Annual general report of the controller and - Parliament of Tanzania
Annual general report of the controller and - Parliament of Tanzania
Annual general report of the controller and - Parliament of Tanzania
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
A review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> tendering procedures revealed that tender<br />
for organization review, job evaluation, <strong>and</strong> grading was<br />
initially advertised on 16, 17 <strong>and</strong> 20 August 2007 <strong>and</strong> was<br />
awarded to PriceWaterHouseCoopers (PWC) on 28/1/2008<br />
after scoring 87.75 against <strong>the</strong> recommendation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
evaluation committee to award <strong>the</strong> tender to Ernest &<br />
Young who scored 87.80. PwC negotiated with TCRA on<br />
5/2/2008 <strong>and</strong> agreed to enter into contract. The same was<br />
indorsed by <strong>the</strong> tender board on 06/02/2008 for TZS<br />
59,879,040. However, no contract was signed with PwC <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong>re was no documentation on what went wrong with<br />
PwC, <strong>and</strong> no evidence that <strong>the</strong> Tender Board cancelled <strong>the</strong><br />
tender.<br />
Fur<strong>the</strong>r; <strong>the</strong> tender was later re-advertised on <strong>the</strong> grounds<br />
that <strong>the</strong>re was no firm that qualified to carry out <strong>the</strong><br />
assignment which in our eyes is considered to be a<br />
misrepresentation since <strong>the</strong>re were qualified firms <strong>and</strong> as a<br />
matter <strong>of</strong> fact an award had been made. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong><br />
advert prohibited participation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> three firms (PwC,<br />
Ernest & Young <strong>and</strong> Charter Consult) that had <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
financial proposals opened. These firms were not included<br />
in <strong>the</strong> evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> re-advertised tender. No reasons<br />
were given for barring <strong>the</strong>se firms. In <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> getting<br />
a competent consultant, Transport Resources Centre<br />
Limited (TRCL), which had been disqualified in <strong>the</strong><br />
technical stage <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> initial tender process, was <strong>the</strong> only<br />
responsive firm out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 11 that qualified technically as<br />
per Tender Board minutes dated 4/6/2008. Subsequently<br />
DG approved a temporary tender board <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> tender was<br />
awarded on 27/6/2008 by a temporary tender board that<br />
was proposed by <strong>the</strong> chairman <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> tender board <strong>and</strong><br />
approved by DG. The temporary tender board had 3 acting<br />
heads <strong>of</strong> department <strong>and</strong> was to serve as tender board<br />
members for that particular meeting only to approve <strong>the</strong><br />
only tender.<br />
Scrutiny <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> tender documents submitted by <strong>the</strong> firm<br />
(Transport Resources Centre Limited) indicated that <strong>the</strong>re<br />
___________________________________________________________<br />
Office <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Controller <strong>and</strong> Auditor General PA&oBs 2007/08 129