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


Published on

“Overview of the application of the OECD/DAC Procurement Assessment Tool”
Pamela Bigart, Lead Procurement Specialist, World Bank
This presentation will provide participants with a strong background on the OECD/DAC
benchmarking tool, its purpose as well as structure, benchmarking indicators and some
emerging lessons learned.

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

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

  1. 1. The OECD/DAC Benchmarking Tool Working towards a consistent understanding and application of the OECD/DAC benchmarking tool.
  2. 2. Background <ul><li>OECD/DAC benchmarking tool was introduced in current form in 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>Created through the work of the Joint Venture on Procurement, a working group under OECD/DAC’s Aid Effectiveness Working Party </li></ul><ul><li>JV Procurement includes bilateral donors, multilateral development banks, UN, and more than 15 partner countries </li></ul>
  3. 3. Structure of the Benchmarking Tool <ul><li>Four Pillars: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>I – Legislative and Regulatory Framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>II – Institutional Framework/Management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>III – Operations and Market Practices </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IV – Integrity and Transparency </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Twelve Indicators </li></ul><ul><li>Fifty-four sub-indicators – level at which scoring is undertaken </li></ul>
  4. 4. Purpose of the Tool <ul><li>Provide information to the end user “snap shot” overview of system including how it links with other PFM/Governance aspects </li></ul><ul><li>Identify gaps with regard to defined and agreed benchmarks or standards </li></ul><ul><li>Management tool to support development of a reform/change management strategy </li></ul><ul><li>Supports a capacity development dialog between government and donors </li></ul><ul><li>Tracks change over time if reform strategy is pursued </li></ul>
  5. 5. PILLAR I Indicator 1 – Legislative and Regulatory Framework <ul><li>Sub-indicator 1( a) – Scope of application and coverage of the legislative and regulatory framework. </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 1(b) – Procurement Methods </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 1(c) – Advertising rules and time limits </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 1(d) - Participation </li></ul>
  6. 6. Pillar I Indicator 1 (continued) <ul><li>Sub-indicator 1(e) – Documentation and specifications </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 1(f) – Evaluation and award criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 1(g) – Submission, receipt and opening of tenders </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 1 (h) - Complaints </li></ul>
  7. 7. PILLAR I Indicator 2- Implementing Regulations and Documentation <ul><li>Sub-indicator 2(a) – Implementing regulations </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 2(b) – Model documents for goods, works and services </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 2(c) – Pre-qualifications </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 2(d) – Contracting for services </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 2(e) – User’s guide or manuals </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 2(f) – General conditions of contract (GCC) </li></ul>
  8. 8. PILLAR II Indicator 3 – Procurement is integrated into governance system <ul><li>Sub-indicator 3(a) – Procurement planning is part of budget formulation and contributes to multiyear planning. </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 3(b) – Budget law supports procurement, contract execution & payment </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 3(c) – No procurement initiated w/o budget appropriation </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 3(d) – Completion reports prepared for reconciliation with budget </li></ul>
  9. 9. Pillar II Indicator 4 – Normative/regulatory body <ul><li>Sub-indicator 4 (a) – Status and basis for body covered in legislative framework </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 4(b) – Body has a defined set of responsibilities </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 4(c) – Body’s funding, staffing and independence are consistent with responsibilities </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 4(d) – Responsibilities are clear and avoid conflict of interest and direct involvement in procurement </li></ul>
  10. 10. Pillar II Indicator 5 – Institutional Development Capacity <ul><li>Sub-indicator 5(a) – System for collecting and disseminating information </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 5(b) – System for collecting and monitoring procurement statistics </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 5(c) – Sustainable training strategy and capacity to implement </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 5(d) – Quality standards for staffing and to monitor performance </li></ul>
  11. 11. PILLAR III Indicator 6 – Operations and practices are efficient <ul><li>Sub-indicator 6(a) – Level of competency of procurement officials is consistent with their level of responsibility </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 6(b) – Training and information programs are consistent with demand </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 6(c) – Established norms for safekeeping of records and documents </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 6(d) – Provision for delegating authority </li></ul>
  12. 12. PILLAR III Indicator 7 – The public procurement market <ul><li>Sub-indicator 7(a) – Effective mechanisms for partnerships between public and private sector </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 7(b) – Private sector institutions are organized and able to facilitate access </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 7(c) – No major systemic constraints inhibiting access </li></ul>
  13. 13. PILLAR III Indicator 8 – Contract administration and dispute resolution <ul><li>Sub-indicator 8(a) – Contract administration procedures are clearly defined and cover inspection/acceptance, amendments, and quality control </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 8(b) – Contract include dispute resolution procedures </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 8(c) - Procedures exist to enforce the outcome of dispute resolution process. </li></ul>
  14. 14. PILLAR IV Indictor 9 – Effective Control and Audit Systems <ul><li>Sub-indicator 9(a) – Control Framework in place to provide for internal/external controls and audit </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 9(b) – Enforcement and follow-up on findings and recommendations to foster compliance </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 9(c) – Internal controls provide timely information to enable management action </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 9(d) – Internal control system supports performance auditing </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 9(e) – Auditors are sufficiently informed about procurement to conduct quality audits </li></ul>
  15. 15. PILLAR IV Indicator 10 – Efficiency of Appeals Mechanism <ul><li>Sub-indicator 10(a) – Decisions made on basis of information; final decisions reviewed; enforcement capacity under the law. </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 10(b) – Capacity to handle complaints efficiently and means to enforce remedy </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 10(c) – System is fair with decisions balanced and justified </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 10(d) – Decisions are published and available to public </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 10(e) - Complaint review body has authority and independence </li></ul>
  16. 16. PILLAR IV Indicator 11- Degree of Access to Information <ul><li>Sub-indicator 11(a) – Information is published and distributed through available media and is supported by information technology when feasible </li></ul>
  17. 17. PILLAR IV Indicator 12 – Ethics and Anticorruption measures in place <ul><li>Sub-indicator 12(a) – The legal framework and procurement documents include provision addressing corruption, fraud, conflict of interest and unethical behavior </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 12(b) – Legal system define responsibilities, accountabilities and penalties for individuals/firms found to have engaged in fraud or corruption </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 12(c) – Evidence of enforcement exists </li></ul>
  18. 18. Pillar IV Indicator 12 (continued) <ul><li>Sub-indicator 12(d) – Special measures exist with regard to fraud and corruption in procurement </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 12(e) – Stakeholders support the creation of a market known for its integrity and ethical behavior. </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 12(f) – Secure mechanism for reporting fraud and corruption </li></ul><ul><li>Sub-indicator 12(g) – Codes of Conduct and disclosure for staff in decision-making positions </li></ul>
  19. 19. Some emerging lessons <ul><li>Tool is useful and relatively easy to use </li></ul><ul><li>Standardization creates need to use tool flexibly in a given country – may require customization. </li></ul><ul><li>Some indicators will require adjustment (we have experience from over 40 countries) </li></ul><ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>Results of benchmarking exercise needs to be more clearly linked to other tools like PEFA </li></ul><ul><li>Reform strategy must be integrated and prioritized on basis of overall public sector management and public financial management strategy. </li></ul>