Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ETHIOPIAN PHARMACEUTICALS SUPPLY AGENCY (EPSA)
Tender Management Lead Time Analysis
(2017-2019)
List of tables
Prepared by
Seifu Isa, Director, Tender Management, EPSA
Dan Victor Ojwando, Senior Technical Advisor, Procurement and
Contracts Management (Global) -PSA
Solomon Berhie Tekle, Technical Advisor, Procurement and
Contracts (National)- PSA
July 2020
April 2020
i
1. Contents
List of tables ................................................................................................................................ i
List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. ii
List of figures .............................................................................................................................. ii
List of abbreviations .................................................................................................................. iii
2. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
3. Background............................................................................................................................ 2
4. Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 3
5. Findings ................................................................................................................................. 3
6. Discussions .......................................................................................................................... 10
7. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 11
8. Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 11
References ............................................................................................................................... 13
Appendix 2: Procurement process as outlined by the PPA Manual 2011 ........................... 17
ii
List of Tables
Table 1: Total time spent on each procurement activity ........................................................................ 4
Table 2: Acceptable statutory timelines per PPA for ICB ........................................................................ 4
Table 3: Acceptable statutory timelines per PPA for NCB ...................................................................... 5
Table 4: Comparison of EPSA lead time with the recommended timelines in the Public Procurement Manual 2011 ........................................................................................................................................... 5
Table 5: Total number of tenders conducted comparison between 2018 and 2019 ............................. 6
Table 6: Total number of days spent between programme funds and RDF in 2018 .............................. 8
List of figures
Figure 1: Total number of days spent per procurement method used in 2018 ..................................... 6
Figure 2: Total number of days spent per procurement method used in 2018 and 2019 ..................... 7
Figure 3: Total POs created and contracts signed through each procurement method used in 2018 .. 8
Figure 4: Total POs created and contracts signed for programme and RDF tenders in 2018 ................ 9
Figure 5: Procurement lead time (days): three-year comparative analysis............................................ 9
Figure 6: Areas of improvements .......................................................................................................... 13
iii
List of abbreviations
CMD Contract Management Directorate
DDG Deputy Director General
DG Director General
DT Direct Tender
EFDA Ethiopian Food and Drug Authority
EPSA Ethiopian Pharmaceuticals Supply Agency
ICB International Competitive Bidding
KPI Key Performance Indicators
NCB National Competitive Bidding
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
PO Purchase Order
PPA Public Procurement Agency
QMSD Quantification and Market-Shaping Directorate
RDF Revolving Drug Fund
RT Restricted Tender
SME Subject Matter Expert
TEC Tender Endorsing Committee
TMD Tender Management Directorate
1
2. Introduction
‘Lead time’ is defined as the time between the initiation of a purchase order (PO) and the
receipt of goods at the warehouse from a selected supplier (MSH 2013, p. 464). However, in
the context of the Ethiopian Pharmaceuticals Supply Agency (EPSA), ‘lead time’ begins with
the date on which the Quantification and Market-Shaping Directorate (QMSD) submits a
procurement request to the Tender Management Directorate (TMD) and ends when the
goods are delivered to EPSA’s warehouses.
Usually, procurement lead time is measured in days or months. With respect for this analy-
sis, lead time was measured using the number of days undertaken per cluster of activities.
EPSA’s Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework document provides ways by which
EPSA identifies corporate, process and individual key performance areas as well as key per-
formance indicators (KPIs) for each area. As procurement is one of the business functions at
EPSA, the M&E framework provides it with process KPIs and lead time management.
Tender Management lead time management has been a major challenge in inbound Supply
Chain operations. The current procurement lead time is causing Supply Chain disruptions
and affecting product availability and affordability across service delivery points.
The current lead times experienced by EPSA have been caused by several factors within the
inbound Supply Chain operation. Examples of these factors include the unavailability of for-
eign currency, weak contract administration and the lack of an Annual Procurement Plan.
These factors have affected proper management of procurement and contract management
processes, leading to extensive delays that affect the Supply Chain operations of EPSA.
This Tender Management lead time analysis will help resolve the identified bottleneck of
long procurement lead time and also address the main areas of delay in the procurement
process for continuous improvements. Furthermore, the analysis outcomes will be used as a
baseline for similar future analyses for comparative purposes.
The purpose of the procurement lead time assessment is to provide a foundation for im-
proving the effectiveness and efficiency of the procurement process to enable it to attain a
Silver maturity level in line with the Global Health Supply Chain Maturity Model (Gates Ma-
turity Model). Specifically, the report aims to determine the following parameters, which
2
will guide the analysis of the findings and make recommendations to address the issues
identified:
1. The total time spent in each procurement process in 2018.
2. The stipulated timelines for each procurement process, as outlined in the Public Pro-
curement Agency (PPA) Procurement Manual of December 2011.
3. The total number of completed tenders and their lead times based on current proce-
dures.
4. A comparison of the total lead times of both programme and Revolving Drug Fund (RDF)
procurement.
5. A comparative analysis of the last three years’ procurement lead times.
6. Areas of variance or delay, providing adequate recommendations for corrective ac-
tions/improvements.
7. Gaps, proposing possible recommendations.
The remaining part of this report includes the background, findings, discussions, conclu-
sions, and recommendations.
3. Background
EPSA is organised by four Deputy Director Generals (DDGs) and 20 Directorates. The In-
bound DDG’s Office comprise of three Directorates, including QMSD, TMD and the Contract
Management Directorate (CMD). This Tender Management analysis focused on TMD.
The office of the Inbound DDG ensures the appropriate planning of the required health
commodities, their sourcing from both local and global markets and their delivery to the
warehouse (except local consignments, which are directly delivered by the manufacturers to
the warehouse).
TMD is responsible for procurement planning, supplier selection and conducting bids effi-
ciently. As with other public procurement institutions, the Directorate is guided by the re-
quirements of a standard procurement process and strictly follows the rules and regulations
set by EPSA, the PPA and all other relevant agencies.
3
4. Methodology
EPSA’s Inbound DDG and the Tender Management Director, in collaboration with the in-
bound logistics Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), performed the lead time assessment through
series of exercises, including meetings, key informant interviews, etc.
The SMEs had series of consultative meetings to design the data collection tool for the Ten-
der Management lead time analysis and also agree on the scope of the data collection and
analysis. The tool was designed to capture data and timelines between each procurement
activity from requisition to the handover of contract awards to CMD.
The TMD Director assigned one officer whose role was to capture the required data for the
procurement undertaken in 2018 using the lead time management data collection tool. The
data captured by the tool was mostly primary data generated from all tendering processes
in the Financial Year 2018.
When the lead procurement time data had been entered into the lead time analysis data
collection tool, the Director and SMEs reviewed the data to ascertain their quality in terms
of reliability, completeness, precision, validity, timeliness and integrity.
The analysis assessed, in detail, the time spent on all activities across EPSA’s procurement
process from the submission of requisitions by QMSD through tender document prepara-
tion, supplier selection, contract award and the submission of contract documents to CMD.
5. Findings
The Assessment Team only selected tenders that had been processed by TMD from the
early stages of the procurement process up to contract signing and handover to CMD for ex-
pediting, contract performance review, contract close-out, etc. According to this criterion,
the team identified 93 tenders that were subjected to this analysis.
As described in the bottlenecks analysis and reports from the revised Pharmaceutical Sector
Transformation Plan, EPSA’s procurement lead time is too long. Hence, the team sought to
find out the exact areas in the procurement process where the delays occur or emanate,
from the point of initiating the procurement process to the point of completion, evidence-
based decision-making and to make recommendations for corrective actions.
4
5.1 Total time spent on each procurement process in 2018
The Assessment Team found that the average time spent on a single tender conducted in
2018, from receipt of the purchase requisition from QMSD to the handover of contract doc-
uments to CMD, was a total of 109 days. Table 1 lists the number of days spent on each pro-
curement process at different clusters. For effectiveness, the processes are organised in
chronological sequence.
Table 1: Total time spent on each procurement activity
Clus-ter
Procurement processes Average number of days
C1 From purchase requisition by QMSD to purchase requisition approval by the Inbound DDG
3
C2 From ‘No objection’ request to Director General (DG) to ‘No objection’ ap-proval by DG
4
C3 From tender document sent to Tender Endorsing Committee (TEC) and ap-proval by TEC.
7
C4 From tender document approval by TEC to tender being advertised 3
C5 From tender being advertised to tender opening 23
C6 From tender opening to evaluation proposal submitted to TEC 28
C7 From submission of evaluation proposal to approval by TEC 11
C8 From evaluation approval by TEC to award 18
C9 From PO creation to submission to the Ethiopian Food and Drug Authority (EFDA)
5
C10 From PO submission to EFDA to EFDA approval 2
C11 From contract issued to supplier to contract signed (returned) by supplier 1
C12 From contract sent to DG to contract signed by DG 2
C13 From contract signed by DG to transfer of contract documents to CMD 2
Average number of days per procurement process 109
5.2 Identification of the stipulated timelines for each procurement processes as outlined
in the Procurement Manual 2011
Tables 2 and 3 illustrate the standard timelines established in the Public Procurement Man-uals for International Competitive Bidding (ICB) and for National Competitive Bidding (NCB) procurement methods, respectively.
Table 2: Acceptable statutory timelines per PPA for ICB
SN Procurement activity Timeline
1 Preparation of bidding documents 1–6 weeks
2 Prior review/Procurement Endorsing Committee 1–2 weeks
3 Adverts/tender invitation 6 weeks minimum
5
4 Tender close/opening Same date and time
5 Tender evaluation and report submission 2–4 weeks
6 Recommendation by Procurement Endorsing Committee 1–2 weeks
7 Contract award 0–2 weeks
8 Contract signature 1–4 weeks
9 Letter of credit (goods) 2–4 weeks
10 Delivery (as per contract) 6–16 weeks
11 Inspection and acceptance 0–4 + weeks
Table 3: Acceptable statutory timelines per PPA for NCB
SN Procurement activity Timeline
1 Preparation of bidding documents 1–3 weeks
2 Prior review/Procurement Endorsing Committee 1–2 weeks
3 Adverts/tender invitation 2–4 weeks
4 Tender close/opening (same date) Same date and time
5 Tender evaluation and report submission 1–2 weeks
6 Contract award 0–2 weeks
7 Contract signature 1–3 weeks
EPSA’s procurement statutory timeline is adhered to and it conforms with the recom-mended timelines of public procurement for effective and efficient procurement processes. Table 4 compares the 2018 lead times with the timelines provided in the Federal Public Pro-curement Manual 2011. It looks at the two main procurement methods (ICB and NCB) used by EPSA.
Table 4: Comparison of EPSA lead time with the recommended timelines in the Public Pro-curement Manual 2011
Procurement activity PPA timeline in days
TMD time-line in days
Adherence
Preparation of bidding documents 7–42 days Not within the scope of analysis
Not applicable
Prior review/Procurement Endorsing Committee
7–14 days 7 Conform
Adverts/tender invitation 42 days 23 Conform
Tender close/opening 42 days 23 Conform
Tender evaluation and report submis-sion
14–28 days 28 Conform
6
Recommendation by Procurement En-dorsing Committee
7–14 days 11
Conform
Contract award 0–14 days 1 Conform
Contract signature 7–28 days 1 Conform
5.3 Identification of the total number of tenders conducted and their lead time based on
current procurement methods
The Assessment Team found that a total of 93 tenders were completed in 2018 and 54 ten-ders were conducted in 2019 using the four procurement methods illustrated in Table 5. As presented in Table 5, the team also discovered that more direct purchases were conducted (in 2018 and 14 in 2019). This was due to the critical nature of procuring machines that are only compatible with consumables produced by the same manufacturers of the machines.
Table 5: Total number of tenders conducted comparison between 2018 and 2019
SN Procurement method Number of tenders con-ducted in 2018
Number of tenders con-ducted in 2019 (up to tender award)
1 ICB 32 34
2 Restricted Tender (RT) 8 0
3 NCB 5 6
4 Direct Tender (DT) 48 14
Total number of tenders 93 54
The Assessment Team also found that the total number of days spent on ICB was lower than the number of days spent on RTs in 2018. Figure 1 illustrates that the total number of days spent on RT was highest (148 days), followed by ICB (132 days) and DT (114 days).
Figure 1: Total number of days spent per procurement method used in 2018
12
4
14
8
69
11
4
I C B R T N C B D T
7
The Assessment Team also compared the total number of days spent on each procurement method used between 2018 and 2019. According to Figure 2, the Assessment Team found that the number of days spent between 2018 and 2019 against ICB, RT, NCB and DT were distinguishable. However, the total number of days spent on DT significantly increased to 203 days in 2019, compared to 114 days in 2018. Figure 2 compares and illustrates the total number of days spent per procurement method used in 2018 and 2019.
Figure 2: Total number of days spent per procurement method used in 2018 and 2019
The Study Team also assessed the total number of POs created and the total number of con-tracts generated on each procurement method. The team discovered that tenders con-ducted through ICB had more POs (284) and contract agreements (244) compared to other procurement methods used in 2018. Figure 3 compares and shows the total number of POs created and contracts generated through each procurement method used in 2018.
12
4
14
8
69
11
4
16
0
0
83
20
3.8
I C B R T N C B D T
2018 2019
28
4
11 16
3
14
5
95
2
24
4
9 15
3
14
5
40
1
I C B I C B A V E R A G E
R T R T A V E R A G E
N C B N C B A V E R A G E
D T D T A V E R A G E
Number of Pos Number of Contracts
8
Figure 3: Total POs created, and contracts signed through each procurement method used in 2018
5.4 Comparison of the total number of tenders conducted and the total number of days spent between programme and RDF procurements
The Assessment Team found that about 52 programme-funded tenders and 41 RDF-funded tenders were conducted in 2018. According to Table 6, the team discovered that an average of 113 days was spent on programme tenders and 115 days on RDF tenders for a single ten-der conducted in 2018.
The Assessment Team also found that the highest number of days was spent between ten-der opening and the submission of the tender evaluation proposal to the TEC: this was 23 days for programme tenders and 34 days for RDF for procurements conducted in 2018. Ta-ble 6 shows a comparison of the number of days spent on each procurement activity cluster per source of funds (programme and RDF) in 2018.
Table 6: Total number of days spent between programme funds and RDF in 2018
Cluster Procurement processes Programme, in days
RDF, in days
C1 From purchase requisition by QMSD to pur-chase requisition approval by Inbound DDG
3 3
C2 From ‘No objection’ request to DG to ‘No objection’ approval by DG
4 4
C3 From tender document submission to TEC to approval by Endorsement Committee
7 7
C4 From tender document approval by En-dorsement Committee to tender being ad-vertised
1 4
C5 From tender being advertised to tender opening
19 27
C6 From tender opening to evaluation proposal submitted to TEC
23 34
C7 From submission of evaluation proposal to approval by TEC
11 11
C8 From evaluation approval by TEC to award 18 20
C9 From PO creation to PO sent to EFDA 12 1
C10 From PO sent to EFDA to EFDA approval 4 1
C11 From contract issued to supplier to contract signed (returned) by supplier
3 1
C12 From contract sent to DG to contract signed by DG
4 1
C13 From contract signed by DG to contract doc-ument transfer to CMD
4 1
Total number of days by procurement process per funding source in 2018
113 115
5.5 The total number of POs created, and contracts signed per source of funds
9
The Assessment Team discovered that a total of 409 POs were created and 313 contracts were signed for both programme and RDF tenders respectively in 2018, as shown in Figure 4. The Assessment Team also identified that more POs were created and contracts signed in RDF tenders compared to programme tenders in 2018. Figure 4 shows the comparison be-tween the number of POs created and the number of contracts signed between programme and RDF tenders in 2018.
Figure 4: Total POs created, and contracts signed for programme and RDF tenders in 2018
5.6 Comparative analysis of the procurement lead time during the last three years of pro-curement
As presented in Figure 5, the Study Team found that the number of days spent between ICB, RT and NCB across the three years was comparable. However, there were huge fluctuation in the number of days spent in DTs conducted throughout the three years (74 days in 2017, 114 days in 2018 and 203 days in 2019). This will require further analysis to identify the root causes.
Figure 5: Procurement lead time (days): three-year comparative analysis
14
6
3
26
3
40
9
9
94
2
21
9
31
3
7
P R O G R A M P R O G R A M A V E R A G E
R D F T O T A L R D F A V E R A G E
Number of Pos Number of Contracts
13
4
12
4
16
0
94
.83
14
8
0
69
83
74
11
4
20
3.8
1
2 0 1 7 2 0 1 8 2 0 1 9
ICB RT NCB DT
10
6. Discussions
One of the annual strategic objectives of TMD is to continuously reduce the procurement lead time. In this instance, its objective is to reduce the lead time from an average of 243 days to an average of 150 days. From the analysis presented above, it is evident that the av-erage lead time in 2018 was 109 days from requisitioning to contract signing. However, this does not really compare objectively with EPSA’s preferred procurement lead time of 150 days, that caters for availability of health commodities in the warehouses. When compared to the proposed procurement lead time of 150 days for requisitioning to goods being in the warehouse, 109 days from requisitioning to contract signing leaves only 41 days to get the goods to the warehouse. This may not be practicable considering the factors contributing to delays mentioned in Section 1.
As EPSA is a public institution of the Federal Republic of Ethiopia, its procurement and con-tract administration operations are governed by the legal framework of the public procure-ment guidelines. It was observed during the data collection that the overall operational ac-tivities complied with the proposed statutory timelines and procurement methods used against the legal standards.
From the analysis, specifically as illustrated in Table 5, out of the total of 93 tenders com-pleted in 2018, about 50% were conducted through DT. This is a red flag and it may contra-vene the PPA’s Proclamation 649/2009, Section 33(1) and (2). However, the DT method was chosen due to it being critical to procure machines that are only compatible with consuma-bles produced by the same manufacturers of the machines.
Out of the total 48 direct purchases conducted in 2018:
• 20 POs were placed for consumables of closed laboratory machines.
• Seven DT purchases were placed for sole manufacturers of commodities captured under the procurement package.
• 11 DTs were carried out as per the directives given by the Ministry of Finance to en-courage local manufacturers.
• Three DT purchases were affected due to a special agreement between the Federal Ministry of Health and some international manufacturers to create medicine access for the poor population.
• Three direct purchases were placed for spare part procurement to complement pre-viously procured machines.
• The remaining tenders were placed for emergency management.
There were limitations to carrying out this task and analysis and the Assessment Team had to make some assumptions when data were not complete, inaccurate, or available. The main limitations of this analysis were:
• The lack of accurate data: for example, some procurement activities were found not to have start and end dates; the Assessment Team agreed to assign zero days to these activities.
• The scope of analysis between previous years and 2018: prior to 2018, the only avail-able lead time data was from the date of receipt of requisition from QMSD to the tender award. However, this analysis covered the time from requisitioning to the handover of contract documents to Contract management Directorate.
11
• Finally, data clustering methods in the two previous years were not detailed enough compared to what was adopted in 2018, which separated the activities in a more de-tailed and sequential manner.
7. Conclusion
Considering the findings above, and with the continued support of the Inbound DDG, the SMEs will support TMD to develop a clear action plan to implement all the recommenda-tions presented in this report and to ensure that EPSA’s procurement lead time improves from 243 days to 150 days, with high product availability at the warehouses. If all the rec-ommendations herein are fully adopted, EPSA’s procurement function will move to a Silver maturity level with product availability of 85%–98% at EPSA headquarters in accordance with the Global Health Supply Chain Maturity Model.
Lastly, the identified gaps and differences will be subjected to a root cause analysis exercise by the respective Procurement Teams and the Inbound SMEs to identify the possible root causes of the differences and to provide long-lasting solutions in line with the legal frame-works of the relevant public procurement guidelines and industry best practices.
8. Recommendations
Based on the findings and the analysis presented in this report, the following recommenda-tions are proposed by the Assessment Team to help the Directorate address the lingering issue of the long procurement lead time.
• The Tender Management Director needs to focus on the procurement process clus-ters with a view to resolving all issues causing delays and to reduce:
❖ The number of days between tender opening and evaluation. ❖ The number of days between invitation and opening. ❖ The number of days between PO creation and EFDA approval. ❖ The number of days between tender endorsement and contract award.
• A consolidated procurement plan should be adopted to integrate the sourcing of programme and RDF procurement at the same time. For the implementation of the tendering process, it can be split into the respective sources of funds upon PO gen-eration and contract signing. This will also support the economy of scale and attract both local and international private sector participation in EPSA’s tendering process.
• A consolidated procurement plan should be used to negotiate foreign currency allo-cations with relevant banks to create a sustainable commodity flow every financial year. The Commercial Bank of Ethiopia will have an annual cash flow projection for EPSA, which should enable EPSA to plan accordingly. EPSA should also ensure that the tendered drugs have met the eligibility requirements and are registered by EFDA to avoid delays due to EFDA approval.
• An Annual Procurement Plan should be instituted with a clear implementation schedule and active tender tracking tools that are shared with key stakeholders in-volved in the process. This will increase the transparency and visibility of TMD oper-ations. The Annual Procurement Plan should also be used to define procurement methods based on the threshold matrix for using RTs. RTs should only be used when no responses are received for open tenders and when the goods are urgently needed, depending on the national stock, and in line with the supply plan.
12
• The functions of the Evaluation Committee should be separated from those of the Tender Opening Committee. This will increase accountability and visibility, as well as create clear timelines and responsibilities for the Committees.
• An ad hoc Bid Evaluation Committee should be established for complex procure-ment processes that require detailed technical evaluation. This will improve timeli-ness and efficiency. The designation and responsibilities of each member of the Bid Opening and Bid Evaluation Committees should be clearly defined, as should the start and end dates of an evaluation and the time when the report will be submitted to the TEC.
• The evaluation exercises should be started by tagging key documents using yellow sticky notes for ease of identification and perusal of the documents during and after the evaluation.
• Evaluations should be integrated and performed in groups and at a specific place and time to avoid any delays resulting from splitting the evaluation processes.
• The members of the Endorsement Committee may also be paid certain allowances for their meetings in line with relevant financial management regulations. This is to encourage them to perform their duties and responsibilities efficiently and effec-tively, as well as in a timely and transparent manner.
• A secure location within EPSA should be identified for the secretariat activities of the TEC. The Tender Management Director should work closely with the Secretary of the Endorsement Committee to ensure that the implementation of the procure-ment plan is adhered to throughout the year with minimal interruptions.
• A Turnkey approach should be adopted for the procurement of medical equip-ment/devices, whereby the bidding document should clearly state that the success-ful supplier will ‘supply, deliver, install, test, commission and train’. The Tender Management Director, therefore, should pay close attention to the above four criti-cal areas of the procurement process.
• Contract signing should be done concurrently at EPSA by the DG and the suppliers. For international suppliers, power of attorney should be given to local appointed agents to sign contracts on their behalf. A local agent must be a director of the com-pany to qualify for power of attorney to sign contracts. This requirement may not be practicable if foreign suppliers do not have local agents and the items are urgently needed by EPSA.
• More on-the-job training on tender evaluation and endorsement in line industry best practice in comparison with other countries should be facilitated for staff to help them gain more practical knowledge.
13
Figure 6: Areas of improvements
References
MSH (2013) MDS-3 Managing Access to Medicines and Health Technologies (3rd ed.) Man-agement Science for Health, Kumarian Press, West Hardford, CT.
Large Volume procurement
(consolidation of RDF and
programme)
Implimentaion of the Annual Procurement
Plan
Compliance with PPA legal
frameworks
Improvement of
evaluation processes
14
Appendix 1: Implementation plan
s/n Activity Timelines Recommendation Responsible Accountable Consulted Informed
1
Long lead time between tender opening and eval-uation
The tender evaluation process should be integrated and performed in groups at a specific place and time
TMD Coordina-tors
Seifu Inbound DDG Inbound DDG /TMD Team
Specific secure location within EPSA where an evaluation room should be designed and allocated
Director TMD Inbound DDG General Ser-vices
DG, TMD Team
Ad hoc Evaluation Committee ap-pointment letters should define des-ignation and responsibilities of each member and the start and end dates of an evaluation
Director TMD Inbound DDG DG TMD Team
The Inbound DDG should find a spe-cific secure location within EPSA where the tender opening ceremony can be held
Director TMD Inbound DDG General Ser-vices
DG, TMD Team
Evaluation Committee members should start the evaluation exercises by tagging key documents using yel-low sticky notes for ease of identifi-cation and perusal of the documents during and after the evaluation
Director TMD Inbound DDG TMD Team TMD Team
Medical equipment tenders should adopt a Turnkey approach whereby the bidding document states ‘supply, deliver, install, test, commission and train’
Medical Coor-dinator
Director TMD Inbound DDG DG
15
s/n Activity Timelines Recommendation Responsible Accountable Consulted Informed
2 Long lead time by TEC
DG should identify a secure location within EPSA for the secretariat activi-ties of the TEC
Inbound DDG DG General Ser-vices
General Ser-vices/Director TMD
Institution of an Annual Procurement Plan with an implementation sched-ule and active tender tracking tools that is shared with key stakeholders involved in the process
Director TMD Inbound DDG TEC TMD Team/DG
Endorsement Committee may be paid certain allowances for their meetings
Inbound DDG TEC DG TMD Team/DG
3
TMD should comply with the PPA’s statutory timelines
Tender Management Director should give emphasis to the lead time of the tender evaluation, report submission and contract awarding processes
Director TMD Inbound DDG TEC TMD Team/DG
Contract signing should be done con-currently at EPSA by the DG and by suppliers
Director TMD Inbound DDG Legal Direc-torate
TMD Team/DG
Establish an ad hoc Bid Evaluation Committee for complex procure-ment processes that require a de-tailed technical evaluation
Director TMD Inbound DDG PPA TMD Team/DG
TMD should separate the functions of the Evaluation Committee from those of the Tender Opening Com-mittee
Director TMD Inbound DDG DG/PPA TMD Team/DG
16
s/n Activity Timelines Recommendation Responsible Accountable Consulted Informed
TMD should use ICB as the preferred method of procurement
Director TMD Inbound DDG DG/PPA TMD Team/DG
4 Low us-age of NCB
Tender Management Director should adopt a preference for local manu-facturers and adhere to the princi-ples of procurement of the PPA Di-rective Section 4(f)
Director TMD Inbound DDG DG/PPA TMD Team/DG
5
Lack of consoli-dated Annual Procure-ment Plan
A consolidated procurement plan should be adopted to integrate the sourcing of programme and RDF pro-curement at the same time
Director TMD Inbound DDG DG/PPA TMD Team/DG
6 Foreign currency shortage
EPSA should use the consolidated procurement plan to negotiate for foreign currency with the National and Commercial Bank of Ethiopia to create a sustainable commodity flow every financial year
Director TMD Inbound DDG DG/Director CMD
TMD Team/DG
17
Appendix 2: Procurement process as outlined by the PPA Manual 2011
