towards programme implementation...towards programme implementation procurement & contract...

TOWARDS PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION Procurement & Contract Training – Jakarta day 3

BFM/FPC

January 2015

2

Agenda – day 3

Topics Presented

by

Time

schedule

Mini case studies on procurement process (1/2) EP

9:00 – 10:30

Coffee Break 10:30 – 10:45

Mini case studies on procurement process (2/2) EP 10:45 – 11:30

Tips revisited EP 11:30 – 12:30

Lunch 12:30 – 13:45

RFP case study – formal competitive bidding process

EP 13:45 – 15:45

Coffee Break 15:45 – 16:00

How to complete your IPA selection form LG 16:00 – 16:45

Wrap up LG 16:45 – 17:15

3

Mini Case Studies

4

Case Study 1

UNESCO FO is seeking an architect to design the specifications of a new Cultural

Resource Centre in the country, this project is under the Joint Programming of UN

Agencies.

FO is proposing this as an individual consultant contract, for the hiring of an architect

to draw the building specifications that will eventually be used for the tender of the

construction.

Funds available: USD 15,000.

Please discuss and advise.

Choose a spokesperson to present the case (5 min).

5

Case Study 2

In July 2014, UNESCO FO gave a contract to a local printer based on informal price

comparison for printing of 3000 books at the rate of USD 5 per book.

The work was done within a short time and in very good quality.

Now, six months later, the Ministry has requested FO to provide them with 8,000

more copies.

Due to the importance and high quality, the Programme Specialist in charge

requested the AO to be give the contract to the same printer.



6

Case Study 3

UNESCO FO wishes to award a contract to a consultancy firm, to undertake

specific activities. The firm was selected through a competitive bidding process,

carried out formally by the SADC (Southern African Development Community).

UNESCO FO has already developed a TOR but is not sure which contract to use.

The total cost USD 72,000.

Please discuss and advise accordingly.


7

Case Study 4

Under the framework of an approved FIT project, a reputable consultancy firm is

named in the project document as the preferred contractor for specified field

activities which include WHC rehabilitation works.

The Programme Specialist proposes to award a Contract for Services under waiver

condition ii. “no competitive market place…”

The estimated budget is USD 120,000

Please discuss and advice.


8

Case Study 5

UNESCO FO is seeking the services of a specialized consultancy firm/institution

to evaluate an EXB project carried out from 2012 to 2013.

Estimated budget: USD 48,000



9

Case Study 6

The UNESCO FO wishes to extend its local security contract (LTA) which has expired

end 2014. The extension will be based UNDP/LTA extension for an additional 12

months.

The estimated annual contract value is USD 160,000

Now, in Jan 2015, UNESCO FO has submitted the following documents to the CC for

its clearance.

New draft contract

Contract Committee submission form

UNDP/LTA extension

Please discuss and advise whether process applied is satisfactory.


10

Case Study 7

As part of UNESCO Post-Conflict Post-Disaster Response, a proposal for

Humanitarian Information Project (submitted to Flash Appeal) has been approved.

A reputed international media development organization with local presence in the

country was identified in the project document as the key partner for the delivery of

the activities including a small equipment component. The project must be finished in

6 months time.

Funds available: USD 200,000.

Please discuss and advice on the procurement process to be followed.


11

Case Study 8

UNESCO FO has issued in February this year based on competitive bidding a

Contract for Service of USD 80,000 to a local NGO. This time also the

programme Specialist wants to give another Contract for Services for the same

NGO from the same budget for different activities for USD 70,000.



12

Case Study 9

UNESCO FO Office - in support to EXB project - requires to publish various

documents (reports, brochures etc).

Although all the needs are not all known yet the Programme Specialist has

budgeted USD 65,000 this year for related printing services.



13

Case Study 10

A Field Office has awarded a contract to National Commission of country X for USD

55,000 to awareness raising campaign and organization of a regional workshop (incl.

Logistics, DSA, flight booking). The award of the contract is based on a waiver to

competitive bidding applying the waiver condition 10.2 art.5.3(i) « there is no

competitive market place ».

The National Commission was said to be the most suitable partner with knowledge of

UNESCO and previous experience, well positioned to coordinate such project

component. The condition “no competitive market place” was used for that purpose.

Please discuss the justification of the waiver in light of condition applied and tips given

to strengthen waiver justification – see section Tips – annex 4 and 5. Please as also

explain the due diligence applied in DUO for granting of a waiver.


14

Case Study

RFP process

15

Case study on RFP process

On 15 August 2014 a call for proposal was announced for 2 weeks by UNESCO Field

Office. See handout, Annex 1, which was sent to shortlisted Bidders.

A total of seven proposals were received by UNESCO Field Office which were opened

and assessed by an evaluation committee. All proposals were technically and

financially assessed. See handout, minutes of the meeting, Annex 2.

The proposal submitted by “Bidder 1” received the highest scoring and therefore the

evaluation team has recommended to the DIR/FO to award the Contract to them

(value of contract: USD 143,099).

The UNESCO Office has confirmed that all proposals were assessed according to the

procedure outlined in the Administrative Manual AM 10.2A “Procurement Guide”.

Please re-assess the case documentation, confirm your findings and explain what has

been done well and what (if anything) could have been done better?

16

How to complete

your IPA selection Form

17

IPA Case study: How to complete your Selection form

Checklist Implementation Partners

(AM Item 7.5) YES/NO

Is the implementation partner a not-for-profit organisation? Please justify under selection criteria n° 3 below.

YES

Are all the programmatic deliverables foreseen in the implementation partner agreement directly related to achieve project results? Please estimate the percentage of funds managed by the partner under the following headings:

- capacity building 10% - infrastructure and works 40% - equipment 35% - mission costs 5% - personnel costs % - others (specify ) PSC 13%

YES

Has the partner been involved in the initial design and planning of the overall programme/project/activity? Please elaborate in the selection criteria n° 9 below.

YES

Does the partner contribute in kind or cash to the implementation of the programme/project/activity? Please elaborate under selection criteria n° 10 below.

NO

Does the partner take co-responsibility for the achievement of programme/project/activity result(s)? Please elaborate under selection criteria n° 11 below.

NO

SELECTION FORM OF AN IMPLEMENTATION PARTNER (Form AM 7-9)

Procurement activities (AM Item 10.2)

YES/NO

Infrastructure and equipment components are very high; no PSC allowed under IPAs

They should contribute to the project execution The partner is executing the project and therefore should be responsible for its achievement

http://manual-part1.hq.int.unesco.org/EN/Chap7/Pages/Item7.5.aspx










18

Brief description of the programme/project/activity to be implemented

Title of programme/project/activity

Brief description of project (please attach project document), including source of financing, partners involved and relevant budget breakdown.

For an extrabudgetary activity, please indicate whether the funding source has given any indications with regard to the choice of implementation partners and include the justification for the choice.

The cooperation with the partner has been mentioned in the original pro/doc as well as in the additional pro/doc for additional funding.

If the programme/project/activity is financed in a programme country by a trust fund contributed by a third party, attach a copy of the third party’s written concurrence to implementation by the government of the programme country or a governmental entity.

Total amount of funds to be implemented by the implementation partner for the entire period of the project and budget code(s) the funds will be taken from (in case of several codes, please provide a breakdown of the distribution of funds).

$180,000

Given that an implementing partner should provide added value by being involved in the conceptualization, design and planning of the project/activity, the selection of the partners should ideally be done before the signature of the agreement/project document with the funding source based on the selection criteria

stipulated in manual item 7.5 para. 5.4.


19

Justification of the choice of an implementation partner (Comparison criteria)

Criteria Justification/documentation

1. What process has lead to the selection of the implementation partner? (cross what applies and provide justification and related documentation):

Comparison among at least three potential partners;

Unique potential partner given the specificities of the project activities;

Other methodologies.

The proposed partner is well situated due to

their experience in this domain of activity.

2. Is the estimated implementation cost breakdown proposed by the partner in line with prevailing market trends and reasonable to UNESCO, whilst providing best value for money?

The breakdown submitted should be sufficiently detailed in order to provide assurance regarding the reasonableness of the cost. Please justify your proposed estimation.

Implementation breakdown is well presented and specify all required details.

x

Detailed explanation regarding the selection process in all three boxes should be provided

Justification should be provided how this

estimation was considered as reasonable


20

Choice of an implementation partner (Assessing the legal status of the partner)

Criteria Justification/documentation 3. Please indicate the organizational/legal status of the proposed implementation partner (such a governmental entity, IGO, NGO, university, research institute, other …). Note: The proposed implementation partner must be a not-for-profit entity.

The status of the proposed partner organization is NGO

4. Please indicate whether the proposed implementation partner has official relations with UNESCO. Please specify.

NO

5. For governments or governmental entities, please indicate whether the programme/project/activity is in a sector of activity where the government concerned has concluded with the Organization a self-benefitting funds-in-trust arrangement.

NA

6. For NGOs, foundations and similar institutions not having official relations with UNESCO please indicate: That their purposes, function and operation are non-governmental and non-profit-making in character (verify by cross checking against their statutes; if necessary, request assistance from LA); That they are endowed with legal status under national law (check against the instrument of their legal recognition; if necessary, request assistance from LA); That they have been active for at least two years (verify their last activity report).

All three conditions should be met

x

x

x


21

Assessing the technical and managerial capacities of the partner 7. Please indicate why the proposed implementation partner is well suited to implement the project (due to, inter alia, its mandate and technical expertise, professional skills and integrity, and ability to access the intended beneficiaries and relevant networks). If the proposed implementation partner has previously implemented activities under contract with UNESCO, please provide, if available, a result based evaluation.

The proposed partner is well

situated in this domain of activity.

8. How does the proposed implementation partner add value to the activity to be implemented? Does the partner have the skills and competencies that complement those of UNESCO?

By raising awareness of the importance of the related project activities.

9. Has the Partner been involved in the conception of the activity to be implemented in partnership with UNESCO? Please justify.

YES

10. Is the proposed implementation partner ready to contribute – in terms of financial or human resources, or contributions in kind - to the project implementation? If yes, how?

NO

11. Will the proposed implementation partner be responsible for achieving project results? If so, what results?

YES

12. Overall, does the implementation partner have the capacity to manage the volume of funds foreseen under the implementation agreement? Please justify your response.

YES, taking into account the capacity of the partner to manage projects.

Detailed info regarding the partner's ability to implement the project should be provided

Detailed info regarding the partner's ability to implement the project should be provided

Details should be provided

The partner should contribute to the project execution. In cash, kind or by providing various support elements i.e. premises, local staff, logistics, etc.

Details should be provided

Justification should be provided


22

Assessing the technical and managerial capacities of the partner

13. Will the proposed implementation partner be responsible for reporting on the achieved outcomes?

YES

14. What makes the proposed implementation partner “unique” for the implementation of the activity in question? Could the proposed implementation partner easily be replaced by another?

YES

15. Have the risks (notably for UNESCO’s reputation, credibility and visibility) in working with the proposed implementing partner been thoroughly assessed? Please justify your response.

YES

16. Has the partner’s credibility and previous performance been checked, for instance with other UN agencies, the EC or national agencies? Please provide justification.

YES

17. Has the National Commission in the partner’s home country been informed of the proposed implementation agreement? Has the National Commission provided any observations?

YES

Details on what kind of reports will be prepared, periodicity, etc.

Statement should be documented

How?

How?

Provide written evidence


23

Organizational and financial structure of the proposed implementation partner

Criteria Justification/documentation

18. Please provide the overall organizational structure, and decision making mechanisms of the partner.

The partner is organized as an NGO.

19. Please provide the internal and external financial control and audit procedures of the partner, including if audited financial statements are available. Where the latter is available, please indicate: a.financial year(s) the audit report covers; b.name of the external auditor; c.procedures for their appointment.

Not available

20. Please provide information on the overall staff resources, number and profiles of relevant staff with assigned responsibilities.

At HQ: In location of activity to be implemented:

21. Does the partner posses logistical infrastructure and equipment?

YES

22. Current annual operational expenditure (does not include programme expenditure).

USD

23. Current annual programme expenditure. USD

Details and documentation should be provided for all paras 18 to 26.


24

Organizational and financial structure of the proposed implementation partner

24. Bank account(s) USD account number and bank name: Local currency account number and bank name: Euro Bank

25. Current assets USD

26. Current liabilities USD

27. Procurement procedures - in case the Partner will be requested to purchase equipment for the implementation of the project it has to be ensured that the process used is in line with UNESCO standard requirements and based on “best value for money”. Your answer should cover briefly their bidding procedures and threshold levels. If this is not the case, the procurement of equipment has to be done by UNESCO.

The partner is being requested to

purchase equipment.

28. The percentage of the procurement or equipment component should not exceed 33% of the total budget of the Implementation Partners Agreement. Under exceptional circumstances the Sector’s Assistant Directors – General, Directors of Bureaux or Heads of Fields Offices may approve the signature of Implementation Partners Agreements which include more then 33% of procurement or equipment component. If this is your case please provide written detailed justification hereafter.

Yes

Is the procurement in line with our requirements ? Elaborate.

Provide justification as requested.


towards programme implementation...towards programme implementation procurement & contract...

Documents