GOVERNMENT auditors are seeking an explanation from the provincial government of Leyte on how it arrived at the price data on procurement of goods and infrastructure totaling P105.99 million undertaken last year.
Also questioned was the absence of delivery dates in the purchase orders and non-compliance with the posting requirements under the Government Procurement Policy Board (GPPB) and RA 11469 or the Bayanihan to Heal as One Act.
“No document was attached to each DV (disbursement voucher) to show that the Province initially obtained price data either from previous purchases of similar items, or from the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), or Department of Health (DOH). Thus, there is no assurance that the result of the price negotiation was the most advantageous to the government,” the audit team said.
Copies of checks obtained by auditors showed Leyte’s biggest transactions involved purchases of “various medical equipment” — one for P26.198 million and another for P23.406 million.
Both transactions were paid on the same day, September 16, 2020, as shown on Check Nos. 4286476 and 4286474.
Another big contract was worth P21.171 million for “various medical supplies and medical equipment” also paid by check bearing the same date.
The other transactions were for the acquisition of hospital beds, personal protective equipment, face shields, medical fluids, and various drugs and medicines.
There was also a separate contract for the construction of a 100-bed isolation facility for the sum of P453,300 and the purchase of seven air conditioning units for it worth P6.96 million.
“The purchase orders issued by the province did not indicate the specific date of delivery, rather the acronym ‘ASAP’ or ‘as soon as possible’ was used, which signifies uncertainty as to when the goods should be delivered,” the Commission on Audit said.
Since these were supposedly “emergency procurement” transactions, the COA said the failure to set a specific delivery date gave the suppliers a wide latitude to fulfill their part, defeating the purpose of urgency.
The provincial government explained that “ASAP” was used in consideration for the community health uncertainties due to the rapid spread of COVID-19.
It clarified that the longest delivery period took only 20 days from the receipt of the approved purchase order, which meant there was no breach of the customary 30-day delivery period.
Auditors reminded the local government that the purpose of setting a delivery date is to protect government interest by allowing the imposition of liquidated damages in case the supplier fails to meet the deadline.
The audit team said the provincial governor should require the Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) and its secretariat to comply with the posting and reporting requirements as mandated by the GPPB and the Bayanihan Act.
“The Notice of Award/BAC Resolution, Contract and Purchase Orders were not posted in the website of the Province or in any conspicuous place within its premises and in the GPPB online portal,” it pointed out.
