaluation Procedures 440 4.5 Contract Award and Management 4.6 Reporting 4.7 Performance of Contracts Committees 4.8 Record Keeping 4.9 Way Forward 440
5 ANNEXES 442
Annex I - Compliance Assessment Tool 442 Annex II – Overall Performance of the 120 PDEs 449 Annex III – Performance of PDEs by category 459 Annex IV- Number of Contracts Committee and PDU members in each PDE 469 Annex V – Overall Ranking of LG and CG PDEs
FIGURES 13
Fig. I – Performance of CG PDEs under Procurement Structures 13 Fig. II - Performance of LG PDEs under Procurement Structures 13 Fig. III- Performance of CG PDEs under Procurement / Disposal Planning 15 Fig. IV - Performance of LG PDEs under Procurement / Disposal Planning 16 Fig. V - Performance of CG PDEs under Solicitation and Bidding Procedures 17 Fig. VI - Performance of LG PDEs under Solicitation and Bidding Procedures 17 Fig. VII - Performance of CG PDEs under Evaluation Procedures 18 Fig. VIII- Performance of LG PDEs under Evaluation Procedures 19 Fig. IX- Performance of CG PDEs under Contract Award and Management 20 Fig. X- Performance of LG PDEs under Contract Award and Management 21 Fig. XI - Performance of CG PDEs under Reporting 23 Fig. XII - Perfo rmance of LG PDEs under Reporting 23 Fig XIII - Performance of CG Contracts Committees 24 Fig XIV - Performance of LG Contracts Committees 25 Fig. XV- Performance of CG PDEs under Record Keeping 26 Fig. XVI- Performance of LG PDEs under Record Keeping 27 Fig. XVII -Performance of CG PDEs under all Compliance Areas 28 Fig. XVIII -Pe rformance of LG PDEs under all Compliance Areas 29 Fig. XIX – Compliance Rating of CG PDEs 30 Fig. XX - Compliance Rating of LG PDEs 31
6 LIST OF ACRONYMS
AG Attorney General AO Accounting Officer CAO Chief Administrative Officer CC Contracts Committee CG Central Government EC Evaluation Committee IGG Inspector General Government GoU Government of Uganda LG Local Government LGA Local Government Act Cap 243 LGPDR Local Government Procurement and Disposal RegulationsNo.39/ 2006 LPO Local Purchase Order MOFPED Ministry of Finance, Planning & Economic Development MOJCA Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs MOLG Ministry of Local Government OAG Office of Auditor General PDE Procurement and Disposal Entity PDU Procurement and Disposal Unit PPDA Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority PPDA Act Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act No. 1/2003 PPDA Reg. Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Regulation, No.70/2003 PRSC Poverty PS/ST Permanent Secretary/Secretary to the Treasury SBD Standard Bidding Document SG Solicitor General TC Town Clerk UD User Departments WB World Bank
7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the key findings and recommendations of a Compliance Check exercise undertaken by the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority (PPDA) between May and August 2008. The main objective of the exercise was to assess the compliance levels of 120 PDEs (72 Central Government Entities and 48 Local Government Entities) as a national representative sample of all the procuring and disposing entities that are currently slightly over 200 in number.
Main Findings The exercise was undertaken on the basis of a Compliance Rating Tool that covered 8 Compliance Areas. The following is a summary of the main findings under each of the eight compliance areas:
Procurement Structures Out of the 120 PDEs assessed 48 PDEs (40%) were not compliant to the legal requirement of having the full membership of the 5 Contracts Committee members approved by the Secretary to the Treasury. A number of Donor funded projects were not using procurement structures of the PDE. Some of the LG PDEs had not yet filled the positions for the Procurement and Disposal Unit staff with procurement professionals.
Procurement Planning Out of the 120 PDEs assessed, 69 PDEs (57.5%) had a procurement plan that was being followed by the PDE. LG PDEs faced challenges in preparation of procurement plans since their User Departments include Town Councils and sub-counties which are geographically distant from the PDU. Few PDEs had in place framework contracts for procurement of repetitively procured or common user items.
Solicitation and Bidding Procedures Most CG PDEs were using the standard solicitation documents in the standard format issued by PPDA LG PDEs not applying standard formats since the LG (Procurement and Disposal) Guidelines had only recently been issued to them. A number of procurements sampled did not adhere to the thresholds in the determination of procurement methods and direct procurements were common especially for Regional Referral Hospitals.
Evaluation Procedures Some PDEs had no record at all of the evaluation process for any of the procurement cases reviewed and others flouted the evaluation procedures and criteria. LG PDEs need more training in this area since some Contracts Committees had appointed one evaluation team for all procurements. Few of the procurement files reviewed had a signed record of the acceptance of code of ethical conduct by the Evaluation Committee members.
Contract Award and Management Many irregularities noted under this area and very few PDEs had records on contract management on the files reviewed.
8 Most of the LG PDEs were not compliant to the legal requirement to seek the Attorney General’s clearance for contracts above Ug Shs. 50m was hardly adhered to by the Local Government PDEs. Few LG PDEs had copies of the signed contracts on the files making it difficult for the PDU to monitor the implementation of the approved contract. For most contracts, there was no appointment of contract managers and no contract monitoring or supplier appraisal reports prepared.
Reporting Requirements There was poor compliance by LG PDEs to this requirement and some CG PDEs with sub divisions had incomplete and infrequent submissions to PPDA. Some Entities were not including all the procurements and disposals undertaken in the reports sent to PPDA PDEs that had sub-delegated Contracts Committees were not submitting reports to PPDA through the main Contracts Committee.
Performance of Contracts Committee Some of the Entities had no consistent records for the Contracts Committee meetings and decisions. A number of the CCs had granted retrospective approvals for procurements undertaken by user departments as emergencies. For both CG and LG PDEs the record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members was not signed by the members at each meeting
Record Keeping For both CG and LG PDEs the record keeping culture in the PDEs was very poor with key documents scattered in several files or in different departments within the PDE. Many of the individual transactions lacked procurement or disposal reference numbers. The PDU lacked adequate storage facilities to store the bulky bidding documents and files
The overall performance under the compliance areas revealed that the compliance area where both CG and LG PDEs scored highest was under Procurement Structures and the compliance areas under which they scored lowest were the following: Record keeping; and Contract Award and Contract Management.
Out of the 72 CG PDEs, the performance of 48 PDEs (40%) was rated as satisfactory and above while for the 48 LG PDEs, 13 PDEs (27%) scored satisfactory and above.
Key Recommendations
The main recommendations of this report arising from the findings are the following:
1. The need to strengthening the Institutional Framework by ensuring the full composition of all Contracts Committees and establishment of the Procurement and Disposal Unit manned by procurement professionals in all PDEs.
2. Enforcement of Procurement and Disposal Planning. Accounting Officers should be required to support their budget estimate submissions with procurement plans as a pre-condition of approval by MOFPED and Parliament. PPDA should publish the list of PDEs that are not
9 compliant to this requirement in the press and refer them to the PS/ST with a recommendation to withhold funding for these PDEs.
3. The need to reduce the overall procurement lead time by having maximum statutory time frames for key stages in the procurement cycle.
4. The need to promote the achievement of value for money by preventing PDEs from eliminating fairly priced bids on their failure to meet eligibility criteria and thus the need for PPDA to provide guidance to PDEs on which criteria should be evaluated under the Preliminary evaluation process and which should fall under post qualification.
5. The need to enforce the requirement for submission of complete monthly and quarterly of reports to PPDA in a timely manner by publication of the list of non compliant PDEs and referring them to the PS/ST for disciplinary action.
6. The PPDA Act should be revised to clearly provide for what amounts to a conflict of interest in procurement and disposal process and the procedures applicable where such conflict exists.
7. Follow up compliance checks should be undertaken on all the PDEs assessed. For the PDEs that are found to be persistent offenders as regards proper record keeping they should be referred to PS/ST and Head of Public Service for stringent disciplinary measures.
8. The need to conduct tailored training programmes for the Entities on the compliance areas where they rated less than satisfactory.
The results of the compliance rating of the 120 PDEs are to be circulated to all the key stakeholders in particular the competent authorities for their further action on the above recommendations. The specific PDE recommendations in this report will be given action time frames for implementation by each of the PDEs and are to be followed up by PPDA in future compliance checks.
10 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority is the regulatory and oversight agency that advises Government on matters relating to public procurement and disposal. Under Section 6 (d) and 7 (r) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act and Regulation 6 (e) (iii) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Regulations, the Authority is mandated to monitor compliance of procuring and disposing entities, administer and enforce compliance with all the provisions of the Act, Regulations, Guidelines, solicitation documents and specification standards issued by the Authority. To this end, the Authority instituted compliance checks on 120 procuring and disposing entities (PDEs) as a representative sample of all the PDEs.
1.2 Scope of the Compliance Checks
In order to have a uniform assessment of all PDEs, the Authority adopted a Compliance Rating Tool with 8 Compliance Areas. Each Compliance area had 3-5 compliance indicators that were scored under a Graphic Rating Scale ranging from a minimum score of 0 to a maximum score of 2. Each compliance indicator was based on a legal requirement under the PPDA Act, LG Act and Regulations / Guidelines made there under. In addition the rating system indicated the source of information and the means of verification for each compliance indicator to improve the quality and ease the verification of the results.
The following were the 8 Compliance Areas under the Compliance Rating Tool: (a) Procurement Structures. (b) Procurement Planning (c) Solicitation and Bidding procedures (d) Evaluation procedures (e) Contract award and management (f) Reporting Requirements (g) Performance of Contracts Committee (h) Record Keeping
The scores of the 120 Entities have been rated ranging from Highly Satisfactory to Highly Unsatisfactory at two levels, namely- (a) Assessment of a Compliance Area within a PDE; and (b) Assessment of the Overall Compliance of a PDE.
Under the above compliance rating system, each PDE was rated basing on actual compliance with the indicators under each compliance area. The system of rating system was able to clearly highlight the differences in the overall performance of the different PDEs as well as under the specific compliance indicators. The Compliance Assessment Tool on which the 120 Compliance checks were conducted is in Annex I of this report.
1.3 Methodology for Compliance Checks
1.3.1 Selection of the PDEs The Authority identified the 120 PDEs on which the compliance checks were to be undertaken based on the following criteria: (a) Reference to the planned audits of the Procurement Audit and Investigations department to ensure that there were no overlaps by the Authority in the same PDEs.
11 (b) Reviewing monthly/quarterly reports and risk ratings from previous procurement audits, frequency of administrative review complaints and waiver requests. (c) Assessment of PDEs’ annual budgets, value and complexity of the procurements handled. (d) The size of the PDE in terms of staffing and geographical spread as well as their classification into categories of large, medium and small PDEs by the Ministries of Public Service and Local Government. (e) The profiles of the PDEs. This includes their mandates and types e.g. for CG PDEs whether Ministry, Government department, Statutory body, Commission, Referral Hospital, Training Institution, State Enterprise, Council, Board etc. For LG PDEs what was considered was the regional representation of the District or Municipality. (f) Based on the above criteria, the 120 PDEs were further subdivided into CG and LG PDEs using a ratio of 3:2 resulting in 72 CG PDEs and 48 LG PDEs. The list of the 120 PDEs is under Annex III .
1.3.2 Planning Once the selected PDEs for which compliance checks are to be undertaken were approved by Management, a standard letter was sent out to the Accounting Officers of the PDE. The letter contained the following information- (a) The date the compliance check is commencing at the premises of the PDE and the period it is envisaged to take (not more than two working days). (b) The conducting of an introductory meeting on the date of commencement of the compliance check with the AO, Chairperson and other members of the Contracts Committee and the head of the PDU. (c) The procurement/disposal documents and records of the PDE during the preceding six months that are to be availed to the compliance team. (d) That management of the PDE will be given an opportunity to respond in writing to the draft report of the compliance team within seven working days of dispatch of the draft report to Accounting Officer. In case of failure/refusal to respond in this time frame, the compliance check report will be deemed final and will be published.
1.3.3 Compliance Check Teams In order to achieve the benchmark of 120 Compliance checks by 30 th September 2008, the Authority outsourced 80 of the Compliance Checks to Individual Consultants while 40 were done in house. The heads of the compliance teams were responsible for ensuring that- (a) The team has orients itself to the key compliance problems of the PDE. (b) The team members are familiar with the analysis/assessment of the compliance check criteria. (c) The necessary support facilities are requisitioned for in time. (d) The cases sampled are representative of the procurements/disposals conducted by the PDE during the preceding six months. (e) All the documents reviewed by the team are handed back to the PDE on completion of the review. (f) The compliance check report and compliance rating is accurate and timely.
1.4 Time Frame
The compliance checks exercise on the 120 PDEs took a total of four months i.e. May to August 2008. The maximum time frame for each compliance check within a PDE was two working days from the date of the introductory meeting at the PDEs premises. Thereafter a Compliance Check Report was prepared by the Compliance team within five working days and dispatched to the PDE for their written comments to be received within seven working days.
12
1.5 Limitations
The findings of the Compliance Checks were limited by the following factors: • Lack of records especially for the Local Governments visited such as Kalangala, Nakasongola, Pader and Isingiro. There were also some Central Government PDEs that did not avail the assessment team with all the requisite records to make an informed opinion such as Management Training and Advisory Centre and Dairy Development Authority. • The compliance ratings were based on a small sample of records of around 10-15 files prepared in advance by the Entity and this limited sample may have biased the overall performance of some of the Entities. • A number of PDEs postponed the scheduled compliance checks for various reasons. The postponement affected the progress of the planned coverage of the compliance check exercise.
The above limitations posed potential risks to the compliance assessment exercise in regard to access to information, the reliability, validity and consistency of the results. However, in order to overcome these risks, the results submitted by the teams and consultants were subjected to a verification process by having different teams to cross check the documented evidence quoted to support the submitted results. This validation exercise ensured that the quality of assessment had minimal deviation between the actual and measured performance.
13 2.0 MAIN FINDINGS
2.1 Performance of PDEs under the 8 Compliance Areas
The results of the compliance check revealed varying levels of compliance among the 120 PDEs. There is also marked variances in performance between Central and Local Government Entities. Due to this observation, this presentation of the findings has been split between Central and Local Government PDEs.
2.1.1 Procurement Structures This compliance area was measuring the role and effectiveness of the procurement structures. It focused on the establishment and performance of the key procurement structures in the PDEs including the Accounting Officer, Contracts Committee, Procurement and Disposal Unit and the User Departments which are required to act independently in relation to their functions and powers in order to promote transparency and accountability in the procurement process. The performance of the Evaluation Committee and Negotiation team which are appointed on a case by case basis was also looked at during the compliance checks under other compliance areas.
In particular the compliance indicators covered the following aspects: • Whether the Accounting Officer had a clear understanding of his/her role for the overall responsibility for the procurement and disposal process; • Whether the 5 Contracts Committee members were approved by Secretary to the Treasury; • Whether the Entity had an established Procurement and Disposal Unit; • Whether the User Department initiates all procurements on standard PP Forms; and • Whether the Internal Auditors conduct audits the procurement and disposal process, payments and deliveries.
From the results of the compliance checks exercise it was evident that the principle of segregation and independence of functions and powers among the procurement structures in a number of Entities was not adhered to. While some PDEs were not totally sure of the roles of each of these structures other PDEs deliberately usurped the roles of other structures in particular the User Departments in a number of instances took over role of the Procurement and Disposal Unit of inviting receiving and opening of bids.
Some of the PDEs assessed had a number of subsidiary bodies/projects which carried out their own procurements independently while others used the procurement structures of the supervising PDE. It was noted that some Accounting Officers had delegated functions of the contracts committee or the procurement and disposal unit to these bodies. However in most of these cases, this delegation was not in writing as required under the law.
It was further observed that for the PDEs that had a larger percentage of donor funding, the User departments often ignored or undermined the roles of the Contracts Committee by only seeking approvals of the procurement processes from the donors. A case in point was that of the Office of the Prime Minister that had a number of projects that were not using the procurement structures of the Contracts Committee and PDU. These projects included NUSAF – World Bank, NUREP – EU, NIMES - World Bank, EU, DFID and ADB, PRDP – World Bank and PSM – Danida.
Out of the 120 PDEs assessed, 48 PDEs (40%) did not have the full membership of the Contracts Committee members approved by the Secretary to the Treasury as illustrated in
14 Annex IV. For the Central Government PDEs only 51 PDEs (71%) had the full membership of 5 members of the Contracts Committee while for the Local Governments it was 21 PDEs (44%). In addition some of the Local Government PDEs complained of unnecessary delays in having the membership to the Contracts approved as well as the rejection of nominees by the Accounting Officer without any reasons provided. The limited numbers of approved contracts committee members affected the efficiency of the PDEs in terms of raising quorum for meetings and Contracts Committee decisions made without the requisite quorum could raise potential legal challenges for the PDEs in future.
The CG PDEs that did not have the full membership of the Contracts Committee were the following:
• Arua Hospital • Office of the Auditor General • Courts of Judicature • Posta Uganda Ltd • Diary Development Authority • Privatization Unit • Gulu Hospital • Public Service Commission • Makerere University Business School • Soroti Hospital • National Council for Children • State House • National Council for Higher Education • Uganda Aids Commission • National Curriculum Development • Uganda Electricity Distribution Centre Company • National Environment Management • Uganda Printing and Publishing Authority Company • National Water and Sewerage • Uganda Property Holdings Ltd Corporation • Uganda Revenue Authority
The LG PDEs that did not have the full membership of the Contracts Committee were the following:
• Apac District • Lira Municipality • Budaka District • Luwero District • Bundibugyo District • Mbarara Municipality • Bushenyi District • Mpigi District • Busia District • Mukono District • Gulu District • Nakasongola District • Hoima District • Namutamba District • Isingiro District • Nebbi District • Kabale Municipality • Oyam District • Kalangala District • Pader District • Kamwenge District • Sembabule District • Kapchorwa District • Soroti Municipality • Kasese District • Wakiso District • Kiruhura District
Nearly all of the Central Government PDEs that were assessed had established Procurement and Disposal Units apart from 6 PDEs namely; Management Training and Advisory Centre, National Council for Higher Education, National Planning Authority, Soroti Referral Hospital,
15 Uganda Export Promotion Board and Uganda Investment Authority. In these PDEs, other staff had been assigned to handle this function in addition to their other substantive work schedules. With regard to the establishment of PDUs in the Local Government PDEs assessed, most of them had recruited procurement personnel in accordance with the Public Service job requirements. However, a few PDEs had not recruited the required staff due a number of reasons that included not having a District Service Commission in place to conduct the interviews while others were still awaiting technical assistance from the Ministry of Local Government to send officials to form part of the interview panel.
In the case of some LGs such as Adjumani, Bundibugyo, Gulu and Moyo Districts the efforts to fill the positions in the PDU by advertising the positions were not successful because all the applications received were not responsive. It was further noted that there were some LG PDEs such as Entebbe Municipality and Pader District where the acting Heads of the PDU (former Secretaries of the Tender Boards) were reluctant to hand over the office and records to the newly appointed procurement personnel. This also affected the availability of records to the Compliance Check Teams.
At Central Government level, most User Departments initiated their procurement requirements on PP Form 20 which were certified by the heads of Finance and the Accounting Officer. However, for the Local Government PDEs this was not the case mainly because they had only received the Local Government Guidelines that contained the standard forms. Therefore most user departments in Local Government PDEs initiated the procurement process using internal memos or letters to the Accounting Officer.
During the compliance checks the important role of Internal Auditors in public procurement was noted especially for the Local Governments since it is a legal requirement under Section 90 of the Local Government Act and Regulation 28 of the LGPD Regulations for Local Government Internal Auditors to play an active role as part of the internal controls to ensure that the proper procurement procedures were being complied with by the Entities.
The Entities that were rated highly satisfactory under this compliance area had the full membership of the Contracts Committee and PDU as prescribed under the law and had active involvement of other structures in the procurement and disposal process such as the user departments and the Internal auditors.
Figure I shows the performance of the Central Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of procurement structures. Out of the 72 CG PDEs, 14 PDEs (19%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 33 PDEs (47%) were satisfactory, 18 PDEs (25%) were moderately satisfactory, 6 PDEs (8%) were unsatisfactory and 1 PDE (1%) was highly unsatisfactory.
16 Figure 1: Performance of CG PDEs under Procurement Structures
Proc Structures -CG HU U 1 6 1% HS 8% 14 19%
MS HS 18 S 25% MS U HU
S 33 47%
Figure II shows the performance of the Local Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of procurement structures. Out of the 48 Local Government Entities assessed, 5 PDEs (10%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 18 PDEs (38%) were satisfactory, 19 PDEs (40%) were moderately satisfactory, 5 PDEs (10%) were unsatisfactory and 1 PDE (2%) was rated highly unsatisfactory. Figure II: Performance of LG PDEs under Procurement Structures
Proc Structures-LG HU HS U 1 5 5 2% 10% 10%
HS S
MS U S 18 HU MS 38% 19 40%
2.1.2 Procurement Planning Procurement and disposal planning is central to proper procurement management. However, while the PPDA Act and Regulations stipulate the requirements to be included in a procurement plan, for most of the PDEs assessed the procurement plan was prepared annually it was rarely
17 adhered to by the PDEs. The observance of the requirement to prepare procurement plans by Central Government PDEs has been largely promoted by the Budget Call Circulars issued by the Secretary to the Treasury in accordance with the annual budget preparation procedures. In the case of the Local Government PDEs the fulfilment of this requirement is part of the national annual assessment by the Ministry of Local Government and thus affects the grants to be availed by the centre.
This compliance area was measuring the level of compliance to the requirement of preparation of an annual procurement plan, implementing the procurement plan and prequalification. The following compliance indicators were looked at: • Existence and implementation of an approved Pre-qualification List for 3 yrs; • Existence and implementation of departmental procurement plans; • Existence of and implementation of an approved consolidated Procurement Plan; • Existence of Assets Register with provision for asset disposal planning; and • Use of framework contracts for repetitively procured items.
It was observed that while the format used by the CG PDEs of the procurement plan was the standard format issued by PPDA, for the LG PDEs there were varied formats used and some were applying the World Bank project formats. It was further noted that while the requirements of the user departments were relatively easily identified by Central Government PDEs there were challenges faced by the Local Government PDEs since their user departments include Town Councils and sub-counties under the Districts and Divisions under the Municipalities which are geographically distant from the procurement and disposal unit. Therefore most user departments in the LG PDEs did not have any departmental procurement plans and the procurement and disposal unit were left to make provisions for the user departments based on the past year. This was observed to result in unplanned and emergency procurement requests to the Contracts Committee by the various user departments when the funds were made available.
It was also observed that both CG and LG PDEs only initiated the procurement process only when the funding was released to the PDE. This resulted in PDEs attempting to shorten the procurement process either through repeated requests for deviations to PPDA or flouting the law by using wrong procurement methods or shorter bidding periods.
It was observed that most of the PDUs were not taking advantage of having framework contracts in place for repetitively procured items to shorten the procurement lead time and thus ensure timely delivery of requirements to user departments. It was observed that the use of Framework contracts was mainly practiced by CG PDEs for supplies like stationery and for services such as Motor Vehicle servicing and repairs.
With regard to the requirement for having a pre-qualified list of providers every three years for CG PDEs and annually for LG PDEs, this was largely adhered to however the management of the list was found wanting in respect of lack of rotation of providers and the non-transparent updating of the list of providers. In the case of LG PDEs the annual pre-qualification exercise which is also referred to as registration was being misused by some PDUs and Contracts Committees to award contracts directly to providers.
Disposal planning was found to be a common problem for both CG and LG PDEs. It is observed that not enough attention was paid by the Entities to have Assets Registers in place and for those that had them, they were deficient in content. A number of LG PDEs as well as Regional Referral Hospitals were facing challenges of wanting to dispose of obsolete equipment
18 that had been donated to them by Central Government PDEs who had retained the log books or certificates evidencing ownership. This made it difficult for the LG PDEs to offer them to interested bidders since they had no proof of ownership of these items.
The Entities rated as unsatisfactory or highly unsatisfactory under this compliance area, did not have any consolidated procurement plans based on their budgets and in some of these Entities the procurement plans were incomplete and did not have the required information to guide the initiation of the procurement process. In addition these Entities were did not adhere to their lists of pre-qualified providers when using restricted or selective bidding and invited providers that were not on these lists to submit bids.
The CG PDES that were rated highly unsatisfactory under procurement planning were the following:
• Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs • Uganda Development Bank • Uganda Investment Authority • Management Training and Advisory Centre • National Council for Higher Education • Parliament of Uganda
The LG PDES that were rated unsatisfactory or highly unsatisfactory under procurement planning were the following
• Sembabule District • Budaka District • Isingiro District • Kabale District • Kampala City Council • Mukono District • Mbarara Municipality • Pader District • Jinja Municipality
Figure III shows the performance of the Central Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Procurement Planning. Out of the 72 CG PDEs, 15 PDEs (21%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 17 PDEs (24%) were satisfactory, 22 PDEs (30%) were moderately satisfactory, 12 PDEs (17%) were unsatisfactory and 6 PDEs (8%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
19 Figure III: Performance by CG PDEs under Procurement Planning
Proc and Disp Planning-CG
HU 6 HS 8% 15 21% U 12 17%
HS S MS U HU
S 17 24%
MS 22 30%
Figure IV shows the performance of the Local Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Procurement Planning. Out of the 48 Local Government Entities assessed, 4 PDEs (8%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 17 PDEs (35%) were satisfactory, 19 PDEs (40%) were moderately satisfactory, 7 PDEs (15%) were unsatisfactory and 1 PDE (2%) was rated highly unsatisfactory. Figure IV: Performance of LG PDEs under Procurement and Disposal Planning
Proc and Disposal Planning- LG HU HS 1 U 4 2% 7 8% 15%
HS S S MS 17 U 35% HU
MS 19 40%
20 2.1.3 Solicitation and Bidding Procedures This compliance area was measuring the compliance of the PDEs to the procedural requirements under invitation and receipt of bids. In particular the compliance indicators covered the following aspects: • Record of issue of solicitation document; • Solicitation document uses standard format issued by PPDA; • Method used is appropriate to threshold and circumstances; • Minimum bidding period observed; and • Record of Bid Submission and Opening.
The findings from Central Government PDEs were that there is good compliance with keeping of records in this area particularly, record of issue of solicitation documents, bid submission and opening. The CG PDEs were also on the whole using the standard solicitation documents in the format issued by PPDA. The exceptions to the good performance by CG PDEs under this area were four PDEs that were rated highly unsatisfactory as follows: • Uganda Development Bank • Diary Development Authority • Arua Hospital • National Council for Higher Education • Management Training and Advisory Centre
With regard to use of appropriate procurement methods, it was observed that some of procurements sampled did not adhere to the thresholds in the determination of procurement methods and a number of direct procurements were noted. In particular, this was observed in the Regional Referral Hospitals which were using the direct procurement method frequently citing emergency situations.
Figure V shows the performance of the 72 Central Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Solicitation and Bidding Procedures . Of the 72 CG PDEs, 30 PDEs (41%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 16 PDEs (22%) were satisfactory, 12 PDEs (17%) were moderately satisfactory, 10 PDEs (14%) were unsatisfactory and 4 PDEs (6%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
21 Figure V: Performance of CG PDEs under Solicitation and Bidding Procedures
Solicitation and Bidding Proc -CG
HU 4 6% U 10 14%
HS 30 HS 41% S MS MS U 12 HU 17%
S 16 22%
A number of the LG PDEs were rated as unsatisfactory under this compliance area, because the standard formats in the Local Government (Procurement and Disposal) Guidelines had only recently been issued to them. However, a few of the LG PDUs had improvised by keeping the records of issue of invitation, bid submission and opening in counter books.
The LG PDEs that were rated highly unsatisfactory under Solicitation and Biding procedures this area were the following: • Entebbe Municipality • Kasese District • Pader District • Soroti Municipality • Luwero District • Kalangala District • Mubende District
Figure VI shows the performance of the Local Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Solicitation and Bidding Procedures . Out of the 48 Local Government Entities assessed, 8 PDEs (17%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 9 PDEs (19%) were satisfactory, 20 PDEs (41%) were moderately satisfactory, 5 PDEs (10%) were unsatisfactory and 6 PDEs (13%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
22 Figure VI: Performance of LG PDEs under Solicitation and Bidding Procedures
Solicitation and Bidding Proc-LG
HU HS 6 8 13% 17%
U 5 10% HS S
S MS 9 U 19% HU
MS 20 41%
2.1.4 Evaluation Procedures This compliance area was measuring the conduct of the evaluation process in PDEs in regard to the procedures and transparency of the process. The compliance indicators were the following: • Approval of Members of Evaluation Committee by Contracts Committee; • Use of appropriate Evaluation Methodology; • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members and Evaluation minutes; • Record of Evaluation Report; and • Approval of Evaluation Report by Contracts Committee.
The findings for the Central Government PDEs revealed that the Contracts Committee was approving the evaluation criteria in the Solicitation documents as well as the membership of the Evaluation Committee. However, in some few PDEs such as Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, there was no record at all of the evaluation process for any of the procurement cases reviewed while in Arua Referral Hospital the evaluation procedures were always flouted.
A number of Local Government PDEs were rated unsatisfactory or highly unsatisfactory under this compliance area since some Contracts Committees had appointed one evaluation team for all the procurements reviewed. For some Entities, the evaluation reports were not on filed and the evaluation methodology was at times not in accordance with the Local Governments (PPDA) Regulations 2006 and the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines, 2008. One common finding for both Central and Local Government PDEs was that few of the procurement files reviewed had a signed record of the acceptance of code of ethical conduct by the Evaluation Committee members.
For the Entities that were rated as highly satisfactory under this compliance area, it was note that for the cases sampled the Contracts Committee had approved all the Evaluation Committee members, the Evaluation Committee used appropriate evaluation methodologies and had the Evaluation committee minutes and evaluation reports on the respective procurement files.
Figure VII shows the performance of the Central Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Evaluation Procedures. Out of the 72 CG PDEs, 24 PDEs (34%) were rated as
23 highly satisfactory, 24 PDEs (33%) were satisfactory, 13 PDEs (18%) were moderately satisfactory, 6 PDEs (8%) were unsatisfactory and 5 PDEs (7%) were rated highly unsatisfactory. Figure VII: Performance of CG PDEs under Evaluation Procedures
Evaluation Procedures-CG
HU 5 U 7% 6 8% HS 24 34% HS MS S 13 MS 18% U HU
S 24 33% Figure VIII shows the performance of the Local Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Evaluation Procedures as follows:
Out of the 48 Local Government Entities assessed, 8 PDEs 17%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 12 PDEs (25%) were satisfactory, 18 PDEs (37%) were moderately satisfactory, 7 PDEs (15%) were unsatisfactory and 3 PDEs (6%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
Figure VIII: Performance of LG PDEs under Evaluation Procedures
Evaluation Procedures-LG HU 3 HS 6% 8 U 17% 7 15%
HS S MS U S HU 12 25%
MS 18 37%
2.1.5 Contract Award and Management
24 This compliance area was assessing whether the Entities were following the prescribed procedures prior to the award of contracts and the arrangements in place for contract management and monitoring. In particular the compliance indicators covered the following aspects: • Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder and Notice of Contract Award posted on PDE Notice board and PPDA website for statutory display period; • Notification of the award to unsuccessful bidders in writing; • Approval of Contract Document by Contracts Committee/Solicitor General/ Donor whichever is applicable and Copy of signed Contract; and • Evidence of Execution /Performance of contract within the contractual completion date.
The findings for both Central and Local Government PDEs revealed that there were many irregularities under this area since very few PDEs had records on contract management on the files reviewed. In addition, there were no copies of notices of best evaluated bidder on file and hence no evidence of them having been posted on their notice boards or on the website of the Authority. It was also noted that unsuccessful bidders were never formally notified as required under the law.
The legal requirement to seek the Solicitor General’s clearance for contracts above Ug Shs. 50m was hardly adhered to by the Local Government PDEs which stated that this was due to the extra costs of transportation of the contracts to the centre and sending officers to follow up on them. For most of the Local Government PDEs, there were no copies of the signed contracts on the file making it difficult for the PDU to monitor the implementation of the approved contract. It was also observed that few of the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period and there were many cases of delays in payment of the providers.
For both Central and Local Government PDEs, the responsibility of the User Department certifying invoices for payment to providers as provided under Section 35 (e) was fairly complied with especially when the payment was by LPO that had to be countersigned by the Accounting Officer, Head of Finance and the Head of the User Department.
The Entities that were rated as unsatisfactory or highly unsatisfactory under this compliance area had not appointed contract managers as required by the procurement regulations; furthermore, there was no contract monitoring or supplier appraisal reports prepared.
Figure IX shows the performance of the Central Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Contract Award and Management. Out of the 72 CG PDEs, 4 PDEs (6%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 12 PDEs (17%) were satisfactory, 21 PDEs (29%) were moderately satisfactory, 25 PDEs (34%) were unsatisfactory and 10 PDEs (14%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
25 Figure IX: Performance of CG PDEs under Contract Award and Management
Contract Award & Management-CG HS HU 4 10 6% 14% S 12 17%
HS S MS U HU U 25 34%
MS 21 29%
Figure X shows the performance of the Local Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Contract Award and Management as follows:
Out of the 48 Local Government Entities assessed, 1 PDE (2%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 4 PDEs (8%) were satisfactory, 9 PDEs (19%) were moderately satisfactory, 18 PDEs (38%) were unsatisfactory and 16 (33%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
26 Figure X: Performance of LG PDEs under Contract Award and Management
Contract Award and Management-LG
HS 1 S 2% 4 8%
HU 16 33% MS 9 19% HS S MS U HU
U 18 38%
2.1.6 Reporting This compliance area was measuring the compliance of Entities to the requirement of monthly and quarterly reporting for CG and LG PDEs respectively. In particular the compliance indicators covered the following aspects: • All Monthly or Quarterly Reports Submitted up to date of review and submitted on time. • Reports use Standard Formats and Contracts Committee Minutes attached; and • Any queries by PPDA on reports have been satisfactorily resolved.
Under this compliance area, Central Government PDEs performed better than the Local Government PDEs. The Central Government PDEs that were highly satisfactory (most compliant) in this compliance area included the following: • Local Government Finance Commission; • National Council for Science and Technology; • National Forestry Authority; • Parliament of Uganda; • Privatisation Unit; • Uganda Electricity Transmission Company; and • Uganda National Examination Board.
The Central Government PDEs which were noted as highly unsatisfactory (most non compliant) to the requirement of submitting monthly reports included the following: • Dairy Development Authority; • Gulu University; • Inspectorate of Government; • Internal Security Organisation; • Management Training and Advisory Centre; • Ministry of Information and Communications Technology;
27 • Ministry of Water and Environment; • Post Bank Uganda Ltd; • Posta Uganda; • Uganda AIDS Commission Secretariat; and • Uganda Property Holdings Ltd.
For the case of Local Government PDEs, the PDEs that were highly satisfactory (most compliant) to the requirement of submitting quarterly reports were the following: • Lira Municipal Council • Apac District • Kamwenge District • Kanungu District • Pallisa District.
The Local Government PDEs that were highly unsatisfactory (most non compliant) in respect of the requirement of submitting quarterly reports were the following: • Adjumani District • Nakasongola District • Iganga District • Namutamba District • Isingiro District • Oyam District • Kalangala District • Pader District • Kapchorwa District • Rukungiri District • Kayunga District • Wakiso District • Kibaale District • Entebbe Municipality • Kiboga District • Fort Portal Municipality • Kiruhura District • Jinja Municipality • Luwero District • Kabale Municipality • Moyo District • Soroti Municipality • Mpigi District • Tororo Municipality • Mukono District
Apart from the frequency of submitting reports, it was observed that there were a number of procurements and disposals that were not being included in the reports sent to the Authority and that the Contracts Committees were not presented with these reports for their endorsement before they were formally dispatched.
Another challenge noted in this area was the infrequent micro-procurement report submission from sub divisions of the larger PDEs which often delayed the submission of the PDE. It was also note that PDEs with sub delegated Contracts Committees were not submitting reports through the main Contracts Committee such as the case for the Internal Security Organisation under the Office of the President and the Financial Management and Accountability Programme (FINMAP) under the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.
Figure XI shows the performance of the Central Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Reporting. Out of the 72 CG PDEs, 32 PDEs (44%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 11 PDEs (15%) were satisfactory, 9 PDEs (13%) were moderately satisfactory, 5 PDEs (7%) were unsatisfactory and 15 PDEs (21%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
28 Figure XI: Performance of CG PDEs under Reporting
Reporting-CG
HU 15 21%
HS 32 HS U 44% S 5 MS 7% U HU
MS 9 13%
S 11 15%
Figure XII shows the performance of the Local Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Reporting . Out of the 48 Local Government Entities assessed, 10 PDEs (21%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 9 PDEs (19%) were satisfactory, 6 PDEs (13%) were moderately satisfactory, 6 PDEs (13%) were unsatisfactory and 17 PDEs (34%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
Figure XII: Performance of LG PDEs under Reporting
Reporting LG
HS 10 21%
HU 17 34%
HS S MS U HU S 9 19%
U 6 MS 13% 6 13%
29 2.1.7 Performance of Contracts Committee This compliance area was measuring the compliance with the prescribed procedures and effectiveness of the Contracts Committee. In particular the compliance indicators covered the following aspects: • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct in Business by Contracts Committee members; • Record of Contracts Committee decision on a submission on PP/DPA Form; • Record of Contracts Committee meeting; and • Contracts Committee has not granted retrospective approvals.
A number of Central Government PDEs were rated as satisfactory under this compliance area since most of the Contracts Committee decisions were documented in minutes under the relevant PP or DPA Forms.
However, for the Local Government PDEs there were many PDEs that were rated as unsatisfactory because of the lack or inconsistent records for the Contracts Committee meetings and decisions. It was further noted from the sampled procurement files for the Local Government PDEs, that some of the Contracts Committees had granted retrospective approvals for procurements undertaken by Sub counties as emergencies. A common observation at both Central and Local Government level was that the record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members was not signed by the members at each meeting.
Figure XIII shows the performance of the Central Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Performance of Contracts Committee. Out of the 72 CG PDEs, 28 PDEs (39%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 25 PDEs (35%) were satisfactory, 11 PDEs (15%) were moderately satisfactory, 7 PDEs (10%) were unsatisfactory and 1 PDEs (1%) was rated highly unsatisfactory. Figure XIII: Performance of CG Contracts Committees
Performance of CC-CG HU U 1 7 1% 10%
MS HS 11 28 15% 39% HS S MS U HU
S 25 35%
30
Figure XIV shows the performance of the Local Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Performance of Contracts Committee as follows:
Out of the 48 Local Government Entities assessed, 1 PDE (2%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 18 PDEs (38%) were satisfactory, 15 PDEs (31%) were moderately satisfactory, 13 PDEs (27%) were unsatisfactory and 1 PDE (2%) was rated highly unsatisfactory.
Figure XIV: Performance of LG Contracts Committees
Performance of CC-LG HU HS 1 1 2% 2%
U 13 27%
S 18 38% HS S MS U HU
MS 15 31%
2.1.8 Record Keeping This compliance area was measuring the compliance of the Entities to the requirement of maintaining procurement and disposal records. In particular the compliance indicators covered the following aspects: • Existence of Record/filing system in PDU; • Records filed contain all the requirements of the law; • Individual cases have the standard procurement reference numbering; and • Records of supplier appraisal
Under Section 56 of the PPDA Act, PPDA Regulations 90–91, Regulation 46 of the Local Government (PPDA) Regulations and Guidelines 8-10 of the Local Government (PPDA) Guidelines, all documentation relating to the procurement and disposal activities is required to be kept in an orderly manner using standard formats. However, a number of Entities were rated as unsatisfactory or highly unsatisfactory under this compliance area because of the limited or non existent procurement and disposal records.
The sample of procurement files reviewed in the PDEs revealed that there were no complete procurement or disposal files and most of the key documents were scattered in several files or in
31 different departments within the PDE. In addition many of the individual transactions lacked procurement or disposal reference numbers making it very difficult to track a process from the commencement to its logical conclusion.
While some Central Government PDE had some of the key records, most of the Local Government PDEs did not have any filing system. For instance the Adverts, Contracts Committee minutes, Records of issue and receipt of bids, Evaluation Reports, Notices, Contracts were kept in separate files making it very difficult to track the procurement or disposal process.
However, a common challenge noted was that the PDU lacked adequate storage facilities to store the bulky bidding documents and files. This resulted in them being kept in the common Registry over which they had no control.
Figure XV shows the performance of the Central Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Record Keeping as follows:
Out of the 72 CG PDEs, 7 PDEs (10%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 36 PDEs (50%) were satisfactory, 11 PDEs (15%) were moderately satisfactory, 15 PDEs (21%) were unsatisfactory and 3 PDEs (4%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
Figure XV: Performance of CG PDEs under Record Keeping
Record Keeping-CG
HU HS 3 7 4% 10%
U 15 21%
HS S MS U HU MS 11 S 15% 36 50%
32 Figure XVI shows the performance of the Local Government Entities assessed under the compliance area of Record Keeping. Out of the 48 Local Government Entities assessed, 0 PDEs (0%) were rated as highly satisfactory, 8 PDEs (17%) were satisfactory, 5 PDEs (10%) were moderately satisfactory, 27 PDEs (56%) were unsatisfactory and 8 PDEs (17%) were rated highly unsatisfactory.
Figure XVI: Performance of LG PDEs under Record Keeping
Record Keeping- LG
HS 0 HU S 0% 8 8 17% 17%
MS HS 5 10% S MS
U
HU
U 27 56%
33 2.2 Overall Performance of the Entities
2.2.1 Performance of Central Government PDEs An analysis of the average performance of PDEs under the 8 Compliance areas revealed that the compliance areas where the Central Government PDEs scored highest were: • Solicitation and Bidding procedures; • Procurement Structures; and • Performance of the Contracts Committee
The compliance areas where the Central Government PDEs scored lowest were: • Contract Placement, Award and Contract Management • Record keeping
Figure XVII: Performance of CG PDEs under all Compliance Areas
Compliance Areas -Central Govt
100.00%
90.00%
80.00% 71.57% 70.97% 70.97% 73.33% 70.00% 60.63% 61.39% 57.51% 60.00% Values 47.50% 50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00% Reporting Evaluation Procudures Structures Procurement Record keeping Management Solicitation and Procurement and Disposal Planning Performance of CC Bidding Procedures Contract Award and
2.2.2 Performance of Local Government PDEs An analysis of the average performance of the Local Government PDEs under the 8 Compliance areas revealed that the compliance area where they scored highest was that of Procurement Structures.
The compliance areas where the Local Government PDEs scored lowest were: • Record Keeping • Contract Placement, Award and Contract Management
34 Figure XVIII: Performance of LG PDEs under all Compliance Areas
Compliance Areas- Local Govt
100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00% 64.17% 61.67% 60.63% 60.00% 57.92% 52.54% 50.00% 45.17% Values 40.00% 37.02% 36.46%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00% Reporting Structures Procurement Record Keeping Management Solicitation and Procurement and Disposal Planning Performance of CC Bidding Procedures Contract Award and Evaluation Procedures % Values
2.2.3 Comparison of Performance of CG PDEs and LG PDEs under Compliance Areas
A comparison of the performance of Central and Local Government PDEs under the 8 compliance areas revealed that CG PDEs performed better than the LG PDEs in 7 of the compliance Areas. However, the LG PDEs performed marginally better than the CG PDEs under the compliance area of Procurement and Disposal Planning.
No Compliance Area CG PDEs LG PDEs 1. Record Keeping 57.51% 37.02% 2. Performance of CC 71.57% 52.54% 3. Reporting 60.63% 45.17% 4. Contract Award and Management 47.50% 36.46% 5. Procurement Structures 70.97% 64.17 % 6. Procurement and Disposal Planning 61.39% 61.67 % 7. Ev aluation Procedures 70.97% 60.63 % 8. Solicitation and Bidding Procedures 73.33% 57.92%
2.2.4 Entity Performance by Compliance Rating
(a) Central Government PDEs An analysis of the average compliance rating of the 72 Central Government PDEs revealed that 49 PDEs (68%) were rated Satisfactory and Highly Satisfactory. While this is a good achievement it should be noted that 8 PDEs (11%) were rated Unsatisfactory and Highly Unsatisfactory. Therefore there still remains a lot of room for improvement especially when
35 compared to the performance of the Local Government PDEs which have only recently started to apply the national standards under the PPDA Act.
Compliance Rating No. of PDEs Percentage Highly Satisfactory 7 10 Satisfactory 41 57 Moderately Satisfact ory 16 22 Unsatisfactory 7 10 Highly Unsatisfactory 1 1 Total 72 100
Figure XIX: Compliance Rating of CG PDEs
Overall Rating of CG PDEs
100
90
80
70
41 P DEs 60 57%
50
40
30 16 P DEs 22% 20 7 P DEs 7 P DEs 10% 10% 10 1P DE 1% 0 HS S MS U HU
(b) Local Government PDEs An analysis of the average compliance rating of the 48 Local Government PDEs revealed that 15 PDEs (31%) had been rated Satisfactory and Highly Satisfactory. This performance was therefore below average especially when it is further noted that 7 PDEs (15%) were rated Unsatisfactory. Compliance Rating No. of PDEs Percentage Highly Satisfactory 1 2 Satisfactory 12 25 Moderately Satisfactory 28 58 Unsatisfactory 7 15 Highly Unsatisfactory 0 0 Total 48 100
36 Figure XX: Compliance Rating of LG PDEs
Overall Rating of LG PDEs
100
90
80
70 28 PDEs 60 58% 50
40 12 PDEs 25% 30 7 PDEs 20 15% 1 PDE 10 0 PDE 2% 0% 0 HS S MS U HU
2.2.5 Comparison of Compliance Rating of CG PDEs and LG PDEs
A comparison of the compliance ratings for CG PDEs and LG PDEs revealed that CG PDEs had more Entities that were rated satisfactory and above (67%) as compared to LG PDEs (27%)
Compliance Rating CG PDEs LG PDEs Highly Satisfactory (81% - 100%) 10% 2% Satisfactory (61% - 80%) 57% 25% Moderately Satisfactor y (41% - 60%) 22% 58% Unsatisfactory (21% - 40%) 10% 15% Highly Unsatisfactory (0% - 20%) 1% 0%
37 3.0 COMPLIANCE RATING OF ENTITIES
3.1 Central Government Entities
3.1.1 Ministries
NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Defence
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 15 th – 16 th May 2008
MANDATE: To defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Uganda against aggression.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Central Government Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and DONOR funding for soldiers in Somalia
SIZE OF PDE: Information not availed
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Acting): Ms. Rosette Byengoma
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Maj. Gen. Fred Okecho - Chairperson 2. Mr. Kazibwe Mbazira - Secretary 3. Brig. Silver Kayemba - Member 4. Lt. Col. David Kyomukama - Member 5. Capt. Thomas Kyebanza - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. John Kateregga - Head PDU 2. Ms. Rehema Nakirunda - PO
On temporary basis 1. Mr. Geoffrey Tumuhairwe - PO 2. Pamela Ankunda - PO
38
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 7/10 • There is a full structure in the entity, headed by an 70% Accounting Officer who undertakes her responsibility for all the procurements and disposal process. • She has an established a Contracts Committee in 5 members approved by PS/ST. The Committee meets twice in a month. • PDU is in place with 2 permanent staff and two temporary staff. • In some instances, evidence of initiation of the procurements using PP Form 20 was not seen.
Procurement Planning 5/10 • Entity in the process of coming up with an 50% aggregated procurement and disposal plan. • Entity has an asset register in place though does not have provision for asset disposal planning. • There were no departmental procurement plans. • Procurements for fuel and lubricants for the aviation department are being procured using the frame work contract.
39 Solicitation and bidding procedures 6/10 • Records of issue of the solicitation documents on 60% file. • Some of the solicitation documents seen use the standard format issued by the Authority. Some of the solicitation documents were missing on the individual procurement files. • In some few instances, the minimum bidding periods were not observed. In others, the requirement could not be ascertained as the records of bid submission and opening were not on file. Evaluation procedures 8/10 • Evaluation committees in place, approved by CC 80% • Evaluation reports are signed by members of the EC and approved by CC • Some of the contracts reviewed did not have evaluation reports. • The appropriate Evaluation methodology was being used for the contracts reviewed. • Record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for the Evaluation members and Evaluation minutes seen on files. Contract placement, award and 3/10 ••• Most of the procurements did not have records for management 30% contract placement. ••• For some of the procurements sampled, there was no evidence of award by letter of bid acceptance from PDE or contract documents like LPOs. ••• There were no notices for best evaluated bidder. ••• There is non submission of letters to unsuccessful bibbers ••• There was no evidence of user department involvement in contract management. ••• The E ntity has several framework contracts with providers for drugs, fuel and foodstuffs. Reporting 3/6 • Report for contracts in excess of USD 200,000 was 50% prepared but had not yet been submitted to the Authority by the time of the review. • Reports on procurement are omnibus and not prepared monthly. • Contract value s are not included for some of the procurements. • There is no reporting on micro procurements • Improper use of procurement methods
Performance of Contracts Committee 4/8 • CC members meet twice in a month and consider 50% all submissions of procurements made . Minutes of some of the CC meetings were not available for review. • There was no evidence of use of the standard forms for approval by CC for some of the procurements. • Some of the files perused had copies of signed minutes. Record Keeping 5/8 ••• Record keeping is still lacking as some of the 63% procurements reviewed lacked documents on contract placement and award. Aggregate Score and Compliance 57 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
40 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should submit PP Forms 229 and 221 on membership of the Contracts Committee and Procurement and Disposal Unit to PPDA. 2. Procurement plans should be prepared each financial year based on the approved budget and a copy of it submitted to the Authority. 3. The different departments in the Entity should submit departmental procurement plans to the PDU to help in compilation of the Entity’s procurement plan as provided for in section 60 of the PPDA Act. 4. All the necessary records for a specific procurement should be properly filed. 5. Evaluation reports should be prepared and filed for each evaluation and submitted to CC for approval in accordance with Reg. 195(3). 6. All the necessary records for a specific procurement should be properly filed. 7. The unsuccessful bidders should always be notified in writing as provided for in Regulation 225(4) of the PPDA Regulations . 8. The user departments should be involved in certifying contractual sums. 9. The Entity is required to submit to the Authority reports on procurements on micro procurements on a monthly basis. 10. All approvals by Contracts Committee should be made using the standard PP forms.
41 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 13 th - 16 th June 2008
MANDATE: To establish, promote the development, strategically manage and safeguard the rational and sustainable exploitation and utilization of energy and mineral resources for social and economic development".
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU &Donor Funds
SIZE OF PDE: Approximately 221 members of staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Kabagambe Kaliisa
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Rubondo Ernest Chairperson 2. Ms. Aheebwa Peninah Secretary 3. Mr. Odida John Member 4. Mr. Beena Benon Member 5. Ms. Nakungu Elizabeth Principal State Attorney
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Ahebwa Stanley Head PDU 2. Mr. Mugabira Micheal SPO 3. Mr. Gulale Fred - PO 4. Ms. Namalele Margaret Sec
42
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 9/10 CC members approved by PSST though PP Form 220 not filed by the entity 90% PP Form 221 which shows the composition of the established PDU is not filed with PPDA Procurement 8/10 There’s evidence of an approved list of pre -qualified Planning providers but no evidence of departmental procurement 80% plans. The Ministry has a list of prequalified providers and an Assets Register. Solicitation and bidding procedures 6/10 Entity complies with the standard format issued by PPDA for the documents and the Law for the 60% procedures. There was evidence of Records of Bid submissions and Opening on the PDU files. The minimum bidding period is some times observed. Evaluation procedures 8/10 Approval of Evaluation Committee members is done by the CC and the appropriate evaluation methodology 80% used though there’s no record of Code of Ethical Conduct for the EC members and no evaluation minutes.
43 Contract placement, award and 4/10 No evidence of approval o Contract Documents by the management CC and Solicitor General but there is some evidence of 40% notices given to the Best Evaluated bidders. The contract award notices are not posted at the PPDA website. Reporting 5/6 Monthly reports are not submitted on time. However, the Entity recently forwarded Macro 83.3% procurements conducted for the period January to May 2008.
Performance of Contracts Committee 7/8 There was some evidence of record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct in Business by CC members. 87.5% Minutes are in place though not recorded on the appropriate forms. For most of the procurements, there were Records of Contracts Committee decisions on submissions on PP/DPA Forms. Record Keeping 4/8 There exists a Record/filing system in the PDU. There were no records of the supplier appraisal 50% performance.
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 71% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. PP Form 220 should filed by the entity. 2. Entity should file PP Form 221 with the Authority 3. The departments in the Ministry should endeavor to compile departmental procurement plans. 4. The members of the EC should always sign the Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct and there should always be signed minutes on file to evidence what transpired during the meetings. 5. The Entity should always ensure that the best evaluated bidders and the unsuccessful bidders are notified after the evaluation of bids. 6. The notice of contract award should also be posted on the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 7. The Entity should ensure that monthly reports are submitted by the 15 th day of each month for the preceding month and that all PP Forms are filled and CC minutes attached to reports as this aids the Authority as it reviews the reports. 8. The CC members should always sign the acceptance of code of Ethical conduct in Business. 9. The Contracts Committee minutes should be recorded on the appropriate forms. 10. The Entity should appraise the performance of their suppliers to ensure quality services and supplies.
44 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 23 rd May 2008
MANDATE: Public financial management and policy.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and donor funds
SIZE OF PDE: Large with 25 development projects, approximately 542 members of staff with an estimated budget of 9 Billion 80% of which is transferred to other Entities like National Planning Authority, Uganda Bureau of Statistics, Presidential Initiative for Banana Industrial Development among others.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Ms. Betty Kasimbazi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. David Kabateraine Ag AC/TAS (Procurement) Chairman 2. Mr. Moses Ogwapus Principal Finance Officer representing components 1&2 3. Mr. Wilson Nabongo Principal Accountant/ STD representing Component 3 4. Mr. Francis Okori Principal Inspector, Ministry of Local Government representing Component 5 5. A representative from Ministry of Justice& Constitutional Affairs
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Yerusa Nyagoma Head Procurement Officer 2. Mr. Oyet Tom Procurement Officer.
DELEGATED CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (FINMAP) (Names):
1. Mr. David Kabateraine – Ag AC/TAS (Procurement) Chairman 2. Mr. Moses Ogwapus – Principal Finance Officer representing components 1&2 3. Mr. Wilson Nabongo- Principal Accountant/ STD representing Component 3 4. Mr. Francis Okori -Principal Inspector, Ministry of Local Government representing Component 5 5. Mr. J.B R Ssuza Avocate, Member
DELEGATED PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (FINMAP) (Names):
1. Ms. Elizabeth Mutesi Head Procurement Officer 2. Mr. Stephen Ariko Assistant Procurement Officer 3. Mr. Patrick Banura Assistant Procurement Officer 4. Mr. Robert Musana Procurement Assistant.
45
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The PDE CC members compose the delegated Sub - contracts Committee for FINMAP- there is a conflict of 80% interest since the FINMAP Sub Committee was recommended by the PDE CC. • Based on the sampled FINMAP files, procurements are initiated by the user departments on PP Form 20. • Internal Auditor carries out post audits. Procurement Planning 6/10 Entity has 25 projects of which the Compliance Team only sampled FINMAP files. 60% • An approved pre-qualified list of providers, how ever some of the sampled cases were awarded to non pre-qualified providers. • A departmental procurement plan. • A procurement plan for FY 2007/08 based on the approved budget, however PDE conducted non planned procurements. • An assets register with provisions for assets disposal plan. • PDE uses framework contracts for commonly procured items like, o Ms Computer Point Ltd –For maintenance of IFMS software/Lan/ Wan and site equipment o Ms. Computer Point Ltd – for maintenance of servers, storages, ups and other equi pment at data centre and disaster recovery centre. o Ms. Sarecen Uganda Ltd for security services. o Ms. Sekanyola systems Ltd for maintenance of
46 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
security facility at data recovery centre - Jinja and Kampala. Solicitation and Bidding 10/10 • Sub PDU has records of issue of Solicitation documents. procedures • Uses SBDs issued by the Authority. 100% • Minimum bidding periods were observed for all the sampled cases. • Has record of bid submission and opening Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The CC approves the members o f the Evaluations Committee (EC) and the Evaluation Report. 80% • Appropriate evaluation methodologies are used. • However, there are no records of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Evaluation Committee
Contract placement, award 5/10 • Notice of contract award is posted on PDE Notice board and and management not posted on PPDA website 50% • Unsuccessful bidders are never notified in writing. • CC approves all contracts and copies of signed contracts were on file. • The sub PDU seeks SG clearance for procuremen ts above 50m. Reporting 4/6 • Sub PDE had last submitted monthly reports for July 07- April 08 on 28 th May 2009 (on standard formats on 67% PP Forms 200, 201 and 202 with CC minutes attached. Performance of Contracts 6/8 • Record of acceptanc e of Code of Ethical Conduct in Committee business by CC members (PP Form 211) 75% • Record of Contracts Committee decision on PP Form. • In the CC minutes sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 6/8 • PDU has a record/filling system. • Most of the sampled cases had the standard 75% procurement reference numbers. • No record of supplier appraisal performance.
Total Score and 74% SATISFACTOR Y Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Entity should submit procurement plans and delegated CC members (if any) for the other 24 projects. 2. EC should record the acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct at all evaluations to avoid conflict on interest. 3. PDE should avoid omnibus submission of monthly reports. They should be submitted by the 15 th day of the following month with all the relevant PP Forms and CC. 4. PDE should have a record of supplier appraisal/performance system.
47 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Gender, Labour & Social Development
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 11 th July 2008
MANDATE: To create an enabling environment for social protection and social transformation of communities.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Central Government Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): The funds for the MGLSD consist of money appropriated by Parliament to enable the ministry perform its functions. Every year the ministry is allocated a share on the National Budget and finances are from the consolidated fund of the Treasury. Donor funds are also obtained from UNFPA, UNDP and UNICEF, and constitute about 9% of the Ministry's total budget.
Other sources are like funds from the sale of Bids and Inspection and issuing certificates for Occupation Safety and Health.
SIZE OF PDE : The Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development is headed by a cabinet minister and four other ministers of state appointed by the President. The The management of MGLSD comprises of two Directorates; The Directorate of Gender and Community Development and The Directorate of Labour.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER : Ms. Christine Guwatudde Kintu
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Beekunda George - Chairperson 2. Mr. Alphonse Ojja Andira - Member 3. Ms. Sherina Tibenkana - Member 4. Ms. Idah Kigonya - Member 5. Ms. Joan Muruumu - Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER:
1. Ms. Catherine Ainesaasi Head PDU 2. Mr. Sam Yiga PO
48
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer was not certifying funds availability for procurements raised. 70% • User Departments duly filled procurement forms but funds availability was not being validated by the AO Procurement Planning 7/10 • Emergency procurements were being handled by the entity in the same way micro procurements are - on ad hoc basis. The commonest 70% of these was in the procurement of tyres and car batteries. • Entity has no assets register. There was no record of Disposal of asset filed in the last six months. Solicitation and Bidding 8/10 • The entity use standard bidding documents and there is a record of procedures bid opening; bid closing and bid evaluation documents. 80% • Thresholds are followed in selection o f most procurement methods to use, with a few exceptions e.g. Direct procurement was used for the tenancy of Simbamanyo house for the MGLSD offices at cost of 120million per month • However a few procurements reviewed did not use the appropriate procurement methods- Evaluation procedures 8/10 • No record of signing the Ethical Code of Conduct by the Evaluation committee. 80% Contract placement, award 4/10 • The entity has a procurement notice board but does not post and management procurement notices like Bid notices, Contract award notices and 40% Notice of Best evaluated bidder • Notification to unsuccessful bidders not done • A number of procurements do not have all the related documents.
49 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
• No contract implementation plan seen or evidence of post contracting performance seen. • PP Form 60 not filed Reporting 5/6 • At the time of the compliance check the entity had submitted monthly reports up to April 2008. 83.3% • Some procurements e.g. procurements of fuel using credit cards, payment for news papers and staff welfare items were not being reported. • Micro procurements being reported did not have invoice numbers filed. Performance of Contracts 6/8 • Some contracts committee minutes were not signed Committee • The user departments do not take responsibility after contracts have 75% been placed for contract management. • CC approvals on retrospectives seen. Record Keeping 4/8 • Record keeping is still a challenge for the entity with a number of records missing from procurement files. PDU claimed these are kept 50% in accounts.
Total Score and 68% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The Accounting officer should ensure that all procurement requisitions are certified for availability of funds in accordance with the PPDA Act 1, 2003, sec 26(f) and Regulation 105(3) to avoid committing the entity without confirmation of funding. 2. The Accounting Officer should nominate another member for appointment by the Secretary to the Treasury to replace the Secretary to the CC Ms. Joan Muruumu. 3. Contracts Committee minutes should always be signed by the Chairperson and Secretary of the Contracts Committee. 4. Procurements, especially from the transport unit should always go through the PDU to ensure proper management of procurements. 5. Spares and Motor Vehicle servicing and maintenance should be procured in accordance with the PPDA Regulations 6. The entity should report all purchases whether using credit cards or not including all micro procurements. 7. The PDU should ensure that invoice numbers are filed in the record of micro procurement transactions. 8. The entity should allocate procurement Reference numbers at the time of initiation of procurement requirements. 9. Procurement planning should be in line with the PPDA Act Sec. 58, to avoid emergency procurement wherever possible. 10. Procurement and disposal notices should be posted in accordance with Regulation 38 of the PPDA Regulations. 11. Evaluation Committee members should sign the Ethical Code of conduct at each meeting in accordance with Act 1 Section 37 (6) of the PPDA Act, 2003. 12. Contract management records should be in accordance with Regulations 258(3) and 260 of the PPDA Regulations 2003.
50 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Information and Communication Technology
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 28 th – 29 th May 2008
MANDATE: To provide strategic and technical leadership, overall coordination, support and advocacy on all maters of ICT in Uganda.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Central Government Department
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): The budget is approximately Ug. Shs 9 billion; with about 60% going towards procurement. The source of funding is Central Government.
SIZE OF PDE: The Entity has 62 staff;
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Dr. Jimmy Pat Saamanya
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Eng. David Turahi Chairman 2. Ms P. Kabiije - Member (State Attorney) 3. Mr. Eliab Talisuna - Member 4. Mr. Ambrose Ruyooka - Secretary 5. Mr. Wafula Wanyama - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Frank Mugisha Head PDU 2. Mr. Omar Turyamureba Okeny PO
51
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • Procurement structures in place but PP Forms 220, 221 and 222 not filed with PPDA. 70% Procurement Planning 4/10 • No department or procurement plan available. • No framework contracts used for repetitively procured items 40% Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • All records required were on file. procedures 100%
Evaluation procedures 9/10 • No minutes of Evaluation committee on file but all other requirement were on file. 90% Contract placement, award and 9/10 • Entity does not post the notices on the PPDA Website for the management statutory display period. But other than that, all the other 90% requirements were on file. Reporting 2/6 • The Entity has not been submitting monthly procurement and disposal reports. 33% Performance of Contracts 8/8 • All records were on file. Committee 100% Record Keeping 8/8 • All records were on file. 100%
Total Score of PDE and 78% SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating
52
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should urgently file PP Form 220 with PPDA. 2. User departments should prepare departmental plans and submit them to the PDU for consolidation. 3. The Entity should use framework contracts for commonly procured items 4. Minutes of evaluation committee meeting should be prepared and attached to the evaluation report. 5. The entity needs training on posting of bid notices on PPDA website 6. The Accounting Officer should prepare and submit monthly procurement and disposal reports to the Authority.
53 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Internal Affairs
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : August 2008
MANDATE: To implement Government policies in respect of internal security, keeping law and order and immigration regulations in the country.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government and donor funds.
SIZE OF PDE : 200 Staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Dr. P.S Kagoda
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Komunda S. Sabiiti Principal Assistant Secretary Chairperson 2. Mr. Eramu Pascal Senior Assistant Secretary Secretary 3. Mrs. Robinah Kirinyi Government Analyst Member 4. Ms. Betty Nassenja Immigration Officer/Lawyer Member 5. Mr. Barigye William Principal Immigration Officer Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Higenyi Kamya Edward Ag. Head/ PDU 2. Ms. Komugisha Hilda Secretary
54
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer is in place and has established the Procurement and Disposal Unit 70% • Contracts Committee in place and approved by PS/ST. • The user de partments initiate procurements but make no use of PP Form 20. • Information as to whether the Internal Auditor has audit ed the procurement and disposal processes was not availed. • No internal audit reports on the procurement and disposal processes seen.
Procurement Planning 6/10 • Procurement plan for FY 07/08 is in place but not prepared in accordance with the PPDA Format. 60% • The procurement plan did not include the department for national community service. • The Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers in place though there are inadequate providers on some categories for works, supplies and services. • No evidence of use of framework contracts seen.
Solicitation and Bidd ing 6/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitation documents procedures are kept on the files 60% • Records of bid submission and opening seen on files.
55 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
• Minimum bidding periods observed in the cases sampled • Some of the methods used are not appropriate to the threshold and circumstances as provided for under the PPDA Guidelines . There is frequent use of direct procurement. • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents issued and bids received availed.
Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Evaluation reports seen on the procurements samples and use the evaluation methodology in the solicitation documents. 60% • Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members seen on the files. • Evidence of nomination by the PDU and approval of the me mbers of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee seen. • Evaluation reports are signed approved by CC.
Contract placement, award 3/10 • Entity does not post the notices of the best evaluated bidder and the and management notice of contract award on the PPDA website. 30% • Contract documents were not on the individual procurement files. • There are no records of supplier appraisal and performance. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing • There was no evidence that the User D epartment is involved in certifying payment.
Reporting 3/6 • Entity is not up to date in the monthly procurement and disposal reporting. 50% • Entity uses the standard format in the monthly reporting • Entity responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports. • Invoice numbers and dates for some procurement transactions are not indicated in the reports and contracts Committee minutes are not submitted with the reports. • Reports are submitted by the Senior Procurement Officer instead of the Accounting Officer as required by the PPDA Act. Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Contracts Committee meets regularly. Committee • Most of the Contracts Committee minutes were available on the file. 63% • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members not signed by the members at each meeting.
Record Keeping 5/8 • The record/filling system is being started in the PDU and needs a lot of strengthening. 75% • Individual procurements have procurement reference numbers assigned to them
Total Score and 58% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should ensure that the departmental plans are approved by the Heads of Departments and aggregated within the procurement and disposal plan 2. Entity is advised to ensure that each procurement file contains all the requirements of the law. 3. The Procurement plan should be prepared in accordance with the PPDA format.
56 4. The Ministry should use framework contracts for commonly procured items as under section 58(c) of the PPDA Act. 5. The unsuccessful bidder should be notified in writing as provided for under Regulation 225(4) of the PPDA Regulations. 6. Copies of the contract documents should be put on the individual files. 7. The Ministry should appraise the performance of its suppliers. 8. The user departments should be involved in certifying the payments of the contractual sums. 9. Entity should adhere to the timely monthly procurement and disposal reporting in accordance with the PPDA Act and Regulations. 10. Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members should be signed at each meeting and kept by the Secretary. 11. The Entity should display notices of the best evaluated bidder and contract award on the PPDA Website.
57 NAME OF PDE : Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs
Date of Assessment: 13 th – 14 th August 2008
MANDATE: To provide legal services to the government and over see the entire justice system in the country.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Mainly GOU with some donor support
SIZE OF PDE: Medium
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Bafaki Ernest
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names)
1. Mr. Billy Kainamura Chairman 2. Ms. Mauda Kakuru Secretary 3. Ms. Christine Kasajja Member 4. Mr. Bisobye Byakusaga Member 5. Mr. Wagubi Andrew Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names)
1. Mohammed Ssegonga Head PDU 2. Jackie Namirimu APO
58
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The PDE has proper procurement structures in place. 80% • The User departments do not use PP Form 20 as required. There is evidence of user departments sourcing suppliers and then simply informing the PDU.
Procurement Planning 2/10 • The PDE did not have any procurement plans in place. This was attributed to the fact that the 20% user departments were not keen on preparing their procurement plans. • The PDE did not use framework contracts for any of its regular procurements. Solicitation and Bidding 4/10 • There was no record of issue of solicitation Procedures documents and submission of bids. 40% • Standard solicitation documents were not being used. Evaluation Procedures 0/10 • There was no record at all of the evaluation process for any of the procurement cases 0% reviewed Contract Placement, Award 1/10 • Contract management records were not included and Management on the files reviewed. 10% Reporting 1/6 • Monthly reports have not been submitted since August 2007 and are only arranging to submit a 17% report covering August 2007-June 2008. • The reports sampled show that the standard
59 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
format is used and all PP Forms are filled. Performance of Contracts 0/10 • There was no record at all of the proceedings of Committee the CC meetings on any of the files reviewed. 0% Record Keeping 2/8 • The entity did not have proper filing with some of the cases reviewed involving loose 25% documents. • In general records were not easy to find. Files were all incomplete and often times comprised only two documents. • The files appeared to have been arranged for the purposes of the compliance check, but were otherwise none-existent.
Aggregate Compliance 25% UN-SATISFACTORY Score and Compliance Rating
RECOMMENDATIONS; 1. PDE should ensure that its departmental heads understand the procurement process through training to stop the practice of departments sourcing suppliers directly. 2. Training on the use of framework contracts is required. 3. The user departments should initiate procurements using PP Form 20 as under Regulation 104 of the PPDA Regulations. 4. The Ministry should prepare a procurement plan and send a copy of it to PPDA. 5. PDE advised to record issue of solicitation documents and bid submission using the standard forms issued by the PPDA. 6. The Ministry should use the standard bidding documents issued by PPDA for their different contracts. 7. When bids are received and opened, there should be a record to that effect and such records filed. 8. PDU advised to complete its files to include contract management records and other information/documentation related to a procurement. 9. The Composition of the Evaluation Committee should always be approved by the Contracts Committee. 10. The Evaluation Committee should use the appropriate methodology by law when evaluating bids as under Regulation 168(2), 172 and 197 of the PPDA Regulations. 11. Such Evaluation Committee should always sign the code of ethical conduct before going about their business. 12. An evaluation report should be prepared by the secretary and approved by the Contracts Committee. 13. The unsuccessful bidders should be given notice in writing as required under Regulation 225(4) of the PPDA Regulations. 14. The best evaluated bidder should also be given notice and the notice of the contract award should be posted onto the PPDA website. 15. The user department should be involved in certifying payments of the contractual sum as provided for under Regulation 260(2) (iii) of the PPDA Regulations. 16. There should be evidence of execution of the contract within the contractual completion date on file. 17. The Ministry should ensure that monthly reports are submitted in time in accordance with Regulation 40 of the PPDA Regulations. 18. The Contracts Committee should always sign the code of ethical conduct in business. 19. Contracts committee decisions on submissions should be recorded on PP/DPA Forms in accordance with Regulation 51(8), 53(2) (c). 20. The Ministry should ensure that all records contain all the requirements of the law. 21. The Ministry should improve its filing system. 22. The Ministry should appraise the performance of its suppliers.
60 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 28 th May 2008
MANDATE: Policy making, standard setting, regulation, coordination, inspection monitoring, back-up and technical support relating to lands, housing and urban development and to promote and foster sustainable human settlement and manage works on government building.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Both Government of Uganda and Donors
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Gabindadde Musoke
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Richard Oput Chairperson 2. Mr. William Walaga Member 3. Mr. Roy Luke Paraka Member 4. Mr. Christopher Gashibarake Member 5. Mr. Eric Byenkya Secretary.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Dorothy Birabwa Head PDU/PPO 2. Mr. Balaam Nabuyaka Senior Procurement Officer. 3. Mr. Charles Oluk Procurement Officer 4. Ms. Rebecca Asio Secretary 5. Mr. Kassim Kalungu Support
61
COMPLIANCE SCORE / FINDINGS AREA RATING
Procurement 4/10 • Although the Entity was under transformation process, fro m Structures Ministry of lands, water and Environment, the Accounting Officer 40% has clear understanding of his roles. • Contracts committee members were all approved by the PS/ST but PP Form 220 not filed with PPDA. • The PDE is in place but PP Form 221 not filed with PPDA. • User departments initiated some of the sampled procurements. • Internal Auditor carries out post audits. Procurement 9/10 • Entity had a prequalified suppliers list for June 2005-June 2008. Planning • Entity had not submitted a procurement plan for the FY 2006/07. 90% It was found that the plan had been prepared but had not been signed. • Entity was in the process of setting up an electronic assets register. • Use frame work contracts for some of the commo nly procured items. Solicitation and 10/10 • PDU has records of issue of Solicitation documents. bidding procedures • Uses SBDs issued by the Authority. 100% • Minimum bidding periods were observed for all the sampled cases. • Has record of bid submission and opening. • Use appropriate solicitation and bidding documents, appropriate methods and observe biding periods. Evaluation 8/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee procedures (EC) and the Evaluation Report. 80 • Appropriate evaluation methodologies are used.
62 • No records of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Evaluation Committee
Contract 6/10 • Notice of contract award not placed on PDE Notice board and not placement, award posted on PPDA website and management 60% • Unsuccessful bidders never notified especially under RFQ method. • CC approves all contracts and copies of signed contracts were on file. • PDE seeks SG clearance for procurements above 50m. • No evidence/ performance of contract within the contractual completion date. Reporting 4/6 • Entity had not submitted monthly reports from January to December 2007. 67% Performance of 5/8 • All the sampled CC decisions were signed and submitted on PP Forms Contracts 210. Committee 63% • In the CC minutes sampled the CC had not granted any r etrospective approvals • No record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct in business by CC members (PP Form 211) Record Keeping 6/8 • PDU has a record/filling system. • Most of the sampled cases had the standard procurement reference 75% numbers. • No record of supplier appraisal/ performance. Total Score and Overall Rating of 72 %. SATISFACTORY PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Accounting Officer should be trained on his role in public procurement cycle. 2. Entity should pre-qualify other providers for June 2008- June 2011. 3. In the management of the pre-qualified list of providers, a fair and equal opportunity should be accorded to all providers through rotation of providers on successive shortlists and there should be no barrier created to deter competition 4. Entity should ensure that procurement plans are signed on time and submitted to the Authority in accordance with Regulation 96of the PPDA Regulations 2003. 5. PDE should avoid omnibus submission of monthly reports. They should be submitted by the 15 th day of the following month with all the relevant PP Forms and CC. 6. Procurement and disposal notices should be posted in accordance with Regulation 38 of the PPDA Regulations 7. Contracts Committee members should sign the Ethical Code of conduct at each meeting. 8. PDU should post BEB Notices and Notices of Contracts award on PPDA website with PPD training. 9. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 10. The Procurement and Disposal Unit should get involved in contract management, should keep copies of all the relevant documents. 11. Entity should have a supplier appraisal/performance system.
63 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Public Service.
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 22 nd -23 rd July 2008
MANDATE: The Ministry of Public Service, as the overall Ministry responsible for the management of the Public Service sector.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Central Government Ministry.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Basket funding – DFID/World Bank/DANIDA and Irish Aid.
SIZE OF PDE : Medium
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Jimmy K. Lwamafa
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Adah K. Muwanga - Chairperson 2. Salome Nyamungu - Member 3. Jane K. Mwesigwa - Member 4. Mary Nankabirwa - Member 5. Benon Kigenyi – Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER (Names):
1. Robert Kiwanuka SPO 2. Specioza Mukazi PO
64
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of his role for the overall responsibility of the procurement and disposal process. 80% • The 5 CC members are approved by PS/ST and PPDA PP Form 220 is filed with the Authority. • PDU is established and PP Form 221 is filled with the Authority. • Internal Auditor is only involved in negotiation and verification of contract. Procurement Planning 5/10 • Has a pre-qualified list of providers. • Entity has procurement plans for some departments. 50% • Has procurement plan for FY 2007/08 but in World Bank format. • Have an assets register with provision of an assets disposal plan. • No use of framework contracts for the use common items. Solicitation and Bidding 8/10 • There are records of issue of Solicitation documents and receipt of bids procedures on PP Forms. 80% • Use of Standard Bidding Documents issued by the Authority for all the sampled cases. • Appropriate procurement methods used. • Minimum bidding periods were observed for the sampled cases. Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee and the Evaluation Report. 80% • All the Evaluation Committee minutes and Evaluation Report s were signed for all the sampled cases. • There was record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC
65 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
members. Contract placement, award 710 • PDU displays BEB notices on the Entity’s notice board for statutory and management display period, however, does not post them on the PPDA web site. 70% • The unsuccessful bidders are some times issued a notification ward in writing. • Entity gets all the relevant approvals i.e. CC, SG and Donors where applicable. • All the sampled cases were completed within the contractual period. • User Departments certify payments in most cases. Reporting 4/6 • Entity had last submitted monthly reports in March 2008, other reports were pending CC approval s, however, those submitted were in standard 67% formats. Performance of Contracts 6/8 • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members Committee present was available. 75% • All the sampled CC decisions were signed and submitted on PP Forms 210. • In the CC minutes sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 6/8 • Entity has a record/filling system exists in the PDU. • Not all sampled cases had all the requirements of the law. 75 % • Key documents on contract management are not included on the files • Entity lacks contract management and supplier appraisal systems. Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 72% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Internal Auditor should audit the entire procurement and disposal processes, payments and deliveries. 2. All User Departments should prepare individual procurement plans. 3. The Entity’s procurement plan should be prepared with reference to Reg. 97 of the PPDA Regulation 70 of 2003. 4. Entity should use framework contracts for repetitively the procured items with reference to Reg. 237 of the PPDA Regulations 70 of 2003. 5. User departments should submit contract management and monitoring reports to the PDU. 6. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing for all procurements/ disposals. 7. The Entity should submit monthly reports on time in accordance with 5 th Schedule of the PPDA Regulations 70 of 2003 8. PDU records should have all the requirements of the law including copies of all contract payment records. 9. PDU records should have all requirements of the PPDA law including contract management reports and copies of all Contract payment records.
66 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Trade Tourism and Industry.
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 22 nd May 2008
MANDATE: To Coordinate and Monitor Activities Relating to Trade, Tourism and Industry
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government Funded
SIZE OF PDE: 170 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. P. W. Atipo
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. James Tukahirwa Secretary 2. Mr. Samuel Sekungu Chairperson 3. Ms. Ruth Nankabirwa Member 4. Mr. Silver Ojakol Member 5. Mr. Joseph Kitandwe Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. J.B. Odongo Head PDU 2. Mr. Alex Muhairwe APO
67
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 Accounting officer was the PS who resigned, the Under Secretary is acting. 80% The Ministry h as an approved CC and a PDU with 2 staff. PP Forms 220 and 221 not files wi th PPDA. The Internal Auditor audits deliveries. Procurement 5/10 The Ministry h as no procurement plan Planning but has departmental procurement 50% plans. It has a list of prequalified providers. It has an Asset Register but no disposal plan Solicitat ion and bidding 6/10 Not all methods used are appropriate to procedures thresholds. 60% No record of issue of solicitation document on most files. The Minimum bidding period is some times observed for some procurements. Evaluation procedures 4/10 There were a few evaluation reports that were filed. 40% The Evaluation reports are not approved by the Contracts Committee. The Evaluation Committee members
68 do not sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business. The appropriate evaluation methodology is only u sed in a few instances. Contract placement, award 6/10 The notice of contract award is not and management posted to the PPDA website for the 60% statutory display period. The unsuccessful bidders are notified on phone and not in writing as required by law. There was evidence of execution/performance of contract with in the contractual completion date. There was no evidence of involvement of user department in certifying payment of contractual sum.
Reporting 0/6 The Ministry does not submit monthly procurement reports to PPDA. 0% Performance of Contracts 7/8 There were a few files that had Committee contracts committee decisions on a 88% submission on PP/DPA Form. The Contracts Committee had not granted any retrospective approvals. The Contracts Commi ttee sign the code of ethical conduct in business. Record Keeping 1/8 Record keeping is poor. The information is scattered. 13% Records filed do not contain all the requirements of the law. The individual cases do not have procurement reference numbers. There were no records of supplier appraisal/performance.
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 51 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Ministry should file PP Forms 220 and 221 with PPDA . 2. The Internal Auditor should audit the procurement processes and deliveries. 3. The Ministry should make provision for Asset disposal plan in the Assets Register. 4. The Ministry should also draft a procurement plan and submit a copy of it to the Authority. 5. The methods of procurement used should always be appropriate to the thresholds. 6. The minimum bidding period should always be observed depending on the method of procurement used. 7. There should always be evaluation reports after the evaluation of bids which should be approved by the Contracts Committee. 8. The members of the Evaluation Committee should always sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business. 9. Notice of the contract award should be posted to the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 10. Notification of contract award to the unsuccessful bidders should be in writing as required. 11. The user departments should be involved in certifying payment of contractual sums.
69 12. The Ministry should submit monthly procurement reports accompanied by the Contracts Committee minutes as it is a requirement of the law. 13. The Ministry’s PDU should use procurement reference numbers for individual procurements. 14. All records filed should contain all the requirements of the law. 15. The Ministry should also appraise its suppliers’ performance.
70 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Water and Environment
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 28 th – 29 th May 2008
MANDATE: Provision of water, sanitation and protecting the environment
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU App 250 Billion, Donor funding 5Billion
SIZE OF PDE: 6 Directorates
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr .O. Obong
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Tindimugaya Callist Chairman 2. Gashirabake Christopher Member 3. Mafabi Paul Member 4. Epitu Joseph Secretary 5. Twinomujuni John Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Alfred Lapyem PPO 2. Arinaitwe Christine Procurement Officer 3. Opolot Herbert Procurement Officer 4. Maria Akidi - Intern 5. Arinaitwe Tom Intern 6. Acayo Christine Secretary
71
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 9/10 • Accounting Officer does not interfere in the processes. 90% • Vacancy of Senior Procurement Officer not filled Procurement 10/10 • The PDE has a procure ment plan and Planning all other requirements hereunder. 100% Solicitation and bidding 9/10 • There is partial evidence on issue of procedures solicitation documents but all oth er 90% requirements hereunder were on file. Evaluation procedures 9/10 • CC Members do not always sign code of ethic al conduct but other than that, 90% all requirements here under were on file. Contract placement, award and 6/10 • Notices are not placed on PPDA management website 60% • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified Reporting 0/06 • No monthly procurement reports have been submitted for the whole year. 0% Performance of Contracts 8/08 • Satisfactory for all 10 cases Committee 100% Record Keeping 5/08 • No supplier appraisal • Some records not on file e.g. bids
72 63%
Total Score and Compliance Rating of PDE 78% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The AO is strongly advised to ensure that all outstanding monthly reports are submitted to PPDA in time in accordance with the Fifth Schedule of the PPDA Regulations 2003. 2. The Ministry should appraise the performance of its suppliers. 3. All records on the file should contain all the requirements of the law. 4. Notices of contract award should be posted onto the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 5. The unsuccessful bidder should be notified in writing as provided for by the Law. 6. The Contracts Committee members should always sign the code of ethical conduct in business.
73 NAME OF PDE: Ministry of Works, Transport and Communication
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 5th – 6th June 2008
MANDATE: • Plan, develop and maintain an economic, efficient and effective transport infrastructure; • Plan, develop and maintain an economic, efficient and affective transport services by road, rail and air; • Manage public works • Promote standards in the construction industry.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Central Government Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU - 266 billion. Donors - 336 billion.
SIZE OF PDE: Total number of staff about 1,400.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Charles Muganzi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Engineer Ssebbuga Kimeze Chairperson 2. Engineer Kavuma Kagyina Assistant Chairperson 3. Engineer Justine Ongom Member 4. Engineer Robert Rwanga Secretary 5. Ms. Patience Kabiije Member
Co-opted members 1. Mrs. Ethel Kamba PAS 2. Mrs. Jennifer Lutimba Principal Economist, Planning.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Denis Ayo SPO- Ag. HPDU 2. Jackline Bagaya PO 3. Kamana Geofrey PO (Soroti Flying School)
74
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • There is an AO who is responsible for all the procurements and disposals 60% • CC in place and made up of 5 members approved by PS/ST and 2 co-opted members authorized by the Authority . However, from our discussion with CC. • Entity has an established Procurement and Disposal Unit and PP Form 221 filed with PPDA. • The User Departments initiate procurements on PP Form 20. • No evidence that the Internal Auditor has audited the procurement and disposal process, payments and deliveries. Procurement Planning 5/10 • Departmental procurement plans are not submitted to the PDU and so there is no approved procurement plan for the entity. 50% • The Entity has an approved list of pre-qualified provider. • The Entity has an Assets Register that is kept with the finance department. Solicitation and bidding 8/10 • Solicitation documents are in the standard format issued by procedures PPDA. 80% • For some procurements the solicitation documents were not on file • Procurement methods used are in some cases not within the required threshold. • Record of Bid Submission and Opening Evaluation procedures 9/10 ••• Evaluation committees in place, approved by CC
75 ••• Evaluation reports are approved by CC 90% ••• In a few ca ses evaluation reports were not in the procurement files and no notice of best evaluated bidder. Contract placement, 3/10 • Lack of solicitor general approval for some of the contracts. award and management • No notification of award made to the unsuccessful bidder 30% • User department is not involved in certifying payment of contractual sum. • Direct procurements are many Reporting 4/6 • CC has been preparing the monthly reports and not the PDU. • Reporting is not in the standard format. Subject matter is n ot 67% clear, date of award and contract value not filled for some procurements • For some of the monthly reports the sections on contract amendments and variations, contracts completed are not filled. • Some procurements such as fuel are not reflected in the monthly reports. Performance of 7/8 • CC members meet once every week and consider all Contracts Committee procurements from the PDU to ensure compliance. 88% • Minutes of CC meetings are well kept, however copies of the minutes are in some cases not filed in the procurement files. Record Keeping 6/8 • For a sample of procurements, solicitation documents, bids submitted by the bidders and evaluation reports were not filed. 75% • Contract management records not on file • Pre bid minutes and CC minutes not on file • Approval of solicitor general not on file.
Aggregate Score and 67 % Compliance Rating SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Procurement plans should be prepared in the appropriate format. 2. User departments should prepare work plans and submit to the PDU for preparation of an annual plan in accordance with section 60 of the PPDA Act.. 3. All the necessary records for a specific procurement should be properly filed. 4. Evaluation reports should be prepared and filed for each evaluation and submitted to CC for approval. 5. Regulation 225 (4) on contract award should be adhered to. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified of the award to successful bidder. 6. User departments should be involved in certifying payments. 7. Use of direct procurement method should be limited to only exceptional circumstances where competition is impossible to achieve. 8. All the records on procurement should be filed and these include; solicitation documents, bids received evaluation reports, contract management records, CC minutes and solicitor general approval.
76 3.1.2 Government Departments / Agencies
NAME OF PDE: Office of the Auditor General
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: June 2008
MANDATE: To ensure that public funds are spent in accordance with the Public Finance and Accountability Act with due regard to economy, efficiency and value for money.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Constitutional Body
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 2,313,189,898=.
SIZE OF PDE: medium entity
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Ms. Kecho Kayemba Nyapendi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Beatrice Wambethe 2. Ms. Sherina Behakanira 3. Mr. Samuel Kavubu 4. Mr. Joseph Ewama
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Edward Barigye
77
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • 5 CC had been approved by the PS/ST 80% however one member of the contr acts committee (Dr. Dixon) had left the Office of the Auditor General to the Accountant General’s office. • The PDU is understaffed in that there is only one procurement officer. Procurement 7/10 • The procurement plan is in place but Planning 70% the entity does not follow it in many procurements. • The entity has a list of pre-qualified providers but there is no evidence of the rotation of providers on this list • The entity does not use framework contracts for repetitive procurements. Solicitation and biddin g 6/10 • The entity does not always use procedures 60% standard forms as per regulations eg the minutes of the CC meetings are are not on the PP Forms but in the traditional Public Service system of minuting and as a result the Secretary signs the minutes b ut the Chairman and other members usually do not sign the minutes and the Ethical Code of Conduct. • The reviewed cases were a mixture of
78 the different methods of procurement but the most common was the selective bidding and direct procurement. The entity d id not seek any deviations from PPDA on the procurement cases assessed. Evaluation procedures 5/10 • Some of the procurements are not 50% evaluated as management sometimes approves a contract first and later sends it down for ratification. Contract placem ent, award and 3/10 • There was no evidence of documents management 30% pertaining to contract management within the entity
Reporting 2/6 • The Entity does not submit timely 33% monthly reports as required and is therefore not compliant in this critical area Performance of Contracts 4/8 • Retrospective approval of some Committee 50% procurements because decision has already been taken by management e.g. case of Crusader House partitioning. • Members do not have the PPDA Regulations • Contracts Committee not repres ented during bid opening contrary to the law. • Records of meetings available on files but not in the stipulated PP forms. • There was no evidence that members of the contracts committee and evaluation committee were signing an ethical code of conduct. Record Keeping 3/8 • The entity keeps scattered documents 38% but those which are available are kept well Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 53 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should nominate a replacement for the Contracts Committee member who left the Entity and forward the name to PS/ST for approval. 2. The Entity needs to improve its records management system. 3. The Entity should make and submit monthly reports to PPDA in accordance with the regulations. 4. In future, Management and the Contracts Committee should desist from making retrospective approvals of procurement contracts. 5. The Entity should embark on using reference numbers and improve on the reporting of procurements as per the regulations, 6. The Entity should use standard PP and DPA Forms for all procurement and disposal transactions. 7. The Entity should submit procurement plan to the Authority and also adhere to it in its procurements.
79 8. All the members of the Contracts Committee should be availed copies of the PPDA Act and Regulations for their ease of reference. 9. The Entity should encourage the use of framework contracts for repetitive procurements. 10. The PDU generally lacks office facilities and the current staffing is low compared to the work. Since this could be one of the factors leading to the Entity’s non compliance with regard to submission of monthly reports, it should be urgently addressed by the Entity. 11. The Entity should ensure that a member of the Contracts Committee attends the opening of bids as required by the law.
80 NAME OF PDE: Courts of Judicature
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 10 th – 11 th June 2008
MANDATE: To exercise judicial powers in the name of the people and in conformity with the law and with the value, norms and aspiration of the people .
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Department
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and Donors (DANIDA)
SIZE OF PDE : 250 staff headquarters, 1,000 staff the whole PDE.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Tusingwire Elisha
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms Harriet Akello Secretary 2. Mr. Semwogerere M. Robert, Assistant Secretary High Court - member 3. Mr. Musene ,Registrar - member 4. Mr.James Ecret, Senior Economist - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Aribaruho Andrew SPO 2. Watera Susan PO 3. Adroa Herbert APO
81
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 5/10 • The Accounting Officer needs training on some of the PPDA modules especially the regulations. 50% • 4 CC Members, entity is in the process of getting a name approved and sent for approval to PS/ST. • PP Form 220 is not filed and PP Form 221 has not been submitted to PPDA Procurement Planning 4/10 • The user Departments initiates all user plans using PPDA format but Interviews with the heads of departments are 40% done verbally and not recorded anywhere. Solicitation and Bidding 10/10 • All the procedures of solicitation and Bidding are procedures followed respectively using the standard format issued by 100% the PPDA Evaluation procedures 9/10 • All the Evaluation carried out but have no minutes 90% attached. Contract placement, award and 6/10 • There is no evidence of involvement of user dept in management certifying payment of Contractual Sum and the final 60% payments • Payments are not processed within the payment schedule specified in the contracts. Unsuccessful bidders are notified on phone and not in writing. Reporting 3/6 • Monthly reports have not been submitted on time because the Head of the PDU has not been having an officer since 50% August 2007 and the work load was too much for him. Performance of Contracts 4/8 • The Contracts Committee is doing a good job and has not Committee granted any retrospective approval. However, they are 50% fours members instead of five because one member was made a judge.
82
Record Keeping 5/8 • This area needs a lot of improvement because all records filed do not contain all the requirements of the 63% law
Total Score and 64% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer and District Technical Planning Committee need more training. 2. The Accounting officer needs training on some of the modules of PPDA especially regulations. 3. The PDU should be in charge of travel arrangements, fuel, meals, Workshops and training and all this related nature of procurements because they are not handled by the PDU 4. Establish good working relationship between the PDU and other user department. 5. The PDU must submitted monthly reports by the 15 th day of each month for the preceding month. 6. The filing system should be improved to enable trailing of the procurement process. 7. The Contracts Committee members should be increased to the required number of five members. 8. Notices of Best Evaluated Bidder should also be seen to PPDA website and to the unsuccessful Bidders.
83 NAME: Directorate of Public Prosecutions
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 14 th – 15 th April 2008
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Departments/Agencies
MANDATE: To handle and prosecute criminal cases in the Country, as prescribed by the Constitution
SOURCE OF FUNDING: Central Government and Donor funds (under basket funding of the Justice, Law and Order Sector)
SIZE OF PDE: DPP is composed of the Headquarters, located on Workers House, and 7 up country stations; altogether, the Entity has 330 staff.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Amos Ngolobe
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mrs. Damalie Lwanga – Chairperson 2. Mr. Samuel Kyambadde – Member 3. Mr. David Kirya - Secretary (Left the Entity) 4. Mr. David Odongkara - Member 5. Mr. Simon Seremba – Member (Left the Entity)
PROCUREMENT & DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Baker Ainebyona - Head PDU
84
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • PP form 20 is not filed by the Entity. • The Contracts Committee has two unfilled positions 70% following the departure of Mr. Simon Seremba and David Kirya. • PP Form 221 not filed with the Authority. Procurement 7/10 • Departmental plans not seen Planning • Entity has commenced on use of framework 70% contracts. Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • Entity is fully compliant. procedures 100% Evaluation procedures 9/10 • Some of the records of acceptance of the code of Ethical Conduct for the Evaluation Committee 90% members not seen but other than that, all records were on file. Contract placement, award and 5/10 • The Entity does not post notices of the best evaluated management bidder and contract award on the PPDA Website. 50% • No evidence/r ecord of notification of the award to the unsuccessful bidders in writing seen on the files sampled. Reporting 4/6 • Monthly reports are submitted late. At the time of the compliance check, the Entity's May 2007 - 67% November 2007 were outstanding. • Reports submitted are not on PPDA standard forms.
85 Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Records of Contracts Committee decision not seen Committee on file. 63% • PP form 210 not used. Record Keeping 5/8 • Filing system is still being developed. 63%
Total Score of PDE and 72% SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Accounting Officer should ensure that the two vacant positions in the Contracts Committee are filled. 2. PP Form 221 should be filed with the Authority. 3. The Accounting Officer should ensure that all user departments prepare department plans and submit them to the PDU. 4. Entity should post bid notices on the PPDA website 5. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing as it is a requirement in the law. 6. Entity should ensure timely submission of monthly procurement reports which is by the 15 th day of each month for the preceding month.
86 NAME OF PDE: Inspectorate of Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 11 th – 12 th June 2008
MANDATE: Promotion of the rule of law and natural justice in public administration
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Department
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU, DANIDA, ADB and Irish Aid
SIZE OF PDE: 272 Employees
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Waiswa Bageya
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mrs. Annet Twine Kyakunda - Chairperson 2. Gloria Anajun - member 3. Mugisha Elinah - Member 4. Makumbi David - Member 5. Amos Baguma - Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr.Kivumbi Abdul PO 2. Mr. Atwijukire Alex PO 3. Ms. Kigongo Anna. Secretary
87
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/ • FINDINGS RATING Procurement Structures 8/10 • All CC members were approved by the ST to Treasury as required by PPDA Reg 45 (3). 80% • The internal auditor audits the procurement and disposal process • There was no evidence of PP form 221 filled with PPDA on file. Procurement Planning 3/10 • The Entity had a procurement plan (in soft copy) that had been not been submitted to PPDA. 30% • There were no departmental procurement plans. • An assets register exists. • There is no usage of framework contracts of repetitively procured items. Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • There was record of issue of solicitation procedures documents, bid submission and opening 100% • The entity uses solicitation documents in the format issued by PPDA • Thresholds were adhered to in the determination of procurement methods Evaluation procedures 8/10 • All files reviewed, save for those under direct procurement, had evaluation reports on file. 80% • However in a few cases a record of acceptance of code of ethical conduct for evaluation committee members were missing of file Contract placement, award 3/10 • Copies of signed contracts exists
88 and management • There were no copies of notices of best 30% evaluated bidder on file and hence no evidence of their posting on the authority web site • Unsuccessful bidders were equally never notified • No evidence of user involvement in certification of payments Reporting 0/6 • The entity was not update in terms of Monthly reports to the Authority 0% Performance of Contracts 8/8 • There was use of forms for meetings (PP Form Committee 210) and record of contracts committee decision. 100% • The records of acceptance of code of ethical conduct exist. • There was no evidence of a retrospective approval by the contracts committee Record Keeping 4/8 • A procurement reference book exists • Individual cases have standard procurement 50% reference numbers • Some confusion between services and supplies was noted in referencing • Copies of correspondences between the PDE and bidder were not on file • There were no record of supplier Appraisal/performance • Total Score and 61% • SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting officer should file PP form 221 with the PPDA 2. The entity should prepare and submit the approved procurement and disposal plan to the Authority 3. All departments should prepare their departmental work plans for procurements 4. Framework contracts for repetitively procured items should be adopted in the entity 5. A record of acceptance of code of ethical conduct for evaluation committee members should be signed by all members as required under Reg. 169(9) and 171(5) 6. Copies of notices of best evaluated bidder should be put on file 7. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified 8. Users should certify payments as required by Reg. 260(2) 9. The entity should compile and submit all pending procurement monthly reports as required under Reg. 118(9) 10. All records pertaining to a given procurement should be put on the respective files 11. The entity should initiate supplier appraisal /performance
89 NAME OF PDE: Internal Security Organization (ISO)
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 24 th -25 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide accurate, reliable and timely intelligence on national security threats in order to support policy making and implementation, law enforcement and general stability.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Department/ Agency
BUDGET: GOU funding – consolidated fund.
SIZE OF PDE : Confidential
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Dr. Amos Makumbi – Director General
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Capt. Charles Oluka – Chairman 2. Capt. Charles Aine 3. Lt. Fred Kyakulaga – Secretary 4. Lt. Churchill Tutayombo 5. Mr. George Baguma
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER (Names):
1. Ms. Hellen Nayiga – Head PDU Office of the President 2. Mr. Ofamba Peter – Head PDU ISO 3. Mr. Mugisha Derrick – Procurement Officer ISO
90
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The delegated Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of his role for the over all 80% responsibility for the procurement and disposal process. • The 5 CC members are approved by PS/ST but PP Form 220 is not filed with PPDA. • Has a fully fledged PDU with two staff who are in turn supervised by the PDU in the president’s office. • The user departments initiate procurements on PP Form 20. • The Internal Auditor carries out post audits before payment of contractual sums. Procurement Planning 7/10 Entity has; • An approved pre-qualified list of providers. 70% • A departmental procurement plan. • A procurement plan for FY 2007/08 based on the approved budget. • An assets register with provisio ns for assets disposal plan. • Uses framework contracts for commonly used items. Solicitation and Bidding 10/10 Based on the CHOGM related sampled cases; procedures • PDU had records of issue of Solicitation 100% documents. • Used SBDs issued by the Authority.
91 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
• Minimum bidding periods were observed for all the sampled cases. • Had record of bid submission and opening Evaluation procedures 9/10 • The CC approved the members of the Evaluations Committee (EC) and the Evaluation Report. 90% • Appropriate evaluation methodologies were used. • The Evaluation Committ ee minutes and Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members are signed. Contract placement, award 7/10 • Notice of contract award not placed on PDE and management Notice board and not posted on PPDA website 70% • While contract management was observed, it was noted that providers do not have access to the PDU’s notice board because of security issues and have to rely on letters from the PDU on the BEB • Unsuccessful bidders are never notified in writing. • CC approves all contracts and copies of signed contracts were on file Reporting 0/6 • Entity has never submitted monthly reports, pending submission of micro procurements 0% from the regional offices. Performance of Contracts 7/8 • Record of Ac ceptance of Code of Ethical Committee Co nduct for CC members present was 88% available. • All the sampled CC decisions were signed and submitted on PP Forms 210. • In the CC minutes sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 7/8 • Each i ndividual procurement had its own file with the respective records includi ng contract 88% management records • Due to security reasons, it was hard for the tam to verify if the PDU had a record/filling system. • Most of the sampled cases had the standard procurement reference numbers. • PDE has no supplier appraisal/performance system.
Total Score and 76% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should urgently implement Section 42 of the PPDA Act that requires national defence and security organizations to manage their procurements and disposals on the basis of a dual list. 2. Since the PDE notice board is not accesses by the public, it should post both the BEB Notices and notices for Contract award on the notice board of the Office of the President and PPDA website. 3. Entity should submit partial report to the PPDA on the macro procurements. 4. AO should consider the delegation of some procurements (especially micros) to the divisions to fasten the procurement and reporting systems. 5. Entity should have a supplier appraisal system.
92 NAME OF PDE: National Curriculum Development Centre
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 16 th –17 th July 2008
MANDATE: To develop and continually improve on study syllabuses for various levels of education.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Institution under the Ministry of Education and Sports.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU with some support from the African Development Bank.
SIZE OF PDE: Medium
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Ms. Connie Kateeba
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. E. Twinomugisha Chairman 2. Myers Mumanyire Member 3. Thembo K. Nathan Member 4. Baguma K. Grace Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Livingstone Rugasira - Head PDU
93
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 10/10 • The PDE has proper procurement structures in place. 100% • However PDU is understaffed as there is only one staff there. In addition a fifth member of the CC is awaiting approval from PSST.
Procurement Planning 8/10 • Procurement Plans are in place both for departments and for the entire PDE. 80% • The PDE did not use framework contracts for any of its regular procurements. Solicitation and Bidding 4/10 • There was no record of issue of solicitation Procedures documents and submission of bids. 40% • Standard solicitation documents were not being used. Evaluation Procedures 3/10 • Evaluation Committee did not sign the ethical code of conduct. 30% • No CC approval of evaluation reports. • Evaluation Committees not approved by CC. Contract Placement, 3/10 • Contract management records were not included Award and Management on the files reviewed 30% Reporting 3/6 • Monthly reports were up to date. However they were not being made on the standard forms. In 50% addition queries from the PPDA have not been responded to. Performance of Contracts 2/10 • CC did not sign ethical code of conduct.
94 Committee • CC minutes were not signed and they did not use 25% the approved forms for their records and approvals.
Record Keeping 4/8 • The entity did not have proper filing with some of the cases reviewed involving loose documents. In 50% general records were not easy to find and follow. Aggregate Compliance Score and Compliance 51% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Rating
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Accounting Officer should ensure that the PDU is appropriately staffed with the required number of PDU members. 2. Entity should use framework contracts for routine procured items. 3. PDU should ensure that the appropriate forms are used for bid submission and bid opening. 4. Entity should use PPDA Standard Bidding Documents and Forms 5. Contracts Committee should ensure approval of evaluation committees and evaluation reports. 6. Contracts committee should sign ethical code of conduct in business prior to a Contracts Committee meeting. 7. All Contracts Committee minutes should be signed and recorded on the appropriate forms. 8. Entity should ensure proper filing of all procurement records.
95 NAME OF PDE: Office of the Prime Minister
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 5th – 6th June 2008
MANDATE: Leader of Government Business
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Ministry
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): (1) 24.8 Billion GOU (2) 4 Billion Donors
SIZE OF PDE : Medium
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Odwedo Martin
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
1. Twesigomwe Carlos Chairman 2. Okuja James Secretray 3. Gashirabake Chrisopher Member 4. Emaru Mackay Member 5. Sali J.M Member (proposed)
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Meke Jane Francis PPO 2. Okware Christopher Procurement Officer 3. Sarah Bbalangulo Secretary 4. Betty Nyangoma Office Attendant 5. Rose Akello Intern
96
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 6/10 • Donor projects are not managed in the OPM procurement structures. 60% • Position of the Senior Procurement Officer not filled. • All the members of the CC are approved by PS/ST. • User departments initiate some of the procurements but other are retrospective. Procurement 8/10 • The Entity has a shortlist of providers. Planning • Departments have departmental 80% procurement plans but are recurrent only. • The Entity also has an approved procurement plan. • The Entity also makes use of framework contracts for items like food stuffs, motor vehicle repairs, stationery and others. Solicitati on and bidding 8/10 • Partial evidence on issue of solicitation procedures documents 80% • There is evidence of use of inappropriate procurement method
97 Evaluation procedures 10/10 • The Entity complies with Evaluation procedures as per the law.
Contract pl acement, award and 6/10 • No best evaluated bidder notices management • No notices to unsuccessful bidders as 60% required by the law. • Contract documents are approved by the CC/Solicitor General/ Donor, whichever is applicable. Reporting 6/6 • The Entity ’s reporting status is up to date and samples of reports reviewed 100% indicate that the standard formats are used and all PP Forms filled. Performance of Contracts 7/8 • The CC members sign the code of Committee ethical conduct in business. • There was some evid ence to show that the CC decisions on submissions are recorded on PP/DPA forms. • There were minutes on file and recorded on the appropriate forms. • The Contracts Committee has not granted any retrospective approval. Record Keeping 6/ 8 • The Entity has a filing system. • Most of the records filed contain all the requirements of the law. • Individual cases have the standard procurement reference numbers. • There was no record of supplier appraisal on file. Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating of PDE 81% HIGHLY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The following projects are not managed under the OPM procurement structures: • NUSAF – World Bank • NUREP - EU • NIMES - World Bank, EU, DFID, ADB, • PRDP – World Bank • PSM - Danida It is recommended that the Accounting Officer ensure that the procurement functions of these projects are delegated in writing to the respective project heads in accordance with the PPDA Regulations. 2. The user departments should always initiate procurements using PP Forms 20. 3. The unsuccessful bidder should always be notified in writing as under Regulation 225(4) of the PPDA Regulations. 4. The Entity should appraise its suppliers’ performance.
98 NAME OF PDE: Parliament of Uganda
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 19 th – 20 th May 2008
MANDATE: Formulation of laws
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Constitutional body
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda (Consolidated Fund)
SIZE OF PDE: 278 staff members
ACCOUNTING OFFICER : Mr. Anaeas.M. Tandekwire
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS : (Names)
1. Mr. Aloysious Makata - Chairperson 2. Mr. Waiswa Henry - Member 3. Mrs. Nadwula Margaret - Member 4. Mr, Wanyaka Samuel - Member 5. Mr. Walubiri Andrew - Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Julianne Kaganzi - Senior Procurement Officer Head PDU 2. Mr. James Kabanda - Procurement Officer 3. Mr. Patrick Lasu - Procurement Officer 4. Mr, Okot Dicks - Assistant Procurement Officer
99
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 10/10 • Procurement structures in place. • The Accounting Officer has appointed the Contracts 100% Committee approved by PS/ST. • The Procurement and Disposal Uni t is in place and has designated offices. • Adhoc committees such as Evaluation and Negotiation committees in place
Procurement 0/10 • Entity does not have an approved procurement plan in place. Planning • The Entity does not have an approved pre-qualific ation 0% /shortlist of providers. • The departments in the Entity do not prepare departmental procurement plans. • There was no Assets Register availed for review.
Solicitation and bidding 8/10 • Copies of the approved solicitation documents on f iles procedures adhered to the standard PPDA SBDs. 80% • In some isolated instances, the bidding procedures were not adhered to BUT as a whole, the Entity adheres to the bidding procedures. • There were records of bid submission and opening on files perused. • The minimum bidding period was observed in most cases.
100 Evaluation procedures 10/10 • The evaluation reports seen on files follow the evaluation criteria in the solicitation documents and are done in 100% accordance with the PPDA Regulations. • Evaluation Committee minutes were seen on files. • Evaluation Committee members sign the code of ethical conduct. • The members of the Contracts Committee approve the composition of the Evaluation Committee. • The Evaluation reports are approved by the Contracts Committee. • The Evaluation Committee uses the appropriate Evaluation criteria. Contract placement, award 3/10 • Few of the contract documents were seen on file. and management • No contract management records were on the files. 30% • No evidence of clearance of contracts above 50 m/- by the Solicitor General. • There was no evidence of execution/performance of contract within contractual completion date.
Reporting 4/6 • Entity adheres to the reporting requirement under the Fifth Schedule. 67% • Entity had not filed contracts above US$ 200 ,000 for the period under review.
Performance of Contracts 7/8 • Contracts Committee meets regularly. Committee • Members sign the code of ethical conduct. 88% • Minutes were detailed and properly recorded. • The Committee has awarded direct procurement for procurements not in accordance with the PPDA Regulations for the use of the method.
Record Keeping 6/8 • Filing system is in place though some few documents were not on the files. 75% • The Entity does use individual reference numbers. • There were no reco rds of supplier appraisal in the Entity’s records.
Aggregate Score and 67 % SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. There is need for the Entity to put in place measures to ensure that there is a procurement and disposal plan for the next financial year and that it is approved and a copy thereof submitted to the Authority. 2. There should be departmental procurement plans submitted to the PDU by departments and signed by the Heads of departments. 3. The procurement files should contain the contract documents and contract management records. 4. The Entity should seek Solicitor General’s approval for contracts above Ushs. 50m and such records should be on the procurement file for a complete record. 5. Entity is advised to ensure that all the procurements are reflected in the monthly reporting such as electricity, water, telephone among others for a complete record.
101 6. The Entity should submit reports for contracts above US$ 200,000 to the Authority. 7. The Contracts Committee should only use direct procurement in accordance with the law. 8. The Entity should appraise its suppliers’ performance as per Reg. 260 of the PPDA Regulations.
102 NAME OF PDE: Population Secretariat
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 25 th -26 th June 2008
MANDATE: To improve the quality of life of the people of Uganda by influencing government policies and programmes to address population trends and patterns
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Body/ Agency
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and Donors through Budget Support
SIZE OF PDE : The entity has 51 members of staff; its annual budget is 1.7bn/= of which approximately 1 billion Uganda Shillings (58.8%) is spent on procurement.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Jotham Musinguzi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Tiondi Andrew Head, MED, Chairperson CC 2. Mr. Musinguzi Hassan Head, FAD, Member 3. Mr. Byarugaba Raymond Accountant, Member 4. Ms. Kigozi Stella SNPO – ICD, Member 5. Ms. Nzeire Hope NPO – FHD, Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER (Names):
1. Mr. Male Lawrence Procurement Officer
103
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of his role for the overall responsibility of the procurement and disposal process. 70% • The 5 CC members are approved by PS/ST but PPDA PP Form 220 is not filed with the Authority. • All requisitions are initiated by the Finance and Administration (F&A) department because the entity has small procurements but on PP Form 20 • The PDU is manned by an Officer. • The entity has no Internal Auditor. Procurement Planning 5/10 • Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers and usually refers to the list of providers of Uganda Bureau of Statistics. 50% • No user department procurement plans. • Has an approved procurement plan for FY 2007/08 prepared by the F & A department but not in the PPDA format • Have an assets register with provision of an assets disposal plan. • No use of framework contracts for the use common items.
Solicitation and Bidding 10/10 • There are records of issue of Solicitation documents and receipt of bids procedures on PP Forms. 100% • Use of Standard Bidding Documents issued by the Authority for all the sampled cases. • Appropriate procurement methods used. • Minimum bidding periods were observed for the sampled cases.
104 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Evaluation procedures 10/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee and the Evaluation Report. 100% • All the Evaluation Committee minutes and Evaluation Report s were signed for all the sampled cases. • There was record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members. Contract placement, award 4/10 • PDU displays BEB notices on the Entity’s notice board for statutory and management display period, however, does not post them on the PPDA web site. 40% • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified. • Bid documents are not approved by CC • No evidence that the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period although there were some delays in payment. • There was no evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment except a few supplies. Reporting 6/6 • Entity had submitted all monthly reports using standard formats with all PP Forms 200,201 and 202 filled and CC minutes attached. 100% • Had satisfactorily resolved all the queries by the Authority on the reports submitted. Performance of Contracts 8/8 • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Co nduct for CC members Committee present was available. 100% • All the sampled CC deci sions were signed and submitted on PP Forms 210. • In the CC minutes sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 4/8 • Entity has a record/filling system exists in the PDU. • The sampled cases did not have the standard proc urement reference 50% numbering, for example, the use of “POPSEC” as the Entity code instead of “PS” as provided for in the Central Guide Guidelines • Key documents on contract management are not included on the files • Entity lacks contract management and supplier appraisal systems.
Total Score and 75 % SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should recruit more PDU staff. 2. PP Forms 220 and 221 on membership of the Contracts Committee and establishment of PDU. 3. All procurements should be initiated by users on PP Form 20. 4. The Entity should improvise an internal control system on the procurement and disposal processes, payments and deliveries. 5. User departments should prepare individual procurement plans as an input to the Entity’s approved procurement plan. 6. The Entity’s procurement plan should be prepared with reference to Reg. 97 of the PPDA Regulation 70 of 2003. 7. Entity should use framework contracts for repetitively the procured items with reference to Reg. 237 of the PPDA Regulations 70 of 2003. 8. All the bid documents should be approved by CC. 9. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 10. All contracts should be executed within the completion dates.
105 11. The User departments should be involved in certifying payments for example by counter signing the LPOs. 12. The Entity needs training on the use of procurement reference numbers as stipulated in the PPDA Guide line 2 of 2003. 13. The Entity should have a supplier appraisal/ performance system. 14. The User departments should submit contract management and monitoring reports to the PDU. 15. The PDU records should have all requirements of the PPDA law including contract management reports and copies of all Contract payment records.
106 NAME OF PDE: Privatization Unit
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 26 th May 2008
MANDATE: Reform and Divestiture of Public Enterprises
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory Body under Ministry of Finance
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government and Donor funds
SIZE OF PDE: Medium
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Ssebabi David
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Byagagire Cilia Turahi 2. Mr. Oyena James 3. Mr. Kainamura Billy 4. Mr. Kajura Khilome
PROCUREMENT DISPOSAL UNIT STAFF (Names):
1. Ms. Violet Kabajaguzi PO 2. Mwesigye Racheal SPO
107
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 6/10 • Accounting Officer understands his roles. 60% • There are only 4 approved CC members and an established PDU. • PP Form 220 and 221 not filed with PPDA. • The User department initiates all procurements. • The Internal Auditor audits deliveries. Procurement 7/10 • Has a procurement plan but uses a list Planning of pre-qualified providers for the 70% Ministry of Finance. • There were no records to show that the Entity has an Assets Register with a disposal plan. • The Entity makes use of framework contracts for frequently procured items. Solicitation and bidding 9/10 • Standard bidding documents are used procedures and bids are properly received and 90% opened. • Solicitation documents use the standard format given by PPDA. • Methods used usually comply with the threshold and the m inimum bidding period observed.
108
Evaluation procedures 8/10 • Each procurement transaction has an evaluation report. 80% • Such evaluation reports are approved by the Contracts Committee. • The appropriate Evaluation methodology is used when evaluating bids. Contract placement, award 7/10 • The Best evaluated bidders are always and management notified and so are the unsuccessful 70% bidders in writing. • There was no evidence of involvement of user departments in certifying payment of contractual sum.
Reporting 5/6 • Monthly reports are submitted in time. • Reports use standard format and all PP 83% Forms are filled.
Performance of Contracts 6/8 • There were a few records of contracts Committee committee decisions on submissions on 75% PP/DPA forms. • The Contrac ts Committee has not granted ant retrospective approvals. • There were minutes on files recorded on the appropriate forms.
Record Keeping 5/8 • The PDE has a proper filing system in the PDU. 63% • Most of the records filed contain all the requirements of t he law with individual reference numbers.
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating of PDE 74% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. PP Forms 220 and 221 should be filed with PPDA . 2. The Internal Auditor should audit the procurement process and payments in accordance with Regulations 27 – 28 of the PPDA Regulations . 3. The Entity should conduct the exercise of pre-qualifying providers. 4. The Entity should get an Assets Register with a disposal plan. 5. The user departments should always get involved in certifying payments of contractual sums.
109 NAME OF PDE: Rural Electrification Agency
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 26 th -27 th May 2008
MANDATE: REA was set up to manage the Rural Electrification Fund
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: The Entity is a statutory body established by The Electricity (Establishment and Management of Rural Electrification Fund) instrument No. 75/2001 under the Electricity Act CAP 45 of the Laws of Uganda
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): REA total budget [2007-08 FY] was approximately Ug. Shs 71,531,247,600, sources of these funds being Government of Uganda and Donors (SIDA, World Bank/IDA and JICA). The Procurement slice is about 70%.
SIZE OF PDE: The Entity has 27 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Kalisa Kabagambe - Permanent Secretary Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Moses Murengezi Chairperson, 2. Ms Elizabeth Nakkungu Member, 3. Mr. Geoffrey Kasozi Member/Secretary, 4. Mr. Richard Muhangi Member, 5. Ms Barbara Asiimwe Member,
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms Annette T Katuramu Procurement Officer
110
SCORE / COMPLIANCE AREA RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The Accounting has a clear understanding of his role. 80% • The CC is fully constituted. • The user departments initiate all procurements. • PP Form 220, 221 and 222 not filed with PPDA.
Procurement Planning 4/10 • No department and overall approved procurement plan 40% • No framework contract in use Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • All Records on file procedures 100% Evaluation procedures 9/10 • No minutes of the evaluation committee meeting on file or as part of the evaluation report. 90% • Other than that, all other records were on file. Contract placement, award and 9/10 • The Entity does not post the notice on the PPDA management Website but complies with all the other 90% requirements in this area. Reporting 6/6 • The Entity’s reporting status is up to date.
100% Performance of Contracts 8/8 The Contracts Committee’s performance is satisfactory as Committee all requirements are complied with. 100% Record Keeping 8/8 • The Entity ha s a filing system and complies with all other requirements in the area. 100%
Total Score of PDE and 86% HIGHLY SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should notify PPDA of the membership of Contracts Committee and Procurement Unit using PP Forms 220 and 221. 2. The Accounting Officer should ensure that user departments prepare departmental procurement plans and submit them to the PDU for consolidation. 3. The entity should use framework contracts for commonly procured items in accordance with Regulation 237. 4. The Evaluation committees should record minutes of their meetings which form the basis of the evaluation report. 5. The entity is advised to post notices on the PPDA website.
112 NAME OF PDE: State House
DATE OF ASSESSEMT: 6th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide at all times, support to the Presidency, to effectively and efficiently perform its constitutional obligations, deliver NRM Manifesto pledges and cater for the welfare and security of H.E. the President, H.E. the Vice President and their immediate families.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Department.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU
SIZE OF PDE: Big with 7 departments with decentralized units.– 2500 staff (2300 permanent and 200 relief), geographically spread on about 65acres of land. Approximately 51% of the total budget is spent on procurements.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name ): Richard Muhinda
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Muyingo C.K Steven Senior Private Secretary, Chairperson 2. Mr. Mawanda Fadhil - State Attorney Member 3. Mr. Norman Isingoma - SAS/Finance and Administration Member 4. Mr. Patrick Muhereza - PRO/Finance and Administration Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Balinda Edison -Senior Procurement Officer 2. Mr. Kagugube Micheal – Procurement Officer
113
COMPLIANCE SCORE / FINDINGS AREA RATING
Procurement 7/10 • Only 4 members, the fifth position not filled. The 5 th Structures member had been promoted to the post of Under 70% Secretary. • The PDE is in place but PP For m 221 not filed with PPDA. • The user departments initiate procurements on PP Form 20. • The Internal Auditor is involved in the procurement process, he always refers to the Contracts Committee minutes.
Procurement 5/10 Entity has Planning • An approved pre-qualified list of providers. 50% • A departmental procurement plan. • A procurement plan for FY 2007/08 based on the approved budget, however, it is never realized- a lot of money is re-allocated to other activities • A non up dated assets register for example; Entity contracted Ms. Crane Crafts & Engravers Ltd to engrave all its assets in Kampala, Entebbe and up country state lodges with a non defined scope.
114 • Uses framework contracts for commonly used items like, dry food supplies and stationery.
Solicitatio n and 9/10 • PDU has records of issue of Solicitation documents. bidding procedures • Uses SBDs issued by the Authority. 90% • Minimum bidding periods were observed for all the sampled cases. • Has record of bid submission and opening
However, due to H.E the Pr esident’s uncertain programmes, most procurement are urgent usually needed on weekends or public holidays. This is a challenge of which limits the utilization of the bidding procedures , for example the procurement of repair of vehicle is always direct due to security concern. Evaluation 8/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations procedures Committee (EC) and the Evaluation Report. 80% • Appropriate evaluation methodologies are used. • No records of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Evaluation Committee • The lengthy vetting process is a big challenge for the completion of contracts within the contractual completion dates. • Users were involved in the certification of payment of contractual sums by counter signing LPOs in all the sampled cases. Contract 5/10 • BEB Notice posted on the PDE notice board, however placement, award it’s not easily accessible by the public. and management 50% • Contract award Notice not placed on PDE Notice board and not posted on PPDA website. • Unsuccessful bidders are never notified in writing. • CC approves all contracts and copies of signed contracts were on file Reporting 3/6 • Entity had last submitted monthly reports in February 2008. 50% • Those submitted were all in the standard formats and all PP Forms 200, 201 & 202 were filed and CC minutes attached. Performance of 5/8 • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Co nduct for Contracts CC members present was available. Committee 63% • All the sampled CC decisions were signed and submitted on PP Forms 210. • Records of CC decisions not on PP/DPA Forms. • CC grants retrospective approvals under emergencies. Record Keeping 5/8 • Entity has a centralized filling system at the registry. • Most of the sampled cases had the standard 63% procurement reference numbers. • Entity had no supplier appraisal records on cases sampled. Total Score and Overall Rating of 65 % SATISFACTORY PDE RECOMMENDATIONS
115
1. PDE needs training on the delegation powers especially to the CC in cases of emergencies procurements. 2. Accounting Officer should forward a name for the 5 th member for PS/ST approval. 3. The PDE should file PP Form 221with PPDA. 4. Internal Auditor should audit the entire procurement and disposal processes, payments and deliveries. 5. Entity should have an up to date assets register wit ha disposal plan. 6. EC should have records on the acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for all Evaluations. 7. Since the PDE notice board is not accesses by the public, it should consider posting both the BEB Notices and notices for Contract award on the notice board of the Office of the President and PPDA website 8. All unsuccessful bidders should be informed in writing. 9. PDE should make timely submit of all relevant monthly reports by the 15 th day of the following month. 10. PDU should use PP/DPA Forms at all stages of the procurement and disposal cycle for example, CC decisions among others. 11. Entity should establish a supplier appraisal/performance system.
116 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Police
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 22 nd - 23 rd May 2008.
MANDATE: PUBLIC : To keep Law and Order in the Country
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Department
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU & Donor Funds
SIZE OF PDE: Approximately 221 members of Staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Ms. Kabogoza Musoke Winnie
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Okoth Ochola - Chairperson 2. Mr. A.R Arumadri - Secretary 3. Mr.Tuhaise Dick - Member 4. Mr. Kiyaga Fred - Member 5. Mr. Isabirye Patrick -Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Magezi Alfred - SPO 2. Mr. Ojambo Nakumolo Francis - PPO 3. Mr. Okou Patrick - PO 4. Ms. Nabukenya Zam – PO 5. Mr. Opiko Charles – Support Staff 6. Mr. Ariko Sam – Support Staff 7. Ms. Nabakooza Robinah - Secretary 8. Ms. Kansiime Constance – Special Police Constable 9. Ms. Nansubuga Betty – Office Attendant 10. Mr. Kamugisha Chris
117
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • CC members approved by PSST though PP Form 2 20 not filed by the entity 60% • PDU is fully established although Form 221 which shows the composition of the established PDU is not filed with PPDA Procurement 7/10 • There’s evidence of an approved list of pre-qualified Planning providers but no evidence of departmental procurement 70% plans. • The Entity has an approved procurement plan. Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • Entity complies with the standard format issued by PPDA procedures for the documents and the Law for the procedures. 100% • The files perused had copies of solicitation document. • The methods used are appropriate to the threshold. • The minimum bidding period was observed for the files perused. • The files perused had records of bi submission and opening. Evaluation procedures 8/10 • Approval of Evaluation Committee members is done by the CC and the appropriate evaluation methodology used. 80% • There were Evaluation reports seen on files perused and some of such reports were approved by the CC.
118 Contract placement, award and 2/10 • No evidence of approval of Contract Documents by the management CC and Solicitor General for Contracts above 50 million. 20% • Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder and Notice of Contract award posted on PDE Notice board. • Entity has not posted any notices of contract award on the PPDA website. • There was no evidence of execution/performance of contract within the contractual completion date. Reporting 5/6 • Monthly reports are not submitted on time and the Entity’s reporting is not up to date. The Entity has not 83% reported for the period September 2007 to date.
• A sample of the reports reviewed indicate that there is use Standard Formats • and all PP Forms 200, 201 & 202 are filled and CC Minutes attached Performance of Contracts 7/8 • Evidence of record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Committee Conduct in Business by CC members present on PP Form 88% 211 seen though such form was not present on all files perused. • The Entity properly keeps records of the Contracts meeting on PP Form 210 and record of signed minutes. • Records of contracts committee decisions on submissions on PP/DPA were seen on files perused.
Record Keeping 5/8 • There exists a Record/filing system in PDU. There were no records of the supplier appraisal performance. 63% • The PDU uses standard reference numbers for individual cases. Aggregate Score and • Compliance Rating 69% • SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. PP Form 220 should filed by the entity. 2. Entity should file PP Form 221 with the Authority. 3. The departments in the Entity should endeavor to compile departmental procurement plans and submit them to the PDU. 4. Evaluation reports by the Evaluation committees should always be approved by the Contracts Committee. 5. The unsuccessful bidders should always be notified in writing as required by law. 6. The CC or solicitor General should always approve the contract documents whenever either is required to do so. 7. The Entity is encouraged to post notices of contract award on the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 8. Documents evidencing execution/performance of contract within the contractual completion date should always be put on the respective procurement files. 9. The Entity should ensure that monthly reports are submitted by the 15 th day of the next month and that all PP Forms are filled and CC minutes attached to reports as this aids the Authority as it reviews the reports. 10. The Entity should appraise suppliers’ performance to ensure quality services and supplies.
119 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Prisons Service
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 12 th - 13 th July 2008
MANDATE: Overseeing prison services in Uganda
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Entity under Ministry of Internal Affairs
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU -
SIZE OF PDE: Medium
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Kimono Simon
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Katungye Moses Chairperson 2. Mr. Nyakuni Felix Member 3. Mr. Ochen Tommy Member 4. Ms. Namuddu Annet Member 5. Mr. Elly Muhumuza - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Lutimba Kyeyune Fred PPO- HPDU 2. Ms. Gillian Okello Amongin PO 3. Ms. Kaitesi Jane OA
120
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 9/10 • There is a full structure in the entity, headed by an AO who undertakes his responsibility for all the procurements and 90% disposal process. He has an established CC in place made up of 5 members approved by PS/ST. CC meets at least once in two weeks. • PDU is in place and has three members. • PP Forms 220 and 221 not filed with PPDA. Procurement Planning 10/10 • An up to date procurement plan was submitted to the Authority in October 2007 and includes departmental plans. 100% • The Entity has an asset Register with a disposal plan. • The Entity makes use of framework contracts. Solicitation and bidding 8/10 • Solicitation documents are in the standard format issued by procedures PPDA. 80% • For some procurements, bids submitted by bidders were not availed. • The Minimum bidding period is in most cases observed. • The method used is appropriate to the thresholds for a number of contracts reviewed. Evaluation procedures 8/10 • Evaluation committees in place, approved by CC
121 • Evaluation reports are signed by members of the EC and 80% approved by CC • There is evidence of non rotation of providers especially for vehicle servicing.
Contract placement, award 3/10 • Records for contract placement are filed and management • For some of the procurements sampled, there was no evidence 30% of award by letter of bid acceptance from PDE or contract documents like LPOs. • There is non submission of letters to unsuccessful bidders • There was no evidence of user department involvement in contract management; however CC said that this role is delegated to the user departments. Reporting 4/6 • Procurement reference numbers are not written in accordance with PPDA guidelines 2002/200 3. Numbers are written as 67% UPN/SUP/07-08/56752/……. • For some of the monthly reports the section on contracts completed was not filled yet there were contracts placed. • There are no CC minutes attached • There is evidence of splitting of procurements especially stationery. Performance of Contracts 6/8 • CC members meet at least once in two weeks and consider all Committee submissions of procurements made. 75% • Minutes of some of the CC meetings were not available for review. • CC approvals are made using the stan dard forms for the different approval requirements. Record Keeping 2/8 • For a sample of procurements, bids submitted by the bidders were available. 25% • Contract management records not on file • Approval of solicitor general not on file. • There were no records of supplier appraisal on file. Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 69 % SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should file PP Forms 220 and 221 with the Authority. 2. The Entity should compile an Assets Register with a disposal plan in accordance with Reg. 295. 3. All the necessary records for a specific procurement should be properly filed. 4. There should be rotation of providers. 5. User departments should be involved in contract management and certifying payments. 6. The unsuccessful bidders should be given notice in writing as required by Regulation 225(4) 7. Referencing of procurements should be as per the PPDA guidelines. 8. The entity is required to submit to the Authority reports on procurements, disposals and those on micro procurements on a monthly basis. 9. The entity should avoid splitting of procurements. 10. All minutes of contracts committee meetings held should be properly filed for ease of reference on decisions on a particular procurement and recorded on the appropriate forms. 11. The Entity should appraise its supplier’s performance in accordance Regulation 260.
122 3.1.3 Statutory Bodies
NAME OF PDE: Capital Markets Authority
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 16 th – 17 th July 2008
MANDATE: Monitoring and regulating capital markets
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory Body
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 25% GOU funded and the rest from Donors
SIZE OF PDE: 22 permanent staff and 2 temporary.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: DR. Japheth Katto.
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms Anne Mpendo, Manager Research and mkts devt, chairperson 2. Mr. Suuza , Senior State Attorney, member 3. Ms Phoebe Kiconco, Compliance Officer, member 4. Mrs. Ann Kyohairwe Muhangi Public Education Officer, member 5. Mr. L’okolong, Compliance Officer, Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mrs. Bernadette N. Kibuule - Administrator in charge of the Procurement Department
123
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The Accounting Officer has knowledge of his main roles but 80% complains that the paper work involved is too much, • 5CC members are all a pproved, user initiates all procurements on PP Form 20 but PP Form 221 has not been submitted to PPDA and the head of PDU is just learning on the job because she has no qualifications for procurement Procurement 10/10 • The per-qualificatio n/short list of Planning providers, departmental procurement 100% plans, an approved procurement plan and an Assets Register are all in place. Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • All the procedures of solicitation and procedures Bidding are followed respectively 100% usi ng the standard format issued by the PPDA Evaluation procedures 8/10 • All the Evaluation procedures are followed but have no minutes attached. 80%
124
Contract placement, award and 8/10 • There is evidence of involvement of management user dept in certi fying payment of 80% Contractual Sum and the final payments are processed within the payment schedule specified in the contracts. Unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing but are not displayed on the PPDA website because the Head of PDU has never been given a pass word for posting. Reporting 5/6 • Monthly reports are submitted on time using the Standard Formats and PP 83% Forms 200,201,202 are filled CC Minutes attached
Performance of Contracts 7/8 • The Contracts Committee is doing a Committee good job and has not granted any 88% retrospective approval. Record Keeping 6/8 • The records are very organized and accurate only that there is no supplier 75% appraisal / performance records only.
Total Score and Overall Rating 86% HIGHLY SATISFACTORY of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Direct Method of procurement should not be used where competition can be obtained and incase of an emergency a waiver should be got from the PPDA. 2. The PDE needs Hands on Training because they have no background on Procurement though they are really doing their best. 3. The IT department of the PPDA should give rights to PDE to assess the Authority’s website in order to be able post Notices of best Evaluated Bidder because the Head of the PDU has tried to get in touch with IT staff but her efforts are fruitless. 4. The Head of PDU should be given a procurement Officer to help in the running of the unit because she is currently the only member in PDU with a substantial work load.
125 NAME OF PDE: Cotton Development Organisation
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 7th July 2008
MANDATE: Regulation, Promotion, and Monitoring of the cotton sector
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: A Parastatal under Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government
SIZE OF PDE : Small
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Ms Jolly K. Sabune
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. William Owachi Chairman 2. Ms Margaret Ngabo Secretary 3. Mr. Hillary Magunda Member 4. Mr. Edward Katarikawe Member 5. Ms Patricia Asimwe (Lawyer) Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Ms Margaret Ngabo Head PDU 2. Ms Judith Kabali Assistant Head PDU
126
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The Accounting Officer has established the Contracts Committee and PDU in place. 80% • The CC members are five and approved by PS/ST and submission was made to PPDA on PP Form 220. • The user departments initiate procurements on PP Form 20. • Internal Auditor audits the procurement and disposal processes
Procurement Planning 8/10 • User departments and procurement plans in place • Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers 80% • There is use of frame work contracts for commonly procured supplies such as stationery.
Solicitation and Bidding 8/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitation procedures documents kept on the files, 80% • Record of bid submission and opening seen • Minimum bidding periods observed by the Entity • Method used are appropriate to the threshold provided for und er the PPDA Guidelines Evaluation procedures 9/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee
127 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
and the Evaluation Report. 90% • The Evaluation Comm ittee minutes and Evaluation Report are signed. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members seen on the files.
Contract placement, award and 6/10 • Notice of Best Evaluated bidder seen although the Entity does management not post them and the notice of contract award on the PPDA 60% website. • Contract documents were on files. • No evidence that the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period although there were some delays in payment. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing • There was evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment.
Reporting 6/6 • Entity is up to date in it procurement reporting. • Entity uses the standard PP form in the monthly reporting 100% • Entity responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports.
Performance of Contracts 5/8 • CC minutes in place and detailed. Committee • Sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective approvals. 63% • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for C C members seen on files. • No records of supplier appraisal and performance availed.
Record Keeping 6/8 • Record/filing system exists in the PDU. • The sampled cases did have the standard procurement 75% reference numbering.
Total Score and 78% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Entity should ensure that the departmental plans are approved by the Heads of Departments 2. Evidence of notification of the unsuccessful bidders in writing should be put on the individual files. 3. The Entity should post notices of the best evaluated bidder and notices of contract award on the PPDA Website. 4. Contract management records including supplier appraisals should be put on the individual procurement files.
128 NAME OF PDE: Dairy Development Authority
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 24 th – 25 th June 2008
MANDATE: To promote, develop and regulate the national dairy industry
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory Body
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Release from central government and donors
SIZE OF PDE : Small
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Dr. Twinamasiko
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names):
1. Mr. Masimilo James Chairperson 2. Mr. Muzira Issa Member 3. Mr. J.B Ssuza Member 4. Mr. Ekyari Vincent Secretary
All members have not been approved by PS/ST.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Moses Okello PO
129
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 3/10 • The entity has the procureme nt structures but the CC is not fully constituted and has 30% not been approved by PS/ST. The PDU is headed by an officer who at the same time performs finance/accounting functio ns which brings conflict in the performance of the two functions. Procurement 3/10 • The procurement plan is not in place and Planning the issue was brought to the attention of the 30% accounting officer. • There is a list of pre-qualified providers but there is no rotation. Solicitation and bidding 2/10 • The entity does not use standard forms as procedures per regulations and the minute of the 20% Contracts Committee meetings are not on the standard PP Forms. Evaluation procedures 3/10 • There were no specific cases reviewed as the files were not availed with the argument 30% that the entity only does micro- procurements of items like tea and sugar. • It was therefore not possible to establish the
130 evaluation procedures being used if at all there was indeed any evaluation process taking place. • The entity sought for a deviation from PPDA in respect of procurement for a milk processing plant on behalf of NAADS but only one company responded. • The Israeli company which responded was not even compliant, complaini ng that they were not used to biddings with very voluminous paper work. Contract placement, award and 1/10 • The entity did not avail any documents to management verify this. • In the case of the Dairy Mini Plant, the 1% Accounting Officer communicated by email to one of the companies indicating that the cooler was needed in five days. • No procurement notices are posted on the notice board. Reporting 0/6 • The entity is not compliant generally as far as reporting is concerned. 0% • The entity does not make and submit monthly reports. Performance of Contracts 3/8 • The chairman and secretary left. The Committee secretary has not been replaced although 38% there is an acting chairman. Record Keeping 2/8 • The entity keeps scattered documents and there were n o single procurement files 25% availed and no cases were reviewed Total Score and overall Rating of PDE 24 % UNSATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The entity must start making and submitted the monthly reports. 2. The entity should start using reference numbers for procurements as provided in the Regulations and Guidelines issued by PPDA. 3. The entity should submit monthly reports for all procurements and disposal activities. 4. The entity should prepare annual procurement plan in accordance with the law and submit a copy to PPDA as per regulations in addition to the required reports 5. The entity must strictly adhere to micro-procurement threshold and other thresholds. 6. The Chairman and secretary of the Contracts Committee who left the entity must be replaced immediately to have a fully constituted and functioning Contracts Committee. 7. Minutes of the contracts committee for the months of January –June 2008 should be prepared and submitted with the monthly reports. 8. The Entity claims that it only does micro-procurements like buying tea and sugar, but even if this is the case, these procurements must be included in the monthly reports submitted to PPDA.
131 NAME OF PDE: Electricity Regulatory Authority (ERA)
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 18 th – 19 th June 2008
MANDATE: To regulate the generation, transmission, distribution, import and sale of electricity in Uganda.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: ERA is Statutory Body established under the Electricity Act 1999 Cap 145
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 3.6 billions
SIZE OF PDE: 30 Employees
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Eng. Dr. F.B Sebbowa
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Johnson Kwesigabo Chairperson 2. Jack Mukumbya Secretary 3. Eng. James Omara Ogwang Member 4. Mr. Benon Mutambi Member 5. Mrs. Sarah Banage Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mrs. Doreen T. Akatuhwera Head PDU
132
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/ FINDINGS RATING Procurement Structures 9/10 • All CC members were approved by the ST to treasury as required by PPDA Reg 45 (3). 90% • Though the internal audit function is outsourced, all payments were first passed by them • There was no evidence of PP form 221 filled with PPDA Procurement Planning 10/10 • The Entity had an approved procurement plan • An assets register exists 100% • Framework contracts for repetitively procured items. Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • There was a record of issue of solicitation procedures documents, bid submission and opening. 100% • The entity uses solicitation documents in the format issued by PPDA. • Thresholds were adhered to in the determination of procurement methods Evaluation procedures 10/10 • All files reviewed had evaluation reports on file. • Members of evaluation committee were
133 100% approved by CC • In the cases reviewed, evaluation followed evaluation criteria • Records of acceptance of code of ethical conduct for evaluation committee members were on file. • CC approved all evaluation reports. Contract placement, award 6/10 • Copies of signed contracts exist. and management • Copies of notices of best evaluated bidder were 60% on file though no evidence to indicate their posting on the authority web site were on files. • There was no evidence of notification made to unsuccessful bidders. • Users were involvement in certification of payments. Reporting 6/6 • The entity was update in terms of Monthly 60% reports to the Authority in the formats prescribed by PPDA Performance of Contracts 7/8 • There was lack of consistent use of forms for Committee meetings (PP Form 210) and record of contracts 88% committee decision as the CC preferred a simplified in house developed versions. • Acceptance of code of ethical conduct exist on files. • There was no evidence of a retrospective approval by the contracts committee Record Keeping 5/8 • A record/filing systems exists • A procurement reference book exists 63% • Individual cases have standard procurement reference numbers. • Most files reviewed had no acceptance letters from successful bidders. • There were no record of supplier appraisal/performance
Total Score and 86% HIGHLY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting officer should file PP form 221 with the PPDA as required by reg. 57. 2. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing as required under Reg. 225(4) 3. The entity should post on the PPDA web site the Best evaluated bidder and notice of contract award as required under reg. 224(3) 4. The entity should maintain such performance in this compliance area. 5. The contracts committee should desist from using house developed versions and stick to PP/DPA form as provided for under Reg. 51(8), 53(2)(c) 6. All records pertaining to a given procurement should be put on the respective files as per reg. 90 and 91. 7. The entity should initiate supplier appraisal /performance as required under reg. 260
134 NAME OF PDE: National Environment Management Authority (NEMA)
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 9th -10 th July 2008
MANDATE: To coordinate, monitor and supervise sustainable management of the environment in Uganda.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: The Entity is a statutory body established by The National Environment Act, CAP. 153 of the Laws of Uganda.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and Donors
SIZE OF PDE: 57 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Henry Aramanya-Mugisha
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Ronald Kagwa Chairperson 2. Ms. Beatrice Adimola Member 3. Ms. Goretti Kituntu Member 4. Ms. Christine Akello Secretary
There is a possibility that the tenure of some of the Contracts Committee members expired.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Allen Asasira Procurement Officer
135
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 6/10 • The re is a possibility that the tenure of some of the Contracts Committee members expired; meeting 60% with them revealed. Some of the Contracts Committee could not remember when they were appointed, but remember that it is over three years ago. No record was on file • PP Form 220, 221 and 222 not filed with PPDA Procurement Planning 6/10 • No departmental procurement plans • PDE does not use framework contracts for 60% commonly procured items Solicitation and bidding procedures 7/10 • PDE does not usually record issue of bidding document, receipt of bid and conduct public opening 70% of bids Evaluation procedures 8/10 • No record on file of signed Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members and no Evaluation minutes on file 80% but the other requirements hereunder were on file.
136 Contract placement, award and 4/10 • No record of Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder; management Notification of the award to unsuccessful bidders 40% Reporting 4/6 • Submission of monthly reports on procurement and disposal not on time. 67% • The repor ts should include reporting of items such as fuel, utilities (water, electricity, telephone) and staff welfare items (sugar, milk) Performance of Contracts 7/8 • There were some cases of retrospective approvals. Committee • There were copies of signed co des of ethical conduct 88% by the contracts committee. • There were minutes on file but not recorded on the appropriate forms Record Keeping 5/8 • Most records on the procurement files lack all the requirements of the law. 63% • The Entity does not appraise the p erformance of its suppliers.
Total Score of PDE and Compliance 65 % SATISFACTORY Rating
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Accounting Officer should ascertain status of tenure of Contracts Committee. 2. Accounting Officer should ensure preparation of departmental procurement plans. 3. PDE should use framework contracts for items such as stationary and fuel. 4. The PDE should record issue of bidding documents, receipt of bids using the relevant PPDA Standard forms. 5. The EC members should ensure that they sign the Ethical Code of Conduct and Evaluation minutes are kept. 6. PDE should post notices of best evaluated bidder to the PPDA website. 7. Notification of award should be sent to unsuccessful bidders. 8. Contracts Committee should avoid granting retrospective approvals. 9. The PDE should improve on record keeping .
137 NAME OF PDE : National Forestry Authority
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 4 th – 5th June 2008
MANDATE: To regulate the use and management of all both natural and plantation Public Forests
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory body created by an act of Parliament.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Receives only 30% of its budget from GOU, the rest is donor funded. More than 50% of the PDE’s budget is spent on procurement. In addition, the PDE generates it own revenue mostly through the sale of timber and the leasing to private developers of Eco Tourism Sites.
SIZE OF PDE: 380 Members of Staff operating in 8 ranges and at the Head Office.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Damian Akankwasa
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. John Diisi Chairman 2. Susan Akahinga Secretary 3. Godfrey Jao Acaye Member 4. Silver Mwesigwa Member 5. Loy Kyarimpa Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Allan Katusiime Head PDU
138
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 10/10 • The CC requires training in order to execute its duties better. 100% Procurement Planning 8/10 • Procurement Plan is in place but user departments do not appear to know how to use it 80% resulting in urgent procurements all the time. Solicitation and Bidding 6/10 • The PDE was not using standard PPDA Procedures documents especially with RFQ procurements 60% Evaluation Procedures 6/10
60% Contract Placement, 4/10 • No evidence at all of contract management Award and Management records on all PDU files reviewed. 40% Reporting 6/6 • The Entity’s reporting status is up to date
100% Performance of Contracts 6/8 • Contracts Committee was not using standard Committee forms and in one case, an approval of a contract 75% was done without the CC meeting but with each
139 individual member signing the approval. • CC did not sign ethical code of conduct. Record Keeping 4/8 • All files reviewed were incomplete and had a number of unsigned documents
50% Total Score and Compliance Rating 69% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. PPDA should use the Standard Bidding Documents particularly when using the Request for Quotation (RFQ) method. 2. Entity should keep contract management records. 3. Contracts Committee decisions should be documented using the relevant standard PP Forms. 4. Contracts Committee members should sign the ethical code of conduct prior to each Contracts Committee meeting. 5. All procurement files should contain all procurement records in accordance with the law.
140 NAME OF PDE: National Planning Authority
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 29 th - 30 th May 2008
MANDATE: To put in place, operationalise, oversee, supervise, monitor, evaluate, and coordinate, the national framework, systems and strategies for cost effective and participatory national development planning in Uganda.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS : Statutory body -Established by Act No. 15 of 2002 in compliance with Article 125 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda (1995)
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and Donors- NEPAD (New Partnership for African Development) and ACBF (African Capacity Building Foundation).
SIZE OF PDE: Staffing capacity of 68 but currently has 29 members of staff; Total annual budget is UGX 2.7bn/= of which UGX 1.6bn/= is for procurements (60%).
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Saul B. Kaye
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr Kavuma John Bosco Economic Analyst, Research, M& E Chairperson 2. Ms Judith Mutabazi, Research Assistant, Member 3. Mr David Katungi, RC/DDP, Member 4. Mr. Francis Mazinga, Research Assistant, Member 5. Ms Catherine Muganga, State Attorney, Legal Officer
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Lwanga Michael
141
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 5/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of his role for the overall responsibility of the 50% procurement and disposal process. • The 5 CC members are approved by PS/ST but PPDA PP Form 220 is not filed with the Authority. • No established PDU. • Internal Audits conducts post audits. Procurement Planning 5/10 • Procurement plan in place but only for micro procurements and not approved by CC 50% • Procurement plan is for only the last quarter of the current FY. • No departmental procurement plans Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • An appropriate SBD and procedures were used for procedures the sampled case. 100% Evaluation procedures 8/10 • On the sampled case, the financial evaluation was conducted before the technical evaluation contrary to 80% Reg. 197 of the PPDA Regulations 70 of 2003. Contract placement, award and 3/10 • BEB notice and Notice of contract award are noted management posted the PDE Notice board only on the PPDA 30% website
142 • The unsuccessful bidders are never notifies in writing.
Reporting 4/6 • Entity had last filed Monthly reports in March 2008.
67% Performance of Contracts 6/8 • CC members do not use PP Form 211. Committee 75% Record Keeping 7/8 • Not all sampled cases had all the requirements of the law. 87.5 • Key documents on contract management are not included on the files • Entity lacks c ontract management and supplier appraisal systems Total Score and 67% Overall Rating of PDE SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. PP Form 220 should be filed with the Authority. 2. The Entity should recruit PDU staff and file PP Form 220 with PPDA. 3. The Internal Auditor should audit the entire procurement and disposal processes, payments and deliveries. 4. The User Departments should initiate all procurements. 5. The User departments should prepare departmental plans for consolidation into overall plan. 6. The entity should always prepare a procurement plan for the whole FY 7. The CC should approve the Entity’s procurement plan. 8. The Evaluation Methodology used for the case sampled was not appropriate. Appropriate and approved evaluation methodology and procedures should be used. 9. BEB Notices and Notices of Contract award should be placed on a special public procurement notice board. 10. All unsuccessful bidders should be always informed in writing. 11. The entity should submit all monthly reports to PPDA on time as stipulated in the 5 th Schedule of the PPDA Regulations 70 of 2003. 12. PDU records should have all requirements of the PPDA law including contract management reports and copies of all Contract payment records.
143 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Coffee Development Authority
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 11 th – 12 th August 2008
MANDATE : To regulate the growing, processing, selling and exporting of coffee.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory body created by an act of Parliament.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and the entity also has rental income and income from the sale of coffee export licenses
SIZE OF PDE: Small
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Henry Ngabirano
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names) 1. John Luzinda Mukasa Chairman 2. Susan Akahinga Secretary 3. Godfrey Jao Acaye Member 4. Silver Mwesigwa Member 5. Loy Kyarimpa Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names) 1. Gladys Kobusingye Head PDU
144
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 10/10 • The CC’s term expires in June 2010.
100% Procurement Planning 6/10 • Departments did not present their procurement plans so it was not possible 60% for the Entity to prepare a procurement plan. Solicitation and Bidding 10/10 • All the requirements hereunder were met. Procedures 100% Evaluation Procedures 10/10 • All the requirements hereunder were met.
100% Contract Placement, Award 7/10 • Some contract management records were and Management not on file. 70% • PPDA website was not being used • The Entity was not using any framework contracts because they are not fully understood.
Reporting 6/6 • The Entity’s reporting status was up to date
145 100%
Performance of Contracts 7/8 • CC minutes were not on individual files Committee but were available in a separate file.
Record Keeping 5/8 • Contract management records were lacking on some of the files. Otherwise all other documents were available on file. • There was no record of supplier appraisals on any of the files reviewed.
Total Score and rating of 85% SATISFACTORY PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should ensure that all user departments prepare their departmental plans. 2. There is need to get an assistant for the Head PDU to reduce on the work load on one person and consequently improve the efficiency of the PDU. 3. Entity should post bid notices to the PPDA website 4. Entity should use framework contracts for commonly procured items. 5. Entity should keep contract management and supplier performance records.
146 NAME OF PDE : Uganda Investment Authority
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 11 th - 12 th June 2008
MANDATE: To market Uganda's investment opportunities and to ensure that Uganda becomes the best investment destination through provision of quick and quality facilitation services to all prospective investors to the country.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory body created by an act of Parliament.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and Donor funded Budget is UShs. 6.4b of which 3b was used to acquire industrial parks. The annual procurement budget is approximately 300m
SIZE OF PDE: 5 Departments with about 35 staff.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Prof. Maggie Kigozi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names): 1. Issa Mukasa Director Investment Promotion Chairperson 2. Barnabas Tumwesigye Director Land Department Member 3. Koratungye A.K Director Strategic Planning Member 4. Catherine Nabirye Legal Officer Member 5. Joyce Sserubombwe Secretary 6. Itaza Muhirwa Advisor Procurement specialist
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
The Entity does not have an established Procurement and Disposal Unit.
147
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 3/10 • The Accounting Officer is in place and has been trained by the Authority. 30% • Contracts Committee in place and approved by PS/ST. • There is no established the Procurement and Disposal Unit • The user departments initiate procurements using internal memos instead of PP form 20. • Information as to whether the Internal Auditor has audited the procurement and disposal processes was not availed. • No internal audit reports on the procurement and disposal processes seem. Procurement Planning 2/10 • Entity has no procurement plan in place. • The Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers in 20% place though there are inadequate providers on some categories for works, supplies and services. • No evidence of use of framework contracts seen.
Solicitation and Bidding 4/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and
148 Procedures solicitation documents are not kept on the files 40% • Few records of bid submission and opening seen on files. • Minimum bidding periods observed in the cases sampled • Some of the methods used are not appropriate to the threshold and circumstances as provided for under the PPDA Guidelines. There is frequent use of direct procurement. • In most of the cases sampled, copies of the solicitation documents issued and bids received were not availed.
Evaluation Procedures 8/10 • Evaluation reports seen on the procurements samples and use the evaluation methodology in the solicitation 80% documents. • Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members seen on the files. • Evidence of approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee seen. • Evaluation reports are signed approved by CC.
Contract Placement, 2/10 • Entity does not post the notices of the best evaluated Award and Management bidder and the notice of contract award on the PPDA 20% website. • Contract documents were not on the individual procurement files. • There are no records of supplier appraisal and performance. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing • User departments issue goods received notes and certify deliveries Reporting 0/6 • Entity is not up to date in the monthly procurement and disposal reporting. At the time of the 0% compliance, the Entity had last reported in September 2007. • Entity has responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports. • Invoice numbers and dates for some procurement transactions are not indicated in the reports and contracts Committee minutes are not submitted with the reports.
Performance of Contracts 4/8 • Contracts Committee meets regularly. Committee • Most of the Contracts Committee minutes were 50% available on the file. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members not signed by the members at each meeting. • Contracts Committee has granted retrospective approvals to some procurements.
Record Keeping 1/8 • The record/filling system is not in place partly because
149 of the un established PDU. 13% • Individual procurements do not have procurement reference numbers assigned to them. The Entity uses contract numbers instead. • The records sampled were kept by Finance and Administration Section.
Total Score and Compliance Rating 33% UN-SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should establish the Procurement and Disposal Unit at the appropriate levels. 2. The CC should ensure that evaluation procedures (approval of EC and EC reports) are followed. 3. Frame work contracts should be used for repetitively procured items. 4. All Solicitation documents for procurements should be made using the standard format issued by the PPDA. 5. There should be a record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC and Contracts Committee members. This should be signed every time the Contracts Committee meets and when the EC carries out an evaluation. 6. All outstanding month procurement and disposal reports should be submitted to PPDA promptly. 7. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured. 8. Performance appraisal should be carried out on all providers and records kept by the PDU. 9. Notice of BEB should be posted on PDU notice board and unsuccessful bidders informed in writing.
150 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Revenue Authority
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 7th – 8th July 2008
MANDATE: Collection of taxes on behalf of government
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory Body
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU, World Bank
SIZE OF PDE: 7 Departments with 1780 staff members.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Ms. Kagina Allen
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Doris Akol Chairperson 2. Sarah Nalwebe Secretary 3. Sam Nakabale Member 4. Mike Chibita Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Kariisa Richard Manager PDU- HPDU 2. Mr. Mwesigye Stephen Supervisor PDU 3. Ms. Esther Namuyomba Officer PDU 4. Ann Namuli Lwanga Sup. corporate services 5. Terence Kavuma Sup. corporate services 6. Carol Sekandi Tugume Officer corporate services 7. Hope Kaberinde Doreen Officer corporate services 8. Patrick Mujuni Officer corporate services 9. Ruth Chebet Officer corporate services 10. Kanda Christine Officer corporate services
151
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 9/10 • There is an AO who is responsible for all the procurements and disposals 90% • CC in place and has 4 members approved by PS/ST. • There is a well established PDU in place and is well staffed with 9 members. • Pp Forms 220 and 221 were not filed with PPDA. • User departments initiate all procurements using PP Form 20.
Procurement Planning 9/10 • Procureme nt and disposal plan exists although it is not prepared in the approved PPDA format. 90% • The Entity has an approved list of pre-qualified providers. • The Contracts Committee is fully established. Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • Solicitation documents use the standard format issued by procedures PPDA. 100% • Bidding periods are observed. • The methods used are appropriate to the thresholds and circumstances. Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Evaluation committees in place, however no evidence of approval of EC by CC
152 60% • Evaluation reports are approved by CC • In a few cases there were no copies of the evaluation report on file.
Contract placement, award 3/10 ••• Notices of Best Evaluated Bidder and the unsuccessful and management bidders were not on file. 30% ••• Notices to the best evaluated bidders should be on file. ••• There is no evidence of involvement of the user department in certifying payment of contractual sum. Reporting 6/6 • Monthly reports are prepared and submitted to the Authority. 100% • Procurement referencing is not in accordance with the guidelines and is not consistent. Performance of Contracts 8/8 • CC members meet at least once every month and consider Committee all procurements from the PDU to ensure compliance. 100% • Minutes of CC meetings are well kept, although too brief. • Contracts Committee decisions on a submission are not recorded on PP/DPA Forms. Record Keeping 5/8 • For some procurements, the following records were found to be missing; Best Evaluated Bidder notices, approval of 63% EC by CC, notification of award to unsuccessful bidders. • There is supplier performance appraisal.
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 78 % SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer should nominate the fifth member of the Contracts Committee. 2. Copies of evaluation report and Best Evaluated Bidder notices should be on each procurement file. 3. The unsuccessful bidders should always be notified in writing as provided for in Reg. 225(4). 4. The user department should always be involved in certifying payment of contractual sum. 5. Regulation 225 (4) on contract award should be adhered to. 6. The notices to the best evaluated bidder should be on file. 7. The Contracts Committee minutes should be recorded on the appropriate forms, detailed and filed. 8. Contracts committee decisions on submissions should be recorded on PP/DPA Forms. 9. There is need to review the referencing as per the requirements of the guidelines
153 3.1.4 State Enterprises
NAME OF PDE: Microfinance Support Centre Ltd
MANDATE: To provide sustainable financial services to the economically active and productive Ugandans through viable Partner organizations and build their capacity.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: State Enterprise - Government company limited by guarantee.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 60,869,869,000 /=
SIZE OF PDE: 94 Employees
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Charles Kulibanza Byanyima
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Jackson Sabila, Ag. Finance manager Chairperson 2. Willy Kayondo, HRM Member 3. David Nambale, Company secretary Member 4. Wilson Wamatsembe, ICBM Member 5. Prossy T.Bahiigwa , R&D Officer Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Moses Madaya Masagwayi
154
SCORE/ COMPLIANCE AREA RATING FINDINGS Procurement Structures 7/10 • All CC members were approved by the ST to Treasury as required by PPDA Reg 45 70% (3). • The Administrative officer is also the Head PDU • The internal auditor audits the procurement and disposal process • No evidence of PP form 220 and 221 filed with PPDA on file • User departments did not initiate all procurement requirements on PP form 20 Procurement Planning 4/10 • The Entity had a procurement plan(in soft copy) with no evidence of either approval 40% or submission to PPDA • There were no departmental procurement plans • An assets register exists • There is no usage of framework contracts of repetitively procured items. Solicitation and bidding 7/10 • In many cases reviewed, there were no procedures records of issue, bid submission and 70% opening
155 • The entity uses solicitation documents in the format issued by PPDA • Thresholds were adhered to in the determination of procurement methods Evaluation procedures 8/10 • There were no record of acceptance of code of ethical conduct for evaluation committee 80% members on majority of the cases reviewed Contract placement, award 5/10 • Copies of signed contracts exists and management • There were no copies of notices of best 50% evaluated bidder on file and no evidence of their posting on the authority web site • Unsuccessful bidders were never notified • No evidence of user involvement in certification of payments Reporting 1/6 • The entity was not update in terms of 15% Monthly reports to the Authority Performance of Contracts 4/8 • There wasn’t any use of forms for Committee 50% meetings(PP Form 210) and record of contracts committee decision • Some cases reviewed lacked records of acceptance of code of ethical conduct • There was no evidence of a retrospective approval by the contracts committee Record Keeping 2/8 • A record/filing system exists 20% • Files nonetheless do not contain all the requirements of the law • There was no procurement reference book • Majority of the cases reviewed had no standard procurement reference numbers • There were no record of supplier appraisal/performance
Total Score and 53% Overall Rating of PDE MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The Accounting officer should file PP form 220 as per S.21 and PP form 221 in line with Reg.57 2. The Accounting Officer should establish the PDU and have it staffed appropriately as per Reg.57 3. All procurement requirements should be initiated by users on a PP form 20 4. The entity should prepare and submit an approved procurement and disposal plan to the Authority 5. All departments should prepare their departmental work plans for procurements 6. Framework contracts for repetitively procured items should be adopted in the entity as required under S.58(c). 7. The entity should take record of issue of solicitation documents as required under reg. 146(3) 8. A record of bid submission and opening should too, be taken as required under reg. 158(3) and 164 9. A record of acceptance of code of ethical conduct for evaluation committee members should be signed by all members as required under Reg. 169(9) and 171(5) 10. Copies of notices of best evaluated bidder should be put on file and award notices posted to PPDA web site 11. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing 12. Users should certify payments as required by Reg. 260(2)
156 13. The entity should compile and submit all pending procurement monthly reports as required under Reg. 40 14. The entity should make use of PP forms for meetings (PP Form 210) and record of contracts committee decision 15. All members of CC should sign records of acceptance of code of ethical conduct 16. All records pertaining to a given procurement should be put on the respective files 17. The entity should use the standard procurement reference numbers on all procurements 18. The entity should initiate supplier appraisal /performance
157 NAME OF PDE: National Housing and Construction Company Ltd.
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 23 rd July 2008
MANDATE: To create the reality of home ownership in well-planned and permanent built environments.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: State Enterprise (Limited Liability Company under the Company’s Act Cap 110 with the Government of Uganda and Libyan Government share holding of 51% and 49% respectively. Entity was accredited under Reg. 342 of the PPDA Regulations 70 of 2003 on the 12 th December 2007.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Self generated income (since the debt swap the Libyan Government has not injected any funds)
SIZE OF PDE: Large- 110 permanent staff. Total budget of 79.13 Billion of which 90% is spent on procurement.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Joseph Kitamirike.
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mohamed Ali Elabani Chief Finance Officer Chairman 2. Mohamed A. Benomran Chief Operations Officer Member 3. Caleb Kakuyo Chief Commercial Officer Member 4. Margaret Sakwa Legal Manager Secretary 5. Robert Twesigye Financial Planning Manager Member 6. Verna Mbabazi Contracts and Admn. Manager Member.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names): 1. Caleb Kakuyo Chief Commercial Officer (Head of Department (Commercial) 2. Patrick Onyango Wafula Procurement Manager (Head of Section (Procurement) 3. Agnes Nakijoba Procurement Officer 4. Dennis Kakube Procurement Officer 5. Suzan Twijukyemukama Procurement Officer 6. Goddieus T. Byaruhanga Procurement Assistant 7. Joel Odokola Procurement Assistant
158
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of the procurement and 70% disposal procedures, however, needs training by PPDA on his role and responsibility. • The re are 6 Tender Committee members appointed by the AO in ear ly 2006 however not yet approved by both the Board and PS/ST. • Established PDU with but pp Form 221 not filed with PPDA. • The user departments initiate procurements on PP Form 20. • The Internal Auditor carries out post audits. Procurement Planning 6/10 Entity has; • An approved pre-qualified list of providers. 60% • No departmental procurement plans. • No approved procurement plan. • An assets register with provisions for assets disposal plan in the custody of Finance department.
159 • Has the following framework contracts for commonly used items; o Ms Tororo Cement for the supply of cement, o National Forest Authority and Ms. Western Patrotic – for supply of timber, o Ms Caltex for supply of fuel and lubricants– installed pump at the Entity premises. o Yet to enter one for suppl y of concrete blocks. Solicitation and bidding 10/10 For all sampled cases there were procedures • Records of issue of Solicitation documents. 100% • Uses SBDs issued by the Authority. • Minimum bidding periods were observed for all the sampled cases. • Has record of bid submission and opening. per the accreditation.
Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee (EC) and the Evaluation 80% Report. • Appropriate evaluation methodologies were used for the sampled cases. • Signed Evaluation Committ ee minutes were on file. • No record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members. Contract placement, award and 4.5/10 • BEB Notices are pl aced on PDE Notice board, management however, never posted on PPDA website 45% • Unsuccessful bidders are never notified in writing. • CC approves all contracts and copies of signed contracts were on file. • Entity does not seek SG approval for contracts above 50m. Due to the urgency of the projects, it realize on the internal legal department. • There was evidence of execution/performance of contracts within the contractual completion date. • The User Departments especially Operations and stores manager only acknowledge receipt of deliveries on the goods received note which is verified by the Project Account. (Micro procurements (below 10 million) are signed by the Procurement Officer and Chief Commercial officer. Micros- (above 20m)–signed by Accounting Officer and Legal Officer.) Reporting 0/6 • Entity had not submitted all monthly reports by the time of the compliance check. 0% • Entity had never submitted the amended/approved Manual as was requested at the accreditation.- it was penning Board approval by the time of the compliance check.
160
Performance of Contracts 6/8 • There was no rec ord of Acceptance of Code of Committee Ethical Co nduct for CC members on all cases 75% sampled. • All the sampled CC decisions were signed and submitted on PP Forms 210. • In the Tender Committee (CC) minutes sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective approvals. PDU u sually calls for extra ordinary meetings or the Committee members agree on issues by circulation. Record Keeping 6/8 • PDU has a record/filling system. • Most of the sampled cases had the standard 75% procurement reference numbers. • There were Contract management records on cases sampled. Every project has an Engineer who acts as Contract Manager to supervise the works and checks the quality of the materials. • Had no supplier appraisal records. Entity was in the process of establishing the system. Total Score and 63% Overall Rating of PDE SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. AO needs training on his roles like seeking approvals from relevant government organs among others. 2. Tender Committee members should be cleared by the Board and seek PS/ST approval. 3. Internal Auditor should audit the procurement and disposal processes too. 4. The respective user departments specially the Project Department should develop project procurement plans to be compiled by the PDU into the PDE procurement plan. 5. EC should record the acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct at all evaluations. 6. PDU should post BEB Notices and Notices of Contracts award on PPDA website with PPD training. 7. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 8. Tender Committee (CC) should record the acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct at all meetings. 9. Entity should have a supplier appraisal/performance system.
161 NAME OF PDE: National Water and Sewerage Corporation
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 16 th – 17 th July 2008
MANDATE: Supply of Water
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Parastatal
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU, Internally Generated Funds, GTZ, KFW & World Bank
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Dr. Muhairwe William
NUMBER OF STAFF : APPROXIMATELY 12,000 Members of Staff
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Eng. Alex Gisagara - Chairperson 2. Mr. David Kakuba Mpango - Member 3. Mr. Jackson Opwonya - Member 4. Mr. Okol George- Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Ssekabembe Robert - Manager Procurement 2. Mr. Mr. Byaruhanga Nable - SPO 3. Mr. Busulwa Martin - P.O Services 4. Mr. Mandela Nelson – P.O Supplies (Imports) 5. Mr. Kirungi Moses – P.O (Imports Process/KW) 6. Mr. Akera Morris - Proc. Support Assistant 7. Mr. Tayebwa Micheal Proc. Support Assistants Services 8. Ms. Mbabazi Irene “ 9. Ms. Anena Doreen Proc. Support assistant – Supplies 10. Ms. Alinda Sarah “ 11. Mr. Mpata Peter “ 12. Mr. Byaruhanga Alex “ 13. Ms. Aliba Betty Proc. Support Assistant
162
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • 4 CC members were approved by PSST. The other is yet to be nominated and sent for approval to the 80% PS/ST. • PP Form 220 not filed by the Entity. Procurement 9/10 • The Entity has an approved list of pre-qualified Planning providers and Departmental Procurement plans. 90% • The Entity also uses Frame work contracts for supplies such as stationery. • The Entity has not submitted the procurement plan for the current FY 2007/08 though it was on its file.
Solicitation and Bidding 9/10 • The solicitation documents for most procurements procedures were on file and the methods used were appropriate 90% to the threshold. • The Solicitation document uses the standard format by PPDA. Evaluation procedures 7/10 • The members of the Evaluation Committee were approved by the CC for most of the procurements 70% and there was a record of Acceptance of Code of
163 Ethical Conduct for the EC members. • However, the evaluation reports were in most cases not approved by the CC. Contract placement, award and 4/10 • There were no notices to the best evaluated bidder on management most files but some are put on the notice board. 40% • The unsuccessful bidders are not notified in writing as required by law. Reporting 5/6 • Monthly reports are not submitted on time. • The Entity last reported in September 2007. 83% • A sample of the reports reviewed indicate that there is use Standard Formats and all PP Forms 200, 201 & 202 are filled and CC Minutes attached Performance of Contracts 4/8 • Minutes are in place though not recorded on the Committee appropriate forms. 50% • There was no record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct in Business by the CC on most files Record Keeping 5/8 • There exists a Record/filing system in the PDU although the files do not contain all the require ments 63% of the law. • Individual cases have standard procurement reference numbering; however, there is no record of supplier appraisal. Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 71% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Entity should nominate the fifth member and send his name to PS/ST for approval. 2. Entity should also file PP Form 220 with the Authority. 3. The Entity should submit the procurement plan for the current FY 2007/8 to the Authority. 4. The Entity should endeavor to have each solicitation document for each procurement filed in the respective file as in accordance with Reg. 146(3) of the PPDA Regulations. 5. The Contracts Committee should always approve the Evaluation reports by the Evaluation Committee and the composition of the Evaluation Committee. 6. The Entity should always notify the best evaluated bidder and the unsuccessful bidders in writing and also put notices on the procurement notice boards. 7. The Entity should ensure that monthly reports are submitted by the 15 th day of each month for the preceding month and that all PP Forms are filled and CC minutes attached to reports as this aids the Authority as it reviews the reports. 8. The CC should always sign the record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct in Business. 9. There should always be a record of Contracts Committee Meeting on PP Form 210 and record of signed minutes. 10. The Entity should appraise suppliers’ performance to ensure quality services and supplies.
164 NAME OF PDE: Post Bank Uganda Limited.
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 5th June 2008
MANDATE : Commercial Banking
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Limited Company
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government Funded and Internally Generated Fund
SIZE OF PDE: Small
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Stephen Mukweli – Managing Director
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Stephen Mukoba – Manager Operations – Chairman 2. Ms. Lillian Ikiriki – Legal Manager – Member 3. Ms. Caroline Basemera – Senior Human Resource Manager- Member 4. Mr. Albert Balekye – Ag. Chief Manager Credit- Member 5. Mr. Emmanuel Mwaka – Ag. Head Finance - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Rebecca Nansubuga Kakooza PO 2. Ms. Emily Nabatanzi APO
165
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 4/10 • The team did not meet the Accounting officer and members of the CC but it was informed that they 40% have not been trained by PPDA. • The user departments ini tiate the procurements but the use of PP Form 20 is recent. Procurement 4/10 • The Entity has no procurement plan. Planning • The user departments do not submit departmental 40% procurement plans. • The Entity uses its budget to make procurements. Solicitation and Bidding 4/10 • The Entity uses the Standard Bidding Documents procedures provided by PPDA. 40% • The Entity does not have a procurement notice Board for posting procurement notices. • The Entity does not always comply with the thresholds for particular procurement methods and the minimum bidding period is not always observed.
166 Evaluation procedures 1/10 • There was no evidence to show that evaluation reports are approved by the Contracts Committee 10% members. • Only a few files had records of bid submissi on and bid opening. Contract placement, award 8/10 • Standard contract documents are used and there is and management evidence of contract performance monitoring. 80% • There were no records of the user department certifying delivery or completion of the ser vices before payment was effected by the finance department. • The user department confirms performance so that the finance department pays. Reporting 5/6 • Reports are submitted to the Authority but not always in time. 83% • The samples perused showed that th e standard formats given by PPDA are used. Performance of Contracts 6/8 • The Contracts Committee sits twice a month Committee except when there is need. 75% • The members of the Contracts Committee do not sign the code of Ethical Conduct in business. • The En tity has not awarded any retrospective approvals. • There were contracts committee minutes on files but not recorded on the appropriate forms. Record Keeping 3/8 • Record keeping is poor, documents are scattered. • The Entity does not appraise its sup pliers’ 38% performance.
Aggregate Score and 53 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer and members of the Contracts Committee need training from PPDA. 2. The Entity should endeavor to submit monthly procurement reports to PPDA on time, which is by the 15 th day of each month for the preceding month. 3. The Entity’s departments should always submit their departmental procurement plans to the PDU. 4. The PDU should make a procurement plan and submit a copy of it to the Authority. 5. The members of the Contracts Committee and the Evaluation Committee should always sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business. 6. The Entity should put up a procurement notice board for posting procurement notices. 7. The Entity should observe the minimum bidding period for the various procurement methods and also comply with the thresholds. 8. The Contracts Committee should always approve the evaluation reports. 9. The Entity should improve its record keeping and filing system. 10. The Entity should appraise its suppliers’ performance.
167 NAME OF PDE: Posta Uganda
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 29 th July 2008
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: State Enterprise – Central Government (Ministry of ICT Communication Act Cap 207 under a statutory instrument)
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Internally generated and from World Bank RCDF
SIZE OF PDE : About 400 staff spread throughout the regional offices in most districts of the country
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Arinaitwe James
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS:(Names)
1. Mr. Kitonga David Chairperson 2. Mr. Wadamba Innocent member 3. Ms. Musonge Monica member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER : (Names)
1. Mr. Muhanguzi Caleb Head PDU 2. Mr. Mayanja William PO
168
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • Only 3 CC members are approved by PS/ST • 2 members have been nominated and forwarded to the A.O to 60% send to the PS/ST for approval. Procurement Planning 5/10 • No departmental procurement plans on records • Pre-qualification list seen but incomplete in terms of categories 50% • No assets register and assets disposal plan seen Solicitation and Bidding 5/10 • Records on solicitation documents were incomplete procedures • There was insufficient information on methods used in the 50% procurements reviewed. Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Record of acceptance of code of ethical conduct for EC not seen. • No sufficient information on approval of EC seen 60% Contract placement, award and 4/10 • No SG approval seen on file management • No evidence of execution/ performance of contracts seen 40% • No record of user department’s involvement in certif ying payments seen.
169 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Reporting 0/6 • No monthly reports submitted • Reports do not use standard formats as required under PPDA 0% Reg. 118 (9) Performance of Contracts 6/8 • Some CC minutes were unsigned Committee 75% Record Keeping 3/8 • Filing system is not uniform for all procurements • No record of supplier appraisal / performance 38%
Total Score and 49% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting officer needs to follow up on the 2 missing members of the CC to ensure that the membership is complete 2. PDE needs to urgently come up with an assets register and a disposal plan 3. PDE needs to revise the short list of pre-qualified providers to ensure that the list is comprehensive enough. 4. Thresholds for procurement methods should be strictly adhered to 5. EC members should adhere to the code of ethical conduct whenever an evaluation is done. 6. Solicitor General’s approval should be sought for any contract above 50 million Uganda shillings 7. User departments should certify payment in accordance with PPDA Reg. 260 (2) (iii) 8. PDE needs to strictly adhere to the monthly reporting requirement in accordance with PPDA Reg. 40. 9. All CC minutes should be signed by the chairman and secretary CC 10. PDU needs to improve on the filing system to ensure that all procurements have their individual procurement action files 11. PDU should ensure that providers are appraised on their performance and a record of their performance kept.
170 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Development Bank Limited
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 11-12 th June 2008
MANDATE: To take over, under the Public enterprises Reform and Divesture Statute (1993), the undertaking of Uganda Development Bank.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: State Enterprise - Public Limited Liability Company registered under the Companies Act (CAP 85); is wholly own by the Government of Uganda.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): UDBL total budget is approximately Ug. Shs 6 billions. From the budget figure seen by the review team; procurement takes up about 30% of the budget.
SIZE OF PDE: UDBL has 33 staff; 17 No. are at officer level and above.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Dr. A. K. Appiah
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Godfrey Nsubuga Chairman 2. Ms Priscilla Mugisha Secretary (legal) 3. Mr. Gabriel Etou Member 4. Mr. Wilbur Naigambi Member 5. Mr. Moses Kayimbe Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms Jessica Kyeyune
She is the In-charge of Procurement and at the same time a Principal Officer Administration and Public Relations
171
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 5/10 • PP Form 220, 221 and 222; details of the Contracts Committee Members and PDU staff not filed with PPDA. 50% • User departments do not initiate procurement using PP Form 20 • The Internal Auditor involvement in procurement is limited; more involved in the vetting of the payment paperwork, during processing of payment to providers. Procurement Planning 2/10 • The Entity does not have an approved Pre-Qualification /Short List of Providers 20% • No department or overall plan available. • No framework contracts for repetitively procured items Solicitation and bidding 3/10 • The entity does not have record of issue of solicitation procedures documents 30% • The entity does not use PPDA standard Solicitation document formats. • Due to lack of records it was not possible to ascertain whether the minimum bidding period observed in most cases.
172 • The entit y does not have record of Bid Submission and Opening
Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Approval of Mr. Wilbur Naigambi a member on the Contracts Committee to participate in the evaluation. 60% • Appropriate evaluation methodology not used. • No record of signed Cod e of Ethical Conduct minutes of the evaluation committees seen. Contract placement, award and 9/10 • The Entity does not have a dedicated notice board for management procurement notices and does not post the notices on the 90% PPDA Website. • No record on file that unsuccessful bidders are notified. Reporting 0/6 • The Entity has not been submitting monthly procurement and disposal reports 0% • The PDE was queried by PPDA for none submission of monthly reports and none was submitted. Performance of Contracts 5/8 • PP Form 210 and PP Form 209 not used Committee • PP Form 210 and PP Form 209 not used; however the 63% detailed minutes are signed Record Keeping 2/8 • Records of the necessary PPDA Procurement Forms 25% • Procurement reference numbers not used Total Score of PDE and Compliance Rating: 44 % UNSATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Accounting Officer should ensure that user departments initiate procurements using LG PP Form 1 2. The Internal Auditor should be involved in auditing the procurement process so as to monitor the effectiveness of the controls in place. 3. The Entity should pre-qualify providers annually 4. The PDE should prepare a consolidated procurement plan for every financial year and submit a copy to the Authority. 5. The Entity should use framework contracts for commonly procured items 6. The entity should record issue of solicitation documents using the appropriate PPDA Forms 7. The entity should use PPDA standard Solicitation document formats. 8. After improving record keeping, the entity should observe the minimum bidding period; Regulation 145. 9. The entity should record Bid Submission and Opening 10. Participation of a member on the Contracts Committee in evaluation is irregular; according to Regulation 169(7). 11. Appropriate evaluation methodology not used, except for micro procurement. 12. Code of Ethical Conduct should be signed and minutes of the evaluation committee meetings recorded. 13. The entity needs training of how [and codes] to use the PPDA website. 14. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified and record receipt of such notice be kept on file. 15. The Accounting Officer should ensure that monthly procurement and disposal reports are prepared and submitted to the Authority.
173 16. The Accounting Officer should ensure that all PPDA queries are responded to in time. 17. Each procurement should be assigned a unique procurement reference number in accordance with Guideline 3/2008.
174 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Electricity Distribution Company Limited.
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 16 th -17 th June 2008
MANDATE: Ownership and asset management of electricity distribution network at 33 kV and below within Uganda and associated assets; operating and maintaining the electricity off – grid stations in Moyo, Moroto and Adjumani till their divesture; monitoring compliance of the lease under the signed agreement.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: State Enterprise - Limited Liability Company incorporated in Uganda under the Company Act and commenced operation on 1st April 2001.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Own resources
SIZE OF PDE: 48 staff; Kampala headquarter; Adjumani, Moroto and Moyo sub stations
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Ms Irene Muloni
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Dorothy Mubiru Chairperson, CC 2. Mr. Protaze Tibyakinura MPP & S, Member, CC 3. Mr. Winston Manzi Member CC
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Moses Mwine Procurement Officer
175
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 6/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of her role for the over all 60% responsibility for the procurement and disposal process. • The 3 CC members are approved by PS/ST but PP Form 220 is not filed with PPDA. • There is an established PDU manned a procurement officer. • The user departments initiate procurements on PP Form 20. • The Internal Auditor does not audit the Procurement processes , payments and deliveries. Procurement Planning 8/10 Entity has; • An approved pre-qualified list of providers. 80% • A departmental procurement plan. • A procurement plan for FY 2007/08 based on the approved budget. • An assets register with provisions for assets disposal plan. • Uses framework contracts for commonly used items.
176 Solicitation and bidding 8/10 • PDU has records of issue of Solicitation documents. procedures • Uses SBDs issued by the Authority. 80% • Minimum bidding periods were observed for all the sampled cases. • Has record of bid submission and opening.
Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee (EC) and the Evaluation Report. 80% • Appropriate evaluation methodologies are used. • The Evaluation Committee minutes and Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members are signed. Contract placeme nt, award and 6/10 • Notice of contract award not placed on PDE Notice management board and not posted on PPDA website 60% • Unsuccessful bidders are never notified in writing. • CC approves all contracts and copies of signed contracts were on file. Reporting 6/6 • Entity had submitted all monthly reports on the standard formats on PP Forms 200, 201 and 202 with 100% CC minutes attached. Performance of Contracts 6/8 • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Co nduct Committee for CC members present was available. 75% • All the sampled CC decisions were signed and submitted on PP Forms 210. • In the CC minutes sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 6/8 • PDU has a record/filling system. • Most of the sampled cases had the standa rd 75% procurement reference numbers. • There were Contract management and supplier appraisal records on cases sampled. Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 75% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Contracts Committee should be fully constituted in accordance with the PPDA Act. 2. There should be a mechanism of auditing the procurement and disposal processes, payments and deliveries. 3. Entity should post BEB Notices and Notices of Contracts award on PPDA website. 4. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing.
177 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Electricity Generation Company
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 11 th – 12 th March 2008
MANDATE: Generation of power and to supervise the concessionaire agreement of M/s Eskom (U) Ltd
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: State Enterprise
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Internally generated funds. Budget for the financial year 2008 was approx.16bn/=.
SIZE OF PDE: 12 staff members
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Managing Director: Mr. John Mugyenzi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
1. Emmanuel Lubandi Manager Finance and Administration Chairperson 2. Moses K. Kaizzi Civil Engineer Secretary 3. Dan Mayanja Technical manager Member 4. A. Kasagga Senior Accountant Member 5. Mooli Albert Sibuta Resident State Attorney Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ahimbisibwe Jackline Head PDU 2. Kasagga Allan Member 3. Kabgonza Daphine Member 4. Musa Mukulu Member
178
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 8/10 • Procurement structures in place. • Th e Accounting Officer has appointed the Contracts Committee 80% and these were approved by PS/ST. This approval is not filed with the Authority. • Procurement Unit has dedicated office. • PDU is comprised of acting members. • Information as to whether the Internal auditor has audited the procurement process was not availed. Procurement Planning 10/10 • Entity has an approved procurement plan in the PPDA format. • There are departmental plans seen on record. 100% • A copy of the assets register with the provision of as set disposal planning was availed. • The Entity makes use of framework contracts for compound maintenance and legal services. Solicitation and bidding 6/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents, id submission and procedures opening seen on file 60% • Copies of the solicitation documents issued to the bidders seen • For most of the files perused, the minimum bidding period was observed. Evaluation procedures 9/10 • Many of the sampled procurement files had the following documents:
179 90% - Approval of members of the Evaluation Committee; -Record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for the Evaluation members - Evaluation reports. • Evaluation minutes were not seen on the files. Contract placement, 6/10 • All the sampled procurement files had contract documents. award and management • No contract management records were on the files. 60% • Notices of Best Evaluated Bidder were on file • The Entity does not post the notice of best evaluated bidder and notice of contract award on the PPDA website • No record of notification of the award to the unsuccessful bidders on the sampled procurement files. • Records for approval of the contract documents by the Contract Committee were found on the sampled files. • There was evidence the involvemen t of the user departments in certifying payment of the contractual sums. Reporting 6/6 • The Entity is up to date in its monthly procurement and disposal reporting. 100% • The Entity responds to queries by the Authority on the monthly reports. Performance of Contracts 7/8 • Contracts Committee meets regularly Committee • Many of the sampled procurement files had the following 88% documents: - Record of acceptance of code of ethical conduct in business by the Contracts Committee members - Records of Contracts Committee decisions on submissions Record Keeping 5/8 • There is a record/filing system in place. • Records filed contain most of l the requirements of the law 63% • Many of the cases sampled had have standard procurement reference numbers • There were no records of supplier appraisal or performance.
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 79 % SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The members of the Evaluation Committee should always sign the code of ethical conduct in Business. 2. The appropriate evaluation methodology should always be used in accordance with Reg. 79(1). 3. Contract management records should be put on the individual procurement files. 4. For contracts above Ug. Shs. 50m, the Entity should seek Solicitor General’s approval 5. The procurement files of the Entity should contain all the records required under the law. 6. The Entity should put in place mechanisms of supplier appraisal/performance.
180 NAME OF PDE : Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 18 th -19 th June 2008
MANDATE: Transmission of Electricity and Maintenance of the Transmission Mains around the Country
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: State Enterprise
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Self financed from own generated funds, Donor and GOU funds as well.
SIZE OF PDE: Medium
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Eriasi Kiyemba
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Muganga Chairman 2. Ms. Solome Nasejje Secretary 3. Mr. Valentine Ketabira Member 4. Ms. Margeret Mutesi Member 5. Ms. Patience Kabijje Kampiire State Attorney
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Godfrey Mugerwa Bisaaso PPO 2. Adipo Florence SPO 3. Wambalya Marianne SPO
181
COMPLIANCE SCORE/RATING FINDINGS AREA Procurement 8/10 • The CC requires training in order to execute its Structures duties better. 80% • Internal Audit is not done before payments are made but rather afterwards. Procurement 10/10 • Framework contracts have recently been Planning introduced for services such as Motor Vehicle 100% servicing and repair. Solicitation and 6/10 • No record of issue of solicitation document in any Bidding Procedures file reviewed. 60% • No record of bid submission and opening on any of the files reviewed. Evaluation 9/10 • Members of the evaluation committees did not Procedures sign the acceptance of the ethical code of conduct. 90% Contract Placement, 6/10 Award and Management 60% Reporting 6/6 • The Entity’s reporting status were up to date
100% Performance of 7/8 Contracts Committee 88% Record Keeping 5/8 • No record of supplier performance appraisal.
63%
182
Aggregate SATISFACTORY 79% Compliance Score of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. PDU should record issue of solicitation documents and bid submission using the standard PP Form. 2. Evaluation Committee should sign the code of ethical code of conduct prior to commencing on an evaluation. 3. Entity should keep supplier performance and contract management records.
183 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 17 th – 18 th June
MANDATE: To Provide Printing and Publishing Facilities.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: State Enterprise
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Budget for FY 2007/2008 was UShs. 2.3b. The Entity generates its own resources from sales of its products. Procurement accounts for 48%.
SIZE OF PDE : 75 Staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mrs. Elizabeth Bakaawa Sekabembe
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS
1. Mr. Joseph Mubuya Assistant Production Manager Chairperson 2. Mr. Francis Bongonyinge Production Manager Secretary 3. Mr. Ferdinard Lukyamuzi Assistant Accountant Member 4. Mr. Leopold Iyamulemye Assistant Accountant Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mrs. Jackie Luutu Assistant Manager Head/PDU
184
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • The Accounting Officer is in place and has established the Procurement and Disposal Unit 60% • 4 Contracts Committee members are approved by PS/ST. • The user de partments initiate procurements and make use of PP Form 20. • Internal audit reports on the procureme nt and disposal processes seem. Procurement Planning 9/10 • Entity has a procurement and disposal plan in place. • The Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers in place 90% • There was evidence of use of framework contracts seen. Solicitation and Bidding 7/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitation procedures documents are kept on the files 70% • Records of bid submission and opening seen on files. • Minimum bidding periods observed in the cases sampled • Methods used are appropriate to the threshold and circumstances as provided for under the PPDA Guidelines. • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents issued and bids received availed.
185 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Evaluation reports seen on the procurements samples and use the 60% evaluation methodology in the solicitation documents. • Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethi cal Conduct for EC members seen on the files. • Evidence of nomination by the PDU and approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee seen. • Evaluation reports are signed approved by CC. Contract placement, award and 2/10 • Entity does not post the notices of the best evaluated bidder and the management notice of contract award on the PPDA website. 20% • Contract documents were not on the individual procurement files. • There are no records of supplier appraisal and performance. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing • There was no evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment. Reporting 3/6 • Entity is not up to date in the monthly procurement and disposal reporting. Reports for March and April 2008 have not been 50% submitted. • Entity uses the standard format in the monthly reporting • Contracts Committee minutes are at times not attached to the reports. • Entity responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports. Performa nce of Contracts 6/8 • Contracts Committee meets regularly. Committee • Most of the Contracts Committee minutes were available on the 75% file. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members not signed by the members at each meeting. Record Keeping 4/8 • The record/filling system is being started in the PDU and needs a lot of strengthening. 50% • Individual procurements have procurement reference numbers assigned to them
Total Score and 60% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should nominate a fifth Contracts Committee member to fully constitute the Committee. This person should have legal background as required by the PPDA Act and Regulations. 2. Entity should adhere to the timely monthly procurement and disposal reporting in accordance with the PPDA Act and Regulations. 3. Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members should be signed at each meeting and kept by the Secretary. 4. The Entity should display notices of the best evaluated bidder and contract award on the PPDA Website. 5. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing and evidence of the notification be put on the procurement file.
186 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Property Holdings Limited (UPHL)
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 12 th – 13 th June 2008
MANDATE: Manage Government Properties in Bugolobi, Nalukolongo, Tororo, Mombasa and London
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: State Enterprise
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Rental income from government properties
SIZE OF PDE: 10 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. A. B Abaliwano
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Kihembo Martin Chairman 2. Ms. Bwanika Damali Member 3. Mr. Bemanya Twebaze Member (Legal) 4. Ms. Keeba Rosette Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Andrew Muhimbise PO
187
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 4/10 • CC details not sent to PPDA • No record of confirmation of funding. 40% • The Internal Auditor does not audit the procurement process, payments and deliveries. Procurement 6/10 • There is no procurement plan Planning • Entity has a shortlist of providers. 60% • User departm ents do not prepare department’s procurement plans. • No approved procurement plan. • Entity has an Assets Register. • Entity does not make use of framework contracts. Solicitation and bidding 4/10 • No record of issue of bid documents procedures • Some times the method of procurement used 40% is appropriate to the thresholds. • No records of bid submission and opening
188 seen on file. • The minimum bidding period is not observed.
Evaluation procedures 5/10 • Evaluation methodology not followed • Some times the composi tion of the Evaluation 50% Committee is approved by the Contracts Committee. • The EC does nit sign the code of ethical conduct. • There were a few evaluation reports seen on file. • The minutes indicate approval of the evaluation reports. Contract placement, award and 0/10 • Delay in award management • There were no notices to the best evaluated 0% bidder or the unsuccessful bidders. • There was no evidence of execution of contracts within the contractual completion date. • There was no evidence of the involvement of the user departments in certifying payments of the contractual sum. Reporting 2/06 • Monthly reports for the period Jan-May 08 not submitted 33% • The samples of reports reviewed indicate that the standard format is used. Performance of Contracts 3/08 • Retrospective approvals. Committee • No record of acceptance of code of ethics. 38% • There were detailed minutes on file but not recorded on the appropriate forms. Record Keeping 2/08 • Not all records pertaining to the procurement are on file 25% • No evidence on supplier appraisal. • Only one procurement had a procurement reference number. Total Score of PDE and Compliance Rating 36% UNSATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS :
1. Entity requires urgent hands-on training in the following areas: a) PDU and Contracts Committee i. Use of PPDA Standard Forms ii. Segragation of duties particularly between CC and PDU b) PDU and User Department i. Preparation of a Procurement Plan ii. Record Keeping 2. Accounting Officer should ensure preparation of departmental plans and consolidated procurement plan and submit a copy to the Authority. 3. Accounting Officer should ensure timely submission of monthly reports.
189 4. The User departments should always initiate procurements on PP Form 20 as required under Regulation 104 of the PPDA Regulations. 5. The Internal Auditor should audit the procurement process, payment and deliveries. 6. The user departments should prepare departmental procurement plans and submit them to the PDU. 7. The Entity should prepare a procurement plan and submit a copy of it to the Authority. 8. The entity should also make use of the framework contracts for commonly procured items. 9. The Entity should use standard bidding documents issued by PPDA for their contracts. 10. The minimum bidding period should always be observed. 11. When bids are received and opened, there should be a record to that effect and such record should be filed. 12. The Evaluation committee should use the appropriate evaluation methodology when evaluating bids. 13. They should also sign a code of ethical conduct before going about their business. 14. Notice should always be given to the best evaluated bidder as provided for under Regulation 224(3) of the PPDA Regulations. 15. The unsuccessful bidders should also be given notice in writing as provided for under Regulation 225(4) of the PPDA Regulations. 16. The notices of contract award should be posted to the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 17. The user departments should be involved in contract management by certifying payments of contractual sums. 18. The contracts committee should always sign the code of ethical conduct before going about their business. 19. The contracts committee decisions on submissions should always be recorded on PP/DPA Forms and the minutes recorded on the appropriate forms. 20. Individual cases should be given procurement reference numbers. 21. Entity should ensure that all procurement records are kept on their respective files. 22. The Entity should appraise the performance of its suppliers.
190 3.1.5 Commissions
NAME OF PDE: Education Service Commission
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 24 th – 25 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide an Efficient, Professional, Accountable, Transparent and Motivated Education Service.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Commission
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda (Consolidated Fund)
SIZE OF PDE: Medium
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Eng. Bezalel K. Kabanda
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names):
1. Mr. Okunny Vincent de Paul: Principal Assistant Secretary - Chairperson 2. Ms. Harriet Tukamushaba : Solicitor General’s Office - Member 3. Mr. Bamweyana Ahmed : Accountant - Member 4. Mr. Stephen Ddungu : Assistant Commissioner/Personnel - Member 5. Mr. Patrick J. Siduda : Senior Office Supervisor - Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER: (Names):
1. Ms Kyasimire Arlene - Assistant Procurement Officer
191
COMPLIANCE SCORE / FINDINGS AREA RATING
Procurement 8/10 • The Accounting Officer has appointed the Contracts Committee and Structures these were approved by PS/ST and PP220 is filed with the Authority. 80% • The PDU has not been established and PP Form 221 has never b een filed with PPDA yet there is a dedicated APO who sits in the officer of the Information officer. • The user depts. initiate all the procurements on PP form 20 • Information as to whether the internal auditor has audited the procurement process was availed.
Procurement 10/10 • Entity has an approved procurement plan in the PPDA format. Planning • There are departmental plans seen on record. 100% • A copy of the assets register with the provision of asset disposal planning was availed. • There is use of Framewo rk contracts for repetitively procured items like Internet, Catering and cleaning Services
Solicitation and 5/10 • There are Records of issue of solicitation documents, and bid bidding submission and opening procedures 50% • There are Copies of the solicita tion documents issued to the bidders and use the format issued by the PPDA
192 • In some of procurements, the method used was not appropriate to the threshold.
Evaluation 5/10 • Two out of the ten sampled procurement files in form of e lacked th e procedures following documents: 50% o Approval of members of the Evaluation Committee; o Record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for the Evaluation members; and o Evaluation minutes. o Evaluation reports. Contract 6/10 • The Entity does not post the notice of best evaluated bidder and notice placement, award of contract award on the PPDA website and management 60% • No record of notification of the award to the unsuccessful bidders in writing on the sampled procurement files. • Though there is some evidence of Execution of the contracts within the contractual completion date, the providers are never paid on time. • There are records of the involvement of the user departments in certifying payment of the contractual sums. Reporting 5/6 • All monthly reports have been subm itted on time for the period under review apart from the Month of April because the APO had left for 83% Maternity leave. • All the reports use the Standard formats and all PP forms are filled and CC minutes attached. • There are no Queries by the Authority on reports submitted Performance of 8/8 • There are records of Acceptance of the Code of Ethical Conduct in Contracts Business by the CC members present on PP Form 211. Committee 100% • There are records of CC decisions on the submission on PP form. • The CC has not granted any retrospective approval. Record Keeping 5/8 • There is a record/filing system in place but some of the records filed do not contain all the requirements of the law 63% • There are no records of supplier appraisal or performance. Total Overall Rating of Entity 72% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS :
1. There is need for the PDE to establish a PDU, file PP Form 221 with PPDA and recruit a senior procurement to help the APO. 2. Much as the PDE procurement planning complies, there are procurements in form of emergencies that come as directives from the MOES that comprise the Law and should be stopped. 3. The Entity should adhere to the (PPDA) Guidelines for the thresholds. 4. The entity should ensure that all procurement files should contain all the evaluation procedures. 5. Notices of the best evaluated Bidder and Contract Award should be posted on the PPDA website for a statutory display period. 6. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 7. Providers should be paid on time to motivate their performance further. 8. Procurement report for the month of April should be submitted by the acting APO. 9. Performance of the CC complies with the law. 10. All the procurement files should contain all the requirements of the law. 11. .Entity should put in place mechanisms of supplier appraisal/performance.
193 NAME OF PDE: Health Service Commission
MANDATE : Recruits health workers for Ministry of Health and Referral hospitals
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory Corporation
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government funded
SIZE OF PDE: 50 workers including support staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Ms. Dorothy Nassolo
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names):
1. Wasike Mary 2. Wamala David 3. Souza J B 4. Byoleko Florence 5. Barente
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT STAFF: (Names):
1. Munyole Moses
194
COMPLIANCE SCORE/ RATING FINDINGS AREA Procurement 5/10 The Commission has an acting Accounting Structures officer 50% The CC members are approved and the PDU is established. The Internal Auditor does not audit the Procurement processes, payment and deliveries. PP Forms 220 and 221 were not filed with PPDA. User departments initiate all procurements. Procurement Planning 5/10 The Entity has a procurement plan but no departmental procurement plans. 50% The Commission has a list of prequalified providers. It has an Assets Register but no Disposal Plan. The Commission does not make use of framework contracts. Solicitation and 8/10 The Commission uses standard bidding bidding procedures document with the standard format issued by 80% PPDA. The methods used are usually appropriate to the threshold and the minimum bidding period
195 observed. There were a few records of bid submission and opening on a few files perused. Evaluation procedures 8/10 Evaluation is done on an approved criteria but no evidence of signing ethical code by members 80% of the evaluation committee. The Contracts Committee approves the members of the Evaluation Committee. There were also Evaluation reports on files and such reports were approved by the Contracts Committee. Contract placement, 3/10 Unsuccessful bidders are not notified in writing. award and The notice of contract award is not posted on the management 30% PPDA website. There was no evidence of involvement of user departments in certifying payments of contractual sums Reporting 6/6 Monthly reports are submitted in time and the Commission’s reporting is up to date. 100% The reports samples used the standard format by PPDA. Performance of 3/8 The CC sits only when there are issues to Contracts Committee discuss however members do not sign the ethical 37 code. There were no records of contracts committee decisions on submissions on PP/DPA forms on files. There contracts committee minutes on file recorded on the appropriate forms. Record Keeping 5/8 The Commission has a filing system in the PDU. The Commission also uses procurement 63% reference numbers for individual cases. There was no record of supplier appraisal.
Aggregate Score and 63 % SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should be trained. 2. The Internal Auditor should audit the procurement processes, payments and deliveries. 3. The Commission should submit PP Forms 220 and 221 with PPDA . 4. The different departments should submit departmental procurement plans with the PDU. 5. The Commission should make a provision for Asset disposal planning. 6. The Commission should make use of framework contracts for frequently procured items. 7. Members of the evaluation committee should be sensitized about the use of the ethical code of conduct. 8. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing 9. The notice of contract award should be posted on the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 10. The user department should be involved in certifying payments of contractual sums . 11. Members should be sensitized to sign the ethical code 12. There should be records of contracts committee decisions on submissions on PP/DPA forms on file. 13. The Commission should appraise its suppliers’ performance .
196 NAME OF PDE: Local Government Finance Commission
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 12th August 2008
MANDATE: To advise the President on all matters concerning allocation of resources to Local Governments from the Consolidated Fund and other sources.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory body established by an Act of Parliament 9 of 2003.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Has a total budget of approximately 1.7 billion Uganda shillings got from G0U and Donors – Local Government Sector Investment Plan (LGSIP), with 24% spent on procurement.
SIZE OF PDE: Entity is divided in sections, Grants, Local revenue and Administration. The entity has a total of 36 members of staff.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Lawrence Banyoya
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names) 1. Mr. Dick Asiimwe - Chairperson 2. Mrs. Ketrah Katunguka - Member 3. Mr. Richard Kwizera - Member 4. Mr. A. Kasule - Member 5. Ms. Priscilla Asiimire - Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Ellis Biryahwaho -Head Procurement Unit.
197
COMPLIANCE SCORE / FINDINGS AREA RATING
Procurement 6/10 • The Accounting Officer knows his role in the procurement cycle. Structures • Handled an administrative review in r espect of procurement Ref No. 60% LGFC/SUPP/06-07/00001/02 by Kampala Nissan Ltd. • The CC members are five (5) and were approved by the PS/ST, on 13 th June 2005. • The senior and middle level staff were trained by the Authority in January 2008. • PDU is under staffed. • Initiation of common user items like stationery is centralized. It is initiated by the stores assistant through DFA on PP Form 20. • Entity does not have an internal Auditor. An external auditor from the Auditor General’s office carries out post audits of the procurement. • External auditor counter signs vouchers for procurements above 1m Procurement 6/10 • The Entity has an approved pre-qualification list for FY 2006-09 and an Planning updated supplier’s list with consultancy services 2007- 2009. 60% • Entity has an approved procurement plan but no departmental procurement plans since it has no departments) • Entity has an up dated assets register. • Entity does not use framework contracts due to the challenge of unstable prices.
198 COMPLIANCE SCORE / FINDINGS AREA RATING
Solicitation and 8/10 • Entity uses SBDs issued by PPDA. Bidding procedures • Most of the sampled cases were procurement under LGSIP. Entity used a 80% wrong method; put the following procurement processes in lots i.e o Desktop Computers, Ext DVD writer CD’s & Flash disks LOT 1 o Asso rted Furniture, Desktop, Laptop computers Soft ware and Assorted office equipment- Lot 2 o Procurement of database server, soft ware, net work HUB and installation services of network software –Lot 3 o Supply of computers equipment, software consultancy and installation configuration- Lot 4 o Assorted stationery Lot 5 o Purchase of furniture -Lot 6 • Records of bid submission and opening on all sampled cases. Evaluation 10/10 • Necessary records on the evaluation procedures were on all sampled files. procedures 100% Contract placement, 7/10 • Entity informs both the successful and unsuccessful bidders. award and • Notices are posted on PDE notice board for the statutory display period. management 70% • Entity does not post notices on PPDA website. • Entity seeks SG approval, although faces a challenge of delays. The clearance takes a minimum of 3 weeks. • Some of the sampled cases were not completed within the contractual completion date due to delayed internal approvals • The user departments are fully involved in the payment process. Payments are based on satisfactory reports by the users that the works/services are done or supplies delivered. Reporting 5/6 • Up to date on submission of monthly reports. Latest submission was on 5 th August 2008. 83% • Entity had not satisfact orily resolved the Authority’s query on the posting of notices on the PPDA website as advised on 6/3/07 Performance of 7/8 • CC members record acceptance of code of ethical conduct in business at Contracts every meeting. Committee 88% • All records of Contracts Committee decision are on PP Forms. • Contracts Committee has no regular meetings due to the members’ busy schedule, it grants omnibus approvals. Record Keeping 6/8 • Entity has record/filling systems in PDU. • All the sampled cases had all records required by law. 75% • All the sampled cases had standard reference numbers. • Entity has no record of supplier performance.
Total Score and 79% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Entity should appreciate the law on division of procurements into lots, Reg. 101. 2. The Entity should file PP Forms 220 and 221 with the Authority. 3. The Entity should post notices on the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 4. Entity should put in place a suppliers’ performance system.
199 NAME OF PDE: Public Service Commission
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 24 th - 25 th July 2008
MANDATE: To determine the rights, responsibilities, terms and conditions, motivation, recruitment, confirmation, career development and assessment of the performance of public officers.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Constitutional Body established under Article 165 (1) of the Constitution- Commission.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU
SIZE OF PDE : 83 members of staff.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Dancun Bigirwa - Secretary/PSC
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Okello Okot ACP/IG & M, Chairperson, CC 2. Mrs Margaret Kyetune PAS, Member, CC 3. Mr. Remmy Tabaro SA, Member, CC 4. Mr. Badru Buyondo SPO, Member, CC
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Geoffrey Etiang Procurement Officer
200
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The AO has a clear understanding of his role for the 80% overall responsibility for the procurement and disposal process. • 4 CC members are in place but PP Form 220 i s not filed with the Authority. • The PDU is established with an Acting Principle Officer. • User departments initiate all procurements on PP Form 20 • Internal Auditor does not audit the procurement processes only deliveries. Procurement Planning 5/10 • Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers, however some providers for the sampled cases were not on the 50% pre – qualified list. • Has no departmental procurement plans • The Assets Register is in place without an assets disposal plan. • Has an approved procurem ent plan though not in the PPDA format. • The entity does not use framework contracts for
201 repetitively procured items Solicitation and bidding 4/10 • There were no records for issue of solicitation procedures documents. 40% • Entity does not use SBD formats issued by PPDA. • Methods used were appropriate to the thresholds for the sampled cases. • Bidding periods were observed in the sampled cases. • Records on bid submission and opening were available on same of the sampled cases. Evaluation procedures 2/10 • No records on evaluation procedures for all cases 20% sampled except approval of evaluation reports by CC Contract placement, award 4/10 • Notices for the BEB and Contract award are posted and management on the PDE Notice Board but not on the PPDA 40% website. • Unsuccessful bidders are sometimes notified in writing. • Draft contracts, agreements and LPOs on all the cases sampled were not approved by CC except for procurement of vehicles, because most procurements are by RFQ method. • There was no evidence on the exe cution of contracts with in the contractual completion period. • User departments are not involved in verifying payments of Contractual sum, they are involved at the verification of deliveries.
Reporting 6/6 • The entity had submitted all monthly repor ts to PPDA in the required format on PP Forms 200, 201 and 202. 100% Performance of Contracts 8/8 On all the sampled cases there were; Committee • Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct 100% in Business present on PP Form 211 • Records of CC decision s on a submission present on PP/DPA Form • Record of CC meetings on PP Form 210. • CC had never approved any contract retrospectively. Record Keeping 3/8 • Individual cases have standard procurement reference numbers 34% • PDU lacks a record/filing system. • Some records lacked some requirements of the law. • Entity does not have supplier appraisal/performance system. Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 58 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Entity should fully constitute the Contracts Committee and adequately staff the PDU. 2. The Internal Auditor should audit the procurement and disposal processes and payments. 3. User departments should prepare multi- annual rolling procurement plans with reference to Reg. 96 of the PPDA Regulations 70 of 2003.
202 4. The assets register should have provisions for an asset disposal plan. 5. The entity should pre qualified providers for supplies, services (Consultancy and non consultancy) and works. 6. The procurement plan for the entity should be prepared in the PPDA format with reference to Reg. 97 of the PPDA 7. The entity should consider using framework contracts for repetitively procured items 8. The CC should approve all the contracts/agreements/LPOs 9. PDU should use SBD formats as issued by the Authority 10. Award notices should be posted on the PPDA website and unsuccessful bidders always notified. 11. Records on contract performance should always be filed 12. User departments should be involved in certifying payments 13. The entity should have a filing system in place 14. PDU should have copies of all relevant records on procurements and disposals. 15. The entity should put in place a supplier appraisal system.
203 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Aids Commission
Date of Assessment: 12 th - 13 th June 2008
MANDATE: To control on behalf of the GOU, all efforts towards reducing/controlling the spread of HIV/AIDS.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government organization under the Office of the President.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Receives only 10% of its budget from GOU, the rest is donor funded.
SIZE OF PDE: 63 Members of Staff.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Dr. Kihumuro Apuuli
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names) 1. Ms. Nalwadda R 2. Mr. C Gashirabake 3. Mr. J Kigozi 4. Mrs. R Mwesigwa 5. Mrs. R Kabugo
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names) 1. Mr. Bernard Rwakihembo - Head PDU 2. Mr. Simon Wairugala - Asst. Head PDU
204
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 10/10 • The CC’s term expires in June 2008. • It was noted that the CC did not undergo any form of training throughout its tenure. • There was evidence that the function of the PDU and CC in the Procurement Process was grossly undermined by the requirements of the donors who are the main financiers (up to 90%) of the PDE’s budget.
Procurement Planning 8/10 • Procurement Plan is in place but it is not followed. 80% • Entity has several procurements of an emergency nature. Solicitation and Bidding 10/10 • Solicitation and bidding procedures are Procedures followed. 100% Evaluation Procedures 10/10 • The appropriate Evaluation methodology is followed and necessary reports filed. 100% Contract Placement, Award 3/10 • The unsuccessful bidders are not notified
205 and Management in writing. 30% • Notices of contract award are not posted on the PPDA website.
Reporting 2/6 • The Entities monthly reports were last submitted in February 2008! 33% Performance of Contracts • Based on one procurement of 4WD Committee 8/8 vehicles considering that the PDE did not have any other procurement apart from 100% micro procurements over the period under review. Record Keeping 6/8 • Record of Supplier appraisal and contract management were not being included on 75% the PDU files.
Aggregate Score of PDE SATISFACTORY 79%
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Contracts Committee requires urgent training 2. The Entity should file PP Form 220 and 221 with the Authority. 3. Entity should adhere to the procurement plan. 4. Entity should ensure timely submission of monthly reports in accordance with the law. 5. The Entity should post contract award notices to the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 6. Entity should keep records on supplier performance and contract management records.
206 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Communications Commission
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 17 th – 18 th July 2008
MANDATE: To facilitate sustainable development of communication services that is universally accessible through effective regulation.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Parastatal
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU, World Bank
SIZE OF PDE: 6 user departments with 63 staff members.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Patrick Masambu
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Patrick Mwesigwa – Chairperson, 2. Ms Joanita Nampewo - Secretary- Manager Legal 3. Mr. David Ogong - Member- Finance Manager 4. Ms. Ann Rita Sembooga - Member 5. Mr. Fred Otunnu - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Elly Ruharo - Procurement Manager- HPDU 2. Mr. David Kizito - Procurement specialist- PDU
207
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 9/10 • There is an AO who is responsible for all the procurements and disposals 90% • CC in place and made up of 5 members approved by PS/ST. • There is a well established PDU. • PP Forms 220 and 221 were not submitted to the Authority.
Procurement Planning 7/10 • Procurement exists and is prepared in the standard PPDA format. • User department plans are not approved by heads of departments. 70% Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • Solicitation documents are the standard format issued by PPDA. procedures • Bidding periods are observed. 100% • No evidence of records for approval of method and bidding documents for procurements under RFQ method.
Evaluation procedures 9/10 • Evaluation committee members are approved by CC. • Appropriate evaluation methodology used. 90% • Code of ethical conduct signed by members of the evaluation committee.
208 Contract placement, 5/10 • Some of the procurements did not have contract management award and management records. 50% • There was no evidence of involvement of the u ser department in certifying payment of contractual sum. • The notice of contract award is not posted on the PPDA website.
Reporting 6/6 • Monthly reports are prepared and submitted to the Authority. • Some CC minutes are not attached to the monthly reports. 100% Performance of 5/8 • CC members meet at least twice every month and consider all Contracts Committee procurements from the PDU to ensure compliance. 63% • Minutes of CC meetings are well prepared and signed. • There’s no record of the Contracts Commit tee decisions on submissions on PP/DPA Forms.
Record Keeping 6/8 • Overall, there is a good record and filing system in the PDU with only a few cases of some missing documents. 75%
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 81 % SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. There’s need to recruit another member in the PDU. 2. The Entity should file PP Forms 220 and 221 with the Authority. 3. All departments should approve the department plans before they are submitted to the PDU. 4. For procurements under RFQ, there is need for CC to delegate approval of method and bidding documents to the PDU. 5. All contract management records where required, should be filed in the procurement files. 6. The user department should be involved in certifying the payment of the contractual sum. 7. Notices of contract award should be posted to the PPDA website for wide circulation. 8. All CC minutes on procurements handled during the month should be attached to the monthly reports. 9. The Contracts Committee decisions on submissions should be recorded on PP/DPA Forms. 10. All the records on procurement should be filed.
209 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Human Rights Commission
MANDATE : Monitoring the Observance of Human Rights in Uganda.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Constitutional Body
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU & Donor Funds
SIZE OF PDE: 122 persons employed in 8 different regional offices.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Gordon Mwesigye
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names):
1. Ms. Dora Kabuye - Chairperson 2. Ms. Kemigisha Rosemary - Member 3. Ms. Mumyirwa Florence - Member 4. Ms. Nantumbwe Harriet - Member 5. Ms. Karugonjo Roselyn - Member
PROCUREMENT DISPOSAL UNIT STAFF: (Names):
1. Ms. Nakirya Prossy 2. Ms. Nabukenya Brenda
210
SCORE/ COMPLIANCE AREA RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The Commission has an acting Accounting officer • The CC members are approved and the PDU is 80% established. • The Internal Auditor does not audit the Procurement processes, payment and deliveries. • PP Forms 220 and 221 were not filed with PPDA. • U ser departments initiate all procurements.
Procurement Planning 9/10 • The Entity has a procurement plan and departmental procurement plans. 90% • The Commission has a list of prequalified providers. • It has an Assets Register but no Disposal Plan. • The Commission does make use of framework contracts.
Solicitation and bidding 8/10 • The Commission uses standard bidding document procedures with the standard format issued by PPDA. 90% • The methods used are usually appropriate to the threshold and the minimum bidding period observed. • There were records of bid submission and opening on a few files perused.
211
Evaluation procedures 8/10 • There was evidence of signing ethical code by members of the evaluation committee. 80% • The Contracts Committee approves the members of the Evaluation Committee. • There were also Evaluation reports on files and such reports were approved by the Contracts Committee. • The Evaluation Criteria followed is not very clear and is not the one given by PPDA. • Contract placement, award 6/10 • The notice of contract award is not posted on the and management PPDA website. 60% • There was no evidence of involvement of user departments in certifying payments of contractual sums. • There was no evidence of involvement of user departments in certifying payments.
Reporting 5/6 • Monthly reports are submitted in time and the Commission’s reporting is up to date. 83% • The reports samples used the standard format by PPDA.
Performance of Contracts 8/8 • The CC sits only when there are issues to discuss Committee and members do sign the ethical code. 100% • There were records of contracts committee decisions on submissions on PP/DPA forms on files. • There contracts committee minutes on file recorded on the appropriate forms. Record Keeping 6/8 • The Commission has a filing system in the PDU. • The Commission also uses procurement reference 75% numbers for individual cases. • There was no record of supplier appraisal.
Aggregate Score and Compliance 82 % HIGHLY SATISFACTORY Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should be trained. 2. The Commission should submit PP Forms 220 and 221 with PPDA. 3. The Commission should make a provision for Asset disposal planning. 4. Members of the evaluation committee should be sensitized about the use of the ethical code of conduct. 5. The notice of contract award should be posted on the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 6. The user department should be involved in certifying payments of contractual sums. 7. The Entity should provide more space to the PDU to keep its records. 8. The Commission should appraise its suppliers’ performance.
212 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Insurance Commission (UIC)
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 23 rd – 24 th July 2008
MANDATE: To ensure effective administration, supervision, regulation and control of the business of insurance in Uganda.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: The Entity is a statutory body established by The Insurance Statute, 1996 [now the Insurance Act (Cap 213) of the Laws of Uganda, 2000] Act.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Shs 2,044,156,697; of which about 40% goes towards procurement. The sources of the funds are: - Government of Uganda, Internally Generated Funds and Donors
SIZE OF PDE: 24 staff, with the following two departments:- • Insurance, • Administration and Finance,
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Ms Evelyn Nkalubo - Muwemba
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
1. Mr. George Okotha - Chairperson 2. Mr. Bernard Obel - Member 3. Mr. Edward Kangave Kasato - Member 4. Ms. Rachel Kabale - Secretary 5. Mr. Chris Kananura - Member The first four members were appointed in April 2006 and the fifth member was appointed in April 2007.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Ms. Audrine Kakuru – Procurement Officer
213
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The 5 members of the contrac ts committee were approved by the PS/ST. 80% • PP Forms 220 and 221 were submitted to the Authority. • The Entity’s PDU is fully established • PDE does not have an Internal Auditor. • The user departments initiate procurements on PP Form 20. Procurement Planning 9/10 • The Entity has an approved pre- qualification/shortlist of providers. 90% • The different user departments prepare departmental procurement plan. • The Entity has an approved procurement plan and an Assets register with a provision for assets disposal. • The E ntity uses framework contracts for servicing computers and fax machines but not for things like stationery and fuel.
214 Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • The files perused had copies of solicitation procedures documents issued by PPDA. 100% • The methods used we re appropriate to the threshold and circumstances. • There were records of bid submission and opening on files perused.
Evaluation procedures 10/10 • The contracts committee approves the composition of the Evaluation Committee. 100% • The appropriate Evaluati on methodology was being used by the Evaluation committee. • The EC signs the Code of Ethical conduct and there were evaluation minutes on files. • The contracts committee approves the evaluation report. Contract placement, award 9/10 • Do es not post Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder and management and Contract Award on PPDA website 100% • The unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing. • There was evidence of execution of the contract within the contractual completion date. Reporting 6/6 • The Entity’s reporting status is up to date.
100% Performance of Contracts 8/8 • The Entity’s CC minutes are recorded on the Committee appropriate forms and filed. 100% • Contracts committee decisions on submissions are recorded on PP/DPA Forms and filed. • Contracts committee has not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 6/8 • The Entity has a filing system and individual cases have procurement reference numbers. 75% • No supplier appraisal report on the performance of suppliers Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating of PDE 90 % HIGHLY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should ensure that an Internal Auditor is recruited. 2. The PDE should use framework contracts for commonly procured items such as stationary and fuel 3. PDE should post Notices of Best Evaluated Bidder and Contract Award on the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 4. The user departments should conduct appraisals on suppliers’ performance.
215 3.1.6 Regional Referral Hospitals
NAME OF PDE: Arua Referral Hospital
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 16th June 2008
MANDATE: To provide specialized tertiary health care, train health workers and conduct research in line with the requirements of the Ministry of Health.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Regional Referral Hospital under Ministry of Health (Semi autonomous).
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): The entity's has a total budget of approximately 781 million Uganda shillings (Consolidated Fund – GOU & part donor funding.)
SIZE OF PDE: Arua Referral Hospital has got about 315 staff, both medical and support staff all working in the key departments of the hospital.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Dr. Charles Olaro: Hospital Medical Superintendent.
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Sr Obiru Sally Ag. Chairperson 2. Sr. Amaguru Grace Member 3. Mr. Adroa G Oyo Secretary 4. Mr. Okoth Leonard Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Dombo Robert Head PDU
216
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • CC committee is short by one member • PP Form 221 was not seen on record. 70% • Requisitions forms are stamped by the Internal Auditor Procurement Planning 3/10 • No indication of User departmental plans seen on file. • No Assets register in place. 30% • No framework contracts seen on file Solicitation and Bidding 1/10 • No record of issue of solicitation documents, Bid submiss ion procedures and opening. 10% • Solicitation documents do not use the PPDA format • Minimum bidding periods not observed • No record of bid submission seen • Thresholds for procurement methods are not followed for all procurements Evaluation procedures 0/10 Evaluation procedures completely flouted: • No record of approval of Evaluation Committee 0% • No evaluation reports generated for procurements carried. • No evidence of acceptance of code of ethics by EC • No clearance of EC reports by the CC
217 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Contract placement, award 0/10 Contract management is very poor. and management • No evidence/documentation of contract placement, award and 0% management. Reporting 3/6 • Monthly reports are not submitted on time.
50% Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Contracts committee signs code of ethical code of conduct. Committee • CC has never granted any retrospective approvals 63% • There is record of meetings and Minutes are prepared however there are no records of CC decisions Record Keeping 3/8 • No record of Supplier Appraisal/Performance. • No Proper filing system in place. 38% • Reference numbering is not standardized
Total Score and 31% UNSATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer and Contracts Committee need more training on the PPDA law. 2. Accounting Officer needs to fill PP Form 221 on PDU and submit to the PPDA. 3. CC should ensure that evaluation procedures (approval of EC, EC reports etc) are strictly adhered to. 4. Membership of the Contracts Committee and membership of the PDU should be filled 5. Frame work contracts should be used for repetitively procured items. 6. All Solicitation documents for procurements should be made using the standard format issued by the PPDA. 7. There should be a record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members. This should be signed every time they carry out an evaluation. 8. All outstanding quarterly Reports should be submitted to PPDA promptly. 9. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured. 10. Performance appraisal should be carried out on all providers and records kept by the PDU 11. Notice of BEB should be posted on PDU notice board and unsuccessful bidders informed in writing.
218 NAME OF PDE: Gulu Hospital
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 8th – 9th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide medical referral cases
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Regional referral hospital
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda releases and Donors
SIZE OF PDE: 236 Employees
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Dr. Otim
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Charles Engenye Chairperson 2. Mr. Tom Ogwal Secretary 3. Mr. Acellam Collin Member (Then RSA Gulu but now transferred to Soroti) 4. Sr. Ocitti Florence Member 5. Mr. Odongmon Lalim Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Bithum Michael APO
219
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/ FINDINGS RATING Procurement Structures 6/10 All CC members were approved by the ST to treasury as required by PPDA Reg 45 (3). 60% The CC members did not sign the Code of Ethical conduct as and when they met. The contracts committee meetings were irregular(with the latest notice of meeting being April 8,2008-though minutes of the same could not be traced) There were no CC meeting attendance forms signed Procurement Planning 3/10 The Entity had not submitted the Procurement Plan to the Authority. The one 30% that the entity purported to use was neither approved nor comprehensive enough! There is no usage of framework contracts of repetitively procured items. Solicitation and bidding 6/10 The entity did not use SBDs in its solicitations procedures as required by PPDA. In most cases details of 60%
220 the required items/services were communicated only through the LPO Evaluation procedures 5/10 Most files reviewed lacked evaluation reports. Where they existed, such reports were found 50% lying in unrelated procurement files though evaluation procedures would have been followed. Contract placement, award 6/10 Copies of LPOs were found on files while others and management were still in the LPO books. No records on 60% contract management on files reviewed were evident. Reporting 1/6 The entity was not update in terms of Monthly reports to the Authority 17%
Performance of Contracts 3/8 There is no use of forms for meetings(PP Form Committee 38% 210) and record of contracts committee decision
Record Keeping 2/8 Procurement files exist but with incomplete records. Nonetheless, a file for contracts 25% committee meetings exists
Total Score and 44% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting officer should ensure the membership of the CC is full following the transfer of Mr. Acellam Collin-RSA /Member to Soroti. 2. Members should sign the Code of Ethical conduct as and when they met and the record of attendance. 3. The Entity should prepare and submit the procurement and disposal plan to the Authority 4. Framework contracts for repetitively procured items should be adopted in the entity 5. The Entity should contact the Authority for the SBDs and intensify their usage as required by PPDA 6. An evaluation report should be an integral part of the procurement file 7. Copies of signed contracts should be kept on the procurement file 8. The Entity should keep all correspondences with providers. 9. The Entity should compile and submit all pending procurement monthly reports 10. Members should always sign the code of ethical conduct 11. CC should consistently use forms provided by PPDA for conduct of meetings and record of contracts committee decision 12. All records pertaining to a given procurement should be put on the respective files
221 NAME OF PDE: Masaka Referral Hospital
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 25 th – 26 th June 2008
MANDATE: Offer health services to the population.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Referral Hospital
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government. Estimated budget for FY 2007/2008 was 2.264b/=.
SIZE OF PDE : 200 Staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Dr. Lule Joseph
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Banura Patrick Head/Community Medicine Chairperson 2. Dr. Musitwa J Herman Head/Surgery Member 3. Ms. Kavuma Barbara Resident state Attorney Member 4. Sr. Mulindwa Sarah Senior Nursing Officer Member 5. Mr. Duhirwe Boniventure Medical Social Worker Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Musinguzi Godfrey APO and Head/ PDU
222
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The Accounting Officer is in place and has established the Procurement and Disposal Unit 80% • Contracts Committee was nominated in April 2008 and approved by PS/ST on 10 th April 2008. • The Head PDU assumed duty in January 2008. Prior to this, there was no Contracts Committee in place and the Accounting Officer was responsible for supervision of the procurements. The He ad of PDU has attended most procurement trainings and he is a holder of CIPS. • Members of the Contracts Committee have attended procurement trainings conducted by PPDA. • The user de partments initiate procurements but make no use of PP Form 20. • Information as to whether the Internal Auditor has audit ed the procurement and disposal processes was not availed.
Procurement Planning 6/10 • Procurement plan for FY 07/08 is in place but not prepared in accordance with the PPDA Format. 60% • Commencement on the preparation of the assets registe r had been started but was still incomplete. • There are no departmental procurement or disposal plans. • The Authority queried the procurement plan but to date the Entity
223 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
had not responded to the queries raised. • The Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers in place though there are inadequate providers on some categories for works, supplies and services. • The Entity is faced with challenges of quantifying items of medical drugs in the plan. • Framework contracts are used fo r cleaning compound/wards/laundry services, supply of raw food stuff and firewood.
Solicitation and Bidding 8/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitation procedures documents are kept on the files 80% • Records of bid submission and opening seen on files • Minimum bidding periods observed in the cases sampled • Most of the methods used are appropriate to the threshold provided for under the PPDA Guidelines. • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents issued and bids received availed.
Evaluation procedures 0/10 • Most of the cases sampled were in the period when there was no Contracts Committee in place and hence there was no evaluation 0% committee minutes and evaluation reports seen. • Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members not seen on the files. • Evidence of approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee not availed, • Appropriate evaluation methodology could not be ascertained as there were no records of evaluation reports.
Contract placement, award 4/10 • Entity does not post the notices of the best evaluated bidder and the and management notice of contract award on the PPDA website. 40% • Contract documents were not on the individual procurement files. • There are records of supplier appraisal and performance availed by the District Engineer as a contract manager for repair works carried out in November and December 2007. • Some Goods Received notes were seen on file. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing • There was little evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment.
Reporting 3/6 • Entity is not up to date in the monthly procurement and disposal reporting. From May 2007, the entity stopped submitting monthly 50% returns to date. There are outstanding reports for the period August to 2007 June 2008. • Entity uses the standard format in the monthly reporting • Entity responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports.
224 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Performance of Contracts 3/8 • Most of the Contracts Committee minutes were not available on the Committee file since there was no Committee in place. Some records were 38% seen after the approval of the current Contracts Committee. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members not seen on files. Record Keeping 3/8 • Record/filling system needs a lot of improvement. • Individual procurements lack procurement reference numbers 38% assigned to them • The Entity does not adhere to the format of assigning procurement reference numbers as provide d under the PPDA Guidelines.
Total Score and 49% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should always respond to queries from the Authority. 2. The Entity should ensure that the departmental plans are approved by the Heads of Departments and aggregated within the procurement and disposal plan 3. Entity is advised to ensure that each procurement file contains all the requirements of the law. 4. Entity should adhere to the timely monthly procurement and disposal reporting in accordance with the PPDA Act and Regulations. 5. Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members should be signed at each meeting and kept by the Secretary. 6. Entity should put improve the record keeping system by ensuring that individual procurements have separate procurement files
225 NAME OF PDE: Mbale Referral Hospital
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 1 st -2nd July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality health service for Eastern Region
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Referral Hospital
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government
SIZE OF PDE : 305 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Stephen Ouma
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr.Masaba J.P.M ,Senior Const Physican chairman 2. Dr.Wakamuke E , Medical Officer Special Grade Member 3. Sr. Oolah P, Senior Nursing Officer Member 4. Mr. Arinaitwe Lawyer Member 5. Mr. Watenyeri Julius , Principal Clinical Officer Secretary CC
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER (Names):
1. Mr. Watenyeri Julius – Ag. Head PDU/ Secretary CC
226
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING Procurement Structures 6/10 • The CC members are four beca use one was made the acting HPU and he is still on the CC as the secretary. 60% • Pp form 2o is not filled with the PPDA • The user dept doesn’t initiate their procurements on PP Form 20. Procurement Planning 7/10 • There are no departmental procurement pla ns and the approved Procurement plan is not followed that has 70% led to all of emergency • Lack of planning • Procedures for procurements are not always followed because the PDE has a lot of emergencies due to poor planning Solicitation and bidding 2/10 • No record of issue of Solicitation document procedures • Solicitation documents don’t use the standard format 20% issued by the PPDA • No record of bid submission and opening • Minimum bidding period is not observed. Evaluation procedures 5/10 • Approval of Members of the evaluations committee was done once in 2006 so it is now constant. 50% • Evaluation Methodology used in most cases is not appropriate because the EC just looks at price.
227 • There is no record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members. Contrac t placement, award 3/10 • There is no record of Notice of Best Evaluated bidder and management any where. 30% • There is no evidence of involvement of user dept in certifying payment of Contractual Sum and the final payments are not processed within the paym ent schedule specified in the contracts. • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified Reporting 0/6 • Monthly reports have never been submitted on time and they are not even written down because the the 0% PDU has no computer. • The only one that is available w as not formatted as required by the law. Performance of Contracts 3/8 • The CC has not granted any retrospective approval. Committee 38% But they are fours members instead of five because one member is the acting HPU and he has not resigned from the CC. • The re is no record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members present.. • There is no record of CC decision on a submission on PP/DPA Form. Record Keeping 6/8 • Record/filling system exists in the PDU though records filed don’t contain all the requirements of the 75% law. • Individual cases have the standard procurement reference numbering but they are recorded in a book and not on the cases themselves • There is some evidence of supplier appraisal/Performance Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 43% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The HPU should resign being a member of the CC because he is acting as HPU. 2. PP Form 221 be filled and filed with PPDA. 3. The user depts should start initiating all the procurements on PP form 20 4. All user depts. should submitted their departmental plans so as to avoid emergency procurements that are costly to the PDE 5. Emergency procurements should be minimized 6. Aggregation of procurement requirements into procurement plans. 7. Solicitation documents should be made using the standard format issued by the PPDA. 8. The minimum bidding period should be observed. 9. Records of issue of solicitation documents, bid submission and opening should be recorded on PP forms. 10. Approval of Members of the evaluations committee was done be done every time they are carrying out an evaluation for a new procurement. 11. Members of the EC should use the appropriate Evaluation Methodology as required by the law. 12. The record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members should be written down and signed as a sign of acceptance.
228 13. Notice of Best Evaluated bidder and Notice of award should be posted on the PDE notice board and PPDA website. 14. The user dept be involved in certifying payment of Contractual Sums and the final payments are processed within the payment schedule specified in the contracts. 15. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing 16. The PDE should provide a Computer for the PDU to enable HPU to start writing monthly reports. 17. The acting HPU should hand delegate his memberships CC to some one else. 18. Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members present be made available. 19. All CC decision on a submission on should be made on PP/DPA Form 20. All records filed should contain all the requirements of the law. 21. Standard procurement reference numbering should be recorded on the Individual cases and not in a book 22. Evidence of supplier appraisal/Performance should be made strong by disqualifying the suppliers that don’t perform.
229 NAME OF PDE : Mulago Referral Hospital
MANDATE : To provide specialized tertiary care, train health workers and conducts research in line with the requirements of the Ministry of Health.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS : Referral Hospital
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU
SIZE OF PDE: The Hospital has 7 departments with decentralized units– 2500 staff (2300 permanent and 200 relief), geographically spread on about 65acres of land.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Dr. Edward Ddumba.
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Gideon Kikampikaho Senior Consultant, Obst/Gyn, Chairperson 2. Dr. W.B.Nganwa, Senior Consultant, dental Surgeon, Member 3. Dr. Rita Musoke, Senior Medical Officer, Member 4. Ms. Elizabeth Nakkungu, State Attorney, Member 5. Mrs. Olivia Kakooza M. Principal Hospital Administrator, Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Crescent Muhumuza Principal Procurement Officer 2. Ms Rose Lwanga Senior procurement officer.
230
COMPLIANCE SCORE / FINDINGS AREA RATING
Procurement 7/10 • Accounting Officer has clear understanding of his roles but the Entity size Structures is overwhelming. 70% • The PDE is in place but PP Form 221 not filed with PPDA. • User departments initiated some of the sampled procurements however, they are not fully engaged on the initiations of common user items like drugs and sundries, procurements. • Contracts committee members were all approved by the PS/ST. Procurement 4/10 • Approved pre-qualification but with one provider for common user items Planning like ICT equipment, Engraving, st aff welfare services, medical gases and 40% accessories among others. • No departmental procurement plans • No approved procurement plan • Decentralized assets registries in the different departments/ wards manag ed by the supplies department. Solicitation and 10/10 • Poor statement of requirements with most procurement. (Since the Entity bidding procedures is the National referral hospital, it does not consult with other Entities.) 100% • Use of SBD with standard formats. • Appropriate methods used based on thresholds. • Minimum bidding periods observed. • Record of bidding submission and opening. Evaluation 10/10 • Relevant evaluation approvals. i.e committees, methodologies, and reports. procedures 100% • Members accept code of ethical conduct on PP Form 211.
231 Contract pl acement, 6/10 • Entity has notice board but inside the PDU. award and • Relevant files have approval from the Solicitor General. management 60% • Notices not posted on PPDA website. • Non successful bidders are never notified. • No evidence for execution of contract. • Some procurements do not stipulate contractual completion dates. Reporting 0/6 • January- June 2008 Monthly on file but not filled with PPDA –pending correct reference numbers. 0% • PP Forms 200,201 and 202 among others not used. Performance of 5/8 • Contracts committee uses internal format of minutes and filed in separate Contracts Committee file. 63% • There were no records of contracts committee decisions on submissions on PP/DPA forms in any of the files perused. • The Contracts Committee has not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 5/8 • PDU has enough room for the filling cabinets. • Records filed do not contain all the requirements of the law. 63% • Individual files have reference files but not in accordance with the PPDA guideline. • Entity has a supplier appraisal/performance system manned by the supplies department; however there is no record on file in the PDU. Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 65% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Entity should be trained on the following areas; • Powers that may be Delegated within the procurement cycle • Role of the user departments in the procurement cycle. 2. PP Forms 220 and 221 should be filed with the Authority in accordance with sections 27 of the PPDA Act and Reg. 57 of the PPDA Regulations. 3. Entity should enter into frame work contracts for the user items like drugs, sundries, food stuffs and equipment. 4. The departments should prepare procurement plans and submit them to the PDU. 5. The Entity should prepare a procurement plan and submit a copy of it to the Authority. 6. The Entity should be trained on development of specifications/ Terms of Reference/Bills of quantities. 7. Entity should consult the Authority or other related Entities at the initial stages of procurement especially, the development of specifications. 8. The notice board should be relocated to the assessment centre. 9. Entity should be trained on posting notices on the PPDA website. 10. Entity should seek guidance on contract drafting. 11. Entity should be trained on contractual management. 12. Entity should refer to the PPDA Guideline on the use of procurement reference numbers. 13. The Contracts committee should be trained be trained on the use of relevant forms. 14. Entity should extract minutes on PP form 210 which should be filed on relevant procurement files. 15. The Entity should record contracts committee decisions on submissions on PP/DPA forms and file them. 16. The PDU should guide the Entity on the requirements of the PPDA law. 17. Entity should be trained on the use of procurement reference numbers. 18. The role of the PDU and the supplies department should be well coordinated.
232 NAME OF PDE: Soroti Referral Hospital
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 9th – 10 th June 2008
MANDATE: Offer health services to the population.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Regional referral Hospital
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government
SIZE OF PDE : Medium
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Dr. Bernard Odu
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Namwoyo Chairperson 2. Mr. David Obol Secretary
N.B The other 3 members of the Contracts retired from Public Service
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Silas Oluka Procurement Assistant (intern)
233
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 4/10 • The Accounting Officer is in place but has not established the Procurement and Disposal Unit 40% • There are currently two members comprising the Contracts Committee and are approved by PS/ST . The Committee lacks the three members to be constituted. • The user de partments initiate procurements but make no use of PP Form 20. • The PDU is not established and is manned by a procurement intern. • Information as to whether the Internal Auditor has audit ed the procurement and disposal processes was not availed. Procurement Planning 4/10 • Entity has no approved procurement and disposal plan • Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers 40% • There are no departmental plans approved by the Heads of Departments • Assets Register record not availed at the time of the compliance • Records for the use of framework contracts not seen Solicitation and Bidding 3/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicita tion procedures documents not kept on the files, 30% • Records of bid submission and opening not available • Minimum bidding periods not observed in the cases sampled • Most of the methods used are not appropriate to the threshold
234 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
provided for under the PPDA Guidelines. The En tity uses a lot of emergency procurements. • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents issued and bids received not availed. Evaluation procedures 3/10 • Some evaluation committee minutes and evaluation report availed. • Records of Acceptance of Co de of Ethical Conduct for EC 30% members not seen on the files. • Evidence of approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee not availed, • Appropriate evaluation methodology could not be ascertained as there were no records of evaluation reports. Contract placement, award 3/10 • Entity does not post the notices of the best evaluated bidder and the and management notice of contract award on the PPDA website. 30% • Contract documents were not on the individual procurement files. • No evidence that the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period although there were some delays in payment. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing • There was little evidence that the User Department is i nvolved in certifying payment. Reporting 3/6 • Entity is not up to date in the monthly procurement and disposal reporting. 50% • Entity uses the standard format in the monthly reporting • Entity responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports. Perform ance of Contracts 4/8 • Some of the Contracts Committee minutes were not available on Committee the file. 50% • From the sampled procurement files, the Contracts Committee had granted any retrospective approvals. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Condu ct for CC members not seen on files. • No records of supplier appraisal and performance availed. Record Keeping 2/8 • Record/filling system needs a lot of improvement. • PDU lacks adequate storage facilities 25% • Individual procurements lack procurement refer ence numbers assigned to them • The Entity does not adhere to the format of assigning procurement reference numbers as prov ided under the PPDA Guidelines.
Total Score and 36% UNSATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting office should follow up the approval of the nominated Contracts Committee members by the PS/ST 2. The Entity should establish an adequately staffed PDU 3. Entity should prepare a procurement and disposal plan and submit it to the Authority.
235 4. The Entity should ensure that the departmental plans are approved by the Heads of Departments and aggregated within the procurement and disposal plan 5. Entity is advised to ensure that each procurement file contains all the requirements of the law. 6. Entity should adhere to the timely monthly procurement and disposal reporting in accordance with the PPDA Act and Regulations. 7. Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members should be signed at each meeting and kept by the Secretary. 8. Entity should put improve the record keeping system by ensuring adequate storage facilities and that individual procurements have separate procurement files
236 3.1.7 Training Institutions
NAME OF PDE: Gulu University
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 23 rd – 24 th June 2008
MANDATE: Provide quality tertiary level education
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: A statutory body established under the University and Other Tertiary Institutions Act No. 7 of 2001
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda, Internally Generated and Donors
SIZE OF PDE: 287 Staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. V. M. Okoth-Ogola
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Prof. Jesper Ogwal-Okeng Chairman 2. M/S Christine Oryema Member 3. Mr. Stephen Odama Secretary 4. Mr. Gilbert Uwonda Member 5. Ms. Judith Oroma Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Adam Ojera Ogora Head PDU 2. Mr. Francis Nyeko Assistant PO
237
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 6/10 • No record of PS/ST approval. • Current CC nominated in September 60% 2004. Procurement 10/10 • All Records on file Planning 100% Solicitation and bidding 8/10 • No record of issue and receipt of m ost procedures bids but other requirements here were on 80% file. Evaluation procedures 9/10 • No record of evaluation minutes on file but all other requirements were on file. 90% Contract placement, award and 4/10 • No record of SG a pproval of contract management above 50 Million 40% • Minimum bidding period of some contracts ignored Reporting 5/6 • Procurements out of imprest not reported • Some reports not submitted on time 83% • No record that reports are received by PPDA
238 Performance of Contracts 4/8 • No record of signed PP Form 211 Committee • CC has been granting retrospective 505 approvals for some procurements. Record Keeping 8/8 • Record available, but scattered. • The Entity does not appraise its suppliers. 100% Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating of PDE 75 % SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Accounting Officer should ensure that a Contracts Committee is established in accordance with the PPDA Act and Regulations. expedite the CC membership should urgently be put in order 2. The Accounting Officer should write to the Authority requesting for training for the procurement structures of the Entity. 3. The files should have records of bid opening and bid submission. 4. The secretary to the evaluation committee should always prepare evaluation minutes to evidence what transpired during the meetings and have them filed. 5. There should always be evidence on file showing the Contracts Committee/Solicitor General/ Donors approval on contracts wherever necessary. 6. The minimum bidding period should always be observed for the different procurements in accordance with the law. 7. The Entity should ensure that monthly procurement reports are submitted to PPDA on time which is by the 15 th day of each month for the preceding month. 8. All records filed should contain all the requirements of the law. 9. The Entity’s filing system should be improved. 10. The Entity should appraise its suppliers’ performance.
239 NAME OF PDE: Kyambogo University
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 18 th – 19 th June 2008
MANDATE: Offering Higher Education
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Training Institution
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU 12 Billion, Income generation 5.5 Billion
SIZE OF PDE: 1000 Staff. 1 Campus
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr Edward Kasolo Kimuli
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Wanyama Aaron Chairman 2. Zakumumpa Ronald Secretary 3. Kato Habib Member 4. Musisa David Member 5. Okeny Gabriel Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Mugisha Steven PO
240
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • 2 positions in the PDU are vacant • The contracts committee is fully 80% established. Procurement 8/10 • No asset register and disposal plan was Planning availed but other requirements here 80% under were on file. Solicitati on and bidding 8/10 • Partial evidence on use of solicitation procedures documents but other than that, all other 80% requirements hereunder were all on file. Evaluation procedures 10/10 • Satisfactory
100% Contract placement, award and 7/10 • No evidence of notice to unsuccessful management bidders 70% • Notices not on PPDA website Reporting 5/06 • Monthly reports submitted to April 2008. May is outstanding. 83% • Samples of reports reviewed indicate
241 that the standard formats are used.
Performance of Contrac ts 8/08 • Satisfactory Committee 100% Record Keeping 8/08 • Satisfactory
100% Total Score of PDE and Compliance Rating 86% HIGHLY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. There is urgent need to fill the 2 vacant positions of SPO and PO considering that the entity has 40 user departments 2. All the entity activities are centralized in the PDU. There is need for delegation of some functions e.g. micro procurements to the 40 user departments. 3. The unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing as required by the law. 4. Notices of contract award should be posted on to the PPDA website for the statutory display period.
242 NAME OF PDE: Law Development Centre
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 31 st March – 1st April 2008
MANDATE: To provide legal education to Lawyers and non-lawyers, undertake research in topical legal issues, contribute to legal reforms, produce legal publications, teaching material and law reports and also provide community legal services
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: LDC is a statutory body established by the Law Development Centre Act, Cap 132. The entity is self-accounting
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 23% Government of Uganda and 77% internally generated with 30% of the total budget spent on procurement. The internally generated funds include: - student fees, applications, certificate and verifications fees, hire of the Binaisa Gardens, Bookshop, canteen, among others.
SIZE OF PDE: 180 members of staff with 10 user departments.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Elijah Wante
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. James Nangwala Chairman, Contracts Committee 2. Mrs. Joyce Werikhe Member, Contracts Committee 3. Mrs. Florence Nakachwa Secretary, Contracts Committee 4. Mrs. Joy Badebye Member, Contracts Committee 5. Mr. Peter Nkuruziza Member, Contracts Committee
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Daniel Onyango Head PDU 2. Mr. Geofry Nyanzi Procurement Assistant 3. Mr. Walter Keuber Procurement Assistant
243
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of his role in the procurement cycle. 80% • The CC members are five (5) approved by the PS/ST. • Has an established PDU, however PP Form 221 is not filed with PPDA. • User departments initiate some proc urements. The stores initiate common user items like stationery on behalf of the printery, Continue Legal Education and Bar Course departments. • The Internal Auditor carries out post audits of the procurement process, usually verifies deliveries and signs on LPOs. She also verifies car repairs. Procurement 5/10 • The Entity has pre-qualified list of providers for the period 2006/7 – Planning 2008/09 for most of the services the Entity may require, save for fuel. 50% The list was approved by the Contracts Committee on July 13 th 2007. • There are no departmental procurement plans. • Entity does not have an approved procurement plan. • Entity has an up to date assets register • Entity has formal framework contracts for the supply the supply of fuel with Shell Old Kampala and sanitary services.
244 Solicitation and bidding 8/10 • Uses SBDs issued by PPDA. procedures • Uses methods appropriate to thresholds and circumstances. 80% • Minimum bidding periods are observed. • Entity has combined records of issue of solicitation document and bid submission in an account book. Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The Contracts Committee approves the evaluation committees and reports. 80% • There was record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct on all the sampled cases. • Some sampled cas es had no evaluation records like venues for professional and farewell diners. Contract placement, 5/10 • Notices are posted on PDE notice board for the statutory display period award and management but never on the PPDA website. 50% • With the exception of micro procurement, the unsuccessful bidders are never notified in writing of the award and rejection of their bids. • Since the Entity is under the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, and members of Contracts Committee are of the legal fraternity , the Entity does not seek Solicitor General’s approval for contracts above 50m. • The user departments are involved in the payment process, they always sign on verify on the invoices but not LPOs.
Reporting 6/6 • Entity was up to date on submission o f monthly report on procurement and disposal on time save for fuel and lubricants all procurements are 100% included in the monthly reports. Performance of 4/8 • No record of Contracts Committee decision on a submission on PP/DPA Contracts Committee form. 50% • Detailed record of minutes on all sampled cases but not on PP Form 210.
Record Keeping 5/8 • The Entity keeps records in separate files and l acks record/filling systems in PDU . 63% • Some sampled cases did not have records required by law. • All the sampled cases had standard reference numbers. • Entity has no record of supplier performance.
Total Score of PDE and Compliance Rating 68%. SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Departments should initiate all procurements on PP Form 20 in accordance with Regulation 104 of the PPDA Regulations. 2. The Entity should prepare procurement plan and submit a copy of it to the Authority in accordance with section 58 of the PPDA Act. 3. Departments should prepare departmental procurement plans as under section 60 of the PPDA Act. 4. The Entity should use PPDA Standard Forms issued by PPDA. 5. The Contracts Committee should sign the ethical code of conduct prior to each Contracts Committee meeting.
245 6. The PDU should ensure that notices are posted on the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 7. The unsuccessful bidders should always be notified in writing as provided for under Regulation 225(4) of the PPDA Regulations. 8. The user departments should be involved in contract management by certifying the payments of the contractual sums. 9. The Entity’s contracts committee decisions on submissions should be recorded on PP/DPA Forms as required by Regulation 51(8), and 53(2) (c) of the PPDA Regulations. 10. The contracts committee minutes should be recorded on the appropriate forms. 11. All the records filed should always have all the requirements of the law. 12. The Entity should appraise the performance of its suppliers.
246 NAME OF PDE: Makerere Business School
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 10 th & 11 th July 2008
MANDATE: Education & Training
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Public Institution
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU & Internally Generated Funds
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Wasswa Balunyo
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Semukono Freddie Chairperson 2. Mr. Akampumuza James Member 3. Ms. Kateega Juliet Member 4. Dr. Bakunda Geofrey Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Senoga K. Cindy Head PDU 2. Mr. Mwesigwa John Admn. Assistant 3. Ms.. Namaganda Shammy Admn. Assistant 4. Mr. Dungu Kassim Supervisor 5. Ms. Aguti Shelly Office Assistant
247
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 9/10 • 4 CC members were approved by PSST. The other is yet to be nominated and sent for approval to the PS/ST. 90% • PP Forms 220 and 221not filed by the Authority. Procurement 9/10 • The Entity has an approved list of pre-qualified Planning providers and Departmental Procurement plans. 90% • The Entity also uses Frame work contracts for supplies such as stationery. Solicitation and bidding 4/10 • Entity did not have solicitation documents for RFQ on procedures most of the files. 40% • The Entity also frequently uses RFQ for most procurements and as such, there’s evidence of splitting of requirements. Evaluation procedures 5/10 • On some files, there was evidence to the effect that the Evaluation Committee members are approved by the 50% CC though there was no evidence that the EC members sign the Code of Ethical Conduct on most files.
248 Contract placement, award and 7/10 • There were no notices to the best evaluated bidder on management file but they are put on the notice board and the 70% unsuccessful bidder notified but not in writing.. Reporting 5/6 • Monthly reports are not submitted on time. • However, the Entity has reported till May 2008. 83% • A sample of the reports reviewed indicate that there is use Standard Formats and all PP Forms 200, 201 & 202 are filled and CC Minutes attached Performance of Contracts 3/8 • Minutes are in place though not recorded on the Committee appropriate forms. 38% • There were no records of acceptan ce of Code of Ethical Conduct in Business by the CC on most files. Record Keeping 4/8 • There exists a Record/filing system in the PDU although the filing system is not standard. 50% • Various procurements are kept in a single file and most of the documentation is not complete. There were no records of the supplier appraisal performance. Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 65% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity was advised to immediately nominate a name of the fifth member and send it to PS/ST for approval. 2. The Entity should file PPF Forms 220 and 221 with the Authority. 3. The Entity should keep a copy of the solicitation document used for the procurement process on file. 4. The EC members should always sign the code of Ethical Conduct in business and the CC should always approve the composition of the Evaluation Committee. 5. The best evaluated bidder and the unsuccessful bidder should always be notified in writing. 6. The Entity should ensure that monthly reports are submitted by the 15 th day of each month for the preceding month and that all PP Forms are filled and CC minutes attached to reports as this aids the Authority as it reviews the reports. 7. The CC Minutes should always be recorded on the appropriate forms . 8. And the Entity should keep records of CC decisions on a submission on PP/DPA forms on file. 9. The CC should always sign the acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct in Business. 10. The Entity should ensure that each procurement process has its own file and that the documentation is complete. 11. The Entity should also appraise the performance of its suppliers to ensure quality services and supplies.
249 NAME OF PDE: Management Training and Advisory Centre
DATE OF ASSEMENT: 8th – 9th July 2008
MANDATE: To train and advise in management skills
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Training Institution
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU AND Donors
SIZE OF PDE: Small
ACCOUNTING OFFICER Dr. N. Tumwesigye
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Francis Mukala 2. Mr. J.O. Okiru 3. Mr. Richard Kagwa 4. Ms. Nakato Aisha 5. Ms. Mugarura Dorris
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS: There is no functional PDU and the work is ‘done’ by the Administration Officer
250
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 4/10 • There is no procurement and disposal Unit and the Administration officer 40% who by the time of my check had resigned his job does the p rocurement work. • The contract committee is in place but is generally not knowledgeable in procurement rules and procedures Procurement 0/10 • There was no procurement plan in Planning place 0%
Solicitation and bidding 0/10 • The solicita tion and bidding procedures procedures for the little procurement 0% done are not followed. Even companies which are not pre-qualified do supply goods to the entity Evaluation procedures 3/10 • There is no trace of evaluation as evidence from the few available 30% rec ords suggests that evaluation is done by the contracts committee
251 Contract placement, award and 3/10 • There is no evidence on files to suggest management its procedural application 30% Reporting 0/6 • The monthly reports had never been submitted and t he immediate answer to 0% this question was that they do procure only small items
Performance of Contracts 2/8 • The performance of the committee is Committee below the mark. However, the time I 25% spend with them explaining the new procurement procedures, a ll had an attitude to learn Record Keeping 2/8 • There are no procurement files and the available documents are scattered in 25% different files which makes it uneasy to trace them Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 19% HIGHLY UNSATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Procurement and disposal unit needs to be established and a professional person appointed to be in charge. 2. The entity should submit monthly reports for all procurements and disposal activities. 3. The entity should prepare annual procurement plan in accordance with the law and submit a copy to PPDA as per regulations in addition to the required reports 4. The entity needs to prepare a procurement plan and submit it to PPDA 5. The records systems in the PDU needs to be put in place. 6. There is a need for training all stakeholders abut the procurement procedures
NB. Because of the unprofessional manner in which procurement is managed, there was no individual procurement file availed for review .
252 NAME OF PDE: Uganda Management Institute
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 12 th – 13 th June 2008
MANDATE: To Provide Higher Education in Management Disciplines
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Government Institution of Higher Learning.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Receives only 3% of its budget from GOU, the rest is generated by the PDE through Tuition Fees paid by students.
SIZE OF PDE: 136 Members of Staff both academic and administrative.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Dr. John Kiyaga Nsubuga
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names)
1. Dr. Mary Muhenga Chairman 2. Mr. Patrick Madaya Secretary 3. Mr. Sylvester Kugonza Member 4. Mr. Benon Baheka Member 5. Ms. Mary Nankabirwa State Attorney
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Cissy Birungi Head PDU 2. Irene Nakiwala APO 3. Sylvia Nangoti Data Clerk
253
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures • The Contracts Committee is well qualified in matters of procurement. • The PDU is fully established with 3 staff. 10/10 • User departments initiate all the
procurements in the Entity. 100% • The Internal Auditor audits the procurement process and disposal, payments and deliveries. Procurement Planning 8/10 • Procurement Plan is in place but following it is usually made difficult by the scarcity of 80% funds. • User Departments do not understand the procurement process and often require emergency procurements on items that were on the procurement plan. • The PDE did not use framework contracts for any of its regular procurements. • Payment to suppliers to the PDE is often delayed and this has resulted in a reluctance of suppliers to provide good, services and supplies to the PDE. Solicitation and Bidding 10/10 • All requirements hereunder were on file.
254 Procedures 100% Evaluation Procedures • The composition of the Evaluation Committee is approved by the Contracts committee and so are the reports. 8/10 • The appropriate Evaluation Methodology id
used by the EC but they do not always sign 80% the code of ethical conduct. • There were Evaluation reports on files perused. Contract Placement, • The Best Evaluated bidder is given notice but Award and Management such notice of contract award is not posted on the PPDA website. • The unsuccessful bidder is not given notice 4/10 as required by the Law. • There was no evidence of execution of 40% contract within the contractual completion date. • The was also no evidence of the involvement of the user department in certifying payments of contractual sums. Reporting • Entity has two outstanding monthly 4/6 procurement reports.
• Reports sampled indicate that the standard 67% format is used. Performance of Contracts • The Contracts Committee sign the code of Committee ethical conduct in business. • There were minutes of the CC on file and 7/10 where recorded on the appropriate forms. • Some of the CC decisions on submissions 70% were on file recorded on the appropriate forms. • The CC has not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping • The Entity has a filing system but not all records filed contain all the requirements of 7/8 the law. • Individual cases have procurement reference 88% numbers. • There were records of supplier appraisals on files. Aggregate Compliance Score and Compliance 79% SATISFACTORY Rating
255
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Accounting Officer should ensure adherence to the procurement plan. 2. Entity should confirm availability of funds prior to commencement of a procurement to avoid delayed payments to suppliers . 3. All records filed should contain all the requirements of the law. 4. The Entity should urgently submit the outstanding monthly procurement reports. 5. The PDE should make use of framework contract for commonly procured items. 6. The unsuccessful bidders should always be notified in writing as required under Regulation 225(4) of the PPDA Regulations. 7. The files should have evidence of execution of the contract within the contractual completion date. As under Regulation 91(c) and (e), 8. The user departments should also be involved in contract management like certifying payments of the contractual sum. 9. The Evaluation Committee members are advised to always sign the code of ethical conduct in business before going about their business.
256 3.1.8 Councils
NAME OF PDE: National Council for Children
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 22 nd May 2008
MANDATE: To provide a structure and mechanism which would ensure proper coordination, monitoring and evaluation of policies and programes relation to the survival and protection of the child and other connected matters.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS : Statutory Body.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Central Government (staff salaries and operations) and Donor funds (projects and programmes).
SIZE OF PDE: 15 Staff composed of the Headquarters with a total budget of approximately Ug. Shs 784 million, of which34% is spent on procurement.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mrs. Joyce Otim
ACTING CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names)
1. Mr. Martin Kiiza - Programme Officer, Communication and Advocacy 2. Mr. Joseph Kusiimwa Isoke - Accountant
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Miliam Musoke Mugwanya – Procurement Officer 2. Ms. Grace Vivian Nabisere - Procurement Officer
257
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 5/10 • CC not in place- Its term expired in September 2007. Its
renewal is pending the inauguration of the Council whose term 50% expired in March 2007 too. • PDU is in established, however, PP Form 221 not filed with PPDA • The internal Auditor does not audit the procurement and disposal processes. Procurement Planning 6/10 Entity has; • An approved pre-qualified list of providers. 60% • Department al procurement plans for the operational procurements. • No approved procurement plan for the PDE • An assets register with provisions of assets disposal planning. • No frame work contracts for the common user items.
258 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Solicitation and bidding 4/10 • No records on issue of solicitation documents. procedures • Standard Bidding Documents issued by the Authority are not 40% used. • Appropriate methods were used for the sampled case. • Minimum bidding periods were observed for the sampled case. • No records on bid submission and opening. Evaluation procedures 9/10 • CC approved the EC. • Financial evaluation was conducted before the t echnical 90% evaluation contrary to Reg. 197 of the PPDA Regulations 70 of 2003. • Record of evaluation report was on file. Contract placement, award 2/10 • Entity does not post BEB notices neither on PDE Notice board and management nor on PPDA website. 20% • Unsuccessful bidders are never notified in writing. • There was no CC approval of the sampled case. Reporting 6/6 • Entity had submitted all the monthly reports.
100% Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Entity does not use PP Form 210 and 211. Committee 63% Record Keeping 5/8 • Entity has no record/ filing system in the PDU. • Not all records were filed for the sampled case. 63% • Entity has no supplier appraisal/performance systems. Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 58 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should solicit for its own shortlist of providers instead of depending on that of the Mother Ministry for purposes of attracting suitable service providers. 2. All the User departments should make and file copies of their departmental procurement and disposal plans with the PDU. 3. The Entity needs training on the modalities of use of framework contracts. 4. The Entity should make use the SBD issued by the Authority. 5. The Entity should undertake and document bid submission and opening in the case of macro procurements. 6. Evaluation Committee should be approved by the CC and the approval recorded in its minutes. 7. Evaluations should use the appropriate methodology as specified in Reg. 168 (2), 172 and 197. 8. BEB notices should be posted on the PDE procurement notice board and the PPDA website. 9. Unsuccessful bidders should be informed in writing for all procurements and disposals. 10. CC should use the relevant PP Forms. 11. The Entity should establish a filing system to ensure proper record keeping for all procurements/disposals conducted. 12. Entity should establish a supplier appraisal/ performance system.
259 NAME OF PDE: National Council for Higher Education
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 17 th June 2007
MANDATE: Regulate Tertiary Institutions and Set Standards
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory Body / Corporation
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Donor Funds and Government funds
SIZE OF PDE: 23 members of staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Prof. Kasozi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Penny Birungi Chairperson 2. Mr. Arthur Babu Muguzi Secretary 3. Mr. Bogere Richard Member 4. Mr. Osikei Martin Member 5. Mr. Okae Patrick Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names): 1. Mike Wanyama PO
260
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 2/10 The Contracts Committee is fully constituted with 5 members. 20% The Accounting Officer, members of the Contracts Committee and the PDU staff have not been traine d by PPDA. PP Form 220 and 221 were not filed with PPDA. The user department does not initiate procurements. The Internal Auditor does not audit the procurement process, payment and deliveries. Procurement 0/10 Has no procurement plan. Planning Depar tments do not submit departmental procurement 0% plans. No list of pre-qualified providers It uses it budget to make procurements. Entity has no Assets Register with a disposal plan. The Entity does not make use of framework contracts. Solicitation and bidd ing 1/10 The Entity does not use the Standard Bidding procedures Documents provided by PPDA. 10% The Entity has no procurement notice board for posting
261 procurement notices. The Entity does not always comply with the thresholds for the various procurement methods.
Evaluation procedures 1/10 There were no evaluation reports on file. There were no records of bid submission and bid 10% opening on file. The Evaluation Committee members do not sign the Code of Ethical Conduct.
Contract placement, award 2/10 No evidence of contract management/monitoring and management mechanism for the procurements reviewed. 20% No records of the user department certifying delivery or completion of the services before payment is effected. The unsuccessful bidders are not notified in any way. There were no records of file evidencing notification of contract award to the best evaluated bidder.
Reporting 2/6 The Entity does not submit reports on time and its reporting is not up to date. 33% Performance of Contracts 7/8 The C ontracts Committee members do not always sign Committee the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business. 88% There were records of contracts committee decisions on submissions on file. The Contracts Committee has not granted any retrospective approvals.
Record Keeping 0/8 There is poor record keeping. Records filed do not contain all requirements of the 0% law. Individual cases do not have standard procurement reference numbers. There was no record of supplier appraisal/performance.
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating of PDE 21 % UNSATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer, Contracts Committee and PDU staff should all be trained regarding their respective roles in the procurement process. 2. PP Forms 221and 220 should be filed with PPDA. 3. The Entity should prequalify providers for their supplies and services. 4. Departments should submit departmental procurement plans. 5. The PDU should draft a procurement plan for the Entity and submit a copy of it to the Authority. 6. The Entity should have an Assets Register with a disposal plan. 7. The Entity should also use framework contracts for frequently procured items.
262 8. The Entity should endeavor to submit monthly procurement reports to PPDA on time, which is by the 15 th day of each month for the preceding month. 9. The Entity’s departments should always submit their departmental procurement plans to the PDU. 10. The user department should initiate all procurements. 11. The Entity’s Internal Auditor should audit the procurement processes in the Entity, payments and deliveries. 12. The PDU should make a procurement plan and submit a copy of it to the Authority. 13. The Entity should use the Standard Bidding Documents provided by PPDA in order to ensure maximum competition. 14. The Entity should put up a procurement notice board for purposes of posting procurement notices of the Entity. 15. The Entity should observe the minimum bidding period for the various procurement methods and also comply with the thresholds. 16. The Evaluation Committee should always ensure that there are evaluation reports sent to the Contracts Committee for approval. 17. The Evaluation Committee should ensure that they sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business. 18. The procurement files should have records of bid opening and bid submission. 19. The unsuccessful bidders should always be given notice of the best evaluated bidder. 20. The best evaluated bidder should always be notified and such notice of contract award posted to the PPDA website. 21. The Entity should improve its record keeping.
263 NAME OF PDE: National Council for Science &Technology (NCST)
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 24 th June 2008
MANDATE: To develop and implement strategies for integration of science and technology in the national development process.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Council under the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): NCST has a total budget of approximately 19 Billion Uganda Shillings made of funds from the consolidated fund –GOU & IDA funds (World Bank)
SIZE OF PDE: According to annual volume of expenditure on procurements: Procurement budget is estimated at 13 Billion Uganda Shillings.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Dr. Peter Ndemere
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names)
1. Mr. Ismail Barugahara - Chairperson 2. Ms. Catherine Munabi - Member 3. Mr. Dickson Avutia - Secretary 4. Ms. Wanyama Naomi - Member 5. Ms. Maria Nyagoma - Member (Nominated)
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Anthony Okimat Opolot - Head Procurement Officer. 2. Mr. Senyonjo Tom - Assistant Procurement Officer.
264
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • There are procurement structures in place. • Contracts committee is approved by the Secretary to the 70% Treasury. • No audit reports were seen Procurement Planning 7/10 • Existence of approved pre-qualification of providers , however the list needs updating. 70% • No evidence of departmental procurement plans was seen although it was implied with the existence of the consolidated procurement plan. • Record of framework contracts were seen for only newspapers Solicitation and Bidding 9/10 • Bidding periods for procurements were observed. procedures • Bidding periods were observed. However a few procurements 90% did not follow the threshold and set procurement methods. • Entity uses the right solicitation documents and Record of bid submission.
265 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Evaluation procedures 10/10 • The entity has a record of evaluation reports. • CC approves the evaluation reports and there is use of 100% appropriate evaluation methodology. • EC members are approved by CC. Contract placement, award 6/10 • No evidence of involvement of User dept in certifying and management payment of Contractual sum. 60% • Notice of BEB not seen in all procurements. Reporting 6/6 • Monthly reports are up to date with a few errors in recording. Standard formats are used. 100% Performance of Contracts 7/8 • Contracts committee minutes are well prepared. Committee • PP Form 210 & PP Form 211 were seen. 88% • There was a record of CC decision on a submission. • CC has granted some retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 4/8 • No record of Supplier Appraisal/Performance. • Procurement Reference numbers are not standardized. 50% 56/72 Total Score and SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE 78%
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The PDE should ensure monthly reports are accurately prepared with all the necessary information. Reference numbers should also be standardized. 2. The Internal auditor should be incorporated into the procurement process – to certify payments and delivery of goods 3. User departments ought to be involved in contract management to ensure effective execution of contracts. 4. User departments should keep a record of their procurement plans and a copy given to the PDU for effective monitoring of the plans 5. PDE needs to update the ministries pre-qualification list on a regular basis. 6. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified by the PDE in writing. 7. Procurement reference numbers for all procurements should follow a standard format in accordance with Reg. 104 of the PPDA Regulations. 8. Supplier appraisal ought to form part and parcel of the procurement process and records kept.
266 3.1.9 Boards
NAME OF PDE: Uganda Export Promotion Board
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 2nd – 3rd July 2008
MANDATE: To promote exports from the country.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Statutory Body
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government and donor funds.
SIZE OF PDE : 20 staff spread out within 4 Divisions
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Ms. Florence Kata
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names)
1. Mr. William Babigumira Director/Management I.S Ag., Chairperson and Secretary 2. Mr. Birungi George Trade Promotion Officer/Accountant, Member 3. Ms. Harriet Tukamushaba State Attorney, Member 4. Mr. Baguma Mutoro Trade Promotion Officer, Member 5. Mr. Bosco Okelo Trade Promotion Officer, Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Birungi George Trade Promotion Officer Head PDU 2. Mr. John Aryon Administrative Assistant Member 3. Mr. Damiano Bihire Officer Assistant Member
267
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING Procurement Structures 5/10 • The Accounting Officer is in place and has established the Procurement and Disposal Unit 50% • Contracts Committee in place and approved by PS/ST. • The user de partments initiate procurements but make no use of PP Form 20. • Information as to whether the Internal Auditor has audit ed the procurement and disposal processes was not availed. • No internal audit reports on the procurement and disposal processes seen. Procurement Planning 6/10 • Entity has no procurement plan in place. • The Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers in place though 60% there are inadequate providers on some categories for works, supplies and services. • No evidence of use of framework contracts seen. Solicitation and Bidding 10/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitation procedures documents are kept on the files 100% • Records of bid submission and opening seen on files. • Minimum bidding periods observed in the cases sampled • Some of the methods used are not appropriate to the threshold and circumstances as provided for under the PPDA Guidelines . There is frequent use of direct procurement. • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents issued and bids received availed.
268 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Evaluation reports seen on the procurements samples and use the evaluation methodology in the solicitation documents. 60% • Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members seen on the files. • Evidence of nomination by the PDU and approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee seen. • Evaluation reports are signed approved by CC. Contract placement, award 7/10 • Entity does not post the notices of the best evaluated bidder and the and management notice of contract award on the PPDA website. 70% • Contract documents were not on the individual procurement files. • There are no records of supplier appraisal and performance. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing • There was no evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment. Reporting 4/6 • Entity is not up to date in the monthly procurement and disposal reporting. 67% • Entity uses the standard format in the monthly reporting • Entity responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports. • Invoice numbers and dates for some procurement transactions are not indicated in the reports and contracts Committee minutes are not submitted with the reports. • Reports are s ubmitted by the Senior Procurement Officer instead of the Accounting Officer as required by the PPDA Act. Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Contracts Committee meets regularly. Committee • Most of the Contracts Committee minutes were available on the 63% file. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members not signed by the members at each meeting. Record Keeping 4/8 • The record/filling system is being started in the PDU and needs a lot of strengthening. 50% • Individual procurements have proc urement reference numbers assigned to them
Total Score and 65% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should prepare and submit the procurement and disposal plan to the Authority. 2. Entity should adhere to the timely monthly procurement and disposal reporting in accordance with the PPDA Act and Regulations. 3. Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members should be signed at each meeting and kept by the Secretary. 4. The Entity should display notices of the best evaluated bidder and contract award on the PPDA Website. 5. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing and evidence of the notification be put on the procurement file.
269 NAME OF PDE: Uganda National Examinations Board (UNEB)
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 15 th – 16 th July 2008
MANDATE: To conduct national examinations (PLE, UACE, UAC, and UAJT)
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Established under the Act of parliament No. 2 of 1983
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 28 billion Shs
SIZE OF PDE: 220 Employees
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Mathew Bukenya
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Chrysostom Kibeti - Chairperson 2. Mr. S. Kisasa - Member 3. Mr. William Kabanza - Secretary 4. Mrs. J. Kiberu - Member 5. Ms. Harriet Tukamushaba - Lawyer
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Naboth Katongole - Head PDU
270
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/ FINDINGS RATING Procurement Structures 7/10 • All CC members were approved by the ST to Treasury as required by PPDA Reg 45 (3). 70% • The internal auditor audits the procurement and disposal process • There was no evidence of PP form 221 filled with PPDA on file Procurement Planning 2/10 • The Entity had no proposed procurement plan • There were no departmental procurement plans 20% • An assets register exists • There is no usage of framework contracts of repetitively procured items. Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • There was records of issue of solicitation procedures documents, bid submission and opening 100% • The entity uses solicitation documents in the format issued by PPDA • Thresholds were adhered to in the determination of procurement methods Evaluation procedures 9/10 • All files reviewed had evaluation reports on file.
271 • However in a few cases a record of acceptance 90% of code of ethical conduct for evaluation committee members were missing of file Contract placement, award and 6/10 • Copies of signed contracts exist management • Copies of notices of best evaluated bidder were 60% on file though no evidence to indicate their posting on the authority web site • Unsuccessful bidders were notified through the fax • No evidence of user involvement in certification of payments Reporting 6/6 • The entity was update in terms of Monthly reports to the Authority in the formats prescribed by 100% PPDA Performance of Contracts 7/8 • There was use of forms for meetings(PP Form Committee 210) and record of contracts committee decision 88% • The records of acceptance of code of ethical conduct exist, save for some not found on file • There was no evidence of a retrospective approval by the contracts committee Record Keeping 5/8 • A procurement reference book exists • Individual cases have standard procurement 72% reference numbers • Most files reviewed had no acceptance letters from successful bidders • There were no record of supplier appraisal/performance
Total Score and 76% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting officer should file PP form 221 with the PPDA 2. The entity should prepare and submit and approved procurement and disposal plan to the Authority 3. All departments should prepare their departmental work plans for procurements 4. Framework contracts for repetitively procured items should be adopted in the entity 5. A record of acceptance of code of ethical conduct for evaluation committee members should be signed by all members as required under Reg. 169(9) and 171(5) 6. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing as required under Reg. 225(4) 7. Users should certify payments as required by Reg. 260(2) 8. All members of the CC should consistently sign acceptance of code of ethical conduct and have then filed on the procurement files they relate 9. All records pertaining to a given procurement should be put on the respective files 10. The entity should initiate supplier appraisal /performance
272
3.2 Local Government Entities
3.2.1 Districts
NAME OF PDE: Adjumani District Local Government
Date of Assessment: 23 rd – 24 th July 2008
MANDATE: Manage To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Mainly GOU and Local Revenue.
SIZE OF PDE: Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Abdul Isoobe
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names)
1. Julius Okuga Chairman 2. Eng. Otema Francis Member 3. Giyaya Charles Member 4. Eng. Kendrick Anyama Member 5. Dr. Dragbe Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names)
The PDE does not have a functional PDU in place.
273
COMPLIANCE SCORE/RATING FINDINGS AREA Procurement 6/10 • The PDE does not have a fully functional PDU in place. Structures Attempts have been made by advertising positions for the 60% PDU but all applications received were not responsive. • User departments do not use PP Form 20.
Procurement • Procurement Plans are in place both for departments and for Planning 6/10 the entire PDE. • The PDE did not use framework contracts for any of its 60% regular procurements. • There is no comprehensive asset register at the PDE. Solicitation and 5/10 • Use of non-standard documents. Bidding • No record of issue of solicitation documents. Procedures 50% Evaluation • Evaluation Committee does not sign the ethical code of 4/10 Procedures conduct.
• No Contracts Committee approval of evaluation reports or 40% evaluation committee members.
274 Contract 3/10 • Contract management records were not included on the files Placement, Award reviewed. and Management 30% • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified. Reporting 2/6 • Quarterly reports are prepared but are never submitted to the Authority. 33% Performance of • CC does not sign ethical code of conduct. 2/10 Contracts • CC minutes were not signed and they did not use the
Committee approved forms for their records and approvals. 20%
Record Keeping • The entity did not have proper filing with some of the cases reviewed involving loose documents. • In addition, procurement reference numbers that were used 2/8 were not standard. • 25% There were no individual files for each of the cases reviewed. Everything was mixed up and it was therefore difficult to follow a case through from initiation to award and completion
Total score for the 42% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY PDE and rating
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Training required by the Entity. 2. PDE advised to re-advertise the posts in order to establish the PDU. 3. The District should file PP Forms 220 and 221 with the Authority after recruitment of the PDU staff. 4. PDE advised to put in place a comprehensive asset register with a provision for assets disposal. 5. PDE advised to use standard documents with the format issued by PPDA. 6. PDE advised to keep an issue of the solicitation documents on file for each contract. 7. PDU advised to complete its files to include contract management records and other information/documentation related to procurement. 8. The District should also submit quarterly procurement reports to the Authority in accordance with the law.
275 NAME OF PDE: Apac District
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 17 th July 2008
MANDATE: Manage To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the Municipaliy
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government, Donors (DANIDA for road development) and internally generated funds from revenue collection centres. Entity benefits from NUSAF and NAADS funds, however, procurements under these funds are conducted at the community level.
SIZE OF PDE : 876 staff under 8 departments (408 approved positions (less teachers) with only 266 filled positions i.e. 65%), approximately 30% of the total budget is spent on procurements. It is categorized in Module II by Ministry of Local Government.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Paul Walakira
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names)
1. Mr. Ateng Francis -Senior Assistant Secretary Chairman. 2. Dr. Emer Mathew -District Director of Health services Member 3. Mr. Ogwang Yovan -District Agricultural Officer Member 4. Mr. Enon Pele Alfred -District Planner Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER (Names):
1. Mr. David Opeto Ag. Procurement Officer
276
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • The Accounting Officer is newly appointed to the district and has never been training on the Procurement 60% laws. • The 4 CC members are approved by PS/ST but PP Form 220 is not filed with PPDA. • There is no established PDU. The unit is manned by an unqualified acting procurement officer. • The user departments initiate procurements on an internal form equivalent to LG PP Form 1. • The Interna l Auditor carries out post audits in quarterly basis. Procurement 9/10 Entity has; Planning • An approved pre-qualified list of providers. 90% • A departmental procurement plan. • A procurement plan for FY 2007/08 based on the approved budget. • An assets register with provisions for assets disposal plan. • There is use of non regulated framework contracts.
277 Solicitation and bidding 10/10 • There are records of issue of Solicitation documents and procedures receipt of bids although all bids received for different 100% procurements are recorded together where the deadline for bid submission is the same. • The SBD for procurement of revenue collection centres does not use the standard PPDA document but has good innovations such requiring bidders to submit LC I Let ters and photographs which helps to trace defaulters. • Entity prefers use of the Request for Quotation method for most procurements to ensure competition. • Minimum bidding periods were observed for all the sampled cases. Evaluation procedures 10/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee (EC) and the Evaluation Report. 100% • Appropriate evaluation methodologies are used. • The Evaluation Committee minutes and Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members are signed. Contract place ment, award 6/10 • BEB Notice and contract award are posted on the Entity’s and management notice board. 60% • Entity does not post notices on the PPDA web site. • The unsuccessful bidders are only informed at pre- qualification. • CC approves all contracts and co pies of signed contracts were on file, however, they were ignorant of the requirement in law on the Solicitor General's approval of contracts above 50 million. • No evidence that some contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period, however, co pies of the signed contracts stipulated the completion periods. • All sampled cases were on-going, however, PDU stated that the user departments usually counter sign the LPOs. Reporting 4/6 • Entity had an up to date reporting record. • PDU had improvised internal forms with guidance of 67% the CG Forms. • The Authority query on the procurement process of Cadastral survey of the primary school's land in Aber sub county that was over quoted by 1000% was deferred to the newly designated Oyam DLG since this Sub county falls there in. Performance of Contracts 4/8 • Since Entity had just received the LG PP/DPA Forms, Committee there was no record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical 50% Conduct for CC members. • In the CC minutes sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 5/8 • PDU has a record/filling system. • Most of the sampled cases had the standard 63% procurement reference numbers. • Contract management and supplier appraisal records were submitted by the engineering department although the water department had not submitted any.
Total Score and 75 % SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
278
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer should be trained on his role in public procurement cycle. 2. PP Form 220 on membership of the Contracts Committee and membership of the PDU should be filled and filed with PPDA. 3. The acting procurement officer needs training on the procedures of the PPDA law. 4. The Entity should recruit more PDU staff and file PP Form 221 with the Authority. 5. The Entity should initiate all procurements on LG PP Form 1. 6. The Entity should formalize the frame work contracts for all repetitively procured items, like stationery, fuel, human drugs and sundries. 7. The Entity should use Standard Bidding Documents (SBD) issued by the Authority. 8. The Entity should record the issue of SBDs, bid submission and opening on the LG PP Forms. 9. The PDU staff need training on the posting of notices on the PPDA website. 10. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing for the individual procurements. 11. The Entity should seek Solicitor General’s approval for all procurements above 50 Million Uganda Shillings. 12. At every meeting the CC members must sign the acceptance of Code of Conduct in Business. 13. All CC decisions on a submission should be made on LG PP Form 20. 14. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured with reference to Guideline 3 of 2008. 15. All User departments should submit contract management and monitoring reports to the PDU. 16. The PDU should get copies of contract payment records that are issued by the Finance dept.
279 NAME OF PDE: Budaka District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 9th – 10 th July 2008
MANDATE: Manage To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government and internally generated resources.
SIZE OF PDE : 18 User Departments with about 1000 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Busingye S.T Amoti
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Pande Stephen - District Health Officer Chairperson 2. Mr. Nabucha Aloysius - Water Engineer Member 3. Mr. Dambya Ambrose - Entomologist Member 4. Mr. Tembeiza Owen - Education Officer Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Kutta Noah - Senior Procurement Officer Head/ PDU 2. Mr. Bwire Geoffrey - Procurement Officer 3. Mr. Dan Waki - Assistant Procurement Officer
280
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer has established the Contracts Committee and PDU in place. 70% • The 4 CC members are approved by PS/ST. • The user de partments initiate procurements but make no use of LG Form 1. • The Internal Auditor regularly audits the pr ocurement and disposal processes
Procurement Planning 4/10 • Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers for FY 07/08 but one for FY 08/09 is being prepared. 40% • Assets register does not exist. • Framework contracts are used.
Solicitation and Bidding 9/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitation procedures documents kept on the files, 90% • Records of bid submission and opening seen • Minimum bidding periods observed in the cases sampled • Methods used are appropriate to the threshold provided for und er the PPDA Guidelines • Copies of the solicitation documents issued and bids received kept
281 properly
Evaluation procedures 10/10 • The Evaluation Committee minutes and Evaluation Report are signed. 100% • Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethi cal Conduct for EC members seen on the files. • Evidence of approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee seen • Evaluation reports seen
Contract placement, award 8/10 • Notices of Best Evaluated bidder seen but not posted on the PPDA and management Website. 80% • Entity does not post the notices of contract award on the PPDA website. • Contract documents were found on the individual procurement files. • Some evidence that the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period was seen although there w ere some delays in payment. • The unsuccessful bidders are disp layed on the procurement notice board. • There was evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment. Reporting 4/6 • The 3 rd Quarter procurement and disposal for the period January 2008 to March 2008 was submitted on 14 th April 200 8 and the 67% fourth quarter report fro April - June 2008 wa s being prepared for submission. Minutes are attached to and signed. PPDA has not raised any query. • Entity a dheres to the format of the reporting as provided under the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008. • Contracts Committee minutes are attached to the quarterly procurement and disposal reports.
Performance of Contracts 6/8 • Contracts Committee minutes were available on the file. In Some Committee cases, Contracts decisions and attendance are written on entity’s 75% letter heads and not on LG form 9 and 10. • From the sampled procurement files, the Contracts Committee had not granted any retrospective approvals. • Some of the records of acceptance of code of ethical c onduct for Contracts Committee seen on files. • No records of supplier appraisal and performance availed.
Record Keeping 5/8 • Separate files have been opened for Contracts Committee’s minutes, list of providers, monthly returns, and procurement plan 75% for 08/09 • Some of the Individual procurements lack procurement reference numbers assigned to them • The Entity has not instated a system of supplier appraisal/performance.
Total Score and 75% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
282 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Entity should send one more name to PS/ST to ensure the Contracts Committee is fully constituted. 2. Entity should prepare a procurement and disposal plan and submit it to the Authority. 3. The Entity should ensure that the departmental plans are approved by the Heads of Departments and aggregated within the District procurement and disposal plan 4. Entity is advised to ensure that each procurement is initiated using LG Form 1 and also to use the standard notices and formats as prescribed by the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008 5. Entity should adhere to the timely quarterly reporting in accordance with the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008
283 NAME OF PDE: Bundibugyo District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESMENT: 26 th May 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government, Donors (Belgian Technical Cooperation, UNICEF, UPHOLD, Save the Children, GOAL and WV) and internally generated funds from revenue collection centres.
SIZE OF PDE: 1,500 staff , District covers 3 Sub Counties and 1 Town Council.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Byamungu Elias
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Nshabiirwe Esau - Chairperson; District Education Officer 2. Ms. Mugera Rose - Member; Physical Planner 3. Ms. Masika Josephine – Member, Personnel Officer
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Nsubuga Hood - Ag. Head PDU
NB: Functional PDU is not yet in place since PDE had not yet recruited
284
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of his role for the overall responsibility of the procurement and disposal process. 60% • The 4 CC members are approved by PS/ST but PPDA PP Form 220 is not filed with the Authority. • The fifth member was moved to kyenjojo district and the CAO is yet to nominate a name to send to PS/ST for approval. • PDU is not fully established. • Internal Auditor does not audit the procurement and disposal process. Procurement Planning 8/10 • Entity has; • An approved pre-qualified list of providers. 80% • Departmental procurement plans. • A procurement plan for FY 2007/08 based on the approved budget , however, it’s not in the PPDA format. • An assets register with provisions for assets disposal plan. • It does not use framework contracts for the common user items.
Solicitation and bidding 6/10 • No records on issuing of SBD. procedures • Entity had improvised bidding documents since PPDA hadn’t just 60% issued the standard formats at the time of the review.
285 Evaluation procedures 4/10 • No records on file on the CC approval of the Evaluation Committee (EC) 40% • No record of Acceptance of Code of Eth ical Conduct for EC members, since Entity had just received the PPDA Formats • There were evaluation reports and their respective CC approvals on all the sampled cases. Contract placement, award 1/10 • BEB notices are placed on the PDE No tice board but not on the and management PPDA web site. 10% • Unsuccessful bidders are never informed in writing. • No record on relevant approvals like SG for contracts above 50 million • No records on the performance of contracts within the contractual completion date. • No recor ds on whether user departments are involved in payment of contractual sums. Reporting 6/6 • Entity had last submitted quarterly reports for the period of Jan – June 2008 100% Performance of Contracts 2/8 • No record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC Committee members, since Entity had just received the PPDA Formats. 25% • There was one case with a retrospective CC approval. Record Keeping 1/8 • No filing system in PDU. 13% • PDU does not use standard procurements reference numbers • PDE does not have a supplier appraisal/performance system. Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 47 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Accounting Officer should forward two more names to the PS/ST to have a fully functioning Contracts Committee. 2. Entity should recruit PDU Staff. 3. The Internal Auditor should audit the entire procurement and process, payment and deliveries. 4. Entity should use framework contracts for repetitively procured items. 5. PDU should record the issue of solicitation documents, bid submission and opening separately on the LG PP Forms for the different procurements. 6. CC should always approve the Evaluation Committee members in accordance with Reg. 27 of the LG (PPDA) Regulations 2006. 7. Appropriate evaluation methodologies should be used in accordance with Reg. 97 of the LG (PPDA) Regulations 2006. 8. All the unsuccessful bidders should be informed in writing to ensure transparency. 9. All procurements should have relevant approvals i.e. Contracts Committee, Solicitor General (all procurements above 50 million Uganda Shillings) and Donors where applicable. 10. All signed Contracts should clearly state the completion date for monitoring and evaluation purposes. 11. All User Departments should be involved in certifying payments of Contractual sum. 12. The Contracts Committee should not grant retrospective approvals i.e. procurement/disposal method, SBD, Evaluation team, Evaluation reports among others. 13. PDU should have a record/filling system with all the relevant documents as stated in Reg. 46 of the LG (PPDA) Regulation 2006.
286 NAME OF PDE: Bushenyi District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 22 nd – 23 rd May 2008
MANDATE: Manage To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda (Consolidated Fund) and internally generated revenue. Budget for the financial year was UShs. 33,750,541,276.
SIZE OF PDE: 7,000 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER : Mr. Charles Nsubuga Kiberu
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names)
1. Mr. Nyakisa Stanley Principal Health Inspector - Ag. Chairperson 2. Mr. Turibarungi Augustus Town Engineer - Member 3. Ms. Tusiime Beatrice Senior Inspector of Schools - Member 4. Mr, Butegeine Godfrey Water Officer - Member
The fifth member Ms. Alice Asiimwe was appointed Deputy CAO and therefore left the Contracts Committee. The CAO was advised to appoint another person.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Robert Byaruhanga Principal Procurement Officer - Head PDU 2. Edgar Atwiine Procurement Officer
287
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8 /10 • Procurement structures in place. • The Accounting Officer has appointed 80% the Contracts Committee save for one member who left the Contracts Committee and these were approved by PS/ST. • The user departments initiate all procurements. Procurement 5 /10 • Entity has an approved procurement Planning plan though not in the PPDA format. 50% • Some of the user departments have departmental plans. Solicitation and bidding 5 /10 • Copies of the approved solicitation procedures documents were not on file in many 50% instances. • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents seen on file were in accordance with the PPDA SBDs. • The Entity adh eres to the bidding procedures.
288 Evaluation procedures 5 /10 • The few evaluation reports seen on file follow the evaluation criteria in the 50% solicitation document. • Some of the f iles lacked evaluation reports. Contract placement, award and 2 /10 • Few of the contract .documents were management seen on file. 20% • No contract management records were on the files. • There was neither a notice to the best evaluated Bidder nor the unsuccessful bidders. • No notices of contract award are posted to the PPDA website. Reporting 0 /6 • The Entity has not filed any quarterly reports for the period under review 0% (November 2007 – April 2008). Performance of Contracts 4 /8 • Contracts Committee meets on average Committee once a month. 50% • Members sign the code of ethical conduct • Some of the minutes were not on file. • The Contracts Committee has not granted any retrospective approvals. • There were no contracts committee decisions on submissions on PP/DPA forms on file. Record Keeping 3 /8 • Filing system being developed. • The District does not follow the PPDA 38% Guideline issued on reference numbering. • Not all records filed contained all the requirements of the law. Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 44 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer should nominate a fifth member to the Contracts Committee and send the name to PP/ST for approval. 2. The District should draft a procurement plan in the PPDA format and send a copy of It to the Authority. 3. All user departments should draft their departmental procurement plans and submit them to the PDU. 4. Copies of solicitation documents should be put on files in accordance with Reg. 66(4) of the LG (PPDA) Regs. 5. There should be copies of evaluation reports on files after such reports have been approved by the District’s CC in accordance with Reg. 84(4). 6. Copies of contract documents should be kept on the respective files after they have been approved in accordance with Reg. 46(2), 84 & 86(2)(f).
289 7. The District should ensure that quarterly reports are submitted by the 15 th day of each quarter for the preceding quarter and that all PP Forms are filled and CC minutes attached to reports as this aids the Authority as it reviews the reports. 8. The District should keep copies of signed minutes on the appropriate forms on file in accordance with Reg. 19(3). 9. The best evaluated bidder and the unsuccessful bidders should be given notice in writing as per Reg. 86(5) of the Local Government Regulations. 10. The notice of contract award should be posted to the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 11. The Entity needs to adhere to the guideline on referencing under the PPDA (Local Governments) Guidelines.
290 NAME OF PDE: Busia District
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 6 th June 2008
MANDATE: Busia District Local Government is a district established and mandated under Local Government Act CAP 49, revised in 2006.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 11 Billion Uganda Shillings (GOU- 99%, Own funds – o.5 & Donors- 0.5%), approximately 1 billion of the overall budget is spent on procurement.
SIZE OF PDE: Busia District has 2 constituencies, 9 Sub Counties, 1Town council, 58 Parishes, and 474 local councils.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Aggrey Ngobi Fredie- District Administrative Officer
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Charles Wadenya District Education Officer- Chairperson 2. Dr. Oundo G.B District Health Officer- Member 3. Mr. Wabwire Fredrick Senior Economic Planner- Member 4. Mr. Wabwire Patrick Economist/Planner (TC) - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Joel Wanjala -Senior Procurement Officer.
The entity has finalized staff recruitment for the PDU to be appointed.
291
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • There are procurement structures in place. • Contracts committee is incomplete by one member. 60% • PP form 221 not found in the PDEs records. • User departments do not initiate procurements using the PP form 20 Procurement Planning 5/10 • Existence of approved pre-qualification of providers and consolidated procurement plan. 50% • No Assets register and Disposal planning. • No framework contracts seen Solicitation and Bidding 8/10 • Methods used are appropriate to the thresholds procedures • Minimum bidding periods are observed in most procurements 80% but not in all Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The en tity has a record of evaluation reports and CC approves the evaluation reports. 80% Contract placement, award 5/10 • No evidence of notification of the award to u nsuccessful and management bidders. 50% Reporting 2/6 • Monthly reports are not up to date. • Standard formats are not used.
292 33% Performance of Contracts 3/8 • Contract's committee minutes are prepared. Committee • PP Form 210 & PP Form 211 not seen. 38% • No signed CC minutes seen. Record Keeping 3/8 • No record of Supplier Appraisal/Performance. • Separate files are kept for the procurements. 38%
Total Score and 56% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer needs to follow up on the missing member from the CC 2. The AO needs to follow up on the PP form 221for the establishment of the PDU to ensure that it is submitted to the PPDA 3. All procurements should be initiated using the LG PP Form 1. 4. PDE should set up an assets register and disposal plan. 5. Frame work contracts should be used for repetitively procured items. 6. PDU should ensure that procurements are executed within a set timeframe. 7. There should be a record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members should be signed every time they are going to carry out an evaluation. 8. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 9. All outstanding quarterly Reports should be submitted to PPDA promptly. 10. All CC decisions on a submission should be made on LG PP Form 20 and should be signed by the C/man CC and the Secretary CC. 11. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured. 12. PDU needs to improve on the filing system. 13. All User departments should submit contract management and monitoring reports to the PDU. 14. Supplier performance appraisal should form part and parcel of contract management and records to this effect should be kept by the PDU.
293 NAME OF PDE: Gulu District Local Government.
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 4 th -5th June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Central Government Grants (Conditional and Equalisation), Donor/NGO funding and Local Revenue
SIZE OF PDE: 1419 staff; 11 Sub Counties; 1 Municipality
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Mwayita Bruno (Acting)
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Olal A. Obong Ag. District Engineer 2. Mr. Bongomin Charles Senior Engineer, Civil 3. Ms. Akello Jane Lakony Ag. Head of Finance 4. Ms. Odwar Santa Ag. Head, PDU, ACAO
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Odwar Santa Ag. Head, PDU, ACAO
.:Click Here to Print
294
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 5/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of his role for the overall responsibility of the procurement and 50% disposal process. • Contracts Committee operational with out PS/ST approval. • No established PDU.
Procurement Planning 7/10 • Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers which is reviewed annually. 70% • Has departmental procurement plans. • Has a PDE approved procurement plan , however, not in the approved PPDA format. • Has an assets register but without provisions of asset disposal planning. Solicitation and bid ding 5/10 • No records for issue of solicitation documents, bid procedures submission and opening. 50% Evaluation procedures 9/10 • Appropriate evaluation procedures were used for the sampled cases. 90%
295 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Contract placement, award 4/10 • BEB Notices posted on PDE notice Board but on the and management PPDA website. 40% • Unsuccessful bidders are never notified in writing. • CC approvals for some most of the sampled cases for works. • No SG approvals. • User departments are involved especially the District Engineers certify payments of contractual sum for works. Reporting 6/6 • Entity had submitted all the relevant quarterly reports and had responded to queries raised on the procurement plan 100% 2007/08. Performance of Contracts 5/8 • PP Form 209 and 210 not used Committee • PP/DPA Form not used 63 Record Keeping 4/8 • Filing system in place • PDU does not use s tandard procurements reference 50% numbers. • PDE has no supplier appraisal/performance system. Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 68 % SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Entity should recruit PDU Staff and file PP Form 221 with the Authority. 2. The District should send the contracts committee nominated names to PS/ST for approval. 3. Entity should include a disposal plan in the assets register. 4. PDU should have records on the issue of solicitation documents, bid submission and opening. 5. All Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 6. PDU should utilize the SBDs and Forms issued by the Authority. 7. PDU should use the standard procurement reference numbers with reference to PPDA (LG) Guideline No. 3/2008. 8. PDU should have a record/filling system with all the relevant documents as stated in Reg. 46 of the LG (PPDA) Regulation 2006. 9. Entity should establish a mechanism for the assessment of the supplier’s performance.
296 NAME OF PDE: Hoima District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 29 th – 30 th May 2008
MANDATE: Manage To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda (Consolidated Fund)
SIZE OF PDE: 2200 staff members.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Iriama Walter
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names)
1. Mr. Byakagaba John Williams - Ag. Chairperson 2. Dr. Kajura Charles - Member 3. Mr. Isingoma Ephraim - Member
N.B Eng. Obala Geoffrey who was the Chairperson and the Town Council representative resigned from the service of the District.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names): 1. Mr. Christopher Byaruhanga - Procurement Officer - Head PDU 2. Ms. Judith Atugonza - Assistant Procurement Officer
297
COMPLIANCE SCORE / FINDINGS AREA RATING
Procurement 6/10 • Procurement structures in place. Structures • The Accounting Officer has appointed the Contracts 60% Committee and these were approved by PS/ST. There are two positions in the Contracts Committee that need t o be filled. • The Procurement and Disposal Unit is staffed but has no dedicated office. • The District has not filed PP Forms 221 and 220 with the Authority.
Procurement 5/10 • Entity does not have an approved procurement plan. Planning • Some of depart mental plans seen were not in accordance 50% with the PPDA format. These were in form of letter addressed to the Head PDU. • It was said that the District had an Asset Register but it was not availed for confirmation.
Solicitation and 4/10 • Copies of the approved solicitation documents were not bidding procedures on file in many instances. 40% • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents seen on file were in accordance with the PPDA SBDs.
298 • The Entity has serious challenges in adhere to the PPDA formats. • There are no records for bid closing and receipt on file. • No letters of acceptance by best evaluated bidders on file. • The minimum bidding period was not observed in a number of instances. Evaluation 5/10 • The few evaluation reports seen on f ile do not follow the procedures evaluation criteria in the solicitation document. 50% • Some of the files lacked evaluation reports. • The few reports available were not approved by the Contracts Committee. • The members of the Evaluation Committee are not approved by the Contracts Committee.
Contract placement, 2/10 • Few of the contract documents were seen on file. award and • No contract management records were on the files. management 20% • Unsuccessful bidders are not given notice in writing as required by law. • There was no evidence that user departments are involved in certifying payment of contractual sum.
Reporting 4/6 • The Entity had filed quarterly reports for the period under review according to PPDA records but these were not 67% availed to the team during the visit.
Performance of 4/8 • Contracts Committee meets on average once a month. Contracts Committee • Members sign the code of ethical conduct 50% • Some of the minutes were not on file. • Some contracts committee minutes not signed.
Record Keeping 3/8 • There is no filing system in place. • There is lack of proper storage facilities by the PDU and 38% lacks a dedicated office for procurement. • Not all records filed contain all the requirements of the law. • There were no records of supplier appraisal in the District.
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 46 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY .
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should provide a dedicated office for the procurement and Disposal unit. 2. The Accounting Officer should nominate two persons to fill the vacant positions in the Contracts Committee for PS/ST’s approval. 3. The Entity is advised to ensure that an approved procurement plan is put in place and should submit a copy to the Authority. 4. The user department procurement plan should be in the format provided by the Authority.
299 5. The Entity requires training on procurement planning. 6. The procurement file should contain copies of the solicitation documents, letters of acceptance by the bidders, records of bid closing and receipt. 7. The Entity should adhere to the Authority’s standard format for notices. 8. The minimum bidding period should be observed in accordance with Reg. 55(3). 9. The Evaluation Committee should adhere to the evaluation methodology in the solicitation documents. 10. The procurement files should contain the evaluation reports. 11. Such Evaluation Reports should be approved by the Contracts Committee. 12. The Contracts Committee should always approve the composition of the Evaluation Committee in accordance with Reg. 72(2). 13. Contract documents and contract management records should be on the procurement files. 14. The Entity should always assign a contract manager for the procurements carried out. 15. Unsuccessful bidders should always be given notice in writing as required by Reg. 68(5) of the Local Government (PPDA) Regulations. 16. The user department should be involved in certifying payment of contractual sum. 17. The Entity should adhere to the reporting format under the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008. 18. There is need to ensure that all the minutes of the Contracts Committee are properly filed, signed by the respective persons and recorded on the appropriate forms. 19. The Entity needs to establish a proper filing system for procurements. 20. The Entity should appraise its suppliers’ performance.
300 NAME OF PDE: Iganga District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 16 th – 17 th June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government and internally generated resources.
SIZE OF PDE : Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Danson Iga Mukasa
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Samuel Batuuka Community Based Services - Chairman 2. Mr. Kaziba Moses District Planner - Member 3. Mr. Ekodoi Opio Pauline Senior Assistant Secretary - Member 4. Dr. Muwanguzi David Director of Health Services - Member 5. Ms Mary Goretti Nyangweso Supervisor of Works (TC) - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Kafute Lyaliya - Senior Procurement Officer 2. Mr. Namukuve Brenda - Procurement Officer
301
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer has established the Contracts Committee and PDU in place. 70% • The CC members are five and approved by PS/ST . However the submission has not been to PPDA on PP Form 220. • The user departments initiate procurements. • The District Engineer performs some of the functions of the PDU contrary to the provisions of the law • Internal Auditor audits the procurement and disposal processes
Procurement Planning 6/10 • Entity has a procurement plan in place • Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers 60% • Departmental plans not integrated into Procurement Plan • Assets Register with cashier without provision for disposal plans
302 Solicitation and Bidding 8/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitat ion procedures documents kept on the files, 80% • Record of bid submission and opening seen • Minimum bidding periods observed by the Entity • Method used are appropriate to the threshold provided for und er the PPDA Guidelines • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents i ssued and bids received not availed.
Evaluation procedures 9/10 • The Evaluation Committee minutes and Evaluation Report are signed. 90% • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members seen on the files. • Evidence of approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee not availed, • Evaluation reports seen
Contract placement, award 5/10 • Notice of Best Evaluated bidder seen although the Entity does not and management post them and the notice of contract award on the PPDA website. 50% • Some of the Contract documents were not on the individual procurement files. • No evidence that the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period although there were some delays in payment. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing • There was evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment.
Reporting 4/6 • Entity is not up to date in its quarterly procurement and disposal reporting. 67% • Entity has not adhered to the format of the reporting as provided under the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008. • Entity responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports.
Performance of Contracts 5/8 • CC minutes in place and detailed. Committee 63% • Sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective approvals. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members not seen on files. • No records of supplier appraisal and performance availed.
Record Keeping 6/8 • Fair record/filling system exists in the PDU. 50% • PDU lacks adequate storage facilities • Some of the individual procurements lack procurement reference numbers assigned to them • The Entity does not adhere to the format of assigning procurement reference numbers as provided under the Local Governments (PPDA) Regulations.
Total Score and 67% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
303 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Entity should ensure that the departmental plans are approved by the Heads of Departments and aggregated within the District procurement and disposal plan 2. The District Engineer’s department should not perform the functions of the PDU such as keeping of the records 3. The PDU should keep a copy of the Assets Register 4. Entity should have a disposal plan in place 5. Entity is advised to ensure that each procurement file has a copy of the approved solicitation document, evidence of notification of the unsuccessful bidder, and contract management records. 6. Entity should adhere to the timely quarterly reporting in accordance with the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008 7. Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members should be signed at each meeting and kept by the Secretary. 8. Entity should put in place a system of supplier appraisal and performance. 9. PDU should endeavor to file procurements in individual procurement files with proper reference numbers.
304 NAME OF PDE: Isingiro District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 2nd – 3rd June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government and Internally generated resources.
SIZE OF PDE : Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Byaruhanga Joseph
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS
1. Dr. Nyahangane William Member 2. Mr. Byakatonda Tom Chairrperson 3. Mr. Besiga Stephen Member 4. Mr. Tumusime Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Tumusine JB – SPO 2. Mr. Kamwine Frank – PO 3. Ms. Nareba Sylvia – APO.
305
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer has established the Cont racts Committee and PDU in place. 70% • The CC members are four, approved by PS/ST . However the submission has not been made to PPDA. One of the CC members has not been approved by the PS/ST • The user de partments initiate procurements but make no use of PP Form 1. • Information as to whether the Internal Auditor has audit ed the procurement and disposal processes was not availed.
Procurement Planning 4/10 • Entity has no approved procurement and disposal plan • Entity has a pre-qualified list of providers 40% • There are no departmental plans approved by the Heads of Departments • Assets Register with cashier without provision for disposal plans
Solicitation and Bidding 6/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitation procedures documents not kept on the files, 60% • Some record of bid submission and opening not seen
306 • Most of the minimum bidding periods observed in the cases sampled • Method used are appropriate to the threshold provided for und er the PPDA Guidelines • Some of the copies of the solicitation do cuments issued and bids received not availed.
Evaluation procedures 5/10 • The Evaluation Committee minutes and Evaluation Report are signed. 50% • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members not seen on the files. • Evidence of approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee not availed, • Evaluation reports seen
Contract placement, award 5/10 • Notice of Best Evaluated bidder not seen. and management • Entity does not post notices of best evaluated bidder and contract 50% award on the PPDA website. • Some of the Contract documents were not on the individual procurement files. • No evidence that the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period although there were some delays in payment. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writting • There was evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment.
Reporting 3/6 • Entity is not up to date in its quarterly procurement and disposal reporting. 50% • Entity has not adher ed to the format of the reporting as provided under the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008. • Entity responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports.
Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Some of the Contracts Committee minutes were not available on Committee the file. 63% • From the sampled procurement files, the Contracts Committee had not granted any retrospective approvals. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members not seen on files. • No records of supplier appraisal and performance availed.
Record Keeping 3/8 • Record/filing system needs a lot of improvement. • PDU lacks adequate storage facilities 38% • Some of the individual procurements lack procurement reference numbers assigned to them • The Entity does not adhere t o the format of assigning procurement reference numbers as provided under the Local Governments (PPDA) Regulations.
Total Score and 53% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
307 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Entity should prepare a procurement and disposal plan and submit it to the Authority. 2. The Entity should ensure that the departmental plans are approved by the Heads of Departments and aggregated within the District procurement and disposal plan 3. The PDU should keep a copy of the Assets Register 4. Entity is advised to ensure that each procurement file has a copy of the approved solicitation document, evidence of notification of the unsuccessful bidder, and contract management records. 5. Entity should adhere to the timely quarterly reporting in accordance with the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008 6. Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members should be signed at each meeting and kept by the Secretary. 7. Entity should provide adequate storage facilities to the PDU for record keeping purposes and ensure that there are separate procurement files for the different procurements carried on.
308 NAME OF PDE: Kabale District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 14 th – 15 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Shs 23,345,487,960; coming from three sources: - • District Generated, • Central Government Transfer, and • Donors Approximately 30% is used in procurement
SIZE OF PDE: 4,067 1 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Joseph Maira Mukasa
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Sunday Mutabazi Chairperson 2. Mr. James Mugisha Member 3. Mrs.Winfred Mbabazi Busingye Member 4. Ms. Lillian Nkwanzi Rutembarika Member 5. Mr. Johnes Tumwesigye Kanyeihamba Member The Contract Committee were approved by PS/ST and their tenure runs to 2009.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Joseph Bruce Twongyeirwe – Procurement Officer 2. Ms Mercy Atuheire - APO
1 3,462 are Teachers
309
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 6/10 • Details of the new PDU staff not filed with PPDA • No record on file of using PP Form 20 to initiate l 60% procurements. • The procurement is departmentalised and some decentralised to Sub-County level and the Internal Auditor is not involved in verification. Procurement Planning 4/10 • Departmental procurem ent plans are too sketchy do not contain all requirements which support their 40% activities. • Consolidated procurement and disposal plan not available. • PDE not using framework contracts [for commonly procured items] Solicitation and bidding 4/10 • In some cases the solicitation documents [market procedures revenue collection] used are not appropriate. 40% • PDE does not record issue of bidding document and receipt of bids Evaluation procedures 7/10 • Use of wrong selection method during evaluation,
310 for exam ple QCBS method for evaluation of 70% works procurements. • New criteria introduced during evaluation stage Contract placement, award and 1/10 • No record of Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder; management notification of the award to unsuccessful bidders; 10% appr oval of contract document by Contracts Committee / Solicitor General; contract execution; • No record of signed contract on file. Reporting 4/6 • The Quarterly Reports for FY 2007/08 were given to the Compliance Team to pass them on to PPDA. 67% • No record o n file of the outcome of the complaints [for example regarding revenue collection of parking fees at Katuna Trading Centre] which reached IGG offices. Performance of Contracts 6/8 • Standard LG PP / DPA not used for recording CC Committee meetings or decisions. 75% Record Keeping 2/8 • Most records on the procurement process are lacking. 25% • The District does not appraise its suppliers’ performances thus there were no records on file. Total Score of PDE and Compliance Rating 47% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer should ensure that details of the new PDU staff and the contracts committee are filed with PPDA 2. User Department should initiate all procurements using LG PP Form 1 3. The Internal Auditor should verify all procurements including those conducted at Sub-County level. 4. Departmental procurement plans should contain all requirements of the department in a particular financial year. 5. The District should use framework contracts for routine items such as stationary, fuel. 6. The District should customise bidding documents to suit the procurement. 7. The District should record issue of bidding documents and receipt of bid 8. The appropriate evaluation method should be used and no criteria should be introduced during the evaluation 9. The District should post notices of best evaluated bidder on the PPDA website 10. The Entity should notify unsuccessful bidders of the award 11. The Procurement and Disposal Unit and Contracts Committee should ensure approval of contract document by Contracts Committee and Solicitor General where applicable. 12. All procurements conducted should be reported on. These include items such as fuel, utilities (water, electricity, telephone) and staff welfare items (sugar, milk) 13. Contracts Committee should used the standard PPDA Forms in the Guidelines 2008 for recording minutes and decisions 14. The District should improve on record keeping; assign procurement reference numbers and ensure that records relating to a single procurement are kept on the same file. 15. The district should also appraise the performance of its suppliers.
311
NAME OF PDE: Kalangala District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 26 th - 27 th May 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU & Donor Funds
SIZE OF PDE: Approximately 221 members of Staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Ms. O.H Nakyanzi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names): 1. Mr. Balironda Mukasa David 2. Mrs. Bbosa Florence 3. Mr. Ssemakula Jeremiah
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names): 1. Mr. Owundo Samson - PPO 2. Mr. Kawalya Julius - Asst. PO
312
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 8/10 • Three of the Five nominated Contracts Committee members were approved by the PS/ST. The Entity nominated two other People 80% and sent the names PS/ST for approval. • The PDU is not fully established as it does not have a procurement officer.
Procurement 7/10 • There is a procurement plan for the entire District but no Planning departmental procurement plans. 70% • They have a list of providers which however does not cover all categories of providers. This was attributed to bidders not responding to the adverts that were put in the newspapers as they are not in wide circulation on all the islands encompassing Kalangala Islands and Kalangala itself. • They were of the view that advertising through radios e.g. CBS, would be more efficient than the newspapers. Solicitation and bidding 0/10 • No samples of solicitation documents were seen in the records, procedures neither any evidence to show that bidding procedures were being 0% followed. • This was attributed to the fact that the PDU was not established until February 2008 and between now and then, the current PDU staff have only handled one big procurement that is not yet complete but the documentation is available.
313 • When the file was perused, it was found that all the necessary documentation until the current stages were on file. Evaluation procedures 3/10 • There was evidence that evaluation reports were approved by the then CC though there was no evidence of approval of the 30% members of the Evaluation Committee, neither evidence to show that the right evaluation methodology was being used. Contract placement, award 4/10 • Evidence of contract award notices but no documents evidencing and management approval of the contract document by the CC. 40% • There were also no documents to prove the performance of the contracts. • There were no documents evidencing notice to the best evaluated bidder or the unsuccessful bidder. Reporting 4/6 • Entity has not submitted Quarterly reports. • A sample of rep orts reviewed showed that there is use of standard 67% format and all PP Forms are filed. Performance of Contracts 4/8 • The District keeps a single file for the records of the Contracts Committee Meeting minutes though they are not recorded on PP Form 210. 50% • The CC members do not sign the Code of Ethical Conduct.
Record Keeping 2/8 • Some of the records are in place but the record keeping is poor. • There is no separation of files for the different procurements. 25% • None of the procurements have the standard procurement reference numbers Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 44% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The AO should request DSC to recruit a Procurement Officer and send two more names to PS/ST to have a fully constituted Contracts Committee. 2. Entity should also file PP Form 221 and 220 with the Authority after the full recruitment process. 3. The different departments should submit departmental procurement plans. 4. The Entity should also write to PPDA formally and inform them of the challenges they are facing with advertising tenders. 5. All procurements conducted by the district should be in accordance with the law and the necessary records kept on file. 6. The CC should always approve the composition of the Evaluation Committee and such committee should always use the evaluation methodology provided by the law. 7. The CC should always approve the contract document in accordance with the law. 8. The best evaluated bidder and the unsuccessful bidders should always be given notice in writing as required by law. 9. The District should ensure that quarterly reports are submitted by the 15 th day of each quarter for the preceding quarter and that all PP Forms are filled and CC minutes attached to reports as this aids the Authority as it reviews the reports. 10. The CC Minutes should always be recorded on the appropriate forms and Record of Contracts Committee decision on a submission on PP/DPA Form 11. The CC Members should always sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in business. 12. The Entity should ensure that each procurement has its own individual file and a standard procurement reference number. 13. The District should also improve the filing system in the PDU.
314 NAME OF PDE: Kamwenge District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 30 th July 2008.
MANDATE: To provide coordinated delivery of services on the national and local priorities for the development of the people of the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Local Government District
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government funding, Donor funds (UNICEF, IFAD, LADBIMO, DLSP) and self generated funds from the revenue centres.
SIZE OF PDE : 1910 staff (181 traditional civil servants, 190 health workers, 92 secondary and t tertiary teachers, 1447 primary teachers) 7 Departments. Total budget is approximately 13.31 Billion with at least 35 Million spent on procurement.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Ntaho Frank
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Kamanyire Alfred Senior Veterinary Officer, Chairman 2. Dr Kasewa Sarah District Director of Health Services Member 3. Mwijikyo Balaam Asiimwe District Planner Member 4. Mugume Ronald Senior enforcement Officer (Town Council) Member.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER:
1. Fedinard Tumusiime - Procurement Officer 2. Andrew Sebalu - Ass. Procurement Officer.
315
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 9/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of most of his role for the over 90% all responsibility for t he procurement and disposal process. • Heads of Departments conduct micro procurements without delegated powers. • Contracts Committee has only 4 members approved by PS/ST- Entity was to follow up with PS/ST’s office on the approval of the 5 th member –Ms. Nissima. • PDU lacks a Senior procurement officer. • The Internal Auditor verifies deliveries with reference to copies of records in PDU and CC approvals. Procurement Planning 8/10 • Entity has assets register kept in the stores department. 80% • Entity operates on implied framework contracts. Solicitation and Bidding 10/10 • PDU has records of issue of Solicitation procedures documents. 100% • Uses SBDs issued by the Authority.
316 • Minimum bidding periods were observed for all the sampled cases. • Has record of bid submission and opening Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee (EC) and the Evaluation Report. 80% • Appropriate evaluation methodologies are used. • The Evaluation Committee minutes, however, PDU was ignorant of the requirement in the law for the record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members. Contract placement, award 8/10 • Notice of contract award not placed on PDE and management Notice board and not posted on PPDA 80% website • Notifies all unsuccessful bidders in writing. • CC approves all contracts and copies of signed contracts were on file. Reporting 5/6 • Entity had submitted quarterly reports on 22 nd July 2008. 83% • Performance of Contracts 6/8 • PDU was ignorant of the record of Committee acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct in 75% Business by CC members present on PP Form 211. Record Keeping 5/8 • PDU has a record/filling system. • Most of the sampled cases had the standard 63% procurement reference numbers. • There were no Contract management and supplier appraisal records on cases sampled.
Total Score and 82% HIGHLY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS 1. CAO should follow up on the approval of the 5 th member. 2. Entity should formalize framework work contracts for the common user items . 3. PP Form 220 on membership of the Contracts Committee should be filled with PPDA. 4. The user departments should start initiating all the procurements on LG PP Form 1. 5. The Sub county chiefs (user departments) need training on the PPDA law. 6. Frame work contracts should be used for repetitively procured items.. 7. There should be a record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members should be signed every time they are going to carry out an evaluation. 8. All contracts should be executed within the completion dates. 9. All CC decisions on a submission should be made on LG PP Form 20 10. PDU should have records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct in business for EC and CC members signed at every meeting. 11. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured with reference to Guideline 3 of 2008. 12. All User departments should submit contract management and monitoring reports to the PDU
317 NAME OF PDE: Kanungu District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 23 rd – 24 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS : District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS) : Local revenue, LGDP LGMSD
SIZE OF PDE: 2338 Staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name ): Mr. Kanyarutokye Moses
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Nizeyimana Kaguliro - Chairman 2. Sebudde Steven - Member 3. Wamukoya Ouma - Member 4. Kagirehi Lazarus - Member 5. Atuhire Innocent - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Murekyezi Gordon - Sen. Procurement Officer 2. Aturinda Brian - Procurement Officer
Assistant Procurement Officer position is vacant following resignation of Mercy Atuhire.
318
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • User department does not initiate procurements using PP Form 20. 80% Loose minute is written by a head of department to the Chairman Contracts Committee Procurement 6/10 • Enti ty claimed to have Assets Register Planning but did not avail it 60% • Entity has no disposal plan • Entity does not use framework contracts. The RFQ method is used to procure repetitively procured items and LPOs are issued as opposed to call-off orders Solicitation and bidding 5/10 • Entity claimed to have a record of issue procedures of solicitation documents but this was 50% not provided to the team. • Entity uses RFQ which is not a procurement method under the LG Regulations 2006. • Minimum bidding period was adhered to i n few cases where the RFQ method
319 is used. • There was no record of bid submission and bid opening. Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Entity uses only the Technical Compliance Selection methodology 60% even in cases of works procurements where methodologies such as Quality and Cost Based or Fixed Budget should have been applied. • Evaluation Reports are not detailed and make reference only to financial evaluation of bids. It is therefore not clear whether criteria relating to technical evaluation are considered in detail. Contract placement, award and 2/10 • Notice of Best Evaluated bidder is not management posted on the PPDA website. 20% • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified in writing • Contract Documents are not approved by Contracts Committee, Solicitor General app roval for the two contracts above Ushs 50m was not sought. • There are delays in execution of contracts • There is no involvement of the User Department in certifying payments. Reporting 5/6 • Quarterly Reports lack procurement reference numbers in accorda nce with 83% PPDA Guidleine Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Contracts Committee decision on a Committee submission is not recorded using the 63# appropriate PP Form. Contracts Committee minutes indicate that the decisions taken by CC only relate to contract awa rd and issues relating to approval of procurement method and solicitation document appear not to be considered. Record Keeping 5/8 • Record which were availed to the team contain the requirements of the law. 63% However, records are kept in various offic es such as user departments, finance. • In general the PDU lacks a proper record filing system where each procurement contains all records relating to a particular procurement and are kept in individual files. • There is no record of supplier performance. Total Score of PDE and Compliance Rating 60 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
320
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. User departments should initiate procurements using LG PP Form 1 2. Entity should avoid using RFQ which is not a procurement method under the LG Regulations 2006. 3. User Departments should carry out supplier appraisals 4. Entity should prepare a disposal plan and maintain an Asset Register 2. Entity should use framework contracts for commonly procured items. 3. Notice of Best Evaluated bidder should be posted on the PPDA website. 4. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing 5. Entity should ensure a proper record filing system where each procurement file contains all records relating to the procurement. 6. The PPDA checklist should be used as a guide by the PDU to maintain records on each file.
321 NAME OF PDE: Kapchorwa District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 3rd – 4th July 2008
MANDATE To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU AND DONORS
SIZE OF PDE: 1,695 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Langoya Patrick Otto
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr.Otulu Daniel.N Ag. c/person 2. Mr.Teko Andrew District Planner Member 3. Sabila Isaac, District Water Officer Member 4. Mr. Cheptack Michael Acting Town Engineer Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER:
1. Mr. Kitiyo George Asst.Procurement Officer
322
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • The CC members are four because one left the district. 60% • Pp form 20 is filed with the PPDA. • The user dept doesn’t initiate their procurements on pp form 20. • The Internal Auditor audits the procurement and disposal processes • The whole PDU has just one Asst. Procurement Officer yet the workload is a lot. • One of the CC members is the head of the water dept and he is also in charge of preparation of all water bidding documents. This slows down the work of the CC, Procurement Planning 7/10 • There are departmental procurement plans but written locally 70% • Lack of early planning has led to many procurements to be executed towards the end of the financial year which makes supervision for all the procurement made in that period poor and therefore shoddy. • There is no use of frame work contracts for
323 repetitively procured items. Solicitation and bidding 7/10 • There are records of issue of Solicitation procedures documents though not on pp forms. 70% • Among the ten Solicitation documents, only two were written using the standard format issued by the PPDA. • There are records of bid submission and opening though not formatted to the standard of the law. Evaluation procedures 7/10 • Approval of Members of the evaluations committee was last done once in 2006. 70% • Evaluation Methodology used in most cases is not appropriate because there is no evidence of Business address for some of the providers. • There is some evidence of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members. Contract placement, 4/10 • There is no record of Notice of Best Evaluated award and management bidder anywhere. 40% • There is some evidence of execution of the contract within the contractual period. • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified Reporting 0/6 • There are no records of Monthly reports.
0% Performance of Contracts 4/8 • The CC has not granted any retrospective Committee approval. But they are only four members instead 50% of five because one member left the job. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members present is available though not on PP Form 211. • There are no records of CC decision on a submission on PP/DPA Form. Record Keeping 4/8 • Record/filling system exists in the PDU though records filed don’t contain all the requirements of 50% the law. • Individual cases don’t have the standard procurement reference numbering. • There is no evidence of supplier appraisal/Performance
Total Score and Overall 54 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Head of water Department should leave the work of preparation Water bidding documents to the PDU. 2. PP form 221 be filled and filed with PPDA. 3. The user departments should start initiating all the procurements on PP form 1 4. The PDE should request the public service commission to recruit a senior procurement officer.
324 5. All user departments. should submit their departmental plans so as to avoid running up and down towards end of the financial year in order to execute as many procurement as possible 6. Aggregation of procurement requirements into procurement plans. 7. Frame work contracts should be used for repetitively procured items. 8. All Solicitation documents should be made using the standard format issued by the PPDA. 9. Records of issue of solicitation documents, bid submission and opening should be recorded on PP forms. 10. Approval of Members of the evaluations committee should be done every time they are carrying out an evaluation for a new procurement. 11. Members of the EC should use the appropriate Evaluation Methodology as required by the law. 12. The record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members should be signed every time they are going to carry out an evaluation. 13. Notice of Best Evaluated bidder and Notice of award should be posted on the PDE notice board and PPDA webs. 14. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 15. All contracts should be executed within the completion dates. 16. All Quarterly Reports should be written using the standard formats and submitted on time. 17. The PDU should be helped by PPDA to get internet connection in order for him to get access to the Authority’s website easily. 18. All Records Contracts meeting should be on PP Form 210 and signed minutes attached. 19. Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members present should be made on PP/DPA Form. 20. All CC decisions on a submission should be made on PP/DPA Form 21. All records filed should contain all the requirements of the law. 22. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured. 23. Supplier appraisal/Performance should be conducted regularly to faze out on Briefcase Providers who are among the per-qualified providers of the PDE
325 NAME OF PDE: Kasese District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 2nd – 3rd July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Central Government, Internally Generated and Donors
SIZE OF PDE: 5,070 Staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Willy Bataringaya
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Police Mugisha - Chairman 2. Mr. Douglas C. Kateemba - Member 3. Mr. John Thawithe - Member 4. Eng. Oleny Lamu - Member (5 th Member/Position) - Vacant
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Paddy Karuusu - Head PDU 2. Mr. Masereka Katkono - Procurement Officer 3. Mr. Edward Kisembo - APO
326
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of his role for the overall responsibility for the 70% procurement and disposal process. • The 4 members of the CC were approved by the PS/ST except for the vacant position where a name has been sent for approval. • PPDA not yet notified of PDU staff particulars since their appointment in March. • There was no evidence to show that the user departments initiate procurements. • It was averred that the Internal Auditor is involved in verifying the process of payment and receipt of goods. Procurement 5/10 • The District has a shortlist of providers. Planning • The Entity has no Dis trict Procurement Plan though 50% there were some departmental procurement plans. • The District does not make use of framework contracts
327 Solicitation and bidding 2/10 • No record of use of standard bidding documents; procedures issue or receipt of bids. 20% • For a few contracts, the methods used were appropriate to the threshold and circumstances.
Evaluation procedures 7/10 • The members of the Evaluation Committee are approved by the Contracts Committee. 70% • The appropriate methodology for evaluation is not us ed by the committee. Standard format are not used for the Evaluation Report but such reports are approved by the CC. Contract placement, award and 2/10 • The District does not have a procurement notice management board. 20% • The unsuccessful bidders are no t notified in writing as required by the law. • There was no evidence on file of execution of the contract within the contractual completion date. • There was also no evidence of the involvement of the user department in certifying payments of the contractual sum except for works contracts only. Reporting 0/6 • No record of ever submitting quarterly reports to the Authority.
Performance of Contracts 2/8 • The CC do not sign the code of ethical conduct in Committee business. 25% • The minutes are in place but not recorded on the appropriate forms.
Record Keeping 2/8 • Not all files contain all the requirements of the law. Most records were missing on files. 25% • The District does not use standard procurement reference numbers. • The District does not appraise its s uppliers’ performance. Total Score of PDE and Compliance Rating 38% UNSATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The user departments should initiate procurements using PP Form 20. 2. The District is encouraged to use framework contracts for commonly procured items. 3. The District should also prepare a procurement plan and send a copy of it to PPDA. 4. The District should use the standard bidding documents issued by PPDA. 5. When bids are submitted and opened, there should be a record to that effect and such record should be filed in accordance with Regulation 70(5) and 71(11-13) of the LG (PPDA) Regulations.. 6. The appropriate evaluation methodology should be used by the Evaluation Committee in accordance with Regulation 79(1) of the LG (PPDA) Regulations. 7. The evaluation reports should take on the standard format as guided by PPDA.
328 8. The unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing as required by the law under Regulation 86(5) of the LG (PPDA) Regulations. 9. The District should also procure a procurement notice board on which to post procurement notices. 10. Notices of contract award should be posted onto the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 11. The user departments should be involved in certifying all payments of the contractual sum as under Regulation 119 thereof. 12. The District should submit quarterly reports to PPDA accompanied by the CC minutes in accordance with section 94D of the PPDA Act. 13. The contracts committee minutes should be recorded on the appropriate forms as required under Regulations 18(3) and 19(3) of the LG )PPDA) Regulations. 14. The District should have individual procurement reference numbers for each contract or item procured as under Regulation 65(3) thereof. 15. The filing system in the District needs to be improved. 16. The District should appraise the performance of its suppliers.
329 NAME OF PDE: Kayunga District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 25 th – 26 th June 2008
MANDATE: Manage To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 12 Billion
SIZE OF PDE: Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Katehangwa Samuel
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Musisi Edirisa – Chairman 2. Kabanda Peter – Secretary 3. Arinaitwe Overson – Member 4. Mwanja Doreen – Member 5. Dr Mugabi - Member (proposed)
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Magala Jacob - Senior Procurement Officer 2. Ms. Barbra - Procurement Officer 3. Mr. Norman Sebidde - Asst. Procurement Officer
330
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 6/10 • Some procurements are not initiated by users 60% • PP forms ar e not signed by user departments, authorizing Officer and AO • Internal Audit has never conducted a review on the procurement function Procurement 4/10 • Entity does not have a procurement Planning plan 40% • There is no asset register and disposal plan • PDU d oes not use framework contracts for common user items like fuel and lubricants. It issues LPOs using the RFQ method Solicitation and bidding 6/10 • Record of issue of solicitation procedures document not on file. 60% • Use of wrong procurement method
331 i.e. R FQ in several procurements and yet this is not a procurement method under the LG Regulations 2003. • Minimum bidding period not adhered to in some cases Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Partially fulfilled. Some evaluation reports could not be found on file 60% • Entity uses Least Cost Selection evaluation methodology for most procurements Contract placement, award 5/10 • Some cases lack evidence of and management notices 50% • Approvals by Contracts Committee are not signed (Form 13 and 20) • Few cases were notices are sent to unsuccessful bidders Reporting 3/6 • Submitted only one Quarterly Report for the period Jan-March 08 50% Performance of Contracts 4/8 • Record of Contracts meeting not on Committee PP Form 210 50% • Record of Contracts Committee decision on PP F orm 1 appears to have been generated for purposes of the compliance check. Record Keeping 3/8 • Records relating to procurement are not kept in individual files. 38% • No evidence on supplier appraisal Total Score of PDE and Compliance Rating 57% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Entity was advised to ensure proper record keeping by using the PPDA checklist for a procurement file. 2. Entity is strongly advised to adhere to minimum bidding periods provided in the LG Guidelines 2008. 3. PP Forms relating to Contracts Committee decisions should be signed by the Chairperson and Secretary. 4. Evaluation Reports should be kept on a procurement file. 5. User Department should conduct supplier appraisals.
332 NAME OF PDE: Kibaale District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 16 th – 17 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government, donor funds and internally generated resources.
SIZE OF PDE : 1000 staff members and 18 User Departments
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Dunstan Balaba
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS
1. Dr. Kyamanywa Dan - District Health Officer, Chairperson 2. Mr. Kyaboona John - Ag. DEO, Member 3. Mr. Sentayi Peter - Production Officer, Member 4. Mr. Mukasa Jimmy - Community Development Officer, Member 5. Mr. Sanyu Christopher - Sub County Chief – Muhoro, Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Irumba Amos - Procurement Officer Head PDU 2. Mr. Tibasima Annet - Assistant Procurement Officer Member
333
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 9/10 • The Accounting Officer has established the Contracts Committee and PDU in place. 90% • The CC members are approved by PS/ST. • The user departments initiate procurements and started making requisitions using LG Form 1. • The Internal Auditor regularly audits the procurement and disposal processes
Procurement Planning 8/10 • Procurement plan including departments and sub counties have been prepared. 80% • -List of approved pre-qualified providers for 07/ 08 and assets register are in place. • There is limited use of framework contracts
Solicitation and Bidding 7/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitation procedures documents kept on the files, 70% • Records of bid submission and opening seen • Minimum bidding periods observed in the cases sampled • Methods used are appropriate to the threshold provided for und er the PPDA Guidelines • Copies of the solicitation documents issued a nd bids received kept
334 properly • The entity has been using LF forms until May 08 when it started using LG forms as per Local Governments (PPDA) G uidelines 2008.
Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The Evaluation Committee minutes and Evaluation Report are signed. 80% • Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members seen on the files. • Evidence of approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee by the Contracts Committee seen • Evaluation methodology used at times is not in accordance with the Lo cal Governments (PPDA) Regulations 2006 and the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines, 2008
Contract placement, award 9/10 • Notices of Best Evaluated bidder seen but not posted on the PPDA and management Website. 90% • Contract documents were found on the individual procurement files. • Some evidence that the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period was seen although there w ere some delays in payment. • The unsuccessful bidders are written to and letters also disp layed on the procurement no tice board. Copies given to the auditor and the storekeeper. • There was evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment.
Reporting 5/6 • The 3 rd and 4 th Quarterly procurement and disposal reports submitted on 15 th July 2008 to the Authority. 83% • Entity adheres to the format of the reporting as provided under the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008. • Contracts Committee minutes are attached to the quarterly procurement and disposal reports and the reports are forwarded by the Accounting officer in accordance with the law.
Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Contracts Committee minutes were available on the file. In Some Committee cases, Contracts decisions and attendance are written on entity’s 56% letter heads and not on LG form 9 and 10. • From the sampled procurement files, the Contracts Committee had gr anted retrospective approvals for procurements undertaken by Sub counties as emergencies. • Records of acceptance of code of ethical conduct for C ontracts Committee seen on files. • No records of supplier appraisal and performance availed.
Record Keeping 6/8 • Separate files have been opened for Contracts Committee’s minutes, list of providers, quarterly returns, and procurement plan 75% for 08/09 • The District Engineer and the PDU have in itiated a system of supplier appraisal/performance. • The E ntity uses one sequence number for all contracts awarded in one meeting instead of adhering to the format of assigning procurement reference numbers in accordance with the Local
335 Governments (PPDA) Guidelines, 2008.
Total Score and 79% SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Entity should prepare a procurement and disposal plan and submit it to the Authority. 2. The Entity should ensure that the departmental plans are approved by the Heads of Departments and aggregated within the District procurement and disposal plan. 3. The Entity’s Contracts Committee should refrain from approving procurements retrospectively. 4. Entity is advised to ensure that each procurement is initiated using LG Form 1 and also to use the standard notices and formats as prescribed by the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008. 5. Entity should adhere to the timely quarterly reporting in accordance with the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008. 6. Entity is advised to use framework contracts for repetitively procured supplies. 7. Procurement reference numbers should be assigned in accordance with the Local Governments (PPDA) Guideline No. 3/2008
336 NAME OF PDE: Kiboga District
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 27 th – 28 th May 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 11,218,722,000/=
SIZE OF PDE: 2038 Employees
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Robert Mulondo
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Byabagambi Simon DAO, Chairperson 2. Mukiibi Ismail District Engineer, Member 3. Rwebuga Kizito District Population Officer, Member 4. Kabuye Martin Senior Health Inspector, Member 5. Dr. Muluta Allan Niyonzima District Health Officer, member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Nabagala Dorothy PO 2. Ssengendo Byron APO
337
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/ FINDINGS RATING Procurement Structures 5/10 All CC members were approved by the ST to Treasury as required by PPDA 50% Reg 45 (3). The District engineer is on the contracts committee Procurement Planning 5/10 The Entity had a Procurement Plan though, it had not been submitted to the 50% authority Works had a procurement plan that had not been integrated in the entity procurement plan The entity lacked an assets register with provisions for asset disposal planning There is no usage of framework contracts of repetitively procured items. Solicitation and bidding procedures 4/10 The entity did not use SBDs in its solicitations as required by PPDA. 40%
338 There were no records for bid submissions and opening Lack of consistent use of appropriate procurement methods as in the case of the periodic maintenance of Ntwetwe- Sirimuka road, the contract Value was 100,883,400/=but was procured through RFQ Evaluation procedures 9/10 The entity adhered to evaluation procedures. 90% All minutes of the evaluation committee meetings were signed Some members of the evaluation had not signed a record of acceptance of ethical conduct for EC members
Contract placement, award and 5/10 Copies of signed contracts existed management though some were kept at different 50% sites with no copy on file. There were no copies of notices of best evaluated bidder on file and hence no evidence of their posting on the authority web site Unsuccessful bidders were equally never notified No evidence of user involvement in certification of payments
Reporting 0/6 The entity was not update in terms of Monthly reports to the Authority 0% Performance of Contracts Committee 3/8 There is no use of forms for meetings and record of contracts committee 38% decision Record Keeping 1/8 Procurement files exist but littered across the entity and with incomplete 13% records. Nonetheless, a file for contracts committee meetings exists
Total Score and 47% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer should nominate another person to replace the District engineer on the contracts committee. 2. The Accounting officer should expedite the recruitment and appointment of the Head and officers in the PDU as required by LGPPDA Reg. 14(2). 3. The entity should prepare and submit the procurement and disposal plan to the Authority.
339 4. Such a procurement plan should be a consolidation of all departmental plans in the entity. 5. Framework contracts for repetitively procured items should be adopted in the entity. 6. The entity should provide for asset disposal planning in the assets register. 7. The entity should contact the Authority for the SBDs and intensify their usage as required by PPDA. 8. Records of bid submission and opening should be put in place as required under Reg.(70(5) and reg.71(11-13). 9. The entity should always adhere to thresholds provided in the LG PPDA guidelines. 10. All evaluation committee members should sign a record of acceptance of ethical conduct for EC members. 11. Copies of signed contracts should be kept on the procurement file. 12. Copies of notices of best evaluated bidder should be put on file. 13. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified. 14. Users should certify payments as required by Reg. 119. 15. The Entity should submit the outstanding quarterly procurement and disposal reports to the authority as required under PPDA Reg. 14(m). 16. CC should consistently use forms provided by PPDA for conduct of meetings and record of contracts committee decision. 17. All procurement files should kept in the PDU. 18. All records pertaining to a given procurement should be put on the respective files
340 NAME OF PDE: Kiruhura District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 30 th June - 1st July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU & Donor Funds
SIZE OF PDE: Approximately 67 members of staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Kanyesigye William
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Turyamureeba Emmanuel - Chairperson 2. Ms. Nyabare Rosbel - Secretary 3. Mr. Tumwebaze Francis - Member 4. Mr. Muhwezi Godwin - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Kukiriza Milly - APO
341
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 Both the CC and the PDU is not fully established. The CC has 4 members but a fifth member has been nominated and sent to CAO. 70% The process of recruiting an SPO is also still going on. The user department does not initiate procurements and there is no use of PP Form 20. Procurement 6/10 The District has a list of pre-qualified providers but no Planning Departmental Procurement plans. It also does not use any 60% framework contracts. The Entity has a procurement plan for the current FY 2007/08 though it was not submitted to the Authority. Solicitation and bidding 9/10 Entity complies with the standard format issued by PPDA for the procedures documents and the Law for the procedures. 90% Most of the District’s procurements are made directly. This was discussed with the team that the officers met and it was agreed that other methods of procurements would be used to encourage competition Evaluation procedures 7/10 Approval of Evaluation Committee members is done by the CC and the appropriate evaluation methodology used though there’s 70% no record of Code of Ethical Conduct for the EC members. There were evaluation minutes seen on files.
342 Contract placement, 4/10 The best evaluated Bidder is given notice but no notice is given to award and management the unsuccessful bidders. There was no evidence of 40% execution/performance of contract within the contractual completion date. The District does not post notices of the contract award to the PPDA website. There were no documents seen evidencing the involvement of user departments in the certification of payments. Reporting 4/6 The District has not been submitting procurement quarterly reports to the Authority and its reporting is not up to date. 67% A sample of the reports reviewed indicates that there is use Standard Formats. Performance of Contracts 5/8 Minutes are in place though not recorded on the appropriate forms. Committee There’s no record of the Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct 63% in Business by CC members present of PP Form 211. Contracts committee had not awarded any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 4/8 There exists a Record/filing system in the PDU. There were no records of the supplier appraisal performance. 50% All procurements have the standard procurement reference numbers. Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 64% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The District should file PP Forms 220 and 221 with the Authority after the recruitment process. 2. The different departments in the district should submit departmental procurement plans. 3. The user department should always initiate procurements using LG PP Form 1. 4. The Entity should submit a copy of the procurement plan to PPDA. 5. The District should use framework contracts for commonly procured items. 6. Entity should use methods of procurements that are appropriate to the threshold and circumstances. 7. The CC should always sign the record of acceptance of the code of Ethical Conduct in Business. 8. There should also always be a record of the evaluation minutes on file for a particular procurement showing what transpired in the meeting of the evaluation committee. 9. Entity should always give notification of award to unsuccessful bidders in writing as it’s a law requirement. 10. The District should post notices of contract award to the PPDA website for the statutory display period. 11. The user Department should be involved in certifying payments of the contractual sum. 12. The District should ensure that quarterly reports are submitted by the 15 th day of each quarter for the preceding quarter and that all PP Forms are filled and CC minutes attached to reports as this aids the Authority as it reviews the reports. 13. The CC minutes should be recorded on PP Form 210. 14. The CC members must always sign the record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct in Business during the CC Meetings. 15. The District should keep a record of supplier Appraisal/Performance.
343 NAME OF PDE: Kisoro District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 2nd - 3rd July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU, Donor Funds & Local revenue
SIZE OF PDE: Approximately 903 members of staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Rubuuka David
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Ndizihiwe Assay Chairperson 2. Eng. Tulimaaso Wilbrod Secretary 3. Eng. Areeno Nelson Member 4. Dr. Kesande Teopista Member 5. Mr. Deinamo Francis Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Muhanguzi Richard – SPO 2. Mr. Kwizera Benon – APO
344
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 10/10 • Both the CC and the PDU are fully established. The CC has 5 members and have been approved by PS/ST. 100% • PP Forms 220 and 221 not filed with the Authority. Procurement 8/10 • The District has a list of pre-qualified providers and the user Planning departments initiate their procurements. There’s no use of 80% framework contracts though. • The District has an Assets Register with provision for asset disposal planning. • It was with the Finance department. • The Entity has a procurement plan for the current FY 2007/08 and it was submitted to the Authority. Solicitation and bidding 6/10 • Entity complies with the standard format issued by PPDA for procedures the documents and the Law for the procedures. 60% • There was evidence of Records of Bid submissions and Opening on the PDU file. • The minimum periods was not observed for all procurements. Evaluation procedures 5/10 • Approval of Evaluation Committee members is done by the CC and the appropriate evaluation methodology used. 50% • Records of
345 • Evaluation Reports were seen on some file.
Contract placement, award and 4/10 • The best evaluated Bidder is sometimes given notice and the management notice to the unsuccessful bidders is put onto the Dist rict’s 40% notice board. • There was some evidence of execution/performance of contract within the contractual completion date but not in all cases. • There was no evidence of involvement of user departments in certifying the contractual sums. Reporting 5/6 • The District has been submitting reports to the Authority but is not up to date. 83%
Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Minutes are in place and recorded on the appropriate forms. Committee • There’s a record of the Acceptance of Code of Ethical 63% Conduct in Bus iness by CC members present of PP Form 211 but not in all cases. Record Keeping 4/8 • There exists a Record/filing system in the PDU. • There were no records of the supplier appraisal performance. 50% Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 65% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The District should file PP Forms 220 and 221 with the Authority. 2. The District is encouraged to make use of framework contracts for repeatedly procured items. 3. The minimum bidding period should always be observed in all instances for the procurements conducted. 4. The District should keep the records of evaluation reports on the files of the various procurements. 5. The Contracts Committee should always approve the Evaluation reports in accordance with Regulation 84(4). 6. Notice of the best evaluated bidder is a mandatory requirement under the law and as such the Entity should always give. 7. The unsuccessful bidder should always be given notice in writing as provided for under Regulation 86(5). 8. The user departments should always be involved in the management of the contracts. 9. The District should ensure that quarterly reports are submitted by the 15 th day of each quarter for the preceding quarter and that all PP Forms are filled and CC minutes attached to reports as this aids the Authority as it reviews the reports. 10. The District should keep a record of supplier Appraisal/Performance.
346 NAME OF PDE: Luwero District Local Government
DATE: 21 st – 23 rd April 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Central Government Grants, District Livelihood Support Programme (DLSP), UPHOLD (support to orphans), Local Revenue (ground rent, markets, taxi parks)
SIZE OF PDE: Has a total of 322 staff, 3 Town Councils and 10 Sub Counties; Total annual budget for Financial Year 2007/8 is 18bn/=.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr Daniel Kirenda
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. B. Agaba Ag. Chairperson 2. Engineer Ssebidde Vincent Member 3. Ms Madina Nabukera Member.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Kiddu Sirajje Nsubuga SPO 2. Mr. Sempagama Godfrey PO 3. Mr. Sserubiri Edrisa APO
347
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • PP Form 20 were not us ed for initiating procurements; 80% • Not all initiations are reported/channeled to PDU; • Procurement processes are not audited
Procurement Planning 7/10 • Assets Register was not seen though reported to be in place; 70% • Entity does not use Framework contracts. Solicitation and bidding 1/10 • Records on issue of solicitation documents, and procedures bid submissions and opening not seen 10% Evaluation procedures 2/10 • EC members were approved once by CC for all contracts; 20% • Records on evaluation reports and minutes not seen Contract placement, award 2/10 • Records on approval of contract documents and and management contract management not seen 20% Reporting 2/6 • Quarterly reports have not been submitted to PPDA up to date
348 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
33% Performance of Contr acts 3/8 • CC proceedings are not reported on PP Form Committee 210 and 211 38% Record Keeping 3/8 • There is no filing system in place but have started to keep records for individual cases. 38% • There were no records of supplier appraisals. Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE UNSATISFACTORY 39 %
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. PPDA should orient the newly recruited PDU staff on record keeping. 2. The District should file PP Forms 220 and 221 with the Authority in accordance with Regulation 15(1) and 23(1) & (2) of the Procurement Regulations. 3. Use departments should use PP Form 20 to initiate procurements and forwards them to the PDU. 4. The District’s internal Auditor should the procurement and Disposal processes, payments and deliveries to the district. 5. The District is encouraged to use framework contracts for frequently procured items in accordance with Regulation 62(5)(g) of the Local Government (PPDA) Regulations. 6. The entity should prepare and submit quarterly reports to PPDA in accordance with section 94D of the PPDA Act 1/2003. 7. The proceedings of the CC should be recorded on PP Forms 210 and 211 and such forms filed. 8. The entity should have a filing system in place and continue to maintain files for all the outstanding individual cases. 9. Entity should seek Solicitor General’s approval for all procurements above 50 Million Uganda Shillings. 10. All CC decisions on a submission should be made on LG PP Form 20. 11. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured with reference to Guideline 3 of 2008. 12. All User departments should submit contract management and monitoring reports to the PDU. 13. The Evaluation Committee should always have the Evaluation reports prepared after carrying out the exercise and such reports should be approved the Contracts Committee. 14. The District should make an effort to appraise the performance of its suppliers.
349 NAME OF PDE: Masaka District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 9th – 10 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government and Donors
SIZE OF PDE : Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr.George Tulume
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Kanoonya Paul Ag. chairperson 2. Eng.Jjuko Elias Member 3. Ms. Musisi Lillian Member 4. Mr. Mr.Muggaga David Member 5. Mrs. Juliet N Mayanja Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER (Names):
1. Ms Hadija Nankya Procurement Officer
350
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 4/10 • The PDU has never been establi shed and there is only one Procurement Officer who shares an 40% office with two other Finance Officers due to lack of office space • The user dept doesn’t initiate their procurements on pp form 20. • The Internal Auditor has not audited the procurement and dispo sal processes for the period under review. • One of the CC members is the Secretary to the CC which does not comply with the law. Procurement Planning 6/10 • The approved Pre-Qualification/Short list of Providers, departmental and a consolidated 60% procurement plans exist. • There is no use of frame work contracts for repetitively procured items. Solicitation and bidding 5/10 • There are no records of issue of Solicitation procedures documents. 50% • All Solicitation documents use the standard format issued by the PPDA. • There are records of bid submission and opening
351 though not formatted to the standard of the law. • The minimum bidding is not always observed.
Evaluation procedures 10/10 • Approval of Members of the evaluations committee is done every time th ey are carrying 100% out an evaluation. • Evaluation Methodology used is appropriate • There is some evidence of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members. Contract placement, award 6/10 • The Notice of Best Evaluated bidder and Award and management are only posted on the PDE Notice Board but are 60% not sent on the PPDA website. • Contract documents are approved by the CC. • There is some evidence of execution of some f the contracts within the contractual period. • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified. • There is evidence of involvement the User Depts. in the Certifying payments of the Contractual Sum. Reporting 1/6 • Only quarterly reports have been submitted but the standard formats are not used, PP Forms 17% 200,201,202are not filed and the CC minutes are not attached .
Performance of Contracts 4/8 • There are no records of Acceptance of Code of Committee Ethical Conduct in Business by CC present on 50% PP Form 211 in all the CC minutes. • There are no records of CC decision on a submission on PP/DPA Form. • The CC has not granted any retrospective approval.
Record Keeping 3/8 • Record/filling system exists though records filed don’t contain all the requirements of the law and 38% procurement files are kept in departments because the PDE has no PDU. • Individual cases don’t have the standard procurement reference numbering. • There is evidence of supplier appraisal/Performance
Aggregate Score and Overall 54% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Rating of PDE
. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer and District Technical Planning Committee need more training on the PPDA law. There is need to urgently establish a PDU because all procurement files are scatted in several departments. 2. Pp form 221 be filled and filed with PPDA. 3. The Internal Auditor must Audit all the procurement and disposal process, payments and deliveries.
352 4. The user depts. must start initiating all the procurements on PP form 20 before commencement. 5. The process of recruiting a senior procurement officer and assistant procurement officer should be expedited. 6. Frame work contracts should be used for repetitively procured items. 7. Records of issue of solicitation documents, bid submission and opening should be recorded on PP forms and filed in their respective files. 8. The minimum bidding period must be observed always. 9. All the Evaluation procedures are compliant. 10. Notice of Best Evaluated bidder and Notice of award should be posted on the PDE notice board and PPDA webs for statutory display period. 11. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 12. All contracts should be executed within the completion dates. 13. All monthly Reports should be written using the standard formats and submitted on time. 14. The CC members present should accept and sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in business on PP Form 211 when approving or rejecting procurements proceedings. 15. All CC decisions on a submission should be made on PP/DPA Form and filed by the CC secretary. 16. All records filed must contain all the requirements of the law and all the procurement files are supposed to be kept in the PDU. 17. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured.
353 NAME OF PDE: Mbale District Local government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 13 th - 14 th August 2008
MANDATE: Manage To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda (Consolidated Fund)
SIZE OF PDE: Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Owuma Steven
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS: (Names)
1. Mrs. Mwambu Magdalen Production Coordinator Chairperson 2. Dr. Abwaino Francis District Medical Officer Member 3. Ms. Mwesigwa Harriet Education Officer /Inspectorate Member 4. Mr. Were Musa Senior Assistant Secretary Member 5. Mr. Dderme Fred Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Bwayo Patrick Senior Procurement Officer 2. Ms. Nagudi Regina Procurement Officer 3. Mr. Nikki Allan Assistant Procurement Officer
354
COMPLIANCE SCORE / FINDINGS AREA RATING
Procurement 6/10 • The Accou nting Officer has appointed the Contracts Structures Committee and these were approved by PS/ST. 60% • There is a fully established PDU which is appro priately staffed. • The internal audit department audits the procurement processes but the audit reports were not availed to the Authority. • PP form 1 is used in the initiation of procurements in some instances. Procurement 5/10 • Entity has no approved procurement plan but is in the Planning process of compiling the procurement plan in the PPDA 50% format. • Some Departmental plans were seen on record. • A copy of the assets register with the provision of asset disposal planning was not availed. • Frame work contracts are only used for fuel and lubricants. Solicitation and 10/10 • Most of the sampled procurement files had records of issue bidding procedures of solicitation documents; r ecord of bid submission and 100% opening and copies of the solicitation documen ts issued to
355 the bidders. • The methods used were not appropriate to the threshold provided for under the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines. • Minimum bidding periods observed Evaluation 7/10 • Many of the sampled procurement files lacked the approval procedures of members of the Evaluation Committee and r ecord of 70% acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for the Evaluation members • Some of the evaluation minutes an reports were not on the procurement files. • Some of the evaluation reports are not in the sta ndard formats prescribed under the Local Governments (PPDA) Guideline 7/2008. • Approval of Evaluation Reports is done by the Contracts Committee. Contract placement, 3/10 • Most of the sampled procurement files lacked contract award and documents. management 30% • No contract management records were on the files. • Notices of Best Evaluated Bidder were not on file • The Entity does not post the notice of best evaluated bidder and notice of contract award on the PPDA website • No record of notification of the award t o the unsuccessful bidders on the sampled procurement files. • No record for approval of the contract document by the Contract Committee found on the sampled files. • No record of seeking approval from the Solicitor General for contracts above UShs. 50m seen on some procurement files. • Some records were seen to evidence the involvement of the user departments in certifying payment of the contractual sums. Reporting 2/6 • Entity is not up to date in the monthly procurement and disposal reporting. At the time of the compliance, the Entity 33% had last reported in September 2007. • Entity does not adhere to the standard format in the quarterly reports as prescribed by the Local Governments (PPDA) Guideline 6/2008monthly reporting Performance of 6/8 • Contracts Committee meets regularly Contracts Committee • The Committee members do not sign the r ecord of 75% acceptance of code of ethical conduct in business at each meeting • Contracts Committee decisions on submissions were contained in the minutes • No evidence seen that the Contracts Committee has granted retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 3/8 • The record/filling system is in place but needs strengthening by availing adequate storage facilities to the PDU. 38% • The procurement files do not contain all the requireme nts of the law. • Procurements reference numbers do not adhere to the format as prescribed by the Guideline. • The records sampled were kept by Finance and Administration Section.
356 • No record of supplier appraisal/performance seen on record.
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 58 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Framework Contracts should be used for repetitive contracts. 2. The entity must adhere to PPDA formats when using solicitation documents. 3. The evaluation reports on file should follow the evaluation criteria in the solicitation document. 4. All of the files should have evaluation reports. 5. Contract Document should be on file and contracts management records should also be on file 6. Proper filing must be done so that each procurement has its on complete file with all documents pertaining to it. 7. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing for the individual procurements. 8. The Entity should seek Solicitor General’s approval for all procurements above 50 Million Uganda Shillings. 9. At every meeting the CC members must sign the acceptance of Code of Conduct in Business. 10. All CC decisions on a submission should be made on LG PP Form 20. 11. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured with reference to Guideline 3 of 2008. 12. All User departments should submit contract management and monitoring reports to the PDU. 13. PDU should get copies of contract payment records that are issued by the Finance dept.
357 NAME OF PDE: Moyo District Local Government
Date of Assessment: 22 nd -23 rd July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and Local Revenue.
SIZE OF PDE: Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr . Nandala Michael
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names): 1. Tabu Job Chairman 2. Lemerika George Member 3. Maali Michael Member 4. Drichi Henry Member 5. Jumanywal Opoka James Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names): 1. Mr. Madra APO
358
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 6/10 • All 5 members of the contracts committee were approved by PS/ST. 60% • The District has just recruited an APO and it is in the process of recruiting a PO. • User departments do not use PP Form 20. • The Internal auditor audits the procurement and disposal process, payments and deliveries. Procurement Planning 7/10 • Procurement Plans are in place both for departments and for the entire PDE. 70% • The PDE did not use framework contracts for any of its regular procurements. • There is no comprehensive asset register at the PDE. Solicitation and Bidding 6/10 • The District does not use standard bidding Procedures documents issued by the PPDA. 60% • The minimum bidding period is some times observed. • There a few copies of bid submission an opening for a few contracts. Evaluation Procedures 6/10 • Evaluation Committee did not sign the ethical code of conduct.
359 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
60% • No CC approval of evaluation reports or evaluation committee members. Contract Placement, 1/10 • Contract management records were not included Award and Management on the files reviewed. • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified. Reporting 5/6 • 2 quarterly reports were outstanding at the time of the visit 83% Performance of Contracts 2/10 • CC did not sign ethical code of conduct. Committee • CC minutes were not signed and they did not use the approved forms for their records and 25% approvals. Record Keeping 1/8 • The entity did not have proper filing with some of the cases 13% • Procurement reference numbers that were used were not standard • There were no individual files for each of the cases reviewed Total Score and Compliance Rating 47% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Accounting Officer should ensure that the PDU is fully established with all members and file PP Form 221 with the Authority. 2. Entity should use framework contracts for routine items or commonly procured items. 3. Entity should maintain an Asset Register and a Disposal Plan 4. Use of PPDA Standard Bidding Documents. 5. Evaluation Committee should sign ethical code of conduct 6. Contracts Committee should ensure approval of all Evaluation Committee members and Evaluation reports 7. Contracts Committee should sign ethical code of conduct 8. All Procurements should be filed on separate files with prescribed Procurement Reference Numbers. 9. The District should ensure timely submission of quarterly reports which is by the 15 th day of each month for the preceding quarter.
360 NAME OF PDE: Mpigi District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 30 th June – 4th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU and Donors
SIZE OF PDE: 3,200 staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Henry Harrison Makumbi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr.Mwanje Anthony chairperson 2. Ms. Namutebi Veronica Member 3. Mrs.Lunyirika Martha Member 4. Mr. Katumwa Simon Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER (Names):
1. Mr. Kaggwa Habib SPO 2. Mr. Ssenyomo Isaac PO 3. Miss. Nakiwala Josephine APO
361
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING Procurement Structures 7/10 • The CC members are four because one left the district. • Pp form 220 is filed with the PPDA. 70% • The user dept doesn’t initiate their procurements on pp form 20. • The Internal Auditor audits the procurement and disposal processes • The whole PDU has just one asst.Procurement officer yet the workload is a lot. • There is an e stablished PDU and PP form 221is filed with PPDA. Procurement Planning 7/10 • There are some departmental procurement plans. • There is lack of planning in some departments. 70% • There is no use of frame work contracts for repetitively procured items. Soli citation and bidding 9/10 • There are records of issue of Solicitation documents procedures though not on pp forms. 90% • Among the ten Solicitation documents, only a few were written using the standard format issued by the PPDA. • There are records of bid sub mission and opening though not formatted to the standard of the law. Evaluation procedures 10/10 • There are records of Approval of Members of the evaluations committee by the CC every time they are 100% carrying out an evaluation. • Evaluation Methodology u sed in most cases is
362 appropriate. • There is evidence of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members. Contract placement, award and 6/10 • Notices of Best Evaluated bidder and contracts award management are posted on the PDE notice Board but th ey are not 60% posted on the PPDA website. • There is some evidence of execution of some contracts within the contractual period. • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified Reporting 0/6 • There are no records of Quarterly reports. 0% Performance of Contracts 8/8 • The CC has not granted any retrospective approval. But Committee they are only four members instead of five because one 100% member left the job. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members present is available and on PP Form 211. • There are records of CC decision on a submission on PP/DPA Form. Record Keeping 5/8 • Record/filling system exists in the PDU though records filed don’t contain all the requirements of the law. 63% • Some cases have the standard procurement reference numbering and others don’t. • There is evidence of supplier appraisal/Performance for Local Revenue collection Providers Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 72% SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. There is need for the AO to nominate one person to replace the CC member who left the district. 2. The user departments should start initiating all the procurements on PP form 20 3. All user depts. should submit their departmental plans on time to enable the PDU aggregate procurement requirements into procurement plans. 4. Frame work contracts should be used for repetitively procured items. 5. All Solicitation documents should be made using the standard format issued by the PPDA. 6. Records of issue of solicitation documents, bid submission and opening should be recorded on PP forms. 7. Much as the EC is fully constituted, they need to train more members because it’s only two members who have been trained on how to carry out evaluations and only one Civil Engineer who is r responsible for bills of quantities and issuing of completion certificates. 8. Notice of Best Evaluated bidder and Notice of award should be posted on the PDE notice board and PPDA webs for statutory display period. 9. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 10. All contracts should be executed within the completion dates. 11. All Quarterly Reports should be written using the standard formats and submitted on time. 12. The performance of CC members’ good job. 13. The filing system needs a lot of improvement and all records filed should contain all the requirements of the law. 14. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured.
363 NAME OF PDE: Mubende District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 30 th June – 1st July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Central Government, Internally Generated and Donors
SIZE OF PDE: 2,592 Staff of which are 1,771 are teachers
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Nicholas Muron Ocakara
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Eng Charles Mubiru Chairman 2. Mrs. Benny Bugembe Member 3. Mr. James Ssebudde Secretary 4. Dr. Wilson Mubiru Member 5. Ms. Norah Kizza Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Issa Ssemwogerere Head PDU 2. Mr. David Kambere PO 3. Ms. Milly Nandawula APO
364
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 4/10 • The letters seen by compliance team show that: - • Mr. James Ssebudde was appointed on 13 th July 2008 40% for three years. • The rest of the CC members were appointed on 26 th June • 2006 for the 2006/07 Financial Year. • No record of PS/ST approval on file. • PP Forms 220 and 221 not filed with PPDA. Procurement 6/10 • District has a procurement Plan available, but lacks Planning input of Health, Education and Mubende Hospital. 60% • The District has a shortlist of providers. • There were no records of departmental procurem ent plans. • The District has an Assets Register with a provision for asset disposal. • The District does not make use of framework contracts for commonly procured items. Solicitation and bidding 0/10 • No record of use of standard bidding documents. procedures • Methods used are not appropriate to threshold and 0% circumstances. • The District does not observe the minimum bidding
365 period. • There were no records of bid submission and opening. Evaluation procedures 5/10 • Evaluation report not in accordance with the standard formats; 50% • No record of evaluation minutes on file. • The contracts committee does not approve the composition of the Evaluation Reports. • The contracts committee a pproves the Evaluation reports. Contract placement, award and 0/10 • No record of SG approval of contract above 50 management Million. 0% • The unsuccessful bidders are not notified in writing as required by law. • There was no evidence of involvement of user department in certifying payment of contractual sum. • There was no evidence of execut ion of contract within the contractual date. Reporting 4/6 • The District’s reporting status is not up to date. • Samples of reports reviewed use standard formats 67% and PP Forms. • The query regarding Mubende Taxi Park seen to have amicably settled, though t he administrative review findings was not copied to PPDA. Performance of Contracts 1/8 CC has been granting retrospective approvals for some Committee procurement 13% Record Keeping 2/8 Complete record not available and the little is not together for each procurement 25% Total Score and rating of PDE 31 % UNSATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Entity should submit a record of PS/ST approval of the Contracts Committee to the Authority 2. The PDU should ensure proper record keeping. 3. The user departments should initiate procurements using PP Forms 20 in accordance with Regulation 65(1). 4. The District should use framework contracts for commonly procured items. 5. The District should use standard bidding documents issued by the Authority for the given contracts. 6. The methods of procurements used should be appropriate to the thresholds and circumstances and the minimum bidding period should be observed. 7. Copies of bid submission and opening should be put on file. 8. The composition of the Evaluation Committee should always be approved by the contracts committee. 9. The Evaluation committee should use the appropriate Evaluation methodology. 10. The unsuccessful bidders should always be notified in writing as required by Reg. 86(5).
366 11. The best Evaluated Bidder should be given notice and the contract award should be posted to the PPDA website. 12. The user department should be involved in certifying payment of the contractual sum. 13. The decisions of the contracts committee on a submission should be on PP/DPA. 14. There were contracts committee minutes on file but not recorded on the appropriate forms. 15. All procurements should be given individual procurement reference numbers. 16. The District should appraise the performance of its suppliers.
367 NAME OF PDE: Mukono District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 19 th June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU Funds and locally collected revenue from licenses, taxes and other levies. There have also been some donor funds such as the STABEX Fund for road construction from the EU.
SIZE OF PDE: Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. George Eustace Gakwandi
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names)
1. Eng. Ssesanga Fred Chairman 2. Eng. Daniel Kamya Secretary 3. Mrs. Gertrude Kakungulu Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names)
1. Gilbert Lenald Walugembe PPO 2. Begayala Ibrahim SPO 3. Olga Nabirungi PO
368
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures • This PDE does not have a fully functional CC. There are only 3 members. • In addition, the CC needs training. • The CAO indicated that there is a lot of 6/10 political influence in the procurement process
at the PDE and this is significantly hampering
the smooth running of the PDU. PDU and CC 60% are intimidated by politicians to change decisions on contract award. The LCV Chairman was particularly singled out. • The PDE does not use LG PP Forms. Procurement Planning • User Departments have not been involved in 4/10 the preparation of the procurement plans to the
extent that there was no one initiating some 40% items that appeared on the plan. Solicitation and Bidding • The use of non standard documents Procedures 6/10 • Lack of observance of the minimum bidding period were a big problem in this area. 60% • There were no records of bid submission and bid opening on the files perused. Evaluation Procedures 4/10 • Members of the evaluation committees did not
369 40% sign the acceptance of the ethical code of conduct. • No record of the approval of the evaluation report by the CC and in some instances the evaluation report itself was not on file.
Contract Placement, Award • Records pertaining to this compliance area 2/10 and Management were generally lacking in all the 5 files that
were available for review. 20%
Reporting 0/6 • The PDE has not submitted quarterly procurement reports for at least a year. 0% Performance of Contracts • The Contracts Committee’s failure starts 3/8 Committee mainly with not using standard forms for
recording decisions and its proceedings. 38%
Record Keeping • There were some files present but these were 1/8 largely incomplete. • The District does not appraise its suppliers’ 13% performance.
Total Score of PDE and compliance rating 36% UN-SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Contracts Committee requires training and 2 more members should nominated and the names sent to PS/ST for approval. 2. The PDU should be fully staffed and PP Form 221 filed with the Authority. 3. The LC V should avoid interfering with the procurement process. 4. PDU should ensure use of PPDA Standard Forms issued by the Authority in accordance with Regulation 66(4) of the Local Government (PPDA) Regulations. 5. User Departments should prepare and submit departmental plans in accordance with Regulation 62(1) of the LG (PPDA) Regulations. 6. User Departments should initiate procurements as provided for in Regulation 65(1) of the Local Government Procurement Regulations. 7. The District should always ensure that the minimum bidding period is observed for all contracts as provided for under Regulation 55(3). 8. There should be records of bid submission and bid opening and such records should be filed as under Regulation 70(5), 71(11-13). 9. The Contracts Committee should always approve the Evaluation Reports by the Evaluation committee and also approve the composition of such committee as under Regulation 84(4) and 72(2) respectively. 10. The Evaluation Committee should always sign the Code of Ethical conduct in business as provided for under Regulation 27(9) & (10). 11. Accounting Officer should ensure submission of all outstanding quarterly reports and timely submission in future which is by the 15 th day of the month for the preceding quarter. 12. The District should appraise its suppliers’ performance in accordance with Regulation 119 and records filed.
370 NAME OF PDE: Nakasongola District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESMENT: 10 th -11 th June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government, Donors/ NGOs and internally generated funds from revenue collection centers.
SIZE OF PDE : 369 staff; 1 Town Council and 8 Sub Counties; total annual budget for FY 2007/8 of 9,034,623,140/= of which 1,876,178,122/= (21%) is spent on procurements.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Paul Mubiru
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Eswahu Sam Member 2. Ms. Nakamya Sarah Member 3. Mr. Arinaitwe Joseph Member 4. Mr. Ssengendo Michael Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Kagwa Robert SPO 2. Mr. Kyeyune Stephen PO 3. Mr. Baleke Moses APO
371
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear unders tanding of his role for the overall responsibility of the procurement and disposal 70% process. • There 4 CC members approved by PS/ST and PPDA PP Form 220 was filed with the Authority • PDU is established, however, PP Form 2 21 has not been filed with PPDA • The User departments initiate procurements, however not on the PP Forms. • Internal Auditor does not audit the procurement and disposal process. Procurement Planning 6/10 Entity has; • An approved pre-qualified list of providers. 60% • A procurement plan for FY 2007/08 based on the approved budget. • A non up to date assets register. • There are no department al procurement plans except for the Town Council. • Entity does not use framework contracts for the common user items.
372 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Solicitation and bidding 7/10 • There are records of issue of Solicitation documents and procedures receipt of bids although all bids received for different 70% procurements are recorded together where the deadline for bid submission is the same. • Solicitation documents used were not in the PPDA formats; Since PPDA had not issued them. • Appropriate procurement methods were used for all the sampled cases. • Minimum bidding periods were observed. Evaluation procedures 5/10 • There were Evaluation reports on the few sampled cases, however without detailed methodology. 50% • No records on approval of EC by CC, detailed evaluation reports and Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members Contract placement, award 7/10 • BEB notice is always posted on the PDE notice board but and management never on the PPDA website. 70% • Contracts Committee had approved some of the sampled cases. • User Departments get involved in the certification of payment of Contractual sums by verify certificates. • Unsuccessful bidders are never notified in writing. • Entity does not seek SG approval. Reporting 4/6 • PDU had compiled Quarterly reports, however had never submitted any to the Authority. 67% Performance of Contracts 5/8 • No record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC Committee members, since Entity had just received the PPDA Formats. 63% • CC had never granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 3/8 • PDU just commenced to establish a filing system; • Not all the relevant records are filed; 38% • Standard reference numbering is not used ; • Entity has no supplier/performance appraisal system. Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 61 % SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. User departments should initiate all procurements on LG PP Form 1 2. The Internal Auditor should audit the entire procurement and process, payment and deliveries in accordance with Regulation 28 of the LG (PPDA) Regulations 2006. 3. User departments should prepare and submit procurement plans to the PDU in accordance with LG (PPDA) Regulations. 4. Entity should use framework contracts for repetitively procured items 5. PDU should record the issue of solicitation documents, bid submission and opening separately on the LG PP Forms for the different procurements. 6. CC should always approve the Evaluation Committee members in accordance with Reg. 27 of the LG (PPDA) Regulations 2006. 7. Appropriate evaluation methodologies should be used in accordance with Reg. 97 of the LG (PPDA) Regulations 2006.
373 8. All the unsuccessful bidders should be informed in writing to ensure transparency. 9. All procurements should have relevant approvals i.e. Contracts Committee, Solicitor General (all procurements above 50 million Uganda Shillings) and Donors where applicable. 10. All signed Contracts should clearly state the completion date for monitoring and evaluation purposes. 11. PDU should have a record/filling system with all the relevant documents as stated in Reg. 46 of the LG (PPDA) Regulation 2006.
374 NAME OF PDE: Namutumba District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 4th – 5th June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Ug. Shs. 6.9 billion
SIZE OF PDE: 1,205 Employees
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Ms. Wanyenze Gimogoi Margaret
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Mukama Silver Chairperson 2. Namasoko Daniel Member 3. Kyakulaga Francis Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Yusuf Kisanifu, who is by substantial appointment, a Sub county chief.
375
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/ FINDINGS RATING Procurement Structures 3/10 The Contracts Committee has only 3 members instead of 5 30% The 3 members were approved by the ST to Treasury as required by PPDA Reg 45 (3). The PP form 221 was not filed with PPDA The Entity has not established a PDU with the requisite staffing level User departments did not initiate requirements on PP form 1 Procurement Planning 7/10 The Entity had a Procurement Plan though, it had not been submitted to the authority 70% There is no usage of framework contracts of repetitively procured items. The Entity lacked an assets register with provisions for asset disposal planning Solicitation and bidding 6/10 • The Entity did not use SBDs in its solicitations as procedures required by PPDA. 60% • There were no records for bid submissions and opening in some cases reviewed • Lack of consistent use of appropriate procurement
376 methods as in the case of (Procurement of garbage collection contract in Namutumba town council worth 36, 960,000/=though sourced through RFP, was being referred to as open bidding!) Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The Entity adhered to evaluation procedures. • All minutes of the evaluation committee meetings 80% were signed • Some members of the evaluation had not signed a record of acceptance of ethical conduct for EC members
Contract placement, award 3/10 • Copies of signed contracts existed though some were and management kept at different sites with no copies on file 30% • Some cases reviewed lacked copies of notices of best evaluated bidders • There was no evidence of posting of notice of award on the PPDA web site • Unsuccessful bidders were equally never notified • No evidence of user involvement in certification of payments Reporting 0/6 • The entity was not up to date in terms of Monthly reports to the Authority at the time of assessment. 0% Performance of Contracts 4/8 • There is no use of forms for meetings and record of Committee contracts committee decision 50% • There was no evidence of a retrospective approval • There is no consistent use of acceptance of code of ethical conduct in business by CC members Record Keeping 1/8 • Procurement files exist but with incomplete records. • All cases reviewed did not have standard procurement 13% reference numbers • No records of supplier appraisal/performance exists in the entity
Total Score and 46% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting officer should fully constitute the CC as per Reg. 14 2. The Accounting officer should expedite the recruitment and appointment of the Head and officers in the PDU as required by LGPPDA Reg. 14(2) 3. User departments should initiate requirements on PP form 1 4. The entity should prepare and submit the procurement and disposal plan to the Authority 5. Such a procurement plan should be a consolidation of all departmental plans in the entity 6. The entity should provide for asset disposal planning in the assets register 7. Framework contracts for repetitively procured items should be adopted in the entity 8. The entity should contact the Authority for the SBDs and intensify their usage as required by PPDA
377 9. Records of bid submission and opening should be put in place as required under Reg.(70(5) and reg.71(11-13) 10. The entity should always seek clarifications from the Authority /or consult LG PPDA guidelines for appropriate procurement methods 11. All evaluation committee members should sign a record of acceptance of ethical conduct for EC members 12. Such signed copies should be put on the procurement action files they relate 13. Copies of signed contracts should be kept on the procurement file 14. Copies of notices of best evaluated bidder should be put on file 15. Notices of award should be posted to the PPDA web site as per Reg.44, 85(1) 16. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified. 17. Users should certify payments as required by Reg. 119. 18. The entity should submit all the outstanding quarterly procurement and disposal reports to the Authority as required under PPDA Reg. 14(m). 19. CC should consistently use forms provided by PPDA for conduct of meetings and record of contracts committee decision 20. CC members should sign acceptance of code of ethical conduct in business at all times of conduct of business as required under Reg. 20(1) 21. All records pertinent to a procurement should be put on a procurement file it relates 22. The entity should use standard procurement reference numbers as required under Reg. 65(3) 23. The entity should conduct a supplier appraisal/performance as required under Reg 119
378 NAME OF PDE: Nebbi District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 2 nd July 2008
MANDATE : To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government Funded and some projects are Donor Funded, also locally Generated Revenue
SIZE OF PDE: 3140 members of staff including teachers.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr . Joseph Balisanyuka
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Anthony Androionzi Chairperson 2. Eng. Mavenjina Jimmy Member 3. Ms. Fauling Doreen Member 4. Mr. Andrinzi Anthony Member 5. Mr. Ojobbi John Baptist Member (Proposed)
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Kasamba Alex Oyofuru SPO 2. Omwer Patrick PO
379
• COMPLIANCEAREA SCORE/RATING • FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 5/10 • Accounting officer seems not to know all his roles, the CC approved members are only four 50% and the PDU is established. with 2 staff. • The fifth member’s name has been sent to PS/ST for approval. • PP Form 220 and 221 not filed with PPDA. • The User department initiates all procurements. • The Internal Auditor audits the deliveries. Procurement Planning 5/10 • Has no procurement plan but has departmental procurement plans. 50% • The District has a prequalification list of providers. • The District has an Assets Register that is kept with the Finance Department. • The District makes no use of framework contracts. Solicitation and bidding 8/10 • Uses standard bidding documents but in some procedures cases methods don’t match with thresholds 80% • The District some times observes the
380 minimum bidding periods depending on the method of procurement used. • There were records of bid submission and opening on files. Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Evaluation procedures are followed but no evidence of signing ethical code by members 60% of the evaluation committee. • The Contracts Committee approves the composition of the Evaluation Committee but does not approve the Evaluation reports. • There were records on Evaluation reports on files perused.
Contract placement, award and 3/10 • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified in management writing 30% • Notices to the best evaluated bidder are posted on the notice board but not on the PPDA website. • There was no evidence of involvement of user department in certifying payment of the contractual sum.
Reporting 1/6 • Quarterly reports are not submitted and there is no use of procurement reference numbers 17% Performance of Contracts 4/8 • The CC sits only when there are issues to Committee discuss 50% • The files perused did not have any records of the Contracts Committee decisions on a submission on PP/DPA. • The Contracts Committee has not granted any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 2/8 • • There is poor record keeping, documents are 25% scattered. • The District does not use Procurement reference numbers. • The District does not appraise its suppliers’ performance.
Total Score and 49% Overall Rating of PDE MODERATELY SATISFACTORILY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer and District Technical Planning Committee need more training on the PPDA law. 2. PP Form 220 and 221should be filed with PPDA. 3. The Internal Auditor should the procurement processes and payments. 4. The PDU should always make a procurement plan out of the departmental procurement plans submitted by the different departments and submit a copy of it to PPDA. 5. The District should use framework contracts for repetitively procured items.
381 6. The procurement methods used should always match the thresholds in accordance with the law. 7. The Evaluation committee should always sign the Code of Ethical Code in Business. 8. The Unsuccessful bidders should always be notified in writing as required by law. 9. The District should submit quarterly procurement reports accompanied by the Contracts Committee minutes as required by law. 10. Procurement reference numbers should also be used for the different procurements conducted. 11. The PDU should improve the record keeping and the filing system for the District. 12. The user departments should start initiating all the procurements on LG PP Form 1. 13. The Sub county chiefs need training on the PPDA law. 14. The user department should always participate in certifying the contractual sum. 15. The Contracts Committee should always approve the Evaluation reports by the Evaluation Committee. 16. The District should appraise its suppliers’ performance.
382 NAME OF PDE: Oyam District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 18 th June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (Gou/Donors & Local Revenue): 18 Billion Uganda Shillings. Procurement budget is estimated at 2.9 Billion Ug. Shillings.
SIZE OF PDE: Oyam District has 2 constituencies, 7 Sub Counties, 1 Town Council, 41 Parishes, 2 Wards and 897 Villages.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Ms. Catherine Amal
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Ogwal Tom- District Veterinary Officer - Chairperson 2. Mr. Ochare Denis – District Planner - Member 3. Mr. Ogwal S Peter – District Inspector of Schools - Member 4. Ms.Margaret Acan Ogomarach – Nursing Officer- Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Malinga Geofrey Maxwell - Head PDU
383
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • The Accounting Officer is knowledg eable of her roles in procurement. 60% • There are procurement structures in place; however user departments are less active. • CC has four members • Internal audits reports were not seen Procurement Planning 5/10 • Departmental Procurement plans are done. • No Assets register and Disposal planning seen. 50% • PDE does not use framework contracts Solicitation and Bidding 5/10 • Fairly complied with use of standard solicitation procedures documentation and bidding procedures 50% • Record of issue of solicitation documents are incomplete Evaluation procedures 6/10 • Contracts Committee approves members of Evaluation committee. Evaluation reports need to improve. 60% Contract placement, award 4/10 • No evidence of notification of the award to unsuccessfu l and management bidders. 40% • User departments are less involved in certifying payments
Reporting 1/6 • Monthly reports are not up to date. 3rd Quarterly Report not yet submitted. Standard formats are not used.
384 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
17% Performance of Contracts 4/8 • Contract's com mittee minutes are prepared. PP Form 210 & PP Committee Form 211 not seen. 50% • Evidence of retrospective approvals seen Record Keeping 3/8 • No record of Supplier Appraisal/Performance. • No Proper filing system in place. 38%
Total Score and 47% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The PDU should ensure timely submission of quarterly reports in accordance with Regulation 40 of the PPDA, 2003. 2. The District should nominate a fifth member to the contracts committee have the name sent to PS/ST for approval and have PP Form 220 filed with PPDA. 3. The PDU should also recruit more PDU staff and have PP Form 221 filed with PPDA. 4. Records of particular procurements should have all the related documents put together using standard forms. 5. PDU needs to improve on the filing system to ensure that each procurement has a procurement action file. 6. Supplier appraisal/ performance should form part and parcel of the procurement process 7. User departments should be involved in certifying payments in accordance with contractual sums. 8. PDU should ensure that notice of best evaluated bidder is communicated to all unsuccessful bidders in writing. 9. Framework contracts should be adopted especially for common user items. 10. PDU should urgently set up an assets register and a disposal plan 11. Internal auditor function should certify all payments and deliveries.
385 NAME OF PDE: Pader District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 22nd – 23rd July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District local government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Release from central government and donors
SIZE OF PDE : Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Charles Otai
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Richard Odoch Poromoi – Senior Assistant CAO, Chairperson 2. Mr. Obali O. Charles – Senior Asistant Engineering Officer, Member 3. Mr. Otto J. Baptist – Town Planner, Member 4. Mr. Amone Charles Ben Akaka – District Education Officer, Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Okello Anthony Senior Procurement Officer 2. Mr. Obwolo Samuel Komakech Assistant Procurement officer
386
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The PS/ST had approved 5 CC members but one of them (M r. Rajab 80% Epila, the former District Forestry Officer) had left leaving only four members of the CC. • The PDU is understaffed as revealed by the SPO Procurement 3/10 • The procurement plan is not in place Planning and the issue was brought to the 30% attention of the accounting officer Solicitation and bidding 2/10 • The entity does not use standard forms procedures as per regulations and the 20% Evaluation procedures 4/10 • There is lack of technical knowledge for people making the evaluations 40% Contr act placement, award and 3/10 • The entity did not avail any documents management to verify this 30%
387 Reporting 1/6 • The entity is not compliant generally as far as reporting is concerned and there 17% is no evidence that monthly reports have ever been subm itted to the Authority. Performance of Contracts 3/8 • There is one member who left and each Committee of the embers seems to be busy for 38% most procurement work Record Keeping 2/8 • The entity keeps scattered documents and there were no single pro curement 25% files availed and no cases were reviewed. • The person who was initially acting as Head PDU had not handed over and the new officer did not know where most of the records were. Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 36 % UN--SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer should replace the member of the Contracts Committee and have the person approved by the PS/ST. 2. The entity needs to address its records management systems and the former acting head of procurement should handover to the new staffs to enable them take charge of the system. Referencing needs to be addressed 3. The entity should prepare annual procurement plan in accordance with the law and submit a copy to PPDA as per regulations in addition to the required reports 4. The PDU generally lacks facilities office space and the PDE should therefore find space for the PDU 5. The entity should prepare a procurement plan. 6. The contracts committee lacks one member to make it complete and this should be done 7. Minutes of the contracts committee for the months of January –June are not available and the procurement officer argued that they were being typed and they should therefore be processed and adequately kept 8. The entity should start using the various procurement and disposal forms in the various stages of the procurement cycle 9. The contract committee minutes and records of proceedings are not done on standard forms 10. Quarterly reports are not available and they have not been submitted to PPDA and this should be rectified
388 NAME OF PDE: Pallisa District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 23 rd June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS : District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government Funded and some projects are Donor Funded
SIZE OF PDE: 3000 workers including teachers
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Abdullah Nsobya Kiganda
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Patrick Muhooka – District Production Officer - Chairman 2. Mr. Buyinza Patrick – District Water Officer - Member 3. Ms Iceduna Christine – District Agricultural Officer- Member 4. Mr. Wamile Dawson - Community Development Officer - Member 5. Mr. Keleba Emmanuel- Inspector of Schools - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Hibombo – Senior Procurement Officer 2. Ms. Akello Rose – Procurement Officer
389
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 9/10 Accounting officer knows his roles. The CC is approved and the PDU is 90% established. PP Form 220 and 221 not filed with PPDA. The User department initiates all procurements. Procurement 8/10 The District has a procurement plan Planning and departmental procurement plans. 80% It has a list of prequalified providers. The District has recently sta rted using framework contracts. Solicitation and bidding 8/10 The District u ses standard bidding procedures documents but in some cases methods 80% don’t match with thresholds. The minimum bidding periods were observed for the files perused. There were records of bid submission and bid opening on files perused.
390 Evaluation procedures 6/10 Evaluation procedures followed but no 60% evidence of signing ethical code by members of the evaluation committee. The Contracts Committee approves the Evaluation committee but not the Evaluation reports. The Evaluation Committee uses the appropriate Evaluation methodology. There were Evaluation reports on files perused. Contract placement, award 4/10 Unsuccessful bidders are not notified and management in writing 40% The notice of contract award is not posted on the PPDA website for the statutory display period. There was no evidence of involvement of user department in c ertifying payment of contractual sums. Reporting 3/6 The District submits quarterly procurement reports to the Authority 50% though there’s no use of standa rd reference numbers. Performance of Contracts 4/8 The Contracts Committee does no t sign Committee the Code of Ethical Conduct in 50% Business. There were no records of contracts Committee decisions on PP/DPA forms on file. There were contracts committee minutes on file recorded on the appropriate forms. There were no records on file to show the contracts committee grant ed any retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 3/8 There is poor record keeping, documents are scattered. 38% There are no procurement reference numbers for individual cases. The District does not appraise its suppliers’ performance.
Aggregate Score and 63 % SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The District should file PP Forms 220 and 221 with PPDA. 2. The Evaluation Committee members should always sign the Code of Ethical Conduct. 3. The Contracts Committee should always approve the Evaluation Reports. 4. The unsuccessful bidders should be notified of the best evaluated bidder in writing. 5. The user department should be involved in certifying payments of contractual sums. 6. The District’s Contracts Committee should always sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business. 7. There should be records of Contracts Committee decisions on submissions on PP DPA Forms on files.
391 8. The District should improve it filing system in the PDU. 9. The PDU should also use procurement reference numbers for the various procurements. 10. The District should also appraise its suppliers’ performance.
392 NAME OF PDE: Rukungiri District
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 15 th - 16 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 14,720,812,000=.
SIZE OF PDE : Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Muhenda Rujumba
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr.Tiwaitu Cleophas – District Community Officer 2. Mr.Tiwangye Freddie – District Commercial Officer 3. Mr. Kasigazi Leonas - District Agricultural Officer 4. Dr. Karyabakabo Zepher – District Health Officer 5. Mr. Muheirwe Laban – Senior Community Officer
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr Karuma David
393
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 • The entity has the proc urement structures but the PDU is understaffed 80% • The entity had been characterized by ‘unstable ‘PDU’ as no procurement officer hardly spent a year in the entity. Procurement 7/10 • The procurement plan is in place but Planning the entity has not subm itted it to 70% PPDA. • The entity had a list of pre-qualified providers but there is no evidence of the rotation of providers on this list
Solicitation and bidding 5/10 • The entity does not use standard forms procedures as per regulations 50% Evaluation procedures 5/10 • The evaluation committees lack the knowledge as perceived from the 50% opinions of the members of the contracts committee. • There was no evidence that members of the evaluation committee were
394 signing an ethical code of conduct.
Contract pla cement, award and 3/10 • There was no evidence of documents management pertaining to contract management 30% within the entity Reporting 1/6 • The entity has not submitted reports as required and is therefore not compliant 17% in this critical area Perform ance of Contracts 4/8 • It is relatively new but appeared to Committee have committed members. 50% • Minutes of the contracts committee were not written on the standard forms although they had one big folder file for minutes of the committee. • There was no e vidence that members of the contracts committee were signing an ethical code of conduct. Record Keeping 3/8 • The entity keeps scattered documents • The entity runs a records system where 38% all evaluation reports are kept in one file, contracts committe e minutes are kept in their own file, award letters are kept in their own file etc. This makes tracking of procurement records tiresome and complicated. • The entity does not use reference numbers for the various procurements as per the 2008 guidelines. • Ther e was no record of supplier performance appraisal on file.
Total Score and Overall Rating of PDE 50 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Entity needs to address its records management systems. 2. The District needs to recruit more PDU staff and file PP Form 221 with PPDA. 3. The District is encouraged to rotate the providers on its shortlist of providers to encourage competition and transparency. 4. The user departments should be involved in contract management especially in certifying the payment of the contractual sum in accordance with Regulation 119 of the LG (PPDA) Regulations. 5. The members of the contracts committee and the Evaluation Committee should always sign the code of ethical conduct in business. 6. The Entity should embark on using reference numbers and improve on the reporting of procurements as per the regulations. 7. The Entity should prepare and submit procurement plans as per Regulation 62 – 63 of the LG (PPDA) Regulations. 8. The District should use standard forms issued by the Authority. 9. The minutes of the contracts committee should be recorded on the appropriate forms and filed.
395 10. The decisions of the contracts committee on a submission should be recorded on PP/DPA forms and filed. 11. The PDU generally lacks facilities and the current staffing is low compared to the work and this was responsible for non compliance in report submission and the Entity should address it. 12. The budget for the PDU is too small compared to the work they do and should therefore be improved. 13. The District should have individual procurement reference numbers for the different procurements in accordance with Regulation 65(3) of the LG (PPDA) Regulations. 14. The District should appraise its suppliers’ performance for quality services and supplies.
396 NAME OF PDE: Sembabule District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 11th June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 12 Billion Uganda Shillings
SIZE OF PDE: Sembabule District has 6 sub-counties, one town council i.e. Sembabule town, 35 parishes and about 441 local councils.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Karenkiza Patrick - Ag. CAO
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Ms. Gertrude Lubega - District Education Officer- Chairperson 2. Mr. Karenkiza Patrick – Asst CAO – Member 3. Mr. Katongole Arthur – Administrative Officer – Member 4. Mr. Mulungi Hillary – Physical Planner - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Ms. Stella Karungi- Ag Head Procurement Officer.
397
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 4/10 • There are procurement structures in place ; however PDU staff are yet to be appointed. 40% • The PDU is manned by one person in acting position. • The acting Accounting O fficer is also a member of the contracts committee contrary to the PPDA Regulation • Internal auditor is not involved in the procurement process. Procurement Planning 5/10 • Existence of approved pre-qualification of providers. • Consolidated procurement plan lacks details like method of 50% procurement. • No evidence of framework contracts seen. Solicitation and Bidding 5/10 • No use of solicitation documents seen. procedures • Record of bid submission is partially done. 50% • Solicitation documents do not use the PPDA format Evaluation procedures 8/10 • The entity has a record of evaluation reports and CC approves the evaluation reports. 80% • No record of signing of code of ethical code of conduct by EC members.
398 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Contract placement, award 3/10 • No evidence of notification of the award to unsuccessful and management bidders. 30% • No records of contract management. • Notice of BE B not posted on the PDE’s notice board or PPDA website Reporting 2/6 • Monthly reports are not up to date - 3rd Quarterly Report not yet submitted. Standard formats are not used in the reports. 33% Performance of Contracts 4/8 • Contract's committee minutes are prepared. Committee • No record of acceptance of the ethical code of conduct by the 50% contracts committee. Record Keeping 2/8 • No record of Supplier Appraisal/Performance. • No use of standard procurement reference numbers. 25%
Total Score and 46% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The PDE should ensure timely submission of quarterly reports in accordance with Regulation 40 of the PPDA, 2003. 2. Records of particular procurements should have all the related documents put together. Entity should use standard procurement reference numbers and standard reporting formats provided by the PPDA. 3. Accounting Officer should follow up with Ministry of Public service on the staffing of the PDU. 4. Function of the Internal Auditor should be strengthened to ensure that all procurements are verified by the internal auditor during payments and delivery. 5. Procurement plan should indicate the planned procurement methods to be used 6. Framework contracts should be instituted for common user items 7. Solicitation documents should use the standard formats issues by the PPDA in accordance with LG PPDA Reg. 48 (1) 8. EC members should adhere to the code of ethical conduct in accordance with LG PPDA Reg. 27 (9) & (10). 9. PDU should ensure that notice of BEB is posted on the procurement notice board and PPDA website and unsuccessful bides notified in writing. 10. CC members should adhere to the code of ethical conduct business in accordance with LG PPDA Reg. 20 (1). 11. Supplier appraisal should form part and parcel of the PDE’s contract management.
399 NAME OF PDE: Wakiso District Local Government
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 23 rd – 24 th June 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: District Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government and Internally generated resources.
SIZE OF PDE : Large
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Joseph Mukwaya
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Dr. Patrick Oine District Veterinary Officer - Chairman 2. Mr. Ssempija Lwanga Henry Senior Education Officer - Member 3. Ms Annette Namugga Senior Production Officer - Member
N.B The other two members to the Contracts Committee resigned from the service of the Entity.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Sam Akankwatsa, Senior Procurement Officer 2. Mr. Charles Lukwago Procurement Officer
400
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer has established the Contracts Committee and PDU in place. The PDU comprises of newly recruited 70% personnel. • There are currently three Contracts Committee me mbers approved by PS/ST. However the submission has not been made to PPDA. One of the Committee members retires whereas the other resigned from the service of the Entity. • The user de partments initiate procurements but make no use of PP Form 1. • The PDU does not keep copies of the LPOs and contracts. • Information as to whether the Internal Auditor has audit ed the procurement and disposal processes was not availed.
Procurement Planning 7/10 • Entity has no approved procurement and disposal plan • There are no departmental plans approved by the Heads of 70% Departments • Record of the Assets Register not availed.
401 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Solicitation and Bidding 7/10 • Records of issue of solicitation documents and solicitation procedures documents kept on the files, 70% • Record of bid submission and opening seen • Minimum bidding periods observed • Entity mostly procures works, services and supplies through the open national bidding method. • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents issued and bids received not availed.
Evaluation procedures 5/10 • The Evaluation Committee minut es and Evaluation Report are signed. 50% • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members not seen on the files. • Evidence of approval of the members of the Evaluations Committee and evaluation report by the Contracts Committee not availed • The Di strict Engineer and the Chief Finance Officers are used in the evaluation of most of the procurements as permanent members of the evaluation committee.
Contract placement, award 5/10 • Notices of Best Evaluated bidder not seen. and management • Entity does not post the notice of the best evaluated bidder and 50% notice of contract award on the PPDA website. • Some of the Contract documents were not on the individual procurement files. • No evidence that the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period although there were some delays in payment. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified in writing • There was evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment.
Reporting 4/6 • Entity is not up to date in its qu arterly procurement and disposal reporting. 67% • Entity has not adhered to the format of the reporting as provided under the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008. • Entity responds to queries raised by the Authority on the monthly reports.
Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Some of the Contracts Committee minutes were not available on Committee the file. 63% • From the sampled procurement files, the Contracts Committee had not granted any retrospective approvals. • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct f or CC members not seen on files. • No records of supplier appraisal and performance availed.
Record Keeping 3/8 • Proper record/filling system not in place. Few procurements have separate individual procurement files. 38% • PDU lacks adequate storage facilities
402 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
• Some of the individual procurements lack procurement reference numbers assigned to them • The Entity does not adhere to the format of assigning procurement reference numbers as provided under the Local Governments (PPDA) Regulations.
Total Score and 60% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Entity should prepare a procurement and disposal plan and submit it to the Authority. 2. The Entity should ensure that the departmental plans are approved by the Heads of Departments and aggregated within the District procurement and disposal plan 3. The PDU should keep a copy of the Assets Register 4. Entity is advised to ensure that each procurement file has a copy of the approved solicitation document, evidence of notification of the unsuccessful bidder, and contract management records. 5. Entity should adhere to the timely quarterly reporting in accordance with the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines 2008 6. Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for Contracts Committee members should be signed at each meeting and kept by the Secretary. 7. Entity should put in place a system of supplier appraisal and performance. 8. Entity should provide adequate storage facilities to the PDU for record keeping purposes and ensure that there are separate procurement files for the different procurements carried on.
403
3.2.2 Municipalities
NAME OF PDE: Arua Municipal Council
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 24 th – 25 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the Municipality.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 4.7 billion
SIZE OF PDE: 111 Employees as per establishment
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr Andua Martin
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Bada Fred Chairperson 2. Mr. Asdedri Fred Member 3. Mr. Ongom Robert Member 4. Mr. Anguzo Lino Member 5. Ms. Stella Acayi Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Omale Jimmy Senior Procurement Officer 2. Ms. Munduru Jacqueline Procurement Officer
404
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 8/10 All members of CC in place and two officers in PDU, (SPO and PO). The Accounting Officer has 80% appointed the Contracts Committee and these were approved by PS/ST Procurement Planning 9/10 Up to date. 2008/09 plan in progress The entity is not using framework contracts for repetitively 90% procured items. Solicitation and bidding 5/10 Copies of the approved solicitation documents were procedures not on file in many instances although copies seen 50% were in accordance with PPDA SBDs Evaluation procedures 5/10 One evaluation team approved by CC for all procurements reviewed. The few evaluation reports on file do not follow the evaluation criteria in the 50% solicitatio n document. Some of the files lacked evaluation reports. No record of acceptance of code of ethical conduct by EC members. Contract placement, award and 2/10 Few of the contract documents seen on file. No management records on contract management on files reviewed 20% Reporting 6/6 Quarterly report up to date. Report to June 2008 is due
405 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
100% Performance of Contracts 6/8 There is no supervision of the PDU by CC. Notable Committee in exceptions in the cases reviewed. Members are 75% not signing ethical code of conduct. Record Keeping 5/8 No complete procurement file. Documents are scattered in several files. All Contracts Committee 63% minutes kept in one file, Adverts in a separate file etc
Total Score and 64 % SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Framework Contracts should be used for repetitive contracts. 2. The entity must adhere to PPDA formats when using solicitation documents. 3. The evaluation reports on file should follow the evaluation criteria in the solicitation document. 4. All of the files should have evaluation reports. 5. Contract Document should be on file and contracts management records should also be on file 6. Members of the Contracts Committee should sign the code of ethical conduct 7. Proper filing must be done so that each procurement has its on complete file with all documents pertaining to it. 8. Enough office space to be availed to the Procurement Officer/Head PDU.
406 NAME OF PDE: Entebbe Municipality
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 10-11 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Municipality.
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda .
SIZE OF PDE: Approved structure of 150 staff, with only 90 positions filled. Has nine (10) departments with two (2) lower local governments .
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. Kimbowa Joseph.
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Kyambadde MD - Chairperson 2. Mr. Mpalanyi Charles – Accountant -Secretary 3. Kalyesubula John Medical Officer- Member 4. Namubiru Betty Senior planner - Member 5. Mr. Mukiibi Joseph District Engineer – Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Kyobe Daniel Kyeyune - Senior Procurement Officer 2. Mr. Ssejjoba Japheth - Assistant Procurement Officer.
407
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 5/10 • The CC members are five (5) approved by the PS/ST, they carry out the roles of the PDU. 50% • The Internal Auditor carries out post audi ts of the procurement and disposal processes with reference to CC minutes. Procurement 5/10 • The Entity has an approved pre-qualification list. Planning However, its not categorized according to type of 50% procurements and its kept by the accountant no t the PDU. • The user departments forward procurement requests directly to the Contracts Committee. • Entity has an approved procurement plan – was filled with PPDA on 8/11/07. • Entity has an assets register but was last updated in 2005. • Entity uses un formaliz ed framework contracts for the supply of stationery.
Solicitation and bidding 3/10 • Entity has combined records of issue of solicitation procedures document for different procurements with similar 30% deadlines. Record is in an account book not on the L G PP Form 6. • Entity does not use SBDs issued by PPDA.
408 • There was no record of bid submission and opening. • The minimum bidding period is not observed in most cases. • The method of procurement used was not appropriate to the threshold and circumstances on most of the files perused. Evaluation procedures 0/10 • On the contracts sampled, there were no records on 0% evaluation procedures.
Contract placement, award 2/10 • Entity only informs the unsuccessful bidders at pre- and management qualification stage. 20% • No tices are posted on PDE notice board for the statutory display period. • Entity does not post notices on PPDA website. • The user departments are not fully involved in the payment process. On receiving the items, the stores manager prepares the LPO and dispat ches items to respective user department. • There was no evidence of execution/performance of contract within the contractual completion date.
Reporting 0/8 • The Entity has never submitted quarterly reports to the 0% Authority.
Performance of Contracts 2/6 • Entity has records of contracts committee minutes but Committee are not filled by the PDU. 33.3% • Entity grants retrospective approvals. Record Keeping 1/8 • Entity lacks record/filling systems in PDU. • All the sampled cases did not have records required by 12.5% law. • Some of the sampled cases did not have the standard reference numbers. • Entity has no record of supplier performance.
Aggregate Score and 21 %. UNSATISFACTORY Compliance Rating
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer should ensure the functionality of the PDU. 2. The PDU should be established fully and PP Forms 221 and 220 filed with PPDA. 3. Copies of approved prequalification/ short list of providers, approved plan, framework contracts should be kept on the PDU files. 4. The PDU should compile a pre-qualified list according to the type of procurements. 5. There should be rotation of providers on the pr-equalified list. 6. Framework contracts should be formalized for only common user items. 7. The Municipality should up date its Assets Register. 8. Entity should use PPDA Standard Bidding Documents and LG PP and PP/DPA forms. 9. The Municipality should keep records of bid submissions and opening.
409 10. The minimum bidding period should always be observed in accordance with the method of procurement used. 11. The method of procurement used should always be appropriate to the threshold and circumstances. 12. The Contracts Committee should approve the members of the Evaluation Committee in accordance with Reg 72(2) of the Local Government (PPDA) Regulations. 13. The Evaluation Committee should use the appropriate Evaluation methodology when evaluating bids in accordance with Reg. 79(1). 14. The Evaluation Committee should always sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business in accordance with Reg. 27(9) &(10). 15. The Municipality should ensure that an Evaluation Report is prepared and approved by the Contracts Committee. 16. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing on the respective procurements. 17. Entity should be trained on the use of PPDA website. 18. The user department should be fully involved in certifying payment of contractual sums. 19. The files should have some form of evidence of execution of contract with in the contractual completion date 20. The Municipality should ensure that quarterly reports are submitted by the 15 th day of each quarter for the preceding quarter and that all PP Forms are filled and CC minutes attached to reports as this aids the Authority as it reviews the reports. 21. CC members should record acceptance of code of ethical conduct in business at every meeting in accordance with Reg. 20(1). 22. All records of Contracts Committee decision should be on LG PP Form 20. 23. The User departments should be trained on the procurement circle to avoid requests for retrospective approvals. 24. Standard reference numbering should be used for each procurement with reference to Local Governments (PPDA) Guideline No. 3/2008. 25. All records filed should contain all the requirements of the Law in accordance with Guideline 9 of the Local Government Guidelines. 26. The Municipality should have a record of supplier appraisal/performance in accordance with Reg. 119 of the Local Government (PPDA) Regulations
410 NAME OF PDE: Fort Portal Municipality
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 30 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality services which focus on local and national priorities for the residents so as to improve their welfare.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Municipal Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 50% from Government of Uganda (for salaries of Municipality staff, teachers and health workers), Conditional and non conditional Grants and self generated income.
SIZE OF PDE : 236 (approved structure but with only 131 filled positions), 7 Departments, 3 Divisions, 11 Parishes, 92 Cells at acreage of 27.82 square metres.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Francis Barubanawe
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Balema Jimmy Ag Chairman 2. Stella Kaganda Member 3. Mbeme Gilbert Member 4. Richard K. Monday Member 5. Tracy C. Kajumba Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBER (Names):
1.Natugonza Gladys Ag Secretary ( No substantive PDU in place)
411
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The Accounting Officer has a clear understanding of her role for the over all responsibility for the procurement and disposal 70% process. • The 5 CC members are approved by PS/ST but PP Form 220 is not filed with PPDA. • No established PDU- there is an adhoc committee composed of heads of user department with minimum procurement knowledge. • The user departme nts initiate procurements on an internal form equivalent to LG PP Form 1. • The Internal Auditor carries out post audits and verifies deliveries. Procurement Planning 9/10 Entity has; • An approved pre-qualified list of providers. 90% • A departmental procurement plan. • A procurement plan for FY 2007/08 based on the approved budget. • An assets register with provisions for assets disposal plan. • There is use of non regulated framework contracts. Solicitation and Bidding 9/10 • There are records of issue of Solicitation documents and receipt of procedures bids although all bids received for different procurements are 90% recorded together where the deadline for bid submission is the same. • Entity prefers use of the Request for Quotation method for most
412 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
procurements to ensure competition. • Minimum bidding periods were observed for all the sampled cases.
Evaluation procedures 10/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee (EC) and the Evaluation Report. 100% • Appropriate evaluation methodologies are used. • The Evaluation Committee minutes and Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members are signed. Contract placement, award 7/10 • BEB notices are posted on the PDE notice Board- has no and management special procurement notice board. 70% • Unsuccessful bidders are not specifically notified in writing, they are informed by the BEB Notice. • Copies of signed contracts were on respective sampled files. Reporting 0/6 • Entity only submits reports to the Auditor General, had never submitted any reports to PPDA, they are ignorant of the 0% requirement in the law. Performance of Contracts 6/8 • There were records of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct Committee in business by CC members. 75% • Contracts Committee grants retrospective approvals for emergencies Record Keeping 4/8 • Entity has centralized registration system. • PDU has relevant records but not filed on respective files. 50% • Some of the sampled cases did not have reference numbers. • Entity has no supplier appraisal system 72% Total Score and SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. PP Forms 220 on membership of the Contracts Committee should be filled with PPDA. 2. The acting PDU needs training on the procedures of the PPDA law. 3. Entity should recruit more PDU staff and file PP Form 221 with the Authority. 4. Entity should initiate all procurements on LG PP Form 1. 5. Entity should formalize the frame work contracts for all repetitively procured items, like stationery, fuel, human drugs and sundries. 6. Entity should use Standard Bidding Documents (SBD) issued by the Authority. 7. Entity should record the issue of SDBs, bid submission and opening on the LG PP Forms. 8. PDU staff need training on the posting of notices on the PPDA website. 9. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing for the individual procurements. 10. Entity should seek Solicitor General’s approval for all procurements above 50 Million Uganda Shillings. 11. All CC decisions on a submission should be made on LG PP Form 20. 12. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured with reference to Guideline 3 of 2008. 13. All User departments should submit contract management and monitoring reports to the PDU.
413 NAME OF PDE: Gulu Municipal Council
MANDATE: Manage To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Municipality
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda (Consolidated Fund) and internally generated funds. Budget for the financial year was approx.6.6 bn/=.
SIZE OF PDE: 101 staff members
ACCOUNTING OFFICER : Town Clerk: Mr. Opolot Odele Mackay
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Ochan John Ezira Principal Health Inspector - Chairperson 2. Mr. Oyoo Samson Ayonic Municipal Planner - Member 3. Mr. Asiire Jose Jola Municipal Education Officer - Member 4. Mrs, Nyeko Hellen Inspector of Schools - Member 5. Mr. Odonga Terence Engineering Assistant - Member 6. Mr. Kidega Nicholas Pece Division Treasurer - Ag. Head PDU
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr.Kidega Nicholas Pece Division Treasurer - Ag. Head PDU
414
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • Procurement structures in place. • The Accounting Officer has appointed the Contracts Committee 70% and these were approved by PS/ST. This approval is not filed with the Authority. • Procuremen t Unit has no dedicated office and officer. Interviews were conducted for the procurement officer and the recruitments is to be done in the financial year.
Procurement Planning 8/10 • Entity has an approved procurement plan though not in the PPDA format. 80% • There are departmental plans seen on record but some of them were not signed by the Heads of Departments. • The Municipality has an Assets register that is kept with the finance department. Solicitation and bidding 4/10 • Copies of the a pproved solicitation documents were not on file procedures in many of the cases seen. 40% • Some of the copies of the solicitation documents seen on file were not in accordance with the PPDA SBDs. • The Entity has serious challenges in adhere to the PPDA formats.
415 Evaluation procedures 2/10 • The few evaluation reports seen on file do not follow the evaluation criteria in the solicitation document. 20% • Some of the files lacked evaluation reports. • Some of the evaluation reports are not in the standard format issued by PPDA. • There were no records showing that the Evaluation Committee signs the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business.
Contract placement, 3/10 • Few of the contract documents were seen on file. award and management • No contract management records were on the files. 30% • Some of the contracts seen do not adhere to the standard contracts issued by the Authority. • There were no records showing the best evaluated bidder or the unsuccessful bidders in writing. • The notice of contract award is not posted to the PPDA website for the statutory display period.
Reporting 3/6 • The Entity had filed quarterly reports for the period under review according to PPDA records but these were not availed to the 50% team during the visit.
Performance of 2/8 • Contracts Committee meets on average once a month. Contracts Committee • Members sign the code of ethical conduct 25% • Some of the minutes were not on file. • There were no records of contracts committee submissions on decisions on PP/DPA forms on files perused.
Record Keeping 3/8 • Filing system is very poor. • There is lack of proper storage facilities by the PDU and lacks a 38% dedicated office for procurement. • Not all records filed do not contain all the requirements of the law. • There were no records of supplier appraisal/performance.
Aggregate Score and 49% Compliance Rating MODERATELY SATISFACTORY.
.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. All the positions in the PDU should be filled. 2. Entity should adhere to the PPDA format in preparation of procurement plans.. 3. The Heads of departments should always sign the departmental procurement plans before submission to the PDU. 4. All the necessary records for a specific procurement should be properly filed. 5. Solicitation documents used should be in accordance with the SBDs issued by the Authority. 6. Evaluation reports should be prepared and filed for each evaluation and submitted to CC for approval. 7. The evaluation teams need to follow the criteria in the solicitation documents while carrying out evaluation. 8. The Evaluation committee should always sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business.
416 9. User departments should be involved in contract management and certifying payments. 10. The Municipality should always notify the unsuccessful bidders in writing as provided for under Reg 86(5). 11. The Entity is required to submit to the Authority reports on procurements, disposals and those on micro procurements on a quarterly basis. 12. All minutes of contracts committee meetings held should be properly filed for ease of reference on decisions on a particular procurement 13. There is need for the Entity to have a dedicated office with adequate storage facilities. 14. Entity needs to have a proper filing system in place so that each procurement has a separate procurement file. 15. The Municipality should appraise its suppliers.
417 NAME OF PDE: Jinja Municipal Council
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 14 th -15 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the Municipality
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Municipal Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Releases from Central Government and Internally generated funds from revenue collection centres
SIZE OF PDE : 359 staff under 12 departments. Municipality covers 3 divisions 14 Sub counties and 1 Town Council. It is categorized in Module II by Ministry of Local Government.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. David Kachontori Bashakara
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Peter Mawerere – Senior Assistant Town Clerk, Chairman 2. Mr. Milton Byale - Senior Supplies Officer, Member 3. Dr. Stephen Banonya - Medical Officer of Health, Member 4. Mr. Balyejjusa Clint – Principal Personnel Officer, Member 5. Mr. Muhammed Saeed – Senior Assistant Engineering Officer, Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS:
1. Mr. Rajab Kitto Ag. Procurement Officer
Newly appointed PDU members who are yet to report for duty :
1. Mr. Charles Mpagi – Procurement Officer 2. Ms. Nabwonso Janet – Assistant Procurement Officer
418
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement 4/10 • The Accounting Off icer is newly appointed to the district but had Structures training on the Procurement law in his last station 40% • The CC members are five and approved by PS/ST but no submission was made to PPDA on PP Form 220. • The user dept does not initiate their procurements on LG PP Form 1. • The PDU has one member of staff who is an Acting Procurement Officer. The Accounting Officer had just signed appointment letters for two procurement staff but they had not yet reported for duty. • No evidence that the Internal Auditor audits the procurement and disposal processes Procurement Planning 1/10 • There were no user department procurement plans. • There was no pre-qualified list of providers 10% • There was no procurement plan for FY 2007/08 • There is use of frame work contracts for procure ment of human drugs and sundries. Solicitation and 6/10 • There are records of issue of Solicitation documents and receipt of bids Bidding procedures although all bids received for different procurements are recorded 60% together where the deadline for bid submission is the same. • The SBD for procurement of revenue collection centres does not use the standard PPDA document but has good innovations such requiring bidders to submit LC I Letters and photographs w hich helps to trace defaulters.
419 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Evaluation procedures 5/10 • The CC approves the members of the Evaluations Committee and the Evaluation Report. 50% • The Evaluation Committee minutes and Evaluation Report are signed. • There was no record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members Contract placement, 2/10 • There are no records of the Notice of Best Evaluated bidder. award and • There is a Notice Board but not dedicated to procurement matters. management 20% • No evidence that the contracts sampled were executed within the contractual period although there were some delays in payment. • No evidence that the unsuccessful bidders are notified. • There was no evidence that the User Department is involved in certifying payment. Reporting 0/6 • There was no evidence that the Entity had submitted any q uarterly reports. 0% Performance of 3/8 • In the CC minutes sampled the CC had not granted any retrospective Contracts Committee approvals. 38% • Record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for CC members present is available. Record Keeping 2/8 • Record/filling system exists in the PDU but needs to be improved. • The sampled cases did not have the standard procurement reference 25% numbering. • Contract management and supplier appraisal records were submitted by the engineering department although the water department had no t submitted any.
Total Score and 32% UN-SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Accounting Officer and District Technical Planning Committee need more training on the PPDA law. 2. PP Form 220 on membership of the Contracts Committee and membership of the PDU should be filled and filed with PPDA. 3. The user depts should start initiating all the procurements on LG PP Form 1. 4. The Sub county chiefs need training on the PPDA law. 5. There should be a procurement plan based on the approved budget 6. A pre-qualified list of providers should be put in place following an open advert. 7. Frame work contracts should be used for repetitively procured items. 8. All Solicitation documents for procurement of services for revenue collection centres should be made using the standard format issued by the PPDA. 9. Records of issue of solicitation documents, bid submission and opening should be recorded separately for the different procurements even if they have the same deadline for bid submission. 10. There should be a record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members should be signed every time they are going to carry out an evaluation. 11. The Evaluation Methodology used for the cases sampled was not appropriate and a criterion of Mayor’s charity was being applied arbitrarily for revenue collection centres. This should stop.
420 12. All unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 13. All contracts should be executed within the completion dates. 14. All outstanding quarterly Reports should be submitted to PPDA promptly. 15. All CC decisions on a submission should be made on LG PP Form 20. 16. Standard procurement reference numbering should be used on each individual case procured. 17. All User departments should submit contract management and monitoring reports to the PDU. 18. PDU should get copies of contract payment records that are issued by the Finance dept.
421 NAME OF PDE: Kabale Municipal Council
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 8 th July 2008
MANDATE : To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the Municipality.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Local Government Body
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government Funded and some projects are Donor Funded, also locally generated revenue.
SIZE OF PDE: 87 staff including teachers.
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Johnson Balyantuma
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Twesigye Francis – Principal Commercial Officer – Member 2. Ms. Kananura Lydia – Municipal Inspector of Schools - Member 3. Mr. Ahimbisibwe Christopher - Senior Assistant Town Clerk - Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Katushabe Pamela PO 2. Ssekalema Hasib APO
422
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE/RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 6/10 • Accounting officer knows all his roles, the CC members are approved by PS/ST. 60% • The PDU is not established. Have just recruited 2 staff. • PP Form 220 and 221 not filed with PPDA. • The User departments do not initiate procurements. • The Internal Auditor audits deliveries.
Procurement Planning 7/10 • The Municipality has a procurement plan and departmental procurement plans. 70% • It also a list of pr-equalified providers. • It has an Assets Register but no Disposal plan.
Solicitation and bidding 9/10 • Uses standard bidding documents as issued by procedures PPDA and methods match with thresholds. 90% • There were records of bid submission and opening on files perused. Evaluation procedures 4/10 • Evaluation is done but the appropriate methodology is not followed. 40% • There’s no evidence of signing ethical code by
423 members of the evaluation committee. • There were Evaluation reports on files perused however, there was no evidence of approval of the such reports by the Contracts Committee. Contract placement, award and 4/10 • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified in management writing. 40% • Notices to the best evaluated bidders are posted to the notice board but not posted to the website. Reporting 2/6 • Quarterly reports are not submitted to PPDA.
33% Performance of Contracts 4/8 • The CC sits only when there are issues to Committee discuss. 50% • There were CC minutes present but not on the appropriate forms. • The Contracts Committee members do not sign the Code of Ethical Conduct. Record Keeping 1/8 • There is poor record keeping, documents are scattered. 13% • Not all records filed contain all the requirements of the law. • There was no record of supplier appraisal/performance.
Total Score and 51 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Accounting Officer should nominate more members for approval by PS/ST and PP Form 220 and 221 on membership of the Contracts Committee and membership of the PDU should be filled and filed with PPDA. 2. The user departments should start initiating all the procurements on LG PP Form 1. 3. A pre-qualified list of providers should be put in place following an open advert. 4. The members of the Contracts Committee and the Evaluation Committee should always sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business whenever necessary. 5. The Evaluation Committee should also use the appropriate evaluation methodology/criteria as provided by PPDA when evaluating bids. 6. The Municipality should endeavour to always notify the unsuccessful bidders in writing as required by law. 7. The District should submit quarterly procurement reports accompanied by the Contracts Committee minutes as required by law. 8. Procurement reference numbers should also be used for the different procurements conducted. 9. The PDU should improve the record keeping and the filing system for the District. 10. The Municipality should appraise its suppliers’ performance.
424 NAME OF PDE: Kampala City Council
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 21 st – 22 nd July 2008
MANDATE: Manage To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold Democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the District.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: City Council
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Government of Uganda (Consolidated Fund) and internally generated funds. Budget for the financial year was approx.63 bn/=.
SIZE OF PDE: 3520 staff members
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Ag . Town Clerk: Mrs. Ruth Kijjambu
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. David Tamale Kiggundu Chairperson 2. Eng. Bonny Nsambu Member 3. Mrs. Josephine Karugonjo Member 4. Ms. Margaret Banna Member 5. Mr. Moses Sengendo Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Wilberforce Turyamubona - Principal Procurement Officer/Head PDU 2. Mr. Robert Musinguzi - Senior Procurement Officer
425
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 6/10 • Procurement structures in place. • The Accounting Officer has appointed the Contracts Committee and 60% these were approved by PS/ST. This approval is not filed with the Authority. • Procurement Unit has dedicated office and officers. • Records where the users initiate all the procurements were not available in most of the cases sampled. • Information as to whether the Internal auditor has audited the procurement process was not availed. Procurement Planning 4/10 • Entity has an approved procurement plan in the PPDA format. • There are no departmental plans seen on record. 40% • A copy of the assets register with the provision of asset disposal planning was not availed. • The Entity does not make use of framework contracts. Solicitation and bidding 6/10 • Many of the sampled procurement files lacked the followin g procedures documents: 60% - Records of issue of solicitation documents - Record of bid submission and opening - Copies of the solicitation documents issued to the bidders • In some of procurements, the method used was not approp riate to the threshold provided for under t he Local Governments (PPDA)
426 Guidelines. • For most of the files perused, the minimum bidding period was not observed. Evaluation procedures 5/10 • Many of the sampled procurement files lacked the following documents: 50% -Approval of members of the Evaluation Committee; -Record of acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for the Evaluation members; and Evaluation minutes. -Evaluation reports. • Some of the evaluation reports are not in the standard formats prescribed under the Local Governments (PPDA) Guideline 7/2008.
Contract placement, 4/10 • Almost all the sampled procurement files lacked contract documents. award and management • No contract management records were on the files. 40% • Notices of Best Evaluated Bidder were not on file • The Entity does not post the notice of best evaluated bidder and notice of contract award on the PPDA website • No record of notification of the award to the unsuccessful bidders on the sampled procurement files. • No recor d for approval of the contract document by the Contract Committee found on the sampled files. • No record of seeking approval from the Solicitor General for contracts above UShs. 50m seen on some procurement files. • No records were seen to evidence the invol vement of the user departments in certifying payment of the contractual sums. Reporting 3/6 • The Entity had filed some quarterly reports for the period under review according to PPDA records. 50% • The reports did not have reports on micro procurements conducted. • The Entity did not submit Contracts Committee reports with the quarterly reports. Performance of Contracts 3/8 • Contracts Committee meets on average three to four times a month. Committee • Many of the sampled procurement files lacked the follo wing 38% documents: • Record of acceptance of code of ethical conduct in business by the Contracts Committee members • Records of Contracts Committee decisions on submissions Record Keeping 3/8 • There is no record/filing system in place. • Records filed do not contain all the requirements of the law 38% • Many of the cases sampled did not have standard procurement reference numbers • There were no records of supplier appraisal or performance.
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating 47 % UNSATISFACTORY
427 RECOMMENDATIONS
6. The approval by PS/ST for the Contracts Committee and the composition of the Procurement and Disposal Unit should be filed with the Authority. 7. User departments should initiate all the procurements using LG PP form 1. 8. All the necessary records for a specific procurement should be properly filed. 9. The Entity should adhere to the Local Governments (PPDA) Guidelines for the thresholds. 10. The Entity should ensure that user departments prepare procurement plans. 11. An asset register should be put in place. 12. The Entity should make use of framework contracts for frequently procured items. 13. Copies of solicitation documents should be kept of file for each respective procurement. 14. Records of bid opening and submission should also be kept of file. 15. The methods of procurements used should be appropriate to the respective thresholds in accordance with the PPDA Local Government Guidelines. 16. The minimum bidding period should always be observed in accordance with Reg 55(3) of the Local Government Regulations. 17. The composition of the Evaluation Committee should always be approved by the Contracts Committee. 18. The members of the Evaluation Committee should always sign the code of ethical conduct in Business. 19. The appropriate evaluation methodology should always be used in accordance with Reg. 79(1). 20. After the evaluation of bids has been conducted, the secretary of the evaluation committee should always produce a copy of the report for approval by the CC and the minutes for filing. Entity should ensure that the evaluation reports adhere to the format in the Local Governments (PPDA) Guideline 7/2008. 21. The Entity should ensure that each procurement file contains the following Contract management records, Notices of Best Evaluated Bidder, Signed Contract document and Record of notification of award to the unsuccessful bidders. 22. For contracts above UShs. 50m, the Entity should seek Solicitor General’s approval. 23. User departments should be involved in contract management and certifying payments. 24. The entity is required to submit to the Authority reports on procurements, disposals and those on micro procurements on quarterly basis. Quarterly reports should be submitted with the Contracts Committee minutes. 25. All minutes of contracts committee meetings held should be properly filed for ease of reference on decisions on a particular procurement. 26. Contracts Committee members should sign the record of acceptance of the code of ethical code of conduct in business. 27. The Entity should file the record of Contracts Committee decision on submission on the respective procurement files. 28. There is need for the entity to put in place a proper record/filing system and for the procurement files should contain all the requirements of the law. 29. The Entity should put in place mechanisms of supplier appraisal/performance.
428 NAME OF PDE: Lira Municipal Council
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 9th -10 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide quality service, a health and clean environment and uphold democratic governance thereby promoting social, economic development in the Municipality.
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 5 billion
SIZE OF PDE: 187 Employees as per establishment
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr Jimmy Ambrose Atwoko
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mrs. Akara Esther,Senior Officer Supplies Chairperson 2. Mr. Obong John, Sports Officer Member 3. Mr. Okello Sam, Assistant Treasurer Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Martin Ocen Secretary
429
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
Procurement Structures 2/10 • 2 Vacancies on CC and 3 Vacancies in PDU
20% Procurement Planning 10/10 • Procurement Plan for 07/08 was seen. 2008/09 plan in progress 100% Solicitation and bidding 4/10 • Copies of the approved solicitation documents procedures were not on file in many instances although 40% copies seen were in accorda nce with PPDA SBDs Evaluation procedures 5/10 • One evaluation team approved by CC for all procurements reviewed. The few evaluation 50% reports on file do not follow the evaluation criteria in the solicitation document. Some of the files lacked evaluation reports Contract placement, award and 1/10 • No records on contract management on files management reviewed 10% Reporting 6/6 • Quarterly report up to date.
430 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / RATING FINDINGS
100% Performance of Contracts 3/8 • There is no supervision of the PDU by CC. Committee Notable in exceptions in the cases reviewed 38% Record Keeping 0/8 • No procurement file. Documents are scattered
0%
Total Score of PDE and 43 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. There are 2 vacancies on CC and 3 vacancies in PDU. The vacancies should be filled as soon as possible 2. Filing of solicitation documents should be done. 3. The evaluation reports should follow the evaluation criteria in the solicitation document and all files should contain evaluation reports 4. Contract Documents and contracts management records should be kept on file. 5. Contracts Committee members should sign the code of ethical conduct
431 NAME OF PDE: Mbarara Municipal Council
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 12 th July 2008
MANDATE: Delivery of services to municipality
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): 5.2 Billion
SIZE OF PDE: 130 staff including the lower local governments which comprise of 3 Divisions; Kamukuzi, Nyamitanga and Kakoba
ACCOUNTING OFFICER (Name): Mr. David Naluwayira (Not reported yet); Dr. John Tinkasimire (Outgoing)
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Magara Silver -Ag.Principal Education Officer, Chairman 2. Kanamugira Patrick - Senior Planner, Member 3. Tumwine Fred - Surveyor Member 4. Baitwababo Geraldine - Sen.Asst. TC (Kamukuzi) Member
The Accounting Officer has written to PS/ST through Ministry of Local Government for the approval of the Chairman CC.
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Musinguzi Johnson Senior Procurement Officer/ Sec. CC 2. Vacant Procurement Officer 3. Byamugisha Emmanuel - Assistant Procurement Officer
432
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 5/10 • Contracts Committee has four (4) members approved by PS/ST. However, Chairman of CC not approved by PS/ST. 50% • PDU comprises of two (2) members. Establishment is for three (3).One vacancy for PO not filled. PDE says not necessary at the moment taking into account the PDUs workload. • Internal Auditor verifies deliveries Procurement Planning 3/10 • There was no procurement Plan for 2007/2008. 2008/09 budget in place but no procurement plan h as been made prepared for both the 30% departmental and consolidated work plans. • Pre-qualified list for 07/08 available • There is no asset register and disposal plan Solicitation and bidding 6/10 • To a large extent Entity does not use PPDA SBDs procedures • Entity records issue of solicitation documents in a counter book 60% • Entity uses Request for Quotation method which is not a procurement method in the LG Regulations 2006. • Minimum bidding period to a large extent is observed save for procurements where RFQ is used. • Record of bid submission and opening does not use the relevant LG PP Form.
433 COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
• Entity has been applying PPDA Regulations 2003 and not Local Government Regulations 2006 and Guidelines 2008.
Evaluation procedures 5/10 • Entity used inappropriate criter ia for prequalification in 2007/08 i.e. not pass/fail basis 50% • Entity appears to have a permanent evaluation committee particularly for non-works procurements Membership of the evaluation committees is not based on expertise and representation. A single commi ttees can be appointed to handle several procurements of diverse nature • Entity uses TCS Evaluation methodology for all procurements. • No record of acceptance of ethical code of conduct for evaluation committee members. • Evaluation Reports are available howev er these are maintained on a separate file. • Record of Contracts Committee approval of the Evaluation Report was available on file. Contract placement, award and 2/10 • Notices of BEB not kept on file management • Notices of award are copied to the Mayor and Contracts signing is 20% witnessed by the Mayor. This can potentially incite interference in the process by organs not required to participate in the procurement cycle. • Notices are not posted on the PPDA website during the statutory display period. • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified of the award. • Contract documents are approved by the Contracts Committee and those above Ushs. 50m are not approved by Solicitor General. • Entity reported delays in contract execution/completion. • User Department is involved in certifying payment. Reporting 4/6 • Quarterly report for the period April-June 2008 is outstanding.
Performance of Contracts 3/8 • There is no record of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Code of Committee Conduct. 38% • Record of Contracts Committee on a deci sion was on file, however it mainly relates to approval of Evaluation Report and Contract award and not approval of procurement method and solicitation document. • No proof of user departments being involved on certifying payments • Contracts Committee is invo lved in retrospective approvals as in the case of major road works Record Keeping 3/8 • There is no record of supplier performance. • Incomplete procurement Reference Numbers for certain 38% procurements. • Although there were procurements files for cases rev iewed, some documents are scattered in other files.
Total Score of PDE and 43% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating
434 RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Entity is advised to expedite the appointment of the Contracts Committee members through Ministry of Local Government. 2. The Entity is advised not to copy award notices to the Mayor since he has no role play at this point 3. The Entity advised that preparation of the procurement plan should be undertaken during the preparation of the entity’s budget. 4. The Entity advised to use the PPDA SBDs. 5. RFQ is not a method under the LG Regulations 2006.Entity should only apply procurement methods prescribed in the LG Regulations 2006. 6. The Entity should ensure that LG PP Forms are used. 7. The Entity is advised that evaluation under prequalification is conducted on PASS/FAIL basis. 8. The Entity is advised that the Evaluation Committee is an ad hoc committee appointed for evaluation of each procurement requirement. 9. The Entity urgently requires hands on training particularly on record keeping. 10. The Entity is advised to ensure timely submission of reports in accordance with LG Guideline 7/2008. 11. The Entity is advised that the Notice of BEB should be kept of the procurement file. 12. The Contracts Committee should ensure that code of ethical conduct is signed by all members prior to commencement of the meeting. 13. All Contracts Committee decisions should be recorded using LG PP Form 20. 14. The Contracts Committee advised to refrain from retrospective approvals. 15. Proper record keeping should be maintained by the PDU on all procurement files using the checklist availed by the Authority.
435 NAME OF PDE: Soroti Municipal Council
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 16 th -17 th July 2008
MANDATE: To manage the Municipal’s Resources and provide Social Services to its Population
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Municipal Council
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): GOU releases & Local revenue
TOWN CLERK (Name): Mr. Omoko Paul
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Oyata Sam Chairperson 2. Dr. Odeke Francis Member 3. Mr. Opolot Grace Secretary
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Opolot Grace Ag. Head PDU
436
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 7/10 • The CC has 3 members, the other 2 are yet to be nominated and sent to PS/ST for approval. 70% • The rec ruitment of the PDU staff is still on going as interviews were conducted and three PDU staff are expected on 1 st August 2008. Procurement 8/10 • The Municipality has a shortlist of providers Planning and an approved procurement plan. The Assets 80% register is kept with the Chief Finance O fficer; However, the Municipality does not make use of frame work contracts. Solicitation and bidding 2/10 • There was no record of solicitation documents procedures on all files. Though there was some evidence 20% of B id submission, such was not recorded on the appropriate forms. Evaluation procedures 4/10 • Approval of Evaluation Committee members is done by the CC. There’s a record of evaluation 40% reports even though the appropriate evaluation methodology was not used. Contract placement, award and 4/10 • The best evaluated Bidder is given notice but management no notice is given to the unsuccessful bidders. 40% The Contract documents are not approved by the CC. The Contracts are signed in the
437 Divisions
Reporting 5/6 • The District has been submitting procurement quarterly reports to the Authority though its 83% reporting is not up to date. Performance of Contracts 5/8 • Minutes are in place though not recorded on Committee the appropriate forms. There’s a recor d of CC 63% decisions but also not recorded on appropriate forms. Record Keeping 3/8 • There exists a Record/filing system in the PDU even though it is not standard and most files 38% don’t contain all requirements of the law.
Total Score and 53% MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Overall Rating of PDE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The full Contracts Committee should be appointed by the Accounting Officer and their names sent for approval to PS/ST Min of Finance. The recruitment of the Procurement Officers must be expedited. 2. The PDU when recruited should take charge of all procurement documentation and register. 3. The Entity should start using framework contracts for repetitively procured items. 4. The entity should strictly adhere to PPDA formats and the records should be kept in the PP Forms wherever applicable. 5. The proper evaluation method agreed upon by the Evaluation Committee and approved must be adhered to and reflected in the report in the proper format. 6. The Contracts Committee should approve all contract documents. All the members should be in place and the Engineer who was transferred to Oyam District should be replaced as soon as possible. 7. All contracts must be signed by the Town Clerk (Accounting Officer). 8. The quarterly reports must be sent by the 15 th day of the following month of the quarter as per the law. 9. The records must all be in the PP forms. 10. Each procurement must have its own complete file with all the documents relating to that particular procurement.
438 NAME OF PDE: Tororo Municipal Council
DATE OF ASSESSMENT : 4 th July 2008
MANDATE: To provide services to Tororo Municipality Community that are responsive to the National and local priorities for improved quality of life
LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL STATUS: Local Government
BUDGET (GOU/DONORS): Estimated budget of 4.535 billion
SIZE OF PDE: 101 Staff
ACCOUNTING OFFICER: Mr. Kenneth Ofwono –Acting Town clerk
CONTRACTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Mannington Katumba Chairperson 2. Mr. Jimmy Ochwo Member 3. MrJohn Choli Member 4. Mr. Isaac Karan Member 5. Dr Obonyo Member
PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL UNIT MEMBERS (Names):
1. Mr. Joseph Ochieng Ag Head of PDU
439
COMPLIANCE AREA SCORE / FINDINGS RATING
Procurement Structures 5/10 • The AO is in an acting position. • There is no established PDU. There is only one person in the PD U 50% who is acting. An advertisement was recently made for only one position and not 3 in the PDU but no recruitment done yet. • There is an established CC in place made up of 5 members approved by PS/ST. CC meets at least once in a month. • User departments initiate all procurements on PP form 20 • The internal Auditor Audits the procurement and disposal process, payments and deliveries but no Audit reports were available
Procurement Planning 6/10 • Procurement plans are in place, including departmental plans. • There is an approved Pre-Qualification /Short List of Providers. 60% • There are no framework contracts for repetitively procured items. Solicitation and bidding 7/10 • The record of issue of solicitation document are available but some procedures are not on PPDA formats 70% • Solicitation documents used follow standard format issued by PPDA • Method used is appropriate to threshold and circumstances • However records of Bid Submission and Opening are not available • It was not possible to determine whether the bi dding period is observed because of missing records as stated above.
440 Evaluation procedures 7/10 • Evaluation reports are prepared although not on PPDA report formats. Evaluation criteria used does not distinguish between 70% preliminary, technical and financial evaluations. • Members of Evaluation are approved by Committee by CC • Records of Acceptance of Code of Ethical Conduct for EC members are available Contract placement, 0/10 • For most of the procurements sampled, there was n o evidence of award and management award by letter of bid acceptance from PDE or contract documents 0% like LPOs. There were no notices for best evaluated bidder. • There is non submission of letters to unsuccessful bibbers. • There was no evidence of user department involvement in certifying payments and contract management. • Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder and Notice of Contract Award are not posted on PDE Notice board and PPDA website for statutory display period. • NO Solicitor General approval has yet been obtained for the contracts recently signed. • There was no Evidence of Execution/Performance of contract within the contractual completion dates as all contracts sampled were recently signed Reporting 0/6 • Procurement reference numbers are not written in accordance with PPDA L G guidelines. Procurements are referenced as e.g. 0% 04/08/03-05. • No quarterly reports on procurements have been submitted to the Authority. Performance of 5/8 • CC minutes on procurements are available with their decision Contracts Committee however ther e is no record of CC decision on submissions on PP 63% form. • Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder and Notice of Contract Award are not posted on PDE Notice board and PPDA website for statutory display period. • Unsuccessful bidders are not notified in writing. • Contract Document is not approved by Contracts Committee/ Solicitor General/ Donor but a Copy of signed Contract is available. • There was no Evidence of Execution/Performance of contract within the contractual completion date. • There was no evidence of involvement of user department in certifying payments
Record Keeping 2/8 • Record keeping is still lacking as most of the procurements reviewed lacked the required documentation as follows: 25% • Records for specific procurements are filed in separate files. • Not all the records filed contain all the requirements of the law • Standard procurement reference numbering is not used. • There is no record of supplier appraisal performance.
Total Score of PDE and 44 % MODERATELY SATISFACTORY Compliance Rating
RECOMMENDATIONS:
441
1. There is need to recruit and fill the 3 vacant positions in the PDU 2. In planning its procurements, the entity needs to consider the use of framework contracts where appropriate. 3. The entity should use the recommended records of Bid Submission and Opening 4. There is need for entity to prepare evaluation reports using the PPDA formats 5. Evaluation reports should be approved by the CC on PPDA formats 6. Unsuccessful bidders should be informed in writing. 7. Users should be involved in certifying payments and contracts management 8. Notice of Best Evaluated Bidder and Notice of Contract Award should be posted on PDE Notice board and PPDA website in accordance with the law. 9. The entity should timely submit reports to PPDA in accordance with the law 10. CC decision submissions should be prepared on the recommended PP forms. 11. Notices of Best Evaluated Bidder and Notice of Contract Award should be posted on PDE Notice board. 12. Unsuccessful bidders should be notified in writing. 13. Proper procurement references should be used 14. All the necessary records for a specific procurement should be properly filed. 15. There is need for the entity to use standard procurement reference numbering 16. There is need for the entity to prepare and file supplier performance reports
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND WAY FORWARD
442
Following the findings and observations from the compliance checks on the 120 PDEs, the following recommendations are proposed under each compliance area to address the compliance weaknesses identified and to be implemented by the responsible actor identified.
4.1 PROCUREMENT STRUCTURES The existence and functionality of the procurement structures is the vital to the achievement of high levels of compliance in PDEs. The following recommendations are made to strengthen this compliance area.
No Recommendation Actor Time frame (from approval of Report) 1. To ensure the full composition of all Contracts One Month Committees Letters should be written to all the Accounting Officers PPDA of the identified 48 PDEs (21 CG and 27 LG PDEs) in Annex IV that did not have the full membership of the 5 members of the Contracts Committee to nominate members to the PS/ST for approval as provided for in S.27 of the Act and Regulation 15(1) of the Local Government Regulations.
Follow up should be made with the PS/ST to ensure that a decision on the nominated members forwarded by the PS/ST Accounting Officers is communicated promptly. For the members who are not approved by PS/ST, reasons for their rejection should also be communicated promptly so that they can nominate alternative suitable members to the Contracts Committee.
Accounting Officers will also be required to put in place a mechanism of informing the relevant authority immediately these posts become vacant.
2. To ensure the establishment of the Procurement and Three Months Disposal Unit manned by procurement professionals A letter should be written to the PS/ST and the Accountant General identifying the CG PDEs in Annex PPDA IV that have PDUs that are not adequately staffed at an AGO appropriate level to handle the volume of procurement/disposal requirements for such entities or are manned by staff who are not procurement professionals. The action to be requested in the letter is for procurement professionals to be deployed to the identified PDEs.
443
For the CG PDEs that are statutory bodies or state enterprises the letter should be addressed to their governing bodies requesting them to recruit professional PPDA staff to handle this function.
For the LG PDEs, the letter should be addressed to the Chairman of the District Service Commission, the CAO MOLG and the Ministry of Local Government. DSCs CAOs
3 To enforce the role of the User Department in Continuous initiation of requirements and verification of performance before payment to a provider
Training should be undertaken for User Departments in PPDA PDEs to ensure they initiate all procurements on PP Form 20 and LG PP Form 1 in accordance with PPDA Regulation 104 and Local Government Regulation 65(1).
4. To strengthen the role of Internal Auditors as part of One month the control mechanisms in PDEs
A Training module should be developed for Internal PPDA Auditors to sensitise them on their key role in auditing all MOFPED the procurement and disposal process including payments and deliveries. 5. To implement a comprehensive Training and Continuous Capacity Building Programme
In light of the irregularities within the PDEs that were observed during the compliance checks, there is need for PPDA to implement a training programme that is targeted to address the individual weaknesses in the PDEs. The stakeholders to be trained should include the following: • Members of the Procurement Structures • Heads and members of User Departments including Sub county chiefs and Town councils in the case of Local Government PDEs. • Members of Governing bodies • Providers on the pre-qualified lists of PDEs • Civil Society.
The areas for training should focus on the areas where PDEs scored least and these include: • Contract Placement, Award and Contract
444 Management • Record keeping • Solicitation and Bidding Procedures • Use of appropriate Evaluation methodology and Evaluation Criteria.
4.2 PROCUREMENT AND DISPOSAL PLANNING
No Recommendation Actor Time frame (from approval of Report) 1. Revision of the Standard Procurement Plan Format Three months
PPDA should form a working team with the Accountant General’s Office and some of the heads of the PPDA procurement and Disposal Units to revise the AGO procurement plan format and make it more practical. The revised format should be detailed enough to capture the time the procurement process should be initiated, the method of procurement for each requirement, the time required for each stage in the procurement cycle as well as provide for aggregation of requirements. Thereafter the revised standard format of the procurement plan should be issued to all PDEs.
2. Introduce a requirement for Accounting Officers to confirm that any procurement/disposal requirement to be undertaken is part of the approved procurement plan of the PDE .
Guidelines should be issued to Accounting Officers requiring them to confirm that procurement and disposal PPDA activities undertaken in their Entities are part of the approved procurement plan except for requirements that arise out of emergency situations. 3. To enforce the requirement of preparation of procurement plans PS/ST Annually at the A Circular should be issued to all Accounting Officers time of the Budget requiring them to support their budget estimate Call Circular submissions with procurement plans as a pre-condition of approval by MOFPED and Parliament.
PDEs should be required to submit to PPDA a copy of PPDA
445 their procurement plans based on the approved budget before the end of the 1 st quarter of each Financial Year. The list of PDEs that are not compliant to this requirement should be published in press and referred to the PS/ST with a recommendation to withhold funding for these PDEs.
4. To require PDEs to publish their procurement plans Three months
A Guideline containing an abridged format of the standard procurement plan should be developed and PPDA circulated to all PDEs requiring them to publish on their procurement notice boards and in the press the main procurements to be undertaken each financial year. PDEs should also make a provision for annual asset disposal planning
5. To require PDEs to regularly update their Three months procurement plans
PDEs should be required on a quarterly basis and in any PPDA other case, where necessary, review and update their procurement plans and submit the updated and approved plan to the Authority.
6. To enforce the requirement of departmental Continuous procurement plans
A circular should be issued to all Accounting Officers PPDA requiring them to put mechanisms in place to ensure that all departments in their PDES prepare and submit departmental procurement plans to their respective PDUs in order to facilitate orderly execution of annual procurement activities. 7. To promote the use of framework contracts Three months
A training module and hands on exercises specifically on PPDA the use of framework contracts for the procurement of repetitive or commonly used items should be developed and implemented to target members of the Contracts Committees and PDUs.
446
4.3 SOLICITATION AND BIDDING PROCEDURES
No Recommendation Actor Time frame (from approval of Report) 1. Enforcement of the use of Standard Bidding PPDA Continuous documents and Forms
Compliance checks should be done regularly to ensure the correct application of the standard documents and forms.
Hands on exercises should be undertaken targeted at the PDEs that scored below the satisfactory compliance rating.
2. Development of sector specific SBDs Six months
Sector specific SBDs should be developed for key sectors PPDA in such as: consultation • Health – Drugs with the • Education - Textbooks sectors • Roads –Labour based maintenance works • Revenue Collection – management services • In formation Technology – supply, installation and training.
3. Guidance on statutory time frames in the Six months procurement process
A study should be commissioned to establish the factors PPDA that create delays in the procurement cycle and propose ways of minimizing the overall procurement lead time.
4. Training of Providers
A training module should be developed to target PPDA Four months providers under their different sectors or regulatory bodies to build their capacity on how to prepare and submit responsive bids
447
4.4 EVALUATION PROCEDURES
No Recommendation Actor Time frame (from approval of Report) 1. To provide guidance to PDEs on the evaluation 3 mont hs criteria at preliminary evaluation and Post qualification stages.
In order to prevent good bids from being eliminated PPDA purely on failure to meet eligibility criteria, guidance should be provided to PDEs on which criteria should be under the Preliminary evaluation process and which should fall under post qualification.
2. To ensure more transparency in the evaluation 5 months process
In order to reduce subjectivity and fraudulent practices in PPDA the evaluation process, a Guideline should be circulated to all PDEs informing them that Bids that contain a wide margin of arithmetic errors (e.g over 10%), or are technically not responsive, should be rejected. Where such bids are deemed not to be responsive, the reasons for their non responsiveness should be recorded by the Evaluation Committee and disclosed in the submission by the PDU to the Contracts Committee when forwarding the Evaluation Report for their approval.
3. To prevent leakage of confidential information during 5 months the Evaluation process
The Code of Business Ethics for Providers should be PPDA revised to include the provision that where a Bidder is discovered to have insider knowledge of the details of the evaluation process before the PDE displays the BEB, the Bid of that bidder should be disqualified from further consideration by the PDE
4. To introduce statutory time frames for the evaluation 6 months process
In order to prevent prolonged delays by PDEs during the PPDA evaluation process, a guideline should be issued to PDEs specifying the maximum evaluation time frames
448 applicable under to each procure ment and disposal method.
5. To strengthen provisions against conflict of interest 8 months
The PPDA Act should be revised to make it an offence where members of Contracts Committees and Evaluation PPDA Committees do not sign the Code of Ethical Conduct in Business before each meeting. MOFPED
The Code of Ethical Conduct in Business in the Fifth Schedule to the Act should be revised to clearly provide for what amounts to a conflict of interest in procurement and disposal process.
4.5 CONTRACT AWARD AND MANAGEMENT
No Recommendation Actor Time frame (from approval of Report) 1. The Accounting Officer should put in place mechanisms AO Continuous to ensure that the user departments are involved in UD certification of payments of the Contractual sum. 2. For contracts entered into after the use of the open and CC Continuous restricted bidding methods, the Contracts Committee should require the head of the user departments to develop contract monitoring performance indicators and submit regular reports to the PDU. 3. The Accounting Officer should ensure that all AO Continuous unsuccessful bidders are informed in writing as required under Reg. 225 (4) of the PPDA Regulations and Reg. 86(5) of the LG (PPDA) Regulations. 4. In order to ha ve a strong deter rent for PDEs from 10 months entering into irregular contracts, the PPDA Act should be PPDA amended to provide that Accounting Officer who enters into a contract without following the prescribed MOFPED procedures and approvals prior to contract award will be personally responsible for any loss that the PDE may incur as a result of the omission.
449
4.6 REPORTING
No Recommendation Actor Time frame (from approval of Report) 1. PPDA should form a working team with the Accountant PPDA 2 months General’s Office and some of the heads of the procurement and Disposal Units to revise the monthly AGO and quarterly reporting format so that it provides more information on a number of key compliance indicators such as whether the procurement was part of the procurement plan.. 2. In order to enforce the requirement for submission PPDA Quarterly monthly and quarterly of reports to PPDA in a timely manner, the list of non compliant PDEs should be PS/ST published and referred to the PS/ST for disciplinary action. 3. PPDA should pursue avenues of enabling PDEs to submit PPDA 6 months required reports and notices electronically using standard formats and for PPDA to electronically capture this data for purposes of having statistics on the procurement and disposal system readily availed to key stakeholders.
PPDA should also operationalise its website to receive and display this information instantly through a dedicated link with the PDEs.
4.7 PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACTS COMMITTEES
No Recommendation Actor Time frame (from approval of Report) 1. Regular compliance checks should be undertaken to PPDA Quarterly ensure that the Contracts Committees are taking decisions on submissions in accordance with the law and that their decisions are properly recorded.
Contracts Committees that remain non compliant will be referred to the PS/ST with a recommendation for their suspension or removal from the committee. 2. The PPDA Act should be amended to specifically PPDA 10 months prohibit the Contracts Committees from granting retrospective approval for any procurement or disposal MOFPED activities in their Entities.
450 4.8 RECORD KEEPING
No Recommendation Actor Time frame (from approval of Report) 1. Hands on training exercises should be undertaken for all PPDA Continuous the PDEs that scored less than satisfactory compliance rating. All PDUs in these PDEs should be trained on proper filing so that each transaction has its on complete file with all relevant records and has the prescribed Procurement / Disposal Reference numbers.
Follow up compliance checks should be undertaken and for the PDEs that are persistent offenders as regards proper record keeping they should be referred to PS/ST and Head of Public Service for stringent disciplinary measures. 2. A circular should b e issued to all Accounting Officers to PPDA One month ensure that a proper filing system is kept by the PDU that records the trail of each procurement / disposal process from planning to contract implementation and fulfils the legal requirement for safe keeping of public records. 3. The Contracts Committees should ensure that the PDU CC Continuous liaises with the User to put in place systems for provider PDU appraisal performance.
451 4.9 WAY FORWARD
The results of the compliance rating of the 120 PDEs are to be communicated to all the key stakeholders in particular the competent authorities for their further action. The specific recommendations will be given agreed action time frames for implementation by each of the PDEs and are to be followed up in future compliance checks.
The Central and Local Government PDEs that have been rated as Highly Satisfactory are in a strong compliance (good to excellent) position. Their Management is committed to ensuring compliance with the law. All procurement structures are in place and functioning effectively. The violations noted relate to relatively minor deficiencies in forms or practices that are easily corrected. As a result, the PDE gives no cause for regular compliance monitoring but random compliance checks may be conducted to ensure it remains in this strong compliance position.
The Highly Satisfactory PDEs were the following:
CG PDES LG PDES Capital Markets Authority Kamwenge District
Electricity Regulatory Authority Kyambogo University Rural Electrification Agency Ug anda Coffee Development Authority Uganda Human Rights Commission Uganda Insurance Commission
The Central and Local Government PDEs that have been rated as Satisfactory are fairly strong compliance (above average) position. Management is capable of compliance. The violations noted involve technical aspects of the law or result from oversight on the part of the procurement personnel. On line support, legal advice and training may eliminate many of the violations. The Satisfactory PDEs were the following:
CG PDES LG PDES Cotton Development Organisation National Environ ment Management Courts of Judicature Authority Kamwenge District Directorate of Public Prosecutions National Forest Authority Kibaale District Education Service Commission National Housing and Construction Apac District Gulu University Company Ltd Budaka District Inspectorate of Government National Planning Authority Fort Portal Internal Security Organisation National Water and Sewerage Municipality Law Development C entre Corporation Ltd Mpigi District Local Government Finance Commission Parliament of Uganda Gulu District Makerere University Business School Privatization Unit Igang a District Ministry of Energy and Mineral State House Kisoro District Development Uganda AIDS Commission Arua Municipality Ministry of Finance, Planning & Ug anda Electricity Distribution Kiruhura District
452 CG PDES LG PDES Economic Development Company Pallisa District Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Uganda Electricity Generation Company Nakasongola Development Uganda Electricity Transmission District
Ministry of Information an d Company Ltd. Communications Technology Uganda Export Promotion Board Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Uganda Management Institute Development Uganda National Examination Board Ministry of Public Service Uganda Police Ministry of Water and Environment Uganda Population Secr etariat Ministry of Works and Transport Uganda Prisons Service Mulago Hospital Uganda Revenue Authority National Council for Science and Office of the Prime Minister Technology Uganda Communications Commission
The Central and Local Government PDEs that have been rated as Moderately Satisfactory are in a weak (less than average) compliance position. Although management may have the ability to ensure compliance, increased efforts are necessary. It is a cause for concern and requires more than normal compliance monitoring to remedy deficiencies since violations may be numerous. In addition, previously identified violations from compliance checks or audits may remain uncorrected. The numerous violations discovered are an indication that management has not devoted sufficient time and attention to compliance with the law. The procurement structures may have not proven effective and require strengthening. This may be accomplished by, among other things, on line support, legal advice and training and regular compliance checks. By identifying a PDE with marginal compliance early, additional monitoring measures may be employed to eliminate violations and prevent further deterioration in the PDE's less- than-satisfactory compliance position.
The Moderately Satisfactory PDEs were the following:
CG PDES LG PDES Auditor General Adjumani District Gulu Hospital Bundibugyo District Health Service Commission Bushenyi District Masaka Hospital Busia District Mbale Hospital Gulu Municipality Micro Finance Support Centre Ltd Hoima District Ministry of Defence Is ingiro District Ministry of Internal Affairs Kabale District Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Industry Kabale Municipality National Council for Children Kalangala District National Curriculum Development Kampala City Council Centre Kanungu District Post Bank (U) Ltd Kapchorwa District Posta Uganda Ltd Kayunga District
453 CG PDES LG PDES Public Service Commission Kiboga District Uganda Communications Commission Lira Municipality Uganda Development Bank Masaka District Uganda Printing and Publishing Mbale District Corporation Mbarara Municipality
Moyo Distric t Nakasongola District Namutamba District Nebbi District Oyam District Rukungiri District Sembabule District Soroti Municipality Tororo Municipality Wakiso District
The Central and Local Government PDEs that have been rated as Unsatisfactory are in an extremely weak compliance position and require constant compliance monitoring to promptly correct the serious compliance problems disclosed. Numerous violations are present and there may be numerous complaints from bidders. Clearly, management of the Entity has not exerted sufficient effort to ensure compliance and this attitude may indicate a lack of interest in ensuring compliance which may have contributed to the seriousness of the PDE's compliance problems. The procurement structures have not proven effective and procedures and records are seriously deficient. Prompt action on the part of the Authority may enable the PDE to correct its deficiencies and improve its compliance position.
The Unsatisfactory PDEs were the following:
CG PDES LG PDES Uganda Printing and Publishing Adjumani District Corporation Luwero District Arua Hospital Kasese District Diary Development Authority Mukono District Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Pader District Affairs Jinja Municipality National Council for Higher Education Mubende District Soroti Hospital Entebbe Uganda Investment Authority Municipality
Uganda Property Holdings Ltd
The Central and Local Government PDEs that have been rated as Highly Unsatisfactory do not have any compliance position since they are substantially noncompliant with the law. Management of the Entity have demonstrated their unwillingness or inability to operate within the law. Previous efforts on the part of the Authority and other government oversight agencies to obtain voluntary compliance may have been unsuccessful. Lack of transparent procedures or
454 serious repeat violations may be present. Improvement of the PDEs compliance position will require the Authority to appeal to other competent authorities for their specific intervention.
The Highly Unsatisfactory PDEs was the following:
CG PDES LG PDES Management Training and Advisory None Centre
Once the report is approved the Authority will publicise the ratings in the media and on the PPDA website. In addition to publicising the PDEs that are rated as Unsatisfactory and Highly Unsatisfactory, the Authority will also publicise the PDEs that are rated as Satisfactory and Highly Satisfactory to provide an incentive for other PDEs that to improve their compliance position. The compliance rating report will also be circulated to stakeholders and included in the Annual Report of the Authority.
The results will also be used by PPDA in planning future Compliance Checks, Procurement Audits and Training Programmes by focusing its limited manpower and resources on the PDEs that are rated lowest and therefore present the highest risk.
It is further planned to undertake Compliance Checks on the remaining 80 Central and Local PDEs so that a Base line can be established for all PDEs to measure their future progress in the implementation of the PPDA Act.
455 ANNEX I TOOL FOR COMPLIANCE CHECKS
Background Information 2
Name of Procuring and Disposing Entity
Legal / Institutional Status Mandate (Public Function) Size of PDE (In respect of number of staff/geographically spread sub units & Estimated Volume of Procurements as % of total annual budget of PDE)
Source of funding – Whether GOU or Donor funded and whether PDE generates its own funds
Previous Compliance Ratings of PDE and dates of these ratings Name of Assessor (s) Date of Assessment
2 The Background Information on an individual PDE will not change much over the years and may be obtained directly from the PDE or the PDE files at PPDA. 2. The compliance rating MUST be based on a sample of completed procurements in each PDE i.e. a minimum of 10 cases and the scores should be based on actual deviations noted from the cases sampled. 3. The sampled cases should have a mix of the different procurement methods and should also have a representative mix from the 3 categories of Works, Services and Supplies.
456
Compliance Compliance Indicators Legal Requirement Source of Information and Score 3 Comments / Area Means of Verification (0-2) Recommendations CG LG
1. Procurement 1. The Accounting Officer has a Sect. 26 Reg.14 Interview with AO to assess Structures clear understanding of his/her role his/her knowledge of main roles i.e for the overall responsibility for the establishment of functional CC & procurement and disposal process. PDU, seeking approvals from relevant govt organs, commitment of funding, signing of contracts, delegation and handling of administrative review complaints
2.The 5 Contracts Committee Sect. 27 Reg. 15 (1) PPDA PDE file or records of Members are approved by ST and Secretary of CC PP Form 220 filed with PPDA 3. Established Procurement and Reg. 57 Reg. 23 (1) PPDA PDE file Disposal Unit and PP Form 221 filed with PPDA. 4. The User Department initiates all Reg. 104 Reg. 65 (1) PDU file records and interviews procurements on PP Form 20. with Heads of departments 5. The Internal Auditor audits the PFAA Reg. 28 Internal Audit Reports to procurement and disposal process, Reg. Management contain findings payments and deliveries. 27-28 from the audit of the procurement and disposal process --- out Total Score and Rating of Compliance Area of 10 = --- %
3 The Score Rating for each Compliance Indicator is as follows: No Evidence = 0; Some Evidence = 1; Strong Evidence = 2.
457 Compliance Compliance Indicators Legal Requirement Source of Information and Score 3 Comments / Area Means of Verification (0-2) Recommendations CG LG
2. Procurement 1.Existence of approved Pre- Reg. Reg. 35 and Disposal Qualification /Short List of 142 PPDA PDE file or Contracts Planning Providers. Committee minutes 2. Existence of departmental Sect. 60 Reg. 62 (1) procurement plans PDU file records and interviews with heads of departments 3. Existence of approved Sect. 58 Reg. 62-63 PDU file records or PPDA PDE Procurement Plan. file 4. Existence of Assets Register with Reg. 295 Reg. 122 provision for asset disposal PDU file records or PDE planning financial records 5. Use of framework contracts for Sect. 58 Reg. 62 (5) PDU file records or Contracts repetitively procured items (c) (g) Committee minutes --- out Total Score and Rating of Compliance Area of 10 = --- % 1. Record of issue of solicitation Reg. 146 Reg. 66 (4) PDU file records 3. Solicitation document (3) and Bidding 2. Solicitation document uses Reg. 128 Reg. 48(1) PDU file records Procedures standard format issued by PPDA 3. Method used is appropriate to Sect. 79 Reg. 73 (3) PDU file records and CC minutes threshold and circumstances 4. Minimum bidding period Reg. Reg. 55(3) PDU file records and copy of observed 145 advert or solicitation doc 5. Record of Bid Submission and Reg. Reg. 70 (5) PDU file records Opening 158 (3) 71 (11-13) & 164 Total Score and Rating of Compliance Area -- out of 10 = --%
458 Compliance Compliance Indicators Legal Requirement Source of Information and Score 3 Comments / Area Means of Verification (0-2) Recommendations CG LG
1. Approval of Members of Reg. 169 Reg. 72 (2) CC minutes and PDU file records 4. Evaluation Evaluation Committee by CC. (2) Procedures 2.Use of appropriate Reg. 168 Reg. 79 (1) PDU file records and solicitation
Evaluation Methodology. (2),172 doc
& 197
3.Record of Reg. 169 Reg. 27 (9) PDU file records Acceptance of Code of Ethical (9) & & (10) Conduct for EC members and 171 (5) Evaluation minutes. 4.Record of Reg. Reg. 81 PDU file records Evaluation Report. 168(1), 171(10) & 195 5.Approval of Reg. 195 Reg. 84 (4) CC Minutes Evaluation Report by CC. (3) & (4) --- out Total Score and Rating of Compliance Area of 10 = --- % Reg. 224 Reg. 44, 85 5. Contract 1.Notice of Best Evaluated (3) (1) PDU file records and PPDA Placement, Award Bidder and Notice of Contract website and Management Award posted on PDE Notice board and PPDA website for statutory display period. Reg. 225 Reg. 86 (5) 2.Notification of the award to (4) PDU file records Unsuccessful bidders in writing. Reg. 48 Reg. 46 (2), 3.Approval of Contract (e), 90 84 & 86 (2) CC Minutes and PDU file records
459 Compliance Compliance Indicators Legal Requirement Source of Information and Score 3 Comments / Area Means of Verification (0-2) Recommendations CG LG
Document by Contracts (j) & (f) containing letters of approval Committee/ Solicitor General/ 225 (2) Donor whichever is applicable and (f) Copy of signed Contract. Reg. 91 Reg. 46 930 4.Evidence of Execution (c) & (e) (e) & 104 PDU file records and CC Minutes /Performance of contract within the contractual completion date. Reg. 260 Reg. 119 5.Evidence of involvement of User (2) (iii) PDU file records dept in certifying Payment of Contractual sum. --- out Total Score and Rating of Compliance Area of 10 = --- %
1.All Monthly Reports Reg. 40 Sect. 94D 6. Reporting Submitted on time and up to date at PPDA PDE file and PDU file the time of the compliance check records Reg. 118 Reg. 7 (1) 2.Reports use Standard Formats (9) PPDA PDE file and PDU file and all PP Forms 200, 201 & 202 records are filled and CC Minutes attached. Reg. 41 Reg. 7 (2) 3. Any Queries by PPDA on (c) PPDA PDE file reports submitted have been satisfactorily resolved. --- out Total Score and Rating of Compliance Area of 6 = --- %
460 Compliance Compliance Indicators Legal Requirement Source of Information and Score 3 Comments / Area Means of Verification (0-2) Recommendations CG LG
1.Record of Acceptance of Reg. 53 Reg. 20 (1) CC Minutes 7. Performance of Code of Ethical Conduct in (2) (b) Contracts Business by CC members present Committee on PP Form 211. 2.Record of Contracts Reg. 51 Reg. 18 (3) Records of CC Secretary Committee decision on a (8), 53 submission on PP/DPA Form. (2) (c) 3.Record of Contracts Reg. 53 Reg. 19 (3) Records of CC Secretary and Meeting on PP Form 210 and (2) (c), PPDA PDE file record of signed minutes. 56 (c) 4.Contracts Committee has not Reg. 55 Reg. 19 (4) CC Minutes granted any retrospective approval. (2) (c)(i) (b) --- out Total Score and Rating of Compliance Area of 8 = --- % 1.Existence of Reg. 90 Reg. 46 (2) PDU file records 8. Record Keeping Record/filing system in PDU. 2.Records filed contain all the Reg. 90 Guideline PDU file records requirements of the law & 91 No.9 3. Individual cases have the Reg. 104 Reg. 65 (3) PDU file records standard procurement reference (3) numbering
4.Record of Supplier Reg. 260 Reg. 119 PDU file records Appraisal/Performance
--- out
Total Score and Rating of Compliance Area of 8 = --- %
461
Aggregate Score and Compliance Rating of PDE = --- %
KEY:
% Total Score for Compliance % Aggregate Score for PDE Rating Area 81-100 81-100 HS Highly Satisfactory 61-80 61-80 S Satisfactory 41-60 41-60 MS Moderately Satisfactory 21-40 21-40 U Unsatisfactory 0 - 20 0 - 20 HU Highly Unsatisfactory
462 ANNEX II OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF THE 120 PDES
Rating Results For Central Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: Contract CA: CA: Solicitation CA: CA: Procurement Placement, CA: Performance Aggregat Procurement and Bidding Evaluation Record Overall Name of PDE Disposal Award and Reporting of Contracts e Score. Structures Procedures Procedures Keeping Rating Planning Management (Max: 6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8)
1. Arua Hospital 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 1 (10%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (50%) 5 (63%) 3 (38%) 22 (31%) U 2. Auditor General 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 7 (70%) 5 (50%) 3 (30%) 2 (33%) 3 (38%) 3 (38%) 36 (50%) MS 3. Capital Markets Authority 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 6 (100%) 6 (75%) 6 (75%) 59 (82%) HS 4. Cotton Development Organisation 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 6 (100%) 6 (75%) 8 (100%) 67 (93%) HS 5. Courts of Judicature 7 (70%) 8 (80%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 4 (40%) 3 (50%) 8 (100%) 5 (63%) 54 (75%) S 6. Diary Development Authority 4 (40%) 4 (40%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 0 (0%) 9 (13%) HU 7. Directorate of Public Prosecutions 7 (70%) 7 (70%) 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 5 (50%) 4 (67%) 5 (63%) 5 (63%) 52 (72%) S 8. Education Service Commission 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 3 (50%) 8 (100%) 5 (63%) 55 (76%) S 9. Electricity Regulatory Authority 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 6 (100%) 7 (88%) 6 (75%) 67 (93%) HS 10. Gulu Hospital 7 (70%) 2 (20%) 3 (30%) 5 (50%) 3 (30%) 3 (50%) 4 (50%) 4 (50%) 31 (43%) MS 11. Gulu University 6 (60%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 9 (90%) 4 (40%) 5 (83%) 4 (50%) 8 (100%) 54 (75%) S 12. Health Service Commission 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 3 (30%) 6 (100%) 3 (38%) 5 (63%) 43 (60%) MS
463
Rating Results For Central Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: Contract CA: CA: Solicitation CA: CA: Procurement Placement, CA: Performance Aggregat Procurement and Bidding Evaluation Record Overall Name of PDE Disposal Award and Reporting of Contracts e Score. Structures Procedures Procedures Keeping Rating Planning Management (Max: 6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8)
13. Inspectorate of Government 10 (100%) 5 (50%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%) 4 (50%) 55 (76%) S 14. Internal Security Organisation 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 7 (70%) 0 (0%) 7 (88%) 7 (88%) 55 (76%) S 15. Kyambogo University 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 7 (70%) 5 (83%) 8 (100%) 8 (100%) 62 (86%) HS 16. Law Development Centre 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 5 (50%) 6 (100%) 4 (50%) 5 (63%) 52 (72%) S 17. Local Government Finance Commission 6 (60%) 6 (60%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 7 (70%) 5 (83%) 7 (88%) 6 (75%) 57 (79%) S 18. Makerere University Business School 9 (90%) 9 (90%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%) 7 (70%) 5 (83%) 4 (50%) 4 (50%) 47 (65%) S 19. Management Training and Advisory Centre 3 (30%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 1 (13%) 0 (0%) 6 (8%) HU 20. Masaka Hospital 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 8 (80%) 0 (0%) 4 (40%) 0 (0%) 1 (13%) 1 (13%) 28 (39%) U 21. Mbale Hospital 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 2 (20%) 5 (50%) 3 (30%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 6 (75%) 32 (44%) MS 22. Micro Finance Support Centre Ltd 7 (70%) 4 (40%) 7 (70%) 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 1 (17%) 4 (50%) 2 (25%) 38 (53%) MS 23. Ministry of Defence 7 (70%) 5 (50%) 6 (60%) 8 (80%) 3 (30%) 3 (50%) 4 (50%) 5 (63%) 41 (57%) MS 24. Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 8 (80%) 4 (40%) 5 (83%) 7 (88%) 4 (50%) 51 (71%) S 25. Ministry of Finance, Planning & Economic Development 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 4 (67%) 6 (75%) 6 (75%) 53 (74%) S
464
Rating Results For Central Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: Contract CA: CA: Solicitation CA: CA: Procurement Placement, CA: Performance Aggregat Procurement and Bidding Evaluation Record Overall Name of PDE Disposal Award and Reporting of Contracts e Score. Structures Procedures Procedures Keeping Rating Planning Management (Max: 6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8)
26. Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development 7 (70%) 4 (40%) 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 4 (40%) 5 (83%) 6 (75%) 4 (50%) 46 (64%) S 27. Ministry of Information and Communications Technology 7 (70%) 4 (40%) 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 9 (90%) 2 (33%) 8 (100%) 8 (100%) 57 (79%) S 28. Ministry of Internal Affairs 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 6 (60%) 3 (30%) 1 (17%) 3 (38%) 5 (63%) 40 (56%) MS 29. Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs 8 (80%) 2 (20%) 4 (40%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 18 (25%) U 30. Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development 4 (40%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 4 (67%) 5 (63%) 6 (75%) 52 (72%) S 31. Ministry of Public Service 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 6 (100%) 8 (100%) 7 (88%) 67 (93%) HS 32. Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Industry 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 6 (60%) 0 (0%) 7 (88%) 1 (13%) 37 (51%) MS 33. Ministry of Water and Environment 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 9 (90%) 6 (60%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%) 5 (63%) 56 (78%) S 34. Ministry of Works and Transport 6 (60%) 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 9 (90%) 3 (30%) 4 (67%) 8 (100%) 5 (63%) 48 (67%) S 35. Mulago Hospital 7 (70%) 4 (40%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 0 (0%) 5 (63%) 5 (63%) 47 (65%) S 36. National Council for Children 5 (50%) 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 9 (90%) 2 (20%) 6 (100%) 5 (63%) 5 (63%) 42 (58%) MS 37. National Council for Higher Education 2 (20%) 0 (0%) 1 (10%) 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 2 (33%) 7 (88%) 0 (0%) 15 (21%)
465
Rating Results For Central Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: Contract CA: CA: Solicitation CA: CA: Procurement Placement, CA: Performance Aggregat Procurement and Bidding Evaluation Record Overall Name of PDE Disposal Award and Reporting of Contracts e Score. Structures Procedures Procedures Keeping Rating Planning Management (Max: 6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8)
38. National Council for Science and Technology 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 5 (83%) 7 (88%) 4 (50%) 56 (78%) S 39. National Curriculum Development Centre 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 4 (40%) 3 (30%) 3 (30%) 3 (50%) 2 (25%) 4 (50%) 37 (51%) MS 40. National Environment Management Authority 6 (60%) 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 8 (80%) 4 (40%) 4 (67%) 7 (88%) 5 (63%) 47 (65%) S 41. National Forest Authority 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 6 (100%) 6 (75%) 4 (50%) 50 (69%) S 42. National Housing and Construction Company Ltd 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 0 (0%) 6 (75%) 6 (75%) 49 (68%) S 43. National Planning Authority 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 1 (10%) 4 (67%) 6 (75%) 7 (88%) 46 (64%) S 44. National Water and Sewerage Corporation Ltd 8 (80%) 9 (90%) 9 (90%) 7 (70%) 4 (40%) 5 (83%) 4 (50%) 5 (63%) 51 (71%) S 45. Office of the Prime Minister 6 (60%) 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 7 (70%) 6 (100%) 7 (88%) 6 (75%) 58 (81%) S 46. Parliament of Uganda 10 (100%) 0 (0%) 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 3 (30%) 4 (67%) 7 (88%) 6 (75%) 48 (67%) S 47. Population Secretariat 7(70%) 5(50%) 10(100%) 10(100%) 4(40%) 6(100%) 8(100%) 4(50%) 54(75%) S 48. Post Bank (U) Ltd 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%) 1 (10%) 8 (80%) 5 (83%) 6 (75%) 3 (38%) 38 (53%) MS 49. Posta Uganda Ltd 6 (60%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 0 (0%) 6 (75%) 3 (38%) 35 (49%) MS 50. Privatization Unit 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 5 (83%) 6 (75%) 5 (63%) 53 (74%) S
466
Rating Results For Central Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: Contract CA: CA: Solicitation CA: CA: Procurement Placement, CA: Performance Aggregat Procurement and Bidding Evaluation Record Overall Name of PDE Disposal Award and Reporting of Contracts e Score. Structures Procedures Procedures Keeping Rating Planning Management (Max: 6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8)
51. Public Service Commission 9 (90%) 5 (50%) 4 (40%) 3 (30%) 4 (40%) 6 (100%) 8 (100%) 3 (38%) 42 (58%) MS 52. Rural Electrification Agency 8 (80%) 4 (40%) 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 9 (90%) 6 (100%) 8 (100%) 8 (100%) 62 (86%) HS 53. Soroti Hospital 6 (60%) 6 (60%) 8 (80%) 1 (10%) 4 (40%) 4 (67%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 33 (46%) MS 54. State House 7 (70%) 5 (50%) 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 3 (50%) 5 (63%) 5 (63%) 47 (65%) S 55. Uganda AIDS Commission 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 3 (30%) 2 (33%) 8 (100%) 6 (75%) 57 (79%) S 56. Uganda Coffee Development Authority 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 6 (100%) 7 (88%) 5 (63%) 57 (79%) S 57. Uganda Communications Commission 10 (100%) 7 (70%) 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 5 (50%) 6 (100%) 5 (63%) 6 (75%) 58 (81%) S 58. Uganda Development Bank 5 (50%) 2 (20%) 3 (30%) 6 (60%) 9 (90%) 0 (0%) 5 (63%) 2 (25%) 32 (44%) MS 59. Uganda Electricity Distribution Company 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 7 (70%) 6 (100%) 8 (100%) 8 (100%) 67 (93%) HS 60. Uganda Electricity Generation Company 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 9 (90%) 6 (60%) 6 (100%) 7 (88%) 5 (63%) 57 (79%) S 61. Uganda Electricity Transmission Company 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 9 (90%) 6 (60%) 6 (100%) 7 (88%) 5 (63%) 57 (79%) S 62. Uganda Export Promotion Board 5 (50%) 6 (60%) 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 2 (33%) 2 (25%) 5 (63%) 43 (60%) MS 63. Uganda Human Rights Commission 8 (80%) 9 (90%) 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 5 (83%) 8 (100%) 6 (75%) 59 (82%) HS
467
Rating Results For Central Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: Contract CA: CA: Solicitation CA: CA: Procurement Placement, CA: Performance Aggregat Procurement and Bidding Evaluation Record Overall Name of PDE Disposal Award and Reporting of Contracts e Score. Structures Procedures Procedures Keeping Rating Planning Management (Max: 6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 8)
64. Uganda Insurance Commission 8 (80%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 6 (100%) 8 (100%) 6 (75%) 65 (90%) HS 65. Uganda Investment Authority 3 (30%) 2 (20%) 4 (40%) 8 (80%) 2 (20%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 1 (13%) 24 (33%) U 66. Uganda Management Institute 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 4 (40%) 2 (33%) 6 (75%) 6 (75%) 54 (75%) S 67. Uganda National Examination Board 7 (70%) 2 (20%) 10 (100%) 9 (90%) 6 (60%) 6 (100%) 8 (100%) 5 (63%) 53 (74%) S 68. Uganda Police 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 2 (20%) 5 (83%) 7 (88%) 5 (63%) 50 (69%) S 69. Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation 6 (60%) 9 (90%) 7 (70%) 6 (60%) 2 (20%) 3 (50%) 4 (50%) 4 (50%) 41 (57%) MS 70. Uganda Prisons Service 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 3 (30%) 4 (67%) 6 (75%) 2 (25%) 54 (75%) S 71. Uganda Property Holdings Ltd 4 (40%) 4 (40%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 3 (38%) 2 (25%) 23 (32%) U 72. Uganda Revenue Authority 9 (90%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 3 (30%) 6 (100%) 8 (100%) 5 (63%) 56 (78%) S
468
Rating Results For Local Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: CA: CA: Procurement Solicitation CA: Contract CA: CA: Performance Aggregate Name of Procurement and and Evaluation Placement, Record Overall Reporting of Contracts Score. PDE Structures Disposal Bidding Procedures Award and Keeping Rating (Max:6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) Planning Procedures (Max: 10) Management (Max: 8) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) Adjumani 1. District 6 (60%) 6 (60%) 5 (50%) 4 (40%) 3 (30%) 2 (33%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 30 (42%) MS
2. Apac District 6 (60%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 4 (67%) 4 (50%) 5 (63%) 54 (75%) S
3. Arua Municipality 8 (80%) 9 (90%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 2 (20%) 6 (100%) 6 (75%) 5 (63%) 46 (64%) S Budaka 4. District 7 (70%) 4 (40%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 10 (100%) 4 (67%) 6 (75%) 6 (75%) 56 (78%) S Bundibugyo 5. District 6 (60%) 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 1 (10%) 3 (50%) 2 (25%) 1 (13%) 31 (43%) MS
6. Bushenyi District 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 2 (20%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 3 (38%) 32 (44%) MS
7. Busia District 5 (50%) 7 (70%) 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 2 (33%) 3 (38%) 3 (38%) 41 (57%) MS
8. Entebbe Municipality 5 (50%) 6 (60%) 3 (30%) 0 (0%) 2 (20%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 1 (13%) 19 (26%) U Fort Portal 9. Municipality 7 (70%) 9 (90%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 7 (70%) 0 (0%) 6 (75%) 4 (50%) 52 (72%) S
10. Gulu District 7 (70%) 9 (90%) 6 (60%) 10 (100%) 5 (50%) 6 (100%) 6 (75%) 6 (75%) 55 (76%) S Gulu 11. Municipality 7 (70%) 8 (80%) 4 (40%) 2 (20%) 3 (30%) 3 (50%) 5 (63%) 3 (38%) 35 (49%) MS
469 Rating Results For Local Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: CA: CA: Procurement Solicitation CA: Contract CA: CA: Performance Aggregate Name of Procurement and and Evaluation Placement, Record Overall Reporting of Contracts Score. PDE Structures Disposal Bidding Procedures Award and Keeping Rating (Max:6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) Planning Procedures (Max: 10) Management (Max: 8) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) Hoima 12. District 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%) 2 (20%) 4 (67%) 4 (50%) 3 (38%) 35 (49%) MS Iganga 13. District 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 4 (67%) 5 (63%) 6 (75%) 56 (78%) S Isingiro 14. District 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 7 (70%) 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 2 (33%) 6 (75%) 6 (75%) 51 (71%) S
15. Jinja Municipality 4 (40%) 1 (10%) 6 (60%) 5 (50%) 2 (20%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 2 (25%) 23 (32%) U Kabale 16. District 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 4 (40%) 7 (70%) 1 (10%) 4 (67%) 6 (75%) 2 (25%) 34 (47%) MS
Kabale 17. Municipality 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 9 (90%) 4 (40%) 4 (40%) 2 (33%) 4 (50%) 1 (13%) 37 (51%) MS Kalangala 18. District 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 0 (0%) 3 (30%) 4 (40%) 4 (67%) 4 (50%) 2 (25%) 32 (44%) MS
Kampala 20. City Council 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 6 (60%) 5 (50%) 4 (40%) 3 (50%) 3 (38%) 3 (38%) 34 (47%) MS Kamwenge 21. District 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 10 (100%) 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 5 (83%) 6 (75%) 5 (63%) 59 (82%) HS Kanungu 22. District 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 5 (50%) 7 (70%) 2 (20%) 5 (63%) 5 (63%) 38 (53%) MS Kapchorwa 23. District 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 7 (70%) 7 (70%) 4 (40%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 4 (50%) 39 (54%) MS Kasese 24. District 7 (70%) 5 (50%) 2 (20%) 7 (70%) 2 (20%) 0 (0%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 27 (38%) U
470 Rating Results For Local Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: CA: CA: Procurement Solicitation CA: Contract CA: CA: Performance Aggregate Name of Procurement and and Evaluation Placement, Record Overall Reporting of Contracts Score. PDE Structures Disposal Bidding Procedures Award and Keeping Rating (Max:6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) Planning Procedures (Max: 10) Management (Max: 8) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) Kayunga 25. District 9 (90%) 6 (60%) 6 (60%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 3 (50%) 4 (50%) 3 (38%) 41 (57%) MS Kibaale 26. District 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 8 (80%) 9 (90%) 5 (83%) 5 (63%) 6 (75%) 57 (79%) S Kiboga 27. District 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 4 (40%) 9 (90%) 5 (50%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 1 (13%) 32 (44%) MS Kiruhura 28. District 7 (70%) 6 (60%) 9 (90%) 7 (70%) 4 (40%) 4 (67%) 5 (63%) 4 (50%) 46 (64%) S Kisoro 29. District 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 5 (50%) 4 (40%) 5 (83%) 6 (75%) 4 (50%) 47 (65%) S Lira 30. Municipality 2 (20%) 10 (100%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%) 1 (10%) 6 (100%) 3 (38%) 0 (0%) 31 (43%) MS Luwero 31. District 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 2 (20%) 2 (33%) 3 (38%) 3 (38%) 28 (39%) U Masaka 32. District 4 (40%) 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 1 (17%) 3 (38%) 4 (50%) 43 (60%) MS Mbarara 33. Municipality 7 (70%) 6 (60%) 9 (90%) 5 (50%) 3 (30%) 3 (50%) 2 (25%) 3 (38%) 38 (53%) MS
34. Moyo District 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 6 (60%) 6 (60%) 1 (10%) 5 (83%) 2 (25%) 1 (13%) 34 (47%) MS
35. Mpigi District 7 (70%) 7 (70%) 9 (90%) 10 (100%) 6 (60%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%) 5 (63%) 52 (72%) S 36. Mubende District 4 (40%) 6 (60%) 0 (0%) 5 (50%) 0 (0%) 4 (67%) 1 (13%) 2 (25%) 22 (31%) U
471 Rating Results For Local Government PDEs CA: CA: CA: CA: CA: Procurement Solicitation CA: Contract CA: CA: Performance Aggregate Name of Procurement and and Evaluation Placement, Record Overall Reporting of Contracts Score. PDE Structures Disposal Bidding Procedures Award and Keeping Rating (Max:6) Committee (Max: 72) (Max: 10) Planning Procedures (Max: 10) Management (Max: 8) (Max: 8) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) (Max: 10) 37. Mukono District 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 2 (20%) 0 (0%) 3 (38%) 1 (13%) 26 (36%) U 38. Nakasongola District 7 (70%) 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 5 (50%) 7 (70%) 4 (67%) 5 (63%) 3 (38%) 44 (61%) S 39. Namutamba District 3 (30%) 7 (70%) 6 (60%) 8 (80%) 3 (30%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 1 (13%) 32 (44%) MS 40. Nebbi District 6 (60%) 5 (50%) 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 3 (30%) 1 (17%) 4 (50%) 2 (25%) 35 (49%) MS 41. Oyam District 6 (60%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 1 (17%) 4 (50%) 3 (38%) 34 (47%) MS 42. Pader District 4 (40%) 1 (10%) 1 (10%) 6 (60%) 3 (30%) 1 (17%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 20 (28%) U 42. Pallisa District 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 8 (80%) 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 3 (50%) 4 (50%) 3 (38%) 45 (63%) S 44. Rukungiri District 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 3 (30%) 1 (17%) 4 (50%) 3 (38%) 31 (43%) MS 45. Sembabule District 4 (40%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%) 8 (80%) 3 (30%) 1 (17%) 3 (38%) 2 (25%) 30 (42%) MS 46. Soroti Municipality 8 (80%) 7 (70%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 4 (40%) 6 (100%) 6 (75%) 3 (38%) 44 (61%) S 47. Tororo Municipality 5 (50%) 6 (60%) 7 (70%) 7 (70%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (63%) 2 (25%) 32 (44%) MS 48. Wakiso District 7 (70%) 7 (70%) 8 (80%) 9 (90%) 8 (80%) 5 (83%) 4 (50%) 5 (63%) 53 (74%) S
472 ANNEX III PERFORMANCE OF PDES BY CATEGORY Ministries
473 Government Departments/Agencies
474 Statutory Bodies
475 State Enterprises
476 Commissions
477 Regional Referral Hospitals
478 Training Institutions
479 Councils
480 Boards
481 Local Governments
482 ANNEX IV: NUMBER OF CONTRACTS COMMITTEE AND PDU MEMBERS Procurement & Disposal Contracts Committee Procurement & Disposal Proc Plan Entity Unit FY 2007/08 Ministries
1. Ministry of Defence 5 Contracts Committee 2 Proc Officers
2. Ministry of Energy 5 Contracts Committee 3 – Principal Proc Officer, and Mineral Senior Proc Officer , Development Proc Officer
5 CC in Delegated CC of 4 PDU in delegated PDU of FINMAP FINMAP
3. Ministry of Finance, 5 Contracts Committee 1 Head PDU √ Planning & Economic Development 4. Ministry of Gender, 5 Contracts Committee 2 - Procurement Officer √ Labour and Social Ass Procurement Officer Development 5. Ministry of 5 Contracts Committee 2 – Principal Proc Officer Information and Procurement Officer Communications Technology 6. Ministry of Internal 5 Contracts Committee 1 Procurement Officer Affairs 7. Ministry of Justice 5 Contracts Committee 2 - Procurement Officer and Constitutional Ass. Procurement Officer Affairs 8. Ministry of Lands, 5 Contracts Committee 5 – Princ Proc Officer √ Housing and Urban Snr. Proc Officer Development Proc Officer
9. Ministry of Public 5 Contracts Committee 2 Senior Proc Officer √ Service Procurement Officer
10. Ministry of Trade, 5 Contracts Committee 2 PDU Tourism and Industry 11. Ministry of Water 5 Contracts Committee 3 - Principal Proc Officer √ and Environment 2 Proc Officer
12. Ministry of Works 5 Contracts Committee 3 - Senior Proc Officer and Transport 2 Proc Officer Government Departments / Agencies
1. Auditor General 4 Contracts Committee 1 Procurement Officer √
483 Procurement & Disposal Contracts Committee Procurement & Disposal Proc Plan Entity Unit FY 2007/08 2. Courts of Judicature 4 Contracts Committee 2 - Senior Proc Officer. Procurement Officer
3. Directorate of Public 5 Contracts Committee 1- APO Prosecutions 4. Inspectorate of 5 Contracts Committee 2 Proc Officers √ Government 5. Internal Security 5 Contracts Committee 2 Members √ Organisation 6. National Curriculum 4 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √ Development Centre 7. Office of the Prime 5 Contracts Committee 2 Principal Proc Officer √ Minister Procurement Officer 8. Parliament of 5 Contracts Committee 4 Senior Proc Officer Uganda 2 Proc Officer IAPO 9. Privatization Unit 4 Contracts Committee 2- SPO and PO
10. Rural Electrification 5 Contracts Committee 1 Procurement Officer Agency 11. State House 4 Contracts Committee 2- SPO and PO
12. Uganda Police 5 Contracts Committee 4 Principal Proc Officer √ Senior Proc Officer 2 Proc Officer 13. Uganda Population 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √ Secretariat 14. Uganda Prisons 5 Contracts Committee 2 Principal Proc Officer √ Service Procurement Officer Statutory Bodies
1. Capital Markets 5 Contracts Committee 1 Ag. Proc Officer √ Authority 2. Cotton 5 Contracts Committee 2 - Procurement Officer and √ Development Ass Proc Officer Organisation 3. Diary Development 4 Contracts Committee 1 Ag. Proc Officer Authority (Not yet approved by the PS/ST) 4. Electricity 5 Contracts Committee 1 Head Proc Unit √ Regulatory Authority 5. National 4 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer Environment Management Authority 6. National Forest 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √ Authority
484 Procurement & Disposal Contracts Committee Procurement & Disposal Proc Plan Entity Unit FY 2007/08 7. National Planning 5 Contracts Committee 1 Ag. Proc Officer Authority 8. Uganda Coffee 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc & Disposal Unit Development Authority 9. Uganda Investment 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Specialist Authority 10. Uganda Revenue 4 Contracts Committee 9 – Proc Manager and Officers √ Authority State Enterprises
1. Micro Finance 5 Contacts Committee 1 Proc Officer Support Centre Ltd 2. National Housing 6 Contracts Committee 7 - CCO, PM, 3 POS and 2 PAS and Construction Company Ltd 3. National Water and 4 Contracts Committee 13 - Proc Manager, Senior Proc √ Sewerage Officer, 3 Proc Officer & 8 Proc Corporation Ltd Support Assts 4. Post Bank (U) Ltd 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer
5. Posta Uganda Ltd 3 Contracts Committee 2 Manager & Procurement √ Officer 6. Uganda 5 Contracts Committee 1 Head of Admin & PR Development Bank 7. Uganda Electricity 3 Contracts Committee 1 Procurement Officer √ Distribution Company 8. Uganda Electricity 5 Contacts Committee 1 Procurement Officer √ Generation Company 9. Uganda Electricity 5 Contracts Committee 3 - Principal Proc Officer, Senior √ Transmission Proc Officer & Proc Officer Company 10. Uganda Printing and 4 Contracts Committee 1 Head of Proc & Disposal √ Publishing Corporation 11. Uganda Property 4 Contracts Committee 1 PDU Holdings Ltd Commissions
1. Education Service 5 Contracts Committee 1 Asst. Proc Officer √ Commission 2. Health Service 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √ Commission 3. Local Government 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √ Finance Commission
485 Procurement & Disposal Contracts Committee Procurement & Disposal Proc Plan Entity Unit FY 2007/08 4. Public Service 4 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √ Commission 5. Uganda AIDS 5 Contracts Committee 2 Proc Officer √ Commission Ass. Proc Officer. 6. Uganda 5 Contracts Committee 2 – Proc Manager & Proc √ Communications Specialist Commission 7. Uganda Human 5 Contracts Committee 2 PDU √ Rights Commission 8. Uganda Insurance 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √ Commission Regional Referral Hospitals
1. Arua Hospital 4 Contracts Committee 1 Procurement Officer √
2. Gulu Hospital 4 Contracts Committee 1 Ass. Proc Officer
3. Masaka Hospital 5 Contracts Committee 1 Ass Proc Officer √
4. Mbale Hospital 5 Contracts Committee Ag. PDU is Sec to CC
5. Mulago Hospital 5 Contracts Committee 2 PDU
6. Soroti Hospital 2 Contracts Committee None but in process
Training Institutions
1. Gulu University 5 Contracts Committee 2 - Proc Officer √ Ass. Proc Officer 2. Kyambogo 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √ University 3. Law Development 5 Contracts Committee 3 - Proc Officer and 2 PAS Centre 4. Makerere University 4 Contracts Committee 1 Head PDU √ Business School 5. Management 5 Contracts Committee None – Admin Officer handles Training and proc function Advisory Centre 6. Uganda Management 5 Contracts Committee 2 - Proc Officer and √ Institute Ass Proc Officer Councils
1. National Council for None 2 Proc Officers Children
2. National Council for 2 Contracts Committee 2 Proc Officers Higher Education
486 Procurement & Disposal Contracts Committee Procurement & Disposal Proc Plan Entity Unit FY 2007/08 3. National Council for 5 Contracts Committee 2 - Proc Officer and √ Science and Ass. Proc Officer Technology Boards
1. Uganda Export 5 Contracts Committee 3 - No Professional Officer Promotion Board 2. Uganda National 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer Examination Board Districts
1. Adjumani District 5 Contracts Committee None applicants failed after √ advert 2. Apac District 4 Contracts Committee 1 Ag. Head PDU √ 3. Budaka District 4 Contracts Committee 3 - Senior Proc Officer √ Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer √ 4. Bundibugyo District 3 Contracts Committee None 5. Bushenyi District 5 Contracts Committee 2 - Princ. Proc Officer and √ Proc Officer 6. Busia District 4 Contracts Committee 1 Senior Proc Officer √
7. Gulu District 3 Contracts Committee √ No PT/ST approval No PDU (Ag. PDU is Asst. CAO) 8. Hoima District 4 Contracts Committee 2 Proc Officer √ Ass. Proc Officer 9. Iganga District 5 Contracts Committee 2 Senior Proc Officer √ Proc Officer 10. Isingiro District 4 Contracts Committee 3 - Snr Proc Officer, Proc Officer and Ass. Proc Officer 11. Kabale District 4 Contracts Committee 2 - Proc Officer Ass. Procurement Officer
12. Kalangala District 3 Contracts Committee 2 - Princ Proc Officer √ Ass. Proc Officer 13. Kamwenge District 4 Contracts Committee √ 2- PO and APO 14. Kanungu District 5 Contracts Committee 2 Snr. Proc Officer Proc Officer 15. Kapchorwa District 4 Contracts Committee 1 Ass. Proc Officer
16. Kasese District 4 Contracts Committee 3 - Snr Proc Officer Proc Officer
487 Procurement & Disposal Contracts Committee Procurement & Disposal Proc Plan Entity Unit FY 2007/08 Ass. Proc Officer 17. Kayunga District 5 Contracts Committee 3 - Snr Proc Officer Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer √ 18. Kibaale District 5 Contracts Committee 2 - Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer 19. Kiboga District 5 Contracts Committee 1 Ag. PDU √
20. Kiruhura District 4 Contracts Committee 1 Ass. Proc Officer √
21. Kisoro District 5 Contracts Committee 2 - Snr Proc Officer √ Ass. Proc Officer 22. Luwero District 3 Contracts Committee 3 - Snr Proc Officer √ Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer 23. Masaka District 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √
24. Mbale District 5 Contracts Committee 3 - Snr Proc Officer √ Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer 25. Moyo District 5 Contracts Committee None √
26. Mpigi District 4 Contracts Committee 3 - Snr Proc Officer Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer 27. Mubende District 5 Contracts Committee 3 - Snr Proc Officer √ Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer 28. Mukono District 3 Contracts Committee 3 - Prin. Proc Officer Snr Proc Officer Proc Officer 29. Nakasongola √ District 4 Contracts Committee 3 - Snr. Proc Officer Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer 30. Namutamba District 3 Contracts Committee 1 Ag. PDU √
31. Nebbi District 4 Contracts Committee 3 PDU √
32. Oyam District 4 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer
2 Snr. Proc Officer 33. Pader District 4 Contracts Committee Proc Officer
34. Pallisa District 5 Contracts Committee 2 Snr. Proc Officer √ Proc Officer
488 Procurement & Disposal Contracts Committee Procurement & Disposal Proc Plan Entity Unit FY 2007/08 35. Rukungiri District 5 Contracts Committee 1 Proc Officer √
36. Sembabule District 4 Contracts Committee 1 Ag. Head PDU
37. Wakiso District 3 Contracts Committee 2 Snr. Proc Officer Proc Officer Municipalities
1. Arua Municipality 5 Contracts Committee 2 Snr. Proc Officer √ Proc Officer 2. Entebbe √ Municipality 5 Contracts Committee 2 Snr. Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer 3. Fort Portal √ Municipality 5 Contracts Committee None
4. Gulu Municipality 5 Contracts Committee 1 √
5. Jinja Municipality 5 Contracts Committee 2 Proc Officer Ass. Proc Officer 6. Kabale Municipality 3 Contracts Committee 2 PDU √
7. Kampala City 5 Contracts Committee 2 Prc. Proc Officer √ Council Snr Proc Officer
8. Lira Municipality 3 Contracts Committee 1 Ag. Head PDU √
9. Mbarara 4 Contracts Committee 2 Snr. Proc Officer √ Municipality Ass. Proc Officer
10. Soroti Municipality 3 Contracts Committee Ag. PDU - Sec √
11. Tororo Municipality 5 Contracts Committee 1 Ag. PDU √
489 ANNEX IV: OVERALL RANKING OF ENTITIES
A: OVERALL RANKING OF CG PDES
Overall Aggregate Score No. Name of PDE Compliance (Max: 72) Rating 1. Uganda Insurance Commission 65 (90%) HS 2. Capital Markets Author ity 62 (86%) HS 3. Electricity Regulatory Authority 62 (86%) HS 4. Kyambogo University 62 (86%) HS 5. Rural Electrification Agency 62 (86%) HS 6. Uganda Coffee Development Authority 61 (85%) HS 7. Uganda Human Rights Commission 59 (82%) HS 8. Office of the Prime Minister 58 (81%) HS 9. Uganda Communications Commission 58 (81%) HS 10. Local Government Finance Commission 57 (79%) S 11. Ministry of Information and Communications Technology 57 (79%) S 12. Uganda AIDS Commission 57 (79%) S 13. Uganda Electricity Generation Com pany 57 (79%) S 14. Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Ltd. 57 (79%) S 15. Uganda Management Institute 57 (79%) S 16. Cotton Development Organisation 56 (78%) S 17. Ministry of Water and Environment 56 (78%) S 18. National Council for Science and Technology 56 (78%) S 19. Uganda Revenue Authority 56 (78%) S 20. Internal Security Organisation 55 (76%) S 21. Uganda National Examination Board 55 (76%) S 22. Gulu University 54 (75%) S 23. Uganda Population Secretariat 54 (75%) S 24. Uganda Electricity Distribution Company 54 (7 5%) S 25. Ministry of Finance, Planning & Economic Development 53 (74%) S 26. Privatization Unit 53 (74%) S 27. Directorate of Public Prosecutions 52 (72%) S 28. Education Service Commission 52 (72%) S 29. Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development 52 (72%) S 30. Ministry of Public Service 52 (72%) S 31. Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development 51 (71%) S
490 Overall Aggregate Score No. Name of PDE Compliance (Max: 72) Rating 32. National Water and Sewerage Corporation Ltd 51 (71%) S 33. National Forest Authority 50 (69%) S 34. Uganda Police 50 (69%) S 35. Uganda Prisons Service 50 (69%) S 36. Law Development Centre 49 (68%) S 37. Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development 49 (68%) S 38. National Housing and Construction Company Ltd 49 (68%) S 39. Ministry of Works and Transport 48 (67%) S 40. National Planning Authority 48 (67%) S 41. Parliament of Uganda 48 (67%) S 42. Makerere University Business School 47 (65%) S 43. Mulago Hospital 47 (65%) S 44. National Environment Management Authority 47 (65%) S 45. State House 47 (65%) S 46. Uganda Export Promotion Board 47 (65%) S 47. Courts of Judicature 46 (64%) S 48. Inspectorate of Government 44 (61%) S 49. Health Service Commission 43 (60%) MS 50. Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation 43 (60%) MS 51. Ministry of Internal Affairs 42 (58%) MS 52. National Council for Children 42 (58%) MS 53. Public Service Commission 42 ( 58%) MS 54. Ministry of Defence 41 (57%) MS 55. Auditor General 38 (53%) MS 56. Micro Finance Support Centre Ltd 38 (53%) MS 57. Post Bank (U) Ltd 38 (53%) MS 58. Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Industry 37 (51%) MS 59. National Curriculum Development Centre 37 (51%) MS 60. Masaka Hospital 35 (49%) MS 61. Posta Uganda Ltd 35 (49%) MS 62. Gulu Hospital 32 (44%) MS 63. Uganda Development Bank 32 (44%) MS 64. Mbale Hospital 31 (43%) MS 65. Soroti Hospital 26 (36%) U 66. Uganda Property Holdings Ltd 26 (36%) U 67. Uganda Investment Authori ty 24 (33%) U 68. Arua Hospital 22 (31%) U 69. Ministry of Justice and Constitutional 18 (25%) U
491 Overall Aggregate Score No. Name of PDE Compliance (Max: 72) Rating Affairs 70. Diary Development Authority 17 (24%) U 71. National Council for Higher Education 15 (21%) U 72. Management Training and Advisory Centre 14 (19%) HU
B: OVERALL RANKING OF LG PDES
Aggregate Score. Overall Name of PDE No (Max: 72) Rating 1. Kamwenge District 59 (82%) HS 2. Kibaale District 57 (79%) S 3. Apac District 54 (75%) S 4. Budaka District 54 (75%) S 5. Fort Portal Municipality 52 (72%) S 6. Mpigi District 52 (72%) S 7. Gulu District 49 (68%) S 8. Iganga District 48 (67%) S 9. Kisoro District 47 (65%) S 10. Arua Municipality 46 (64%) S 11. Kiruhura District 46 (64%) S 12. Pallisa District 45 (63%) S 13. Nakasongola District 44 (61%) S 14. Kanungu District 43 (60%) MS 15. Wakiso District 43 (60%) MS 16. Mbale District 42 (58%) MS 17. Kayunga District 41 (57%) MS 18. Busia District 40 (56%) MS 19. Kapchorwa District 39 (54%) MS 20. Masaka District 39 (54%) MS 21. Isingiro District 38 (53%) MS 22. Soroti Municipality 38 (53%) MS 23. Kabale Mu nicipality 37 (51%) MS 24. Rukungiri District 36 (50%) MS 25. Gulu Municipality 35 (49%) MS 26. Nebbi District 35 (49%) MS 27. Bundibugyo District 34 (47%) MS 28. Kabale District 34 (47%) MS 29. Kampala City Council 34 (47%) MS 30. Kiboga District 34 (47%) MS 31. Moyo District 34 (47%) MS 32. Oyam District 34 (47%) MS
492 Aggregate Score. Overall Name of PDE No (Max: 72) Rating 33. Hoima District 33 (46%) MS 34. Sembabule District 33 (46%) MS 35. Bushenyi District 32 (44%) MS 36. Kalangala District 32 (44%) MS 37. Namutamba District 32 (44%) MS 38. Tororo Municipality 32 (44%) MS 39. Lira Munici pality 31 (43%) MS 40. Mbarara Municipality 31 (43%) MS 41. Adjumani District 30 (42%) MS 42. Luwero District 28 (39%) U 43. Kasese District 27 (38%) U 44. Mukono District 26 (36%) U 45. Pader District 26 (36%) U 46. Jinja Municipality 23 (32%) U 47. Mubende District 22 ( 31%) U 48. Entebbe Municipality 19 (26%) U
493