Jagdeo blames evaluation team for handing ‘Critic’ $865M pump station contract

Apr 19, 2024 News

---

Kaieteur News – Vice President, Bharrat Jagdeo on Thursday blamed the evaluation team for the procurement breaches found in the handing out of a $865M pump station contract to Tepui, a company closely linked to the ‘Guyanese Critic’.

Kaieteur News told Jagdeo at his weekly party press conference yesterday that an investigation done by the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) revealed several breaches of the procurement regulations in the awarding of the contract and asked the vice president for his response in this regard.

The VP responded, “It didn’t say breach however it pointed out the application for evaluation criteria; an evaluation criterion that was outlined in the bid that there was not a perfect kind of application or in this bid’s case, the evaluation criteria”.

Jagdeo pointed out that the report by the PPC did not recommend the cancellation of the contract.

Earlier during his initial statement at the press conference, Jagdeo said that the PPC did make some recommendations as it relates to the evaluation process and that his government will take them into consideration.

“…the recommendations will be taken into consideration especially on the evaluation, the application of evaluation criteria,” he said.

Jagdeo also sought to defend the awarding of the contract to Tepui by saying most of it was transparent and that the findings show that there is a functioning PPC under his government than was under the past administration.

“One thing was clear and that is there was a public tender for all of the 19 pump stations that were being built across the country including the one under review by the PPC,” Jagdeo said before adding “that an evaluation committee consistent with the Public Procurement Act was established. It was a multi-agency evaluation Committee”.

“So I asked who the evaluators were today and they sent me this document,” he continued before naming the evaluators.

“The evaluators were Randy Beckles, he was the coordinator for the particular project and he is the procurement officer from the GNBS (Guyana National Bureau of Standards), Miss Shabbana Omar, a civil engineer at the BNTF, Ministry of Finance and Mr. Larry Karrel at the ASDU (a unit at the Ministry of Agriculture). These were the three evaluators so they completed their evaluation report and then the report was sent to NPTAB and then it went to the Cabinet for a no objection,” Jagdeo said.

He also told the media that while it is good that it focuses on the transparency of the handing out of contracts, it must also shed light on the implementation and completion of projects by his government along with the benefits it brings to the populace of Guyana.

The report released by the PPC revealed that although TEPUI – the company closely linked to social media personality, Mikhail Rodrigues popularly known as the ‘Guyanese Critic’ had failed miserably during the evaluation process for bids at the level of the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB), but it was still handed a $865 million contract to build a pump station at Belle Vue, West Bank Demerara (WBD).

In fact, Rodrigues’ company beat off 26 other bids, 13 of which were described as “substantially responsive,” to win the lucrative deal. This was revealed in a report released by the Public Procurement Commission (PPC)—the body legally mandated to with oversight and investigative capabilities to monitor public procurement.

The PPC, in its report released on Tuesday highlighted several procurement breaches committed by TEPUI and overlooked by NPTAB in awarding the contract. According to the document which was perused by Kaieteur News, NPTAB ignored several key details when it came to the company satisfying the evaluation criteria for the award of the $865M deal.

The investigation was launched into the award of contract after a complaint was lodged at the PPC by opposition Member of Parliament, David Patterson who raised concerns over the questionable circumstances under which the contract was awarded.  For its part, NPTAB had previously defended the contract award to TEPUI claiming that it follows the systems, processes and procedures enshrined in the Procurement Act and its regulations in the award of contracts.

The Tender Board had explained that in any bid, there are administrative, technical and financial criteria to be followed which are assessed by the Evaluation Committee in making its recommendation to NPTAB.

“These criteria are all fully enshrined in the specific tender document applicable to the specific procurement, whether for goods, works or services,” the tender board said.

However, in its report, the PPC underlined the fact that the company failed to satisfy several technical criteria for the specific award but was still given the contract.  According to the report, the contractor-TEPUI – did not demonstrate that it had construction experience or “[completed] projects of a similar nature” as the Belle Vue pump station project.

Instead, the record before the commission reflects that TEPUI submitted two contracts under this criterion stating that it has a contract Hadi’s World Inc. dated March 27, 2023, for the construction of a concrete wharf at Providence, and a contract between it and the Central Housing and Planning Authority dated February 24th, 2023, for the upgrading of roads in Block three, Great Diamond. However, it was pointed out that the list of current projects submitted by TEPUI under evaluation criteria, gave the status of the aforesaid projects at the time of the bid submission (June 2023) as 30% and 20% completed, respectively.

The commission noting that the works for which the contracts were submitted by TEPUI were neither for a “pump station, sluice and or drainage structure” as specified in the evaluation criteria nor were any, by TEPUI’s own admission, completed, also as required by the said criteria. In addition, the bidder, TEPUI , submitted as part of its tender, a letter addressed to the procuring entity and dated June 13th, 2023,  by Winston Martindale, Director captioned “Record of Past Work Experience” in which it is stated – “Our company was registered in August 2022 and has now commenced the process of bidding for projects, hence we do not have any past work experience but our team of personnel have years of experience under upgrading and rehabilitation of roads as indicated on their respective resumes.”

By way of the aforesaid letter of February 6th, 2024, the commission also requested from NPTAB, “clarification as to the authority on which the evaluation committee acted which permitted the winning bidder to rely on, and the committee to accept, the purported work experience of the bidder’s officers, as distinct from the bidder itself (a company) which admitted no past work experience.

Further, the committee evaluated the bid submission, important to note that discrepancies were identified between the original bid document and electronic copies submitted by company, particularly regarding project completion percentages.

The original bid document listed the construction of a concrete pile bed and foundation at Providence (Hadi’s World Inc.) and the upgrading of roads in Block 3, Great Diamond (CH&PA) as 100% and 80% completed, respectively, while the electronic copies indicated lower completion rates of 30% and 20%.

In such cases, the document noted that the information provided in the original bid document takes precedence. It went on to state further that whether the projects submitted by TEPUI were 20% complete or 80% complete (Re: letter from NPTAB dated February 20th, 2024) is immaterial, as what was required by the evaluation criteria was ‘completion.’

Another requirement for the successful bidder is to provide evidence of financial capacity representing (30%) of the bid price. Bidder must provide a bank statement or LINE of credit from a bank or a recognized financial institution. The criterion has a number of levels within it which are to be satisfied. The first, being a bank statement or line of credit from a “recognized financial institution”. The record reflects the submission by TEPUI of a line of credit issued by Puran Brothers ‘Top Mix.’

The PPC noted that in the absence of bank statements, which are not reflected in the record as having been submitted, a line of credit from a “bank” or “recognized financial institution” is required. What is a “recognized financial institution” is not defined. Notwithstanding, the issuer must at least be a “financial institution”. What is a financial institution is defined by law, pursuant to the Financial Institutions Act, Cap. 85:03 and in accordance therewith, must be licensed by the Bank of Guyana (Sections 2 and 3). [A bank must be similarly licensed by the Bank of Guyana in accordance with the said Act.]

Puran Bros. Top Mix is not a ‘bank’ or a ‘financial institution’ within the meaning of the Financial Institutions,” the regulatory body stated in its report.

Yet, another criterion required the successful bidder is for the company to– “…provide audited financial statements for the last financial year, dated within one year, for incorporated companies. Financial statements must be audited by a Chartered accountant/accountancy firm and include an auditor’s note…”

In response to this requirement the company’s director, Martindale addressed to the procuring entity dated June 13th, 2023, which states – “…Our company was registered in August 2022 and has now commenced the process of bidding for projects; hence, we do not have any financial statements.”

The company was mandated to show evidence of ownership and or possession of key equipment in the specified number, is available for the project. The criterion provides that “ownership or possession can be demonstrated by providing the licences, purchase documents, registrations, agreement to lease or rent from a recognized leasing agency, and or affidavit of ownership.” The record reflects that TEPUI Inc. did not submit any of the aforesaid, to wit, a ‘licence, purchase document, registration, agreement and or affidavit.’

In addition to the aforementioned criterion, the successful bidder was required to submit “bid security in the sum of 1% of the Bid Price.”  The report pointed out that TEPUI’s bid was in the sum of $865,543,500. Hence, the Bid Security ought to have been in the sum of $8,655,435. However, the security submitted by TEPUI was in the sum of $7,791,985. That is, $863,450 less than the required sum in satisfaction of this criterion.

Stemming from the PPC report, Minister within the Office of the President with the Responsibility for Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh, on Tuesday night, sought to reassure the nation of government’s commitment to transparency and accountability in the distribution of state contracts. In a live address, Dr. Singh spoke of the government commitment to the scrutiny of bidders to ascertain whether they would be able to meet the work demands and discharge contracts in a timely manner.

“I wish to assure the Guyanese public that this PPP/C government, led by His Excellency President Dr. Irfaan Ali, remains firmly and unwaveringly committed to good governance and accountability, including through the maintenance and preservation of public bodies that can withstand scrutiny,” Dr. Singh said.

Meanwhile, NPTAB, in a subsequent release, also indicated what steps would be taken to strengthen its systems. It said it has “commenced two consultancies to strengthen records management and develop a public procurement management system.” The NPTAB release added, “Both will introduce information technology solutions to current processes and procedures and pave the way for a robust e-procurement system.”

---

• Bharrat Jagdeo, Guyanese Critic, President, Public Procurement Commission, Vice President

---