Compendium of Country Examples and Lessons Learned from ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Annex BSummary of Agency Procurement Performance Indicators (APPI), PhilippinesFor the Compliance/Performance Indicators (CPIs), the Philippines employed two methods ofassessment to evaluate the application of the procurement regulations and the prevailing procurementpractices in the country.The first method used the Agency Procurement Performance Indicators (APPI). The APPI is atool used to assess and compare the effectiveness of a government agency‟s procurement systemagainst that of the national public procurement system using 28 baseline standards and indicatorsbased on the baseline indicators system. Ten key public procurement entities have been benchmarkedapplying agency procurement performance indicators (APPI). The results of the independentevaluation of 10 agencies were utilised to support the findings of the BLI assessment. The APPIresults were applied to the following 16 indicators: 1b, 1c, 1h, 2b, 2c, 2f, 3a, 3b, 5b, 5c, 6a, 6d, 7b, 9a,10b and 10c.A second method of assessment used was the CPIs which comprise Part II of the Methodology. The CIexercise is currently being undertaken by the Transparency and Accountability Network (TAN), a civilsociety organisation.Table 8. Summary of agency procurement performance indicators (APPI) in the PhilippinesMajor Criteria BIS Indicator Name BLI Indicator Agency 1 Agency 2 AverageScoreStrategy (6%)1. Agency Procurement ReformStrategy (40%)2. Strategic policy initiativesoutlined by the agency (30%)3. Key/strategic procurementissues (30%)Indicator 1 2.40% 2.40% 2.40%None 1.80% 0.00% 1.44%None 0.00% 0.00% 1.08%Total for agency strategy 4.20% 2.40% 4.92%ProfessionalisationMeasures(16%)4. Human Capital (60%) 5(c) 9.60% 9.60% 2.88%5. Use of the GovernmentProcurement System (G-EPS)(20%)6. Legal incentives toprocurement officers andemployees (20%)5(b) 3.20% 3.20% 3.20%None 1.40% 0.00% 0.92%Total for agency professionalization 14.20% 12.80% 7.00%OrganisationalStructure (16%)7. BAC and BAC Secretariat(40%)8. Hierarchical structure ofagency (30%)9. Standard documentation andprocedures (30%)None 6.40% 6.40% 6.40%6(d) 1.60% 4.80% 4.16%2(e), 2(b), 6(c ) 4.80% 4.80% 4.24%Total for organisational structure 12.80% 16.00% 14.80%COMPENDIUM OF COUNTRY EXAMPLES AND LESSONS LEARNED […] - OECD 2008 81
Procurementprocess (30%)10. Method of procurement usedShopping (30% of 10%)11. Limited source competition/shopping (20% of 10%)12. Direct contracting (20% of10%)13. Bidder’s participation (15%of 10%)14. Time for preparation of bids(15% of 10%)None 3.00% 0.00% 1.80%None 2.00% 0.00% 1.00%None 2.00% 0.00% 1.00%7(b) 0.00% 0.00% 0.15%None 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%Total for competition 8.50% 1.50% 5.45%15. Advertisement of bid noticesand publication of awards (70%of 10%)16. Posting of all procurementopportunities/activities andcontract awards in the G-EPS(30% of 10%)1(c ) 7.00% 7.00% 7.00%5(a) 1.50% 0.00% 1.20%Total for transparency 8.50% 7.00% 8.20%17. Procurements in APP (30%of 10%)18. Time for public bidding (25%of 10%)19. Time for bid evaluation (15%of 10%)20. Bidding process cancelled(15% of 10%)21. Late payments (15% of10%)3(a) 0.00% 3.00% 0.9%6 2.50% 2.50% 2.50%None 1.50% 0.00% 1.15%None 1.50% 1.50% 1.50%3(b) 0.00% 0.00% 0.55%Total for efficiency 5.50% 7.00% 6.60%Total for agency procurement process 22.50% 15.50% 20.25%Effectiveness(16%)22. Award prices lower thanABC23. Contract amount increase(30%)None 6.40% 6.40% 6.40%None 4.80% 4.80% 4.80%24. Number of protests (10%) 1(h) 1.60% 1.60% 1.60%25. Time to resolve protests(10%)26. Action taken on protest(10%)10(b) 1.60% 1.60% 1.60%10(c ) 1.60% 1.60% 1.60%Total for effectiveness 16.00% 16.00% 16.00%Accountabilitymeasures (16%)27. Internal audit units (60%)28. Systems and procedures tohear and documentadministrative cases (40%)9 (a) 9.60% 9.60% 6.72%10(b) 6.40% 6.40% 4.48%Total for accountability measures 16.00% 16.00% 11.20%TOTAL AGENCY RATING 85.70% 78.70% 74.17%82 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 14 and 15:
The Process of Preparing and Planni
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 70 and 71: Country Sampling for CPI Stakeholde
Page 80: Country Sampling for CPI Stakeholde
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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?