Procurement Notices

Terms of Reference: National Assessor

The current Philippine government under President Rodrigo R. Duterte is pursuing an agenda to provide a matatag, maginhawa, at panatag na buhay (life that is strongly rooted, comfortable, and secure) to Filipinos. Towards this, it intends to boost spending on inequality-reducing social services like education and on infrastructure through its “build, build, build” program. Moreover, the administration is committed to pursuing open governance. “I believe we will prosper more in our anti-criminality, anti-corruption, and anti-poverty goals by involving the people in the selection and monitoring of the use of taxpayers’ money, especially in the programs and projects which directly affect their lives,” President Duterte said.[1

Undeniably, sound public procurement is at the heart of effective service delivery and of achieving sustainable development. At least 20 percent of the National Budget goes through the procurement process. The Philippines’ legal framework for public procurement is notably strong: the passage of the Government Procurement Reform Act (GPRA) in 2003 ended the era of fragmented procurement regulations which had enabled leakages. The law is also celebrated for institutionalizing citizen participation in public procurement, particularly as bid observers and as monitors of ongoing contracts. Still, public procurement continues to suffer from frequent delays (e.g., bid failures) as well as corruption scandals (e.g., bid riggings), both of which hamper the timely and effective delivery of public services.

The “tedious” process for open and competitive procurement and “restrictive” rules like the criteria for the lowest price are often faulted for procurement delays and poor quality of goods and services delivered. However, such views are not hinged on a systematic analysis of integrity risks and bottlenecks before the procurement process (e.g., poor procurement planning) and after the contracting process (e.g., weak contract management systems). How this downstream process links to the next cycle of procurement preparation, and how public procurement is intricately linked to the overall public financial management (PFM) process needs to be unbundled in order to surface the integrity risks and address capacity gaps.

This process of systemic reform and capacity building is needed to support the government’s plans to boost public spending to meet its development goals. This Rapid Assessment is being pursued to help inform the process of strengthening institutions for public procurement. Its results will, for one, help define the UNDP’s strategy for engaging the broader PFM reform agenda of the government through its upcoming Country Programme Document. 

Objectives

The objectives of this assignment are to make a diagnosis of integrity risks in public procurement and the management of public finances in order to develop a collective agenda for improving public service delivery.  The main outputs will be a) an assessment report of the integrity risks in public procurement in the Philippines, which would include the results of dialogues conducted among key stakeholders on these integrity risks and broader public financial management (PFM) and service delivery issues; and b) a capacity development action plan that identifies concrete recommendations for improving service delivery.

Specific Objectives include:

1. Engage and facilitate key stakeholders in a dialogue on the key integrity risks and issues identified in procurement, PFM, and service delivery towards fostering a collective platform for reform to address these issues;

2. Conduct a rapid assessment of the public procurement and the public financial system to identify integrity risks for service delivery, from the procurement planning phase throughout the bidding phase until the contract management and payment;

3. Based on the rapid assessment of integrity risks and the dialogues with key stakeholders, develop a capacity development action plan with concrete recommendations, milestones, and resource requirements.

   As gleaned from the above, the assignment gives a strong emphasis on facilitating a national dialogue amongst key stakeholders to develop a collective platform for reform. Stakeholders will include, amongst others:

• Office of the President (OP)

• Department of Budget and Management (DBM)

• Government Procurement Policy Board—Technical Support Office (GPPB-TSO)

• The Procurement Service (DBM-PS)

• Three (3) high spending departments involved in service delivery: Departments of Education (DepEd), Health (DoH), and the Interior and Local Government (DILG)

• Office of the Ombudsman

• Commission on Audit (CoA)

• Civil society organizations (including local communities/ citizens involved as monitors) and representatives from private sector such as chambers of commerce and business associations (e.g. Makati Business Club, Integrity Initiative)

• Relevant development partners working on procurement, PFM and/or auditing/ anti-corruption reforms (e.g. WB, IMF, USAID, Australia DFAT)

METHODOLOGY

The methodology for the rapid assessment of procurement risks will primarily be based on the UNDP Guidebook on Tackling Integrity Risks in Government Contracts: An Opportunity to Unlock Resources for Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific. As the performance of and integrity risks in key service delivery agencies will be reviewed, the assessment will focus on the organizational, process, and individual levels of the framework presented in the UNDP Guidebook, though the system-wide (national) level may also be touched upon.

Prior to the conduct of the dialogues and rapid assessment, a high-level meeting with key government officials from DBM, GPPB-TSO, COA, OMB, DILG, and other implementing agencies such as but not limited to DepED and DOH will be held to create buy-in and narrow down the goals and expectations for the activities. Also, to enhance the gathering of information and analysis of results, the rapid assessment will a) take stock of past assessments of the Philippines’ procurement and PFM systems (e.g., 2016 Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability; 2012 Country Procurement Assessment Report; etc.); b) make use of key sections of the PFM Benchmarking Tool that was developed by the UNDP Philippines to guide the gathering of public finance and procurement-related data.

The assessment and development of a reform platform will be driven by dialogue among key stakeholders on how to address integrity and service delivery issues. As such, the second mission will include bilateral meetings and focus group discussions with key government stakeholders. The mission team will use the checklists and guide questions in the UNDP Guidebook to steer the interviews. A focus group discussion will aim at mapping out integrity risks from the planning throughout the bidding until the contract management in the Philippines, building on the UNDP Checklist on Identifying and Mitigating Integrity Risks in Public Procurement. During the last day of the mission a debriefing roundtable will be organized with selected policy-makers to validate the preliminary findings and inform the next steps.

A follow-up misión might be organized to endorse the Capacity Development Action Plan and assess integrity risks in service delivery at the subnational level. In between and to the two missions, follow-up research, interviews (e.g., by national consultant), and correspondences (e.g., by international consultant) may be conducted.

COMPOSITION OF THE TEAM AND QUALIFICATIONS OF THE NATIONAL ASSESSOR

The mission team will consist of colleagues from UNDP Philippines and UNDP Bangkok Regional Hub (BRH) as well as international and national experts bringing experience on: a) service delivery, particularly public procurement, PFM, auditing and anti-corruption; and b) institutional development for stakeholders’ involvement and coalition-building for reforms.

Two National Assessors will be hired to support the Lead National Assessor in conducting in-depth assessments of three (3) implementing agencies in order to contextualize the findings of the rapid assessment to be conducted with the International Expert. Each national assessor will be assigned with assessing one (1) agency and will support the Lead National Assessor and International Expert in designing the consultations and assessments, consolidating the report, and crafting the capacity development action plan.

In particular:

1. Professional Experience – minimum of:

   1. Seven (7) years of experience in national government in positions related to public finance, procurement, development, and service delivery; with preference to candidates from PFM oversight agencies.

   2. Five (5) years of experience in consulting, research, and advocacy on public finance- and serviced delivery-related projects with international development organizations, consulting firms, non-government organizations, academe, among others.

   3. Sectoral experience in education, health, and/or local government is an advantage.

       

2. Educational Experience –

   1. Minimum of a bachelor’s degree in public finance, public administration, business administration, economics, statistics, social sciences, and other related fields.

   2. Master’s degree is desired.

National Assessors’ Deliverables, Timeframe, and Level of Effort

Payment scheme

Duty Station

The missions will take place in Manila. In between the missions, the international expert will be based in his/her country of residence; while the national experts will be based in the Philippines.

Institutional Arrangements

• The project will be coordinated by a Programme Manager in UNDP’s country office, including the selection of the team experts in the country office and the coordination of the inputs of various team members.

• The Governance Team Leader in UNDP Philippines will provide overall guidance on the dialogues, rapid assessment report, capacity development action plan. He will be the first point of contact for lead government stakeholders.

• Support staff in UNDP Philippines CO will organize meetings with the all relevant stakeholders and provide logistical support.

• UNDP Bangkok Regional Hub will provide technical backstopping for the rapid assessment and the preparation of the capacity development action plan, as well as facilitate the mobilization of relevant international experts.

• International expert will be the technical lead for designing and facilitating the dialogues, preparing the assessment report, and the capacity development action plan.

• The national experts will collect relevant documents prior to the mission to facilitate the desk review and take stock of existing work in these areas. During the missions, they will provide insights into the context and applicability of recommendations emerging from the international expert. After the mission, the national experts will prepare a stocktaking report highlighting the main takeaways from the discussions.

PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR CV AND FINANCIAL PROPOSAL (USE ATTACHED FINANCIAL PROPOSAL TEMPLATE) AND EMAIL TO:

 procurement.ph@undp.org

Kindly make sure that your email does not exceed 4MB.