Georgia rapid development and low cost model
e-Procurement in Georgia
Everyone sees everything
Tato Urjumelashvili, CSPA
Tbilisi, September, 2012
1Where we started
SPA office. January 2010
Collection of documents from state bodies (paper tenders)Service agency of mia
Tax Department
NATIONAL AGENCY OF PUBLIC REGISTRYOther state agencies
Commercial banks
Notary
courtsProcuring Entity
Tender proposal
Qualification docsWaste of time
BidderWaste of moneyWaste of administrative resourcesWaste of paper3
Paper tenders and geographical inequality
Procuring entity
Bidders had to make at least 4 physical visits to procuring entity, and the winner an additional 5th visit to sign a contract
20 mln paper copies in last 5 years
High transaction costsLimited access to informationHigh compliance costs
4Side effects of paper tendersLack of transparencyHigh risk of corruptionNon-reliable dataRestricted competitionGeographical inequalityHigh compliance costsFailing procurement system5What we wantedTransparency
Non- discrimination
Fair evaluation
Streamlined and easy to follow procedures
..and get rid of papers!!!In-house developmentOff-the-shelf solutionsCostCostLess than$ 1 mlnApprox.$ 10 mlnTwo options7Second option: Georgian alternativeS/W $ 150 000H/W $ 500 000BI $ 70 000Website $ 10 000Communication campaign $ 30 000
Sleepless nights not counted
Pace of the reformsJanuary 2010. Started with legal amendments and design of the e-procurement systemAugust 2010. E-procurement system launched in test modeOctober 2010. First e-tender announcedDecember 2010. Paper tenders abolished. Only e-tenders allowedSeptember 2011. 10 000 registered usersOctober 2011. $ 100 mln savings generatedDecember 2011. Bilingual system was introducedMay 2012. 13 339 registered usersSeptember 2012. $ 198 mln savings generatedMore is coming !!!
Geographical inequality eliminatedWhat we got
Procuring entity
Bidders do not make physical visits to procuring entity. Only the winner once visit procuring entity to sign a contract
Minimum paperworkMinimum transaction costsEveryone sees everythingNo physical visits
Increased competitionMaximum efficiencyFair evaluationElectronic dispute resolution10Georgian Electronic Government Procurement - Ge-GPSome features of Ge-GPGe-Gp business process in brief
Yes
YesYesYesNoNo
System prevents mechanical and procedural mistakesSystem provides subscription and internal messaging optionsElectronic payments module/ linkage with State TreasuryAll activities are loggedBilingual system.Georgian - English Integrated appeal mechanismEveryone sees everything
DRB Business Process
Data on DRB activities
CPV Codes
Clear and well articulated political will Visionary approach no special rigid strategyConsolidated team unified views and valuesCorrection during the implementation return to the reforms several time Unilateral liberalization of procurement market for foreign biddersStreamlined, easy-to-follow proceduresNon-discrimination & fair evaluationMaximum transparency everyone sees everythingHow we built itTransparent & Efficient System of State Procurement (in 1 year !!!)Mainstream Alternative:Elaboration of a strategy (1 year)Dialogue with the interested parties Elaboration of an action plan/introduction (1 year)Implementation (3 years)Too long and too expensive for us (what about you ?)22What we learned
Reform boldly, broadly and communicateStart small and leverage on demonstrable resultsBusinesses love change they understandMore transparency less corruptionStreamline then automateSimplicity is powerKeep on identifying the next biggest binding constraint, reform in seriesReform unilaterally, dont wait for reciprocity
Communicate reforms Results inspireAssessment by OthersUN- United Nations Public Service Award, 2nd place, in the category of Preventing and Combating Corruption in the Public Service,2012EBRD - In the Eastern European countries, including Georgia and Russia, the basic policy features of public procurement are in place. However, only Georgia scored a high compliance rate, as most integrity safeguards and procurement efficiency instruments recommended by international best practice were adopted in Georgia in 2010Transparency International Georgia - "In the past year, we have seen the successful introduction of an electronic, transparent procurement system, which has been a very positive development .European Parliament, Committee on International Trade - Welcomes Georgias new procurement system, enabling e-auctions for all types of contracts, irrespective of their size or nature; points out that Georgia should also serve as an example for the EU Member States in this area.
Thank you for your attention!
28 Pekini Ave., Tbilisi 0160, Georgia e-mail: [email protected]
Full cycle of the review of disputes by the Board
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Upload a complaint into the system
Complainant
Examine the filed complaint and where a deficiency is found instruct a complainant to fix it.
DRB Office
Fix the deficiency in the complaint and upload to the system
Complainant
DRB Office
Draft a decision about admissibility of the filed complaint
DRB Chairman
Take final admissibility decision
DRB Office, DRB Chairman
Send a notification to the complainant about the admissibility decision over his/her complaint
DRB Office
Upload the admissibility decision into the System
DRB Office
Suspend the challenged procedure in the Electronic Procurement System
DRB Office
Notify Board members by phone, SMS and/or e-mail about thr complaint declared admissible
Send a notice to the respondent about the challenged and suspended procurement procedures
DRB Office
Appoint the hearing of the case based on the submission of the DRB Office
DRB Chairman
Send a notice to the parties about date and venue of the Board hearing
DRB Office
Substantial review of the dispute at the Board hearing
DRB members, parties
Keeping minutes of Board hearing
DRB Office
Meeting and taking a decision on allowing the complaint partially or fully or disallowing the complaint
DRB members
Draft the Board decision
DRB Office, DRB members
Review the DRB draft decision and sign thereof
DRB Members
Upload the DRB decision nto the Integrated State Procurement System
DRB Office