The Chairman of the Independent Procurement Review Panel (IPRP), Dr. Emmanuel Saffa Abdulai, in a ruling stated that the evaluation committee of the procuring entity under the Free Education Project of the Ministry of Basic and Sernior Secondary School (MBSSE) did not observe  stringent procurement guidelines and allowed bidding institutions to progress from technical to financial evaluation stage.

The Panel further advised the procuring entity to endeavor to do due diligence during their evaluation of bids to allow only those that are qualified to progress from one stage to the other thereby avoiding misperception.

According to a report by the Procurement agency’s communication unit the ruling came about after a complaint filed by Grace Mack Engineering and Construction

Services to the Independent Procurement Review P’anel (IPRP)on alleged Procurement Irregularities in the procuremnent process. Based on the summary of facts the Free Education Secretariat advertised a bid in September 2022 in Local newspapers, inviting Competitive Expression of Interest (EOI) for the construction of classrooms, Admin Blocks, and Wash Facilities in Kono District.

The Appellant submitted a bid, on 22nd December 2022 expressing interest to construct classrooms Admin Blocks, as well as Wash Facilities. After the expression of interest the Appellant was invited to a bid opening by the procurement committee of the Respondent. Bids were opened in the presence of bidders.

During the bid opening. the report notes that the Complainant alleged Yorma Engineering and Construction Services did not include Power of Attorney which was a conditional precedent to be fulfilled.

The appellant added that his entity complied with the said requirement, and after the evaluation process, the respondent in a letter dated 28th April 2023 informed the appellant that his entity was unsuccessful in the evaluation process.

The IPRP held a day’s hearing on the matter after which it revealed that the appellant has no case as he flouted the instructions of the TB and section 21 (1), 21(5) of the Public Procurement Act of 2016.

The panel found that the Power of Attorney was included in the bid data sheet and that the Power of Attorney was not a condition for the disqualification of the bidder. It added that the appellant had issues with understanding the technical language used in the bid document which led to his inadvertent non- compliance with simple instructions especially the one that requires the bidder to have a Higher

National Diploma as qualification for core staff instead of Ordinary National Diploma which the appellant submitted.

The panel, therefore, ordered that the previous winner be awarded the contract