Overview of the application of the OECD/DAC Procurement Assessment Tool

The OECD/DAC Benchmarking Tool Working towards a consistent understanding and application of the OECD/DAC benchmarking tool.

Background
OECD/DAC benchmarking tool was introduced in current form in 2006
Created through the work of the Joint Venture on Procurement, a working group under OECD/DAC’s Aid Effectiveness Working Party
JV Procurement includes bilateral donors, multilateral development banks, UN, and more than 15 partner countries

Structure of the Benchmarking Tool
Four Pillars:
I – Legislative and Regulatory Framework
II – Institutional Framework/Management
III – Operations and Market Practices
IV – Integrity and Transparency
Twelve Indicators
Fifty-four sub-indicators – level at which scoring is undertaken

Purpose of the Tool
Provide information to the end user “snap shot” overview of system including how it links with other PFM/Governance aspects
Identify gaps with regard to defined and agreed benchmarks or standards
Management tool to support development of a reform/change management strategy
Supports a capacity development dialog between government and donors
Tracks change over time if reform strategy is pursued

PILLAR I Indicator 1 – Legislative and Regulatory Framework
Sub-indicator 1( a) – Scope of application and coverage of the legislative and regulatory framework.
Sub-indicator 1(b) – Procurement Methods
Sub-indicator 1(c) – Advertising rules and time limits
Sub-indicator 1(d) - Participation

Pillar I Indicator 1 (continued)
Sub-indicator 1(e) – Documentation and specifications
Sub-indicator 1(f) – Evaluation and award criteria
Sub-indicator 1(g) – Submission, receipt and opening of tenders
Sub-indicator 1 (h) - Complaints

PILLAR I Indicator 2- Implementing Regulations and Documentation
Sub-indicator 2(a) – Implementing regulations
Sub-indicator 2(b) – Model documents for goods, works and services
Sub-indicator 2(c) – Pre-qualifications
Sub-indicator 2(d) – Contracting for services
Sub-indicator 2(e) – User’s guide or manuals
Sub-indicator 2(f) – General conditions of contract (GCC)

PILLAR II Indicator 3 – Procurement is integrated into governance system
Sub-indicator 3(a) – Procurement planning is part of budget formulation and contributes to multiyear planning.
Sub-indicator 3(b) – Budget law supports procurement, contract execution & payment
Sub-indicator 3(c) – No procurement initiated w/o budget appropriation
Sub-indicator 3(d) – Completion reports prepared for reconciliation with budget

Pillar II Indicator 4 – Normative/regulatory body
Sub-indicator 4 (a) – Status and basis for body covered in legislative framework
Sub-indicator 4(b) – Body has a defined set of responsibilities
Sub-indicator 4(c) – Body’s funding, staffing and independence are consistent with responsibilities
Sub-indicator 4(d) – Responsibilities are clear and avoid conflict of interest and direct involvement in procurement

Pillar II Indicator 5 – Institutional Development Capacity
Sub-indicator 5(a) – System for collecting and disseminating information
Sub-indicator 5(b) – System for collecting and monitoring procurement statistics
Sub-indicator 5(c) – Sustainable training strategy and capacity to implement
Sub-indicator 5(d) – Quality standards for staffing and to monitor performance

PILLAR III Indicator 6 – Operations and practices are efficient
Sub-indicator 6(a) – Level of competency of procurement officials is consistent with their level of responsibility
Sub-indicator 6(b) – Training and information programs are consistent with demand
Sub-indicator 6(c) – Established norms for safekeeping of records and documents
Sub-indicator 6(d) – Provision for delegating authority

PILLAR III Indicator 7 – The public procurement market
Sub-indicator 7(a) – Effective mechanisms for partnerships between public and private sector
Sub-indicator 7(b) – Private sector institutions are organized and able to facilitate access
Sub-indicator 7(c) – No major systemic constraints inhibiting access

PILLAR III Indicator 8 – Contract administration and dispute resolution
Sub-indicator 8(a) – Contract administration procedures are clearly defined and cover inspection/acceptance, amendments, and quality control
Sub-indicator 8(b) – Contract include dispute resolution procedures
Sub-indicator 8(c) - Procedures exist to enforce the outcome of dispute resolution process.

PILLAR IV Indictor 9 – Effective Control and Audit Systems
Sub-indicator 9(a) – Control Framework in place to provide for internal/external controls and audit
Sub-indicator 9(b) – Enforcement and follow-up on findings and recommendations to foster compliance
Sub-indicator 9(c) – Internal controls provide timely information to enable management action
Sub-indicator 9(d) – Internal control system supports performance auditing
Sub-indicator 9(e) – Auditors are sufficiently informed about procurement to conduct quality audits

PILLAR IV Indicator 10 – Efficiency of Appeals Mechanism
Sub-indicator 10(a) – Decisions made on basis of information; final decisions reviewed; enforcement capacity under the law.
Sub-indicator 10(b) – Capacity to handle complaints efficiently and means to enforce remedy
Sub-indicator 10(c) – System is fair with decisions balanced and justified
Sub-indicator 10(d) – Decisions are published and available to public
Sub-indicator 10(e) - Complaint review body has authority and independence

PILLAR IV Indicator 11- Degree of Access to Information
Sub-indicator 11(a) – Information is published and distributed through available media and is supported by information technology when feasible

PILLAR IV Indicator 12 – Ethics and Anticorruption measures in place
Sub-indicator 12(a) – The legal framework and procurement documents include provision addressing corruption, fraud, conflict of interest and unethical behavior
Sub-indicator 12(b) – Legal system define responsibilities, accountabilities and penalties for individuals/firms found to have engaged in fraud or corruption
Sub-indicator 12(c) – Evidence of enforcement exists

Pillar IV Indicator 12 (continued)
Sub-indicator 12(d) – Special measures exist with regard to fraud and corruption in procurement
Sub-indicator 12(e) – Stakeholders support the creation of a market known for its integrity and ethical behavior.
Sub-indicator 12(f) – Secure mechanism for reporting fraud and corruption
Sub-indicator 12(g) – Codes of Conduct and disclosure for staff in decision-making positions

Some emerging lessons
Tool is useful and relatively easy to use
Standardization creates need to use tool flexibly in a given country – may require customization.
Some indicators will require adjustment (we have experience from over 40 countries)
Use of the tool is an input to a process so don’t focus too much on scoring but on the information learned and how it can be used to improve the system.
Results of benchmarking exercise needs to be more clearly linked to other tools like PEFA
Reform strategy must be integrated and prioritized on basis of overall public sector management and public financial management strategy.

http://icgfm.blogspot.com	46
http://www.slideshare.net	5
http://icgfm.blogspot.fr	3

Overview of the application of the OECD/DAC Procurement Assessment Tool

by icgfmconference on May 13, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

3 Embeds 54

Statistics

Overview of the application of the OECD/DAC Procurement Assessment Tool — Presentation Transcript