Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Peru : Country Procurement Assessment Report (CPAR), UpdateSince the 2001 CPAR, Peru has made considerable progress in setting in motion the right conditions to improve public procurement. The primary regulator for procurement, the High Council for Government Procurement (CONSUCODE), has been strengthened; the development of the e-government procurement system has begun; significant training initiatives are underway; and important amendments have been made to the procurement law and its regulations. In addition, a very good Integrated Financial Management System has been implemented in all public sector entities. These initial achievements in procurement reform have complemented a deepening democratization process and Peru's impressive macroeconomic performance over the last few years. Several institutions play important roles, defined by law, in public sector procurement. However, there is no unifying vision of the system's objectives and priorities. Consequently, the initial reforms implemented by the Government were not framed within a comprehensive policy that includes a consistent strategy on how to move forward with the reform program and establishes clear leadership. Recommended short term actions include bringing all key institutions to an agreement for a detailed reform strategy with clearly defined leadership and objectives; emphasizing prevention over control and consolidating the supervisory role of the CONSUCODE; adopting a set of tools in the short-term to facilitate implementation of the reform; carrying out in-depth market studies, reviewing the Government supply processes, and implementing cost reduction strategies; and accelerating the development of e-government procurement. Mid-term actions include further streamlining the regulatory framework; and engaging civil society in a more constructive fashion. Suggested long-term actions include significantly strengthening human resource infrastructure and the procurement capacity of local governments.
-
Philippines Country Procurement Assessment Report 2012Proper public procurement practices directly reflect good governance. Transparent and effective procurement practices minimize expenditure and create opportunity. Procurement is an enormous component in the process by which governments build infrastructure, such as schools and hospitals. It involves the management of significant amounts of money and is therefore often the cause for allegations of corruption and government inefficiency. The difference between getting public procurement right and doing it wrong has the potential to be either highly rewarding, or highly damaging. In some nations, reforms implemented to improve the efficiency of public procurement have resulted in savings of 1% of a country's gross domestic product. One can see why public procurement is so significant to the development of a country and its people. Citizens have the right to expect their government to spend these funds for the good of the people. In the past, corruption, inefficiency, ignorance, and disorganization have resulted in billions of pesos worth of losses. It is with the importance of these issues in mind that this report is produced to report on the state of procurement in the Philippines today. A 2012 CPAR action plan integrating all the existing and proposed initiatives and recommendations to address the areas for improvement in the Public Procurement System is presented at the end of this report. The action plan provides the road map and agenda for procurement reforms to be undertaken by the government, together with its development partners during 2013-2016. Some of the priorities focus on strengthening monitoring and enforcement and procurement capacity, and improving procurement processes and practices, i.e., (i) implementation of the professionalization program, (ii) implementation of the Agency Procurement Compliance and Performance Indicator, or APCPI and development of mechanisms to enforce compliance, (iii) review and possible revision of the IRR to provide procedures for international competitive bidding, (iv) establishment of an independent complaints or protest review body and development of its governing rules and procedures, and (v) development and implementation of a framework to sustain and ensure CSO participation in procurement monitoring. The Philippine development forum sub-working Group on Procurement will continue to monitor the implementation of the action plan, ensure the availability of funding support and address issues that may arise during implementation.
-
Global Stock-Take of Social Accountability Initiatives for Budget Transparency and Monitoring : Key Challenges and Lessons LearnedBudgets are key documents that lay out a government's economic priorities in terms of policies and programs. Budget transparency refers to the extent and ease with which citizens can access information about and provide feedback on government revenues, allocations, and expenditures. Budget monitoring entails using such information to analyze, critique, and track government finances in order to provide this feedback. Budget transparency is a prerequisite for public participation and accountability, which are instrumental for a democratic and legitimate budget process. Both budget transparency and monitoring efforts also help remove institutional bottlenecks that result in delayed budget allocations, thereby jeopardizing the delivery of vital services to people. Even though they have a far-reaching impact on the lives of people, opening up budgets beyond the exclusive domain of policy makers and administrators is a relatively recent phenomenon that has gained momentum in the last two decades. The stock taking exercise illustrates the range of mechanisms involved in Budget Transparency and Monitoring (BT&M) in different contexts and demonstrates significant promise of influencing governance processes and outcomes. Finally, there is a dearth of literature on initiatives that have not achieved their goals, which would allow lessons to be drawn from these failures. There are incentives to document successes rather than failures, but there is value in documenting failures because this allows for a better understanding of the challenges and opportunities that may be useful to consider when designing future BT&M interventions.