Reflections From The Field | School of Data

You are browsing the archive for Reflections From The Field.

Public Procurement Data in the Philippines and Where to Find It

Meg Foulkes - March 6, 2019 in Fellowship, Reflections From The Field, Uncategorized

Ben Hur Pintor, our fellow from the class of 2018, here shares his thoughts and research on public procurement data in the Philippines.

During the selection process for the 2018 School of Data Fellowship here in the Philippines, I was informed that the selected Fellow will be working with data related to public procurement. As I wasn’t a public procurement expert, I did a little research on the topic. Here, I’d like to share some of the interesting observations that I noticed:

Public Procurement Data in the Philippines

In theory, we expect public procurement in the Philippines to produce a lot of data considering how the process is defined by RA 9184 or the Government Procurement Reform Act.

Under the law, public procurement includes all “acquisition of Goods, Consulting Services, and the contracting for Infrastructure Projects by any branch, department, office, agency, or instrumentality of the government” including procurement for projects that are wholly or partly funded by Foreign Loans or Grants pursuant to a Treaty or International or Executive Agreement unless different procurement procedures and guidelines are expressly stated or if the foreign loan and grant is classified as Official Development Assistance (ODA) under RA 8182 or the Official Development Assistance Act.

From this definition alone, we can see that almost all government spending falls under public procurement and, thus, it is logical to assume that whenever the government spends, public procurement data should be produced.

Aside from the definition of public procurement, the law also provides, as a general rule, that all procurement shall undergo Competitive Bidding except for specific cases when Alternative Methods of Procurement such as Limited Source Bidding, Direct Contracting, Repeat Order, Shopping, and Negotiated Procurement are allowed. These specific cases are subject to the prior approval of the Head of the Procuring Entity (HOPE) and should be justified by the conditions provided by the Act.

Most of the time, Competitive Bidding which has the following steps — advertisement, pre-bid conference, eligibility screening of prospective bidders, receipt and opening of bids, evaluation of bids, post-qualification, and award of contract — is followed.

Steps in Public Procurement by Competitive Bidding

Each step in the public procurement process produces its own data — bid posts, pre-procurement and pre-bid conference proceedings, submitted bids, winning bids, information on the bidders, and the awarded contracts to name a few. There are also monitoring and evaluation documents and reports that are regularly created during the implementation of a government project and even after its completion.

So with all this public procurement data supposedly being produced, where can it be found?

Where to Find It

The Government Procurement Reform Act or RA 9184 enacted in 2003 is the comprehensive law governing public procurement in the Philippines that put together all procurement rules and procedures covering all forms of government purchases from goods, to consulting, to infrastructure services. It sought to address the complexity and vagueness of public procurement and its susceptibility to abuse and corruption due to multiple procurement laws by simplifying and standardizing the procedures with a focus on transparency and accountability.

The law added two interesting features to ensure transparency and accountability:

the creation of an electronic portal which shall serve as the primary and definitive source of information on government procurement (PhilGEPS); and
the establishment of the Government Procurement Policy Board (GPPB).

The PhilGEPS (Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System) is the country’s single, centralized electronic portal that serves as the primary and definitive source of information on government procurement. Government agencies, as well as suppliers, contractors, manufacturers, distributors and consultants, are mandated to register and use the system in the conduct of procurement of goods, civil works, and consulting services.

On the website, the government can publish what goods, consulting services, and civil works projects it needs while suppliers, private contractors, and companies can search and view these procurement opportunities. It features an Electronic Bulletin Board where all procurement opportunities, results of bidding, and related information are posted; a Registry of Manufacturers, Suppliers, Distributors, Contractors and Consultants; and an Electronic Catalogue of common and non-common use goods, supplies, materials and equipment. When fully implemented, the system is also intended have a Virtual Store, Electronic Payment System, and Electronic Bid Submission. The system is managed by the Procurement Service of the Department of Budget and Management.

The PhilGEPS website (version 1.5)

PhilGEPS also releases public procurement data published by different government agencies as mandated by the Government Procurement Reform Act together with other infographics and reports.

Some datasets available in PhilGEPS

Standard Reports and Datasets

Sample data (Number of Registered Organizations per Year)

Reports, Notices, and Infographics

The GPPB, as established by the Government Procurement Reform Act, is an independent inter-agency body with private sector representation envisioned as the policy making entity and the governing body overseeing the implementation of procurement reform in the country. Its objectives include the preparation of a generic procurement manual and standard bidding forms for procurement; establishing a sustainable training program to develop the capacity of Government procurement officers and employees; and ensuring the conduct of regular procurement training programs by the procuring entities.

It also stores and displays public procurement data submitted to it by procuring entities and regulatory bodies. These include information on Annual Procurement Plans, Procurement Monitoring Reports, List of Blacklisted Suppliers and Constructors, Constructors Performance Evaluation Summaries, Pre-Selected Suppliers and Consultants, List of Observers, and Status of Protests.

GPPB Website and Monitoring Data

Sample data (PDF format)

Aside from the PhilGEPS and GPPB, the different government agencies also publish procurement records on their respective websites in compliance with National Budget Circular No. 542. This Circular is more commonly known in the Philippines as the Transparency Seal Circular because it directs government agencies to have a Transparency Seal visible on their websites where the public can access information related to their agency.

Some of the data that the circular requires to be released are: annual reports, approved budget and corresponding targets, major programs and projects, program and project beneficiaries, status of implementation and program/project evaluation and/or assessment reports, annual procurement plans, contracts awarded, and the name of contractors/suppliers/consultants.

For example, the Department of Public Works and Highways has a Civil Works page on their website that shows key documents related to the public procurement of civil works projects.

DPWH Civil Works page

Is it Enough?

As highlighted by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) on their report “Public Contracting in the Philippines: Breakthroughs and Barriers” about the infrastructure projects of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), there are challenges in terms of the completeness and accessibility of public procurement data in the country. Tracking the process from planning to implementation is difficult because not all the documents related to the procurement of infrastructure projects are published. This is compounded by the weak organization of files in agency websites which can confuse those unfamiliar with the procurement process. For example, even though the different documents related to one infrastructure project are available in the DPWH site, they are located on different web pages and are not linked to one another thus preventing users from easily understanding how documents might connect to each other. Aside from this, even though PhilGEPS and the GPPB are good sources of public procurement data, they are only repositories and are dependent on the data submitted to them by procuring entities. This becomes problematic when the procuring entities themselves fail or even refuse to submit their data.

Another important thing I noticed about public procurement data in the Philippines is this: Publishing public procurement data in machine-readable formats is not (yet) the norm in the Philippines. If you look at the Government Procurement Reform Act, there is no mention about releasing or publishing procurement data and documents in machine-readable formats. The training programs by the GPPB designed to develop the capacity of procurement officers and employees for both the private sector and the national government agencies, government-owned and controlled corporations, etc do not include parts on working with or publishing machine-readable data. As a result, procuring entities and agencies release data without considering the implications of the format they are releasing it in.

In fact, aside from those found in PhilGEPS, most of the public procurement data in the country are in non-machine-readable formats — as PDFs, documents, or even scanned images. Now, the procuring entities releasing the data might not consider this as a problem since compliance with the law only requires them to release the data but from the point of view of a data practitioner analysing public procurement data, a civil society organization creating visualizations in support of its advocacy, a journalist investigating government infrastructure projects, or even just a citizen trying to look for possible evidence of corruption in the procurement process, this adds a lot of extra steps to convert and standardize the data before any meaningful work can be done on it. Steps that could have been skipped had the data been released in a machine-readable format such as a spreadsheet, a comma-separated value (CSV) file, or JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) file.

One of the positive things pointed out by the PCIJ report was the opportunity to standardize, link, and publish more contracting data given by the current trend of government agencies creating or upgrading their information-management systems. This should be supported by efforts to raise awareness and convince the procuring entities, journalists, CSOs, and citizens of the benefits of releasing machine-readable data.

Public procurement data should not be released just for the sake of releasing it. It should be released for the purpose of ensuring transparency, accountability, and equitability in the procurement process. To do this, it is imperative that the documents and information for each step in the procurement process, from planning to implementation, should be released in an open, transparent, and timely manner. Public procurement data should also serve the purpose of encouraging citizens, individuals, and organizations to keep themselves informed and engaged in how public money is spent. Towards this end, it is important to release data in formats such as spreadsheets, CSV, or JSON that make it easier for stakeholders to analyse, share, and re-use the data. One of the ways to ensure that data is easily shareable, analysable, and reusable is by following a standard like the Open Contracting Data Standard (OCDS). Of course, simply following a standard is not enough and could even be counterproductive when done without the right preparation. It is equally important to study how a standard complements the process and how it can be integrated with the current system.

Sources

Civil Works – Department of Public Works and Highways. http://www.dpwh.gov.ph/dpwh/business/procurement/civil_works/awarded_contracts

Open Contracting Data Standard. Open Contracting Partnership. http://standard.open-contracting.org/latest/en/

Philippine Transparency Seal – Department of Budget and Management. https://www.dbm.gov.ph/index.php/about-us/philippine-transparency-seal

Public Contracting in the Philippines: Breakthroughs and Barriers. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) with support from Hivos and Article 19. http://pcij.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/PCIJ.-Open-Contracting-in-Philippines-Report_01102018_b.pdf

RA 9184 (Government Procurement Reform Act). https://www.gppb.gov.ph/laws/laws/RA_9184.pdf

The 2016 Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 9184. https://www.gppb.gov.ph/laws/laws/RevisedIRR.RA9184.pdf

The Government Procurement Policy Board. https://www.gppb.gov.ph/

The Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System. https://www.philgeps.gov.ph/

The Procurement Service. http://main.ps-philgeps.gov.ph/

Comments Off on Public Procurement Data in the Philippines and Where to Find It

Using the procurement process as a lens for assessing audit reports: what to watch out for

Meg Foulkes - March 4, 2019 in Fellowship, Reflections From The Field

Odanga Madung, our 2018 Fellow, was fortunate to collaborate with the Institute of Economic Affairs in Kenya on their recent study into public procurement. In this article, Odanga reflects on his experiences and offers some tips for those tackling similar work.

The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) in Kenya recently carried out a study entitled ‘Public Procurement in Kenya: An Analysis of the Auditor General’s Reports’. I was fortunate enough to contribute as part of my fellowship with the School of Data.

The Auditor General’s Office (OAG) was established in Kenya in 2004 under an Act of Parliament. Its aim is to provide independent oversight over how the Kenyan Government and its agencies spend taxpayers’ money. The audit process involves obtaining the accounts of a government entity, scrutinising them against proposed budget plans and contractual obligations, then providing a professional opinion on the state of the accounts. The OAG opinions consist of three types:

Unqualified: represents a clean bill of health. This means that the Auditor did not find any problem with the documentation and the entity has managed its funds properly.
Qualified: occurs when the Auditor General has found some problems but they are not pervasive. The auditor received all the information required for audit, but it revealed gaps in adherence to procedures and budgets.
Adverse: occurs when the auditor general is able to review the ministry’s documentation, but found pervasive problems and considerable changes will be necessary in order to rectify. This kind of finding should be of concern to oversight bodies.
Disclaimer: when the auditor is unable to review fully the ministry’s documentation because there is a substantial amount of information that the ministry has not made available. The record keeping is so bad that the auditor cannot give an opinion.

The IEA’s study looked at the Auditor General’s report through the lens of public procurement. They analysed the OAG’s reports by using the OC framework of the tender process, i.e. placing each violation in either the Pre Tender, Tender or Post Award stages. As a result, it highlighted what steps are often breached when the OAG does not give an unqualified opinion to a state entity’s accounts.

This was a much needed breath of fresh air in the corruption conversation that Kenyans are currently having. Mainly because it focussed on the how (the methods) rather than the what (numbers, figures and personalities) of corruption. I say this as corruption is not something that just happens, it is engineered.

The main finding of the study was that majority of procurement breaches tend to happen in the post award stage. A process that the IEA states often lends itself to the least public scrutiny and transparency in comparison to the other parts of the tender process in Kenya. This is very important in the Kenyan context because at the heart of the corruption problem in Kenya is the Tender process. However, very few Kenyans understand what it looks like. Few Kenyans also understand how the Tender process is used in the plunder of public funds.

The reason the problems in the above paragraph exist are twofold:

Firstly, how the Kenyan media covers stories about corruption. They tend to focus on the figures lost and the personalities involved rather than how the money was stolen. This may be because media practitioners feel that is what will sell newspapers as opposed to producing reporting that may drive significant action both publicly and legislatively. It’s no surprise then that Kenya’s corruption coverage ends up echoing tabloid reporting. The fundamentals in understanding how corruption happens are missing at large.

Secondly, lack of public awareness on the intricacies of the tender process leads to lack of accountability demands from them. This is in part due to lack of government outreach and the current coverage afforded by the media.

IEA’s report sought to address the problems above. The points below are some key lessons learned from my collaboration:

It is important to define the professional opinions the Auditor gives and provide examples of what may lead to specific outcomes.

The Auditor General’s report is a very technical document. The majority of ordinary citizens either tend to misunderstand or have no knowledge about the content at all. Given that they are a target audience for these reports, a key task when doing the research was to define the opinions that the auditor gives in a simple manner. Providing examples as to what each opinion meant was also important. Lack of a clear definition also lends itself to misinterpretation from the press, something that may lead to unintended consequences down the line.

Descriptions provided in the IEA report of the auditor opinions.

For relatability, try to show how much expenditure each Opinion represents.

This gives a clearer picture to audiences about how much of public spending comes under threat due to procurement violation in specific cases.

Multiple levels of procurement breaches may occur and it may be worthwhile to highlight serial offenders.

Corruption is something that is engineered to escape the prevailing systems of accountability in a country. IEA found that many procurement violations occurred at multiple stages of the tender process. In some cases they found unsupported expenditure leading to exaggerated prices for products, or single sourcing leading to incomplete projects that have been fully paid for. It is therefore important to highlight how many violations occur at multiple levels when carrying out such a study.

Try your best to advocate for machine readability of report releases in machine readable formats to reduce errors that could be caused in transcribing.

One of the biggest hurdles experienced in working with government reports currently in Kenya (and this would probably be the case in a lot of other African countries) is that the reports are produced in the form of scanned PDFs. It makes the process time consuming and error ridden due to transcription of the documents. This problem is something that we see being widespread across government institutions. As we press for better systems of accountability, making sure that accessibility of information is easier should be part of it.

If you encounter such a problem, I would recommend using sandwich pdf (https://www.sandwichpdf.com/) to try to make majority of the text recognizable.

An example of one of the outputs from the Auditor General’s Office.

Media houses have a habit of misinterpreting or exaggerating the findings found in such reports. Training them and holding them accountable for their reporting is important.

Journalists and CSOs are a key conduit of this kind of information to the public. However, we have found cases where a lot of them do not understand the terminologies and reasoning contained in Audit reports. What this means is in an attempt to simplify the information for the public, a lot of it gets lost in translation. The IEA had an open forum with journalists explaining how to go about reading the report they wrote and the Auditor General’s as well.

To conclude, the IEA did an amazing study that used the Open Contracting framework on the tender process to analyze the auditor general’s report. Corruption is a problem plaguing the developing world. However, audit and oversight organisations are gaining more powers and prominence in these countries. Looking at the information provided by them could reveal a lot about how corruption happens around the world. If you do decide to undertake a study like the one IEA did, the above points I mentioned should help you come up with a study that becomes an effective advocacy tool against corruption.

Comments Off on Using the procurement process as a lens for assessing audit reports: what to watch out for

Reflections from the Field #2: Cultural Heritage Conservation as a Data Problem

Meg Foulkes - October 8, 2018 in Fellowship, Reflections From The Field

For the second in our series of blog posts – ‘Reflections From The Field’ – our 2018 School of Data Fellow, Ben Hur Pintor, is inspired to ask questions about cultural heritage data.

“Can this be considered a data problem?” asked Tatine, one of the participants of the Data Pipeline training conducted by Hani and I, referring to her work on the conservation of the Mangyan script and language of the Mangyan indigenous people in Mindoro, Philippines.

The question piqued my interest because, as mentioned by Tatine, indigenous communities rarely have physical records of the information related to their culture and language. Most of the time, this information is passed from generation to generation as a form of oral tradition or oral history. So how do we take something intangible and make data work for it?

Fieldworks

One of the most common ways of working with language and other cultural heritage data is through the conduct of fieldworks. Terry Crowley’s Field Linguistics: A Beginner’s Guide highlights this process, discussing ethical issues such as informed consent and voluntary participation, the importance of selecting language helpers — people who speak the language you are studying but also share a common language with you, and how to keep track and archive the data using daily records, filing systems, and computer storage.

Linked Open Cultural Heritage Data

Linked open data is open data available on the world wide web in a standard markup format. It has a lot of potential uses in cultural heritage conservation especially when utilized together with traditional cultural heritage institutions such as libraries, archives, and museums. With linked open data, users can create and share their own cultural heritage experiences using different media, applications, maps, etc.

“We believe linked open data has the potential not just to preserve cultural heritage for users, but to offer users new opportunities to understand, manipulate, and recreate cultural heritage experiences.” (Linked Open Data for Cultural Heritage, J. Marden, 2013)

The combination of data, technology, and cultural heritage is an interesting one and it will be fascinating to see how these three fields interact, grow, and collaborate with each other in the future.

Comments Off on Reflections from the Field #2: Cultural Heritage Conservation as a Data Problem