Report on the Procurement Body Questionnaire

A. Background

1. During the Procurement Capacity Development Workshop1 a simple Questionnaire was distributed to
the seminar participants, who are directors and senior staff of the procurement agencies in Asian countries.

2. The purpose of this small research was to understand the functions of the Central Policy Body for
Public Procurement (Procurement Body) of these countries and to identify a better way of cooperation to
improve procurement constraints limiting effectiveness of the projects. The questions assumed that the
following sub-indicators from the OECD-DAC benchmarking tool have been substantially achieved for the
Procurement Body.

Functional Normative Body (the Body) at the Centre:

a) The status and basis for the functional normative body at the centre (The Body) is covered in the
legislative and regulatory framework.
b) The responsibilities of the Body address a well defined set of functions.
c) Organisation and staffing of the Body and its level of independence and authority (formal power) of the
Body to exercise its duties in a trustful and credible manner is sufficient to implement the responsibilities.
d) Responsibilities of the Body provide for sufficient separation and clarity so as to avoid conflict of interest.

Even if any of the above benchmarks have not been substantially achieved, participants were requested to
respond and were asked to add comments at the end of the Questionnaire if necessary.

3. The Questionnaire was designed to be very specific focusing on the existing structure and functions
of Procurement Body and explore a possibility for future partnership directly with COSO on procurement
issues related to any ADB funded projects in the country. It comprises of only 10 questions with multiple
choice answers, which are targeted to assess the basic starting point of entry if the partnership initiative will
be supported by the parties. In order to be realistic, the exercise was intended to get views and insights of the
procurement professionals, who are currently handling the main functions of country procurement policy and
responsible for their reforms to improve their procurement system in general.

However some countries, such us Philippines, Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka preferred to provide a single
response/view of the country. Total of 11 responses, which are representing 8 countries2 were received. The
bar charts in Appendix 1 illustrate the details of responses and short summary for each question. The actual
Questionnaire is shown in Appendix 2.

B. Summary and Conclusions

4. Donors and partner countries are trying to have more dialogue and interaction (few initiatives mainly
with OECD, WB, UNDP, Danida) to improve country procurement systems and use them where possible in
procurement transactions of foreign assistance projects. In many cases, Procurement Bodies in the country is
playing a leadership role toward a sound public procurement system, so why the potential interest and
capacity of these agencies are relevant and critical in the successful cooperation to achieve a use of country
systems in the future.

1
The workshop was organized by the Procurement Capacity Development Centre in collaboration with DANIDA and the OECD-
DAC Joint Venture for Procurement for national public procurement representatives on 16-18 September 2008 in Manila.
2
Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Mongolia, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka
5. All 8 countries participated in the survey has a Central Policy Body for Public Procurement with
formal authority to formulate the government procurement policy and public procurement regulations and
ensure enforcement through oversight, monitoring, and professional advice. However most offices are small
with around ten professional staff and need more resources (mainly additional staff) to fulfill their mandates
and carry out new activities under the procurement reform, which are started recently in most of these
countries.

6. Public procurement in most developing countries normally covers all types of procurement financed
by public funds such as the central/local budget, revenues earned by State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) and
foreign assistance financing through technical assistance, grant and loan from different donors. This was
clearly understood in all countries involved in the survey especially among procurement professionals as
sufficiently covered provisions by the regulations, but there is still need for more public awareness to improve
the clarity of the concept.

7. The statement “The government monitoring and oversight for foreign assisted procurement is equally
important as procurement funded by the government (state and local government, and SOEs) ” was agreed by
the absolute majority of the respondents, which confirms the importance to address this matter effectively. In
other words there is a same interest for the government to ensure ownership and for ADB to ensure good
procurement in projects funded by ADB.

8. In order to seek an effective way to address this issue, the survey proposed the direct partnership
arrangement (focal point) between Procurement Body and ADB (COSO) for all procurement related matters
of the project in the country such as procurement planning, reviewing the documents, dealing with complaints
and representations, exchange information and statistics, capacity building and workshops, capacity
assessments, project reviews and audits etc. Not surprisingly all respondents thought it is “very good idea” (5)
or “may be good idea” (6). Therefore it could be a successful initiative if we explore further details on the
implementation arrangements to make sure all partners understand the process and benefits from it.

9. When we check the outcome insights of the partnership arrangement initiative, the majority of
respondents believe that there will be positive impacts on the national procurement system and overall
capacity of the government including the improved efficiency and effectiveness of the ADB funded projects.
In order to move on this arrangement, most respondents expressed a need for special procurement training and
some assistance in gathering information on procurement and project visits as an immediate help.

10. Because of the broader objectives of proposed partnership arrangements besides the apparent goal of
improving the implementation of ADB funded projects the survey requested the respondents to identify
priority reform activities in their agenda to improve country procurement system. As these countries are in the
different stages of development in terms of the procurement system, the need that require a technical
assistance funding was scattered from assessing the compatibility of their public procurement system with
their overall public financial systems to assisting the capacity of Procurement Body and also improving a
public awareness for procurement. One interesting trend observed in majority countries current reform agenda
was the demand to create professionalism and career development system for procurement practitioners
placed as a priority activity among others. Most likely this area was not well covered by any of the ongoing
assistances from the donors.

11. Finally, we can conclude there is strong interest for the closer cooperation, more specifically a
possible support from the Government (Procurement Bodies) for a partnership arrangement with ADB
(COSO) to improve their procurement systems and efficiency of ADB assistance in DMSs, which in turn will
move us forward to meet Paris/Acra agenda on government ownership, harmonization and reliance on the
country systems.
 Appendix 1

Results and Findings

Details of all responses are illustrated below in bar charts drawn for each question. The short summary on the
result is given under each chart.

1. Does your agency have a formal authority to formulate the

government procurement policy and public procurement
regulations and ensure enforcement through oversignt,
monitoring and professional advice?

Yes, f ully mandated by law

Yes, partially mandated by law

Yes, but not mandated by the law

No

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Procurement Body in 5 countries out of 8 has an authority fully mandated by law to implement its functions
including the key responsibilities mentioned in the question. The Procurement body in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh
and Laos has a formal power to exercise its duties, but may be mandated partially by the secondary legislation
such as Prime Minister’s Degree in case of Laos PDR.

2. What is the actual size of your office?

3-5 Staf f

6-8 Staf f

9-15 Staf f

15 and more

0 1 2 3 4

In most countries a Procurement Body has a small size (fewer than 10 people) with some scatterings like
Bhutan and Lao was smallest with 3-5 staff, whereas Nepal has more than 15.

3.Are current resources adequate to fulfill your mandates?

Yes, very adequate

Yes, but w ith some constraints

No, need some more staf f

No, need more staf f and budget

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Majority of the respondents has the opinion that current recourses used for their offices are not adequate and
they need some more staff or budget to operate effectively.
 4. Public procurement policy normally covers all types of
procurement financed by public funds (state and local budget,
revenues earned by SOEs and FA financing through TA, grant, loan
financing). How true or clear this statement in your country
context?

Very clear

Clear

Not Clear

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

The coverage of public procurement looks generally understood by the procurement professionals in the
country context except for one participants, who see it not clear in the country wide level.

5. If not clear, what do you think is needed to make it clear?

Change the law

Change the secondary rules and regulations

Issue guidance from your agency

Increase public aw areness

0 1 2 3 4 5

Most respondents think that more public awareness is sufficient to increase the general understanding of types
of public procurement except one, who thinks it may require a change in the rules and regulations to clarify a
full coverage of public procurement.

6. Do you agree that the government monitoring and

oversight for foreign assissted procurement is equally
important as procurement funded by the government (state,
local, SOEs) ?

Fully agree

Partially agree

Not agree

Not understand

0 2 4 6 8 10

It seems the answer was obvious as almost all of the respondents are fully agree that the government
monitoring for ADB funded procurement is equally important as locally funded procurement
 7. Do you support the idea of having direct partnership
arrangement (focal point) between your agency and ADB in
procurement related matters?

Very good idea

May be good idea

Not good idea

I don’t know

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

All respondents support some sort of close partnership arrangement between their agency and ADB to better
manage the procurement matters

8. Do you believe the arrangements listed in question 7 w ill bring any of the follow ing result?

a.      Improved efficiency of ADB funded projects (less procurement related delays and
misunderstanding, better information flow and closer monitoring on the procurement process,
etc)

b.      Positive effect on the capacity of the government and its business practices 

c.      Improve the reputation of Procurement Body and its policy outreach   

d.      Positive effect on overall capacity and performance in handling procurement issues

e.      Strengthened country procurement systems and its institutional capacity  

f.      Improved public perception on the procurement system and reliance on it

g. all of above

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Many of the respondents expect the direct partnership and cooperation between the procurement oversight
professionals of the government and ADB will bring not only the efficiency and effectiveness in the projects,
also will strengthen their country procurement system and overall capacity of the government.
 9. If your agency w ill act as a focal point for procurem ent related issues uner ADB funded projects,
w hat im m idiate assisstance/support or prelem inary actions do you think w ould be necessary to
start?

a. Revision to the law or secondary legislation to mandate this

role into the daily function of Procurement Body

b. One or tw o more staff w ith the know ledge of ADB

procurement policy and procedures

c. Special procurement training

d. Assistance in issuing separate manuals/regulations

e. Assistance in introducing IT systems for improved

information flow

f. Additional budget for project visits and monitoring

g. Others (please specify if any)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Many respondents specified the special procurement training as an immediate necessary action for the
partnership arrangement to deal with ADB projects' procurement issues and 3 respondents observed the need
for improved IT system for better information flow and other 3 concerned about a funding for project
monitoring purpose.

10. What kind of technical assisstance in your view is needed for your unit to improve your public procurement
policy and strategy in the near future

a. Carry out a self assessment of the procurement system

b. Assess effectiveness of the public financial management system if it

supports public procurement policy and practice
c. Create a sustainable training system for procurement practitioners to
ensure professionalism and career development
d. Create a single w indow for procurement related information and statistics
led by Procurement Body in the country through an e-procurement system

e. Improve public aw areness and communication strategy

f. Build a positive image

g. Analyze the structure and business practice of Procurement Body and

support re-engineering
h. Develop a capacity development plan and implement the plan for
Procurement Body
I. Acquire additional resources through the engagement of long term staff
consultants for Procurement Body

j. Others (please specify if any)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

This question checked a first hand need for technical assistance in the longer timeframe to improve the
country procurement system in general. The priority reform action in majority countries reveals "Creating
professionalism and career development system for procurement practitioners". Next priority area is
"Capacity and image development for specifically Procurement Body" and "Public awareness for
procurement".
 Appendix 2

Questionnaire

1. Does your agency have a formal authority to formulate the government procurement policy and public
procurement regulations and ensure enforcement through oversight, monitoring, and professional advice?
Answers

a. Yes, fully mandated by law 9 (Lao, by Prime minister’s degree)

b. Yes, partially mandated by law 2 (Sri, Ban)
c. Yes, but not mandated by law
d. No

2. What is the actual size of your office (number of staff)?

a. 3 -5 staff 3 (Bhutan, Lao)

b. 6-8 staff 4 (Mongolia, Sri, Ban)
c. 9-15 staff 2 (Philippines, Cambodia)
d. 15 and more 2 (Nepal)

3. Are current resources (staff, budget etc.) adequate to fulfill your mandates?

a. Yes, very adequate

b. Yes, but with some constraints 2(Lao)
c. No, need some more staff 3 (Nepal, Sri, Ban)
d. No, need more staff and budget 6 (Cambodia, Phil, Bhu,Nep, Mon )

4. Public procurement policy of the country normally covers all types of procurement financed by public
funds such as the state and local budget, revenues earned by State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) and foreign
assistance financing through technical assistance, grant, and loan financing. How true or clearly
understood is this statement in your country context?

a. Very clear 4 (Mon, Bhu, Phil, Cam)

b. Clear 6 (Nep, Lao, Sri, Ban)
c. Not clear 1 (Mon)

5. If not clear, what do you think is needed to make it clear?

a. Change the law

b. Change the secondary rules and regulations 1 (Nep)
c. Issue guidance from your agency
d. Increase public awareness 4

6. Do you agree that the government monitoring and oversight for foreign assisted procurement is equally
important as procurement funded by the government (state and local government, and SOEs)?

a. Fully agree 9 (Bhu, Lao, Nep, Mon, Sri, Ban)

b. Partially agree 1 (Cam)
c. Not agree 1 (Phil don’t understand the Q)
7. Do you support the idea of having direct partnership arrangement (focal point) between your agency and
ADB in procurement related matters such as procurement planning, reviewing the documents, dealing
with complaints and representations, exchange information and statistics, capacity building and
workshops, capacity assessments, project reviews and audits etc.

a. Very good idea 5 (Lao, Mon, Cam, Bhu, )

b. May be good idea 6 (Nep, Lao, Phil, Sri, Ban)
c. Not good idea
d. I don’t no

8. Do you believe the arrangements listed in 7 will bring any of the following results:

a. Improved efficiency of ADB funded projects (less procurement related delays and misunderstanding,
better information flow and closer monitoring on the procurement process, etc) 1 (Ban)
b. Positive effect on the capacity of the government and its business practices 2 (Phil, Nep)
c. Improve the reputation of Procurement Body and its policy outreach
d. Positive effect on overall capacity and performance in handling procurement issues 1 (Sri)
e. Strengthened country procurement systems and its institutional capacity 2 (Lao)
f. Improved public perception on the procurement system and reliance on it
g. All of above 5 (Mon, Cam, Bhu, Nep)

9. If your agency will act as a focal point for procurement related issues under ADB funded projects, what
immediate assistance/support or preliminary actions do you think would be necessary to start?

a. Revision to the law or secondary legislation to mandate this role into the daily function of
Procurement Body 1 (Mon)
b. One or two more staff with the knowledge of ADB procurement policy and procedures 2(Bhu, Sri)
c. Special procurement training 5 (Nep, Mon, Lao, Bhu)

d. Assistance in issuing separate manuals/regulations 1(Cam)

e. Assistance in introducing IT systems for improved information flow 3 (Phil, Bhu, Sri)
f. Additional budget for project visits and monitoring 3 (Mon, Bhu, Phil,)
g. Others (please specify if any) 1 (Nep: We are just starting, need identification will be done later on) 1
(Ban: working under WB assistance)

10. What kind of technical assistance in your view is needed for your unit to improve your public
procurement policy and strategy in the near future:

a. Carry out a self assessment of the procurement system

b. Assess effectiveness of the public financial management system if it supports public procurement
policy and practice 2 (Cam, Ban)
c. Create a sustainable training system for procurement practitioners to ensure professionalism and
career development 7 (Bhu, Lao, Mon, Nep, Ban)
d. Create a single window for procurement related information and statistics led by Procurement Body
in the country through an e-procurement system 1 (Bhu)
e. Improve public awareness and communication strategy 2 (Phil, Bhu)
f. Build a positive image 2 (Bhu, Mon)
g. Analyze the structure and business practice of Procurement Body and support re-engineering
h. Develop a capacity development plan and implement the plan for Procurement Body 2 (Bhu, Nep)
 i. Acquire additional resources through the engagement of long term staff consultants for Procurement
Body 1 (Bhu)
j. Others (please specify if any)

Notes (if any)

Nep: ADB TA is there, preliminary things may be covered under this TA and remaining things will be
dicided during the TA operation.

Mon: Better coordination and reliance on local systems will enable developing countries to overcome
difficulties and reach development goal)

Sri: Manila workshop may include i) harmonization of donors, ii) arranging the mechanism of experience
sharing developing-developed countries, iii) any distraction in e-GP

Thank you!