Bid evaluation, stock management and integrity of the procurement process

Total costs: A = 1,500 × 21.40 = USD 32,100 (transport included); B = 1,500 × 19.80 + 2,600 = 29,700 + 2,600 = USD 32,300; C = 1,500 × 20.10 + 1,650 = 30,150 + 1,650 = USD 31,800; D = 1,500 × 18.90 + 3,400 = 28,350 + 3,400 = USD 31,750.

Procedure: the amount (about USD 32,000) falls between USD 10,000 and 99,999: restricted tender, three-member committee, scoring grid announced in advance.

Admissibility: A admissible. B not admissible: non-compliant soap (400 g instead of 1,000 g per kit); non-compliance leads to elimination, even though B is the fastest. C admissible. D not admissible: delivery time of 25 days exceeds the 21 days required. D is the cheapest bid, but price does not make up for an eliminatory criterion. Only 2 admissible bids remain: the award requires a written justification approved by the country director.

Recommendation: "The committee recommends awarding the contract to supplier A for USD 32,100. A scores 97.53 against 83.14 for C. The price difference is USD 300 (0.9%), but A delivers two days earlier, requires no advance (C would ask for USD 15,900 before delivery, a real financial risk with a less well-known supplier) and has better references. B is rejected for non-compliant soap, D for a delivery time outside the requirement. As only two bids are admissible, we request the written approval of the country director, in line with the procedure. A suspicion of collusion between B and D is being reported separately to the anti-fraud focal point. Budget line and availability of funds to be confirmed by finance before the purchase order is issued."

Discrepancy: theoretical balance 90, physical 72, i.e. 18 kits missing (20% of the balance). This is a significant discrepancy: carry out a joint recount, check delivery notes BL-0912, 0931 and 0944 against the signed distribution lists, write a discrepancy report; do not "correct" the card without a documented explanation.

Consumption: September issues 180 + 250 + 200 = 630; 3-month average (570 + 600 + 630) / 3 = 600 kits per month, i.e. 20 per day.

Reorder point: 20 × (35 days lead time + 15 days safety) = 1,000 kits. The stock (72) is far below this: the order should have been placed several weeks ago. Current coverage: 72 / 20 = 3.6 days.

Quantity: 1,500 kits cover 75 days. Maximum stock = 20 × (35 + 15 + 30 days review period) = 1,600; 1,600 − 72 = 1,528: the quantity of 1,500 is consistent.

Avoiding the stock-out: even with A (12 days), about 8 to 9 days of consumption are missing, i.e. 160 to 180 kits. Options: stock loan from a partner or from the WASH cluster pipeline, with a written repayment agreement; postpone a non-urgent distribution in agreement with the programme; ask A for an early partial delivery.

The indicators (same telephone, same post office box, same layout) suggest collusion or cover bids: competition may not be genuine. Steps: document the facts neutrally (copies of the bids, committee observations); report in writing to the anti-fraud focal point within 48 hours, copying the country director or as set out in the reporting policy; keep the evidence. What I do not do: contact B or D to "ask for explanations", make public accusations, or carry out an investigation myself: this would compromise any investigation. Follow-up: check whether B or D have already won contracts (search past comparative bid analyses), check legal registration and ownership, update the supplier list (suspension pending investigation if the policy provides for it), broaden the supplier base to guarantee 3 genuinely independent bids.

Four orders of 375 × 21.40 = USD 8,025 each constitute splitting of the same requirement: this is forbidden, and an auditor would spot it immediately (same supplier, same item, same dates). The donor may declare the costs ineligible (USD 32,100). Furthermore, if the base manager is the requester or approver, he cannot also sign the goods receipt: segregation of duties.

I refuse politely but clearly, in writing after the verbal exchange, and propose a solution to the real emergency: (1) the committee meets within 24 hours, since the bids have already been received and evaluated; (2) if the normal procedure is not enough, a formal, reasoned and filed emergency waiver request to the country director; (3) a loan of 160 to 200 kits from a partner to cover the stock-out period; (4) a request to A for a partial delivery. Goods are received by the storekeeper together with a programme representative. If the pressure continues, I inform the country logistics coordinator.