Compendium of Country Examples and Lessons Learned from ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Process of Preparing and Planning a Procurement AssessmentIn 2007, the JV on Procurement pilot countries started to prepare the assessment of their nationalprocurement system on the basis of the Methodology for Assessment of National ProcurementSystems. In sharing experiences, many pilot countries refer to “roadmaps” or “action plans” whichwere developed to allow for a smooth workflow in implementing the assessment. Different approacheswere chosen reflecting the specific country situation and resulting in different actions when planningthe assessment. The key questions discussed at the planning stage can be summarised as follows:Status of the assessment: Self-assessment, joint donor/partner country assessment, externalassessment?Context of the assessment: Stand-alone assessment using the Methodology, assessment inthe context of a CPAR/CPAR update, combined PEFA/Procurement assessment, follow-upassessment?Scope of the assessment: BLIs and CPIs? National level/agency level? Degree ofdecentralisation?Level of information available: Availability of national procurement statistics, quality ofprocurement records?Availability of expertise to conduct assessment: Assistance of a consultant experienced inthe use of the Methodology needed?Budget/Timing: costs involved? Funding? Sponsoring by donors? Time schedule?The text that follows is structured along the following lines:The section under Strategic issues discusses experiences in ensuring credibility and trust in theassessment results: local ownership, donor participation, and stakeholder involvement. Planning thework reflects more practical issues relative to planning the assessment process.I. Strategic issuesLocal ownership and donor participationBackground informationAid is more effective when partner countries exercise strong and effective leadership over theirdevelopment policies and strategies. This is why ownership is the fundamental tenet underpinning theParis Declaration. In particular, country ownership is key to procurement capacity development, thecore objective of the Methodology. The Methodology provides input into designing capacitydevelopment initiatives and serves as a baseline against which progress can be measured. A country‟scommitment to strengthen the national procurement systems includes a political willingness to change.COMPENDIUM OF COUNTRY EXAMPLES AND LESSONS LEARNED […] - OECD 2008 13
In the Paris Declaration, donors have agreed to commit resources for reforms and capacitydevelopment to help achieve the 2015 Millennium Development Goal targets. Donors have agreed touse the common assessment to develop strategies for assisting the capacity development plan and asan input to risk assessments for the use of national systems. 7Country experiencesBased on the country assessment reports provided, it is apparent that a variety of different assessmentapproaches were used depending on the specific country situation. They highlight the abovementionedprinciples of ownership and donor participation.Several countries conducted self-assessments (Tanzania, Sri Lanka, Zambia) and inviteddonors to discuss the scope and the approach of the assessment.In the Philippines, Paraguay and Indonesia, a review or update of a CPAR was upcoming.The procurement assessment was therefore integrated in this comprehensive process. Inthese three countries, joint assessments were done involving government and active donors.In Ghana, procurement capacity development was already part of a comprehensive publicfinancial management development programme. The government of Ghana and the WorldBank, as well as representatives of the Multi Donor Budget Support Group and otherstakeholders, therefore conducted a joint PEFA/procurement assessment.In Afghanistan, a post-conflict country, the legal framework was put in place only recentlyand a snapshot assessment focusing on the baseline indicators and on a few importantministries was conducted. It was highlighted in the monitoring report that the assessment sofar has been independent and that the same practice will be ensured throughout the process.The World Bank supported the assessment; other donors will be increasingly involved.In many of the pilot countries, national procurement statistics and data on procurementtransactions were not readily available. Data for performance and compliance measurementneeded to be collected for the purposes of the exercise. In these cases, pilot countries usuallylimited the data collection process to key agencies - mainly at the national level - anddecided to include only a limited number of indicators to keep the cost for undertaking suchan assessment under control. In the Philippines and Ghana, existing tools were used toevaluate performance at the entity level.Cross-country sharing seems to have worked well. Many countries involved procurementspecialists, donor representatives, consultants experienced in the Methodology orrepresentatives from other partner countries who have successfully used the Methodology intheir country to add value relative to facilitating the process, independence and credibility.Regional initiatives such as UEMOA (l‟Union économique et monétaire ouest africaine)have initiated regional public procurement reform programs encouraging and assistingmember countries in using the Methodology (for example Senegal, Niger).The Mongolia procurement assessment experience illustrates how high-level political support can bedemonstrated and how donor participation can facilitate the exercise.7The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness.14 COMPENDIUM OF COUNTRY EXAMPLES AND LESSONS LEARNED […] - OECD 2008
Page 1 and 2: Compendium of Country Examplesand L
Page 3: ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERAT
Page 8 and 9: ForewordIn 2002, the OECD-DAC and t
Page 10 and 11: Background and Purpose of this Pape
Page 12 and 13: The Procurement Assessment Methodol
Page 16 and 17: Box 1. High-level political support
Page 18 and 19: Table 2. Potential stakeholders in
Page 20 and 21: Based on the assessment reports pro
Page 22 and 23: willing to participate in the asses
Page 24 and 25: Implementing a Procurement Assessme
Page 26 and 27: 1 = areas where substantive work is
Page 28 and 29: Country experiencesMost of the pilo
Page 30 and 31: Indicator 4: Normative and regulato
Page 32 and 33: “Considerations for assessment”
Page 34 and 35: Lao, for example, reports that nati
Page 36 and 37: Figure 4. Possible negative impact
Page 38 and 39: Country experiencesThe usefulness o
Page 40 and 41: They identify and correct mistakes
Page 42 and 43: Box 8. Validation process in Zambia
Page 44 and 45: Making Use of the Assessment Result
Page 46 and 47: Procurement Capacity Development: I
Page 48: StakeholdersThe GPP argues that as
Page 51 and 52: Table 4. Compliance and Performance
Page 53 and 54: Engage banks in a dialogue to secur
Page 56 and 57: Linkages with Public Financial Mana
Page 58 and 59: Elements of transparency (transpare
Page 60 and 61: which serves as the externalinforma
Page 62 and 63: Next StepsThe Joint Venture on Proc
Page 64 and 65:
CountryLatestprogressreportAssessme
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Country Sampling for CPI Stakeholde
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80:
Page 83 and 84:
Procurementprocess (30%)10. Method
Page 85 and 86:
4. Member countries should ensure t
Page 88 and 89:
Annex DList of Referenced Resources
show all

Compendium of Country Examples and Lessons Learned from ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?