Latest topics
» No Objection Letter
Yesterday at 5:21 pm by zeph03

» CATERING SERVICES FOR CONGRESSIONAL MEET AT SAGBAYAN, BOHOL
Thu Dec 14, 2017 7:14 pm by btorres4

» PURCHASE OF FERTILIZERS FOR LIVESTOCK, CORN, HVCDP, INLAND FISHERY, AND ORGANIC PROGRAM
Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:35 pm by btorres4

» Newspaper Publication
Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:10 pm by btorres4

» RENTAL OF LIGHTS AND SOUND SYSTEM
Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:46 pm by btorres4

» Newspaper Publication
Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:50 pm by btorres4

» PURCHASE OF OTHER SUPPLIES FOR SB OFFICE
Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:51 pm by btorres4

» PURCHASE OF RICE FOR FOOD SUPPLIES OF PEACE & ORDER CAMPAIGN
Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:19 pm by btorres4

» Expired Tax Clearance during payment
Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:11 pm by vallemaco6224

» PURCHASE OF MEDICINE FOR MHO
Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:53 pm by btorres4


TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

View previous topic View next topic Go down

TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by engrjhez® on Sat Apr 04, 2009 4:56 pm

Here is a query left on the Forum Chat by <rene geraldo ledesma>

  • Thank you for accepting me at gppb. I am a member of the BAC of NFRDI. I shall seek your advice in relation to problems we are encountering. Thanks.

Welcome in the GPPB forum! Thank you too.

  • In June 2008 a bidder for a 1 million peso construction contract was declared sole bidder. The BAC chairman made a letter for the procuring entity to sign and award the contract. The procuring entity did not sign the Notice of Award. This March 27, 2009 the bidder entered a complaint with the Ombudsman against the BAC Chairman and the Procuring entity, because the same contract is now reopened for rebidding. The bidder claims that said contract need not be rebidded, instead, it should be awarded to him. The NFRDI BAC believes that he should join the bidding of the contract once more. Who is right? The bidder or the NFRDI BAC?

The HOPE may have invoked his/her exercise of the reservation clause under Section 41, to wit:

The Head of the Agency reserves the right to reject any and all Bids, declare a failure of bidding, or not award the contract in the following situations:

(a) If there is prima facie evidence of collusion between appropriate public officers or employees of the Procuring Entity, or between the BAC and any of the bidders, or if the collusion is between or among the bidders themselves, or between a bidder and a third party, including any act which restricts, suppresses or nullifies or tends to restrict, suppress or nullify competition;

(b) If the BAC is found to have failed in following the prescribed bidding procedures; or

(c) For any justifiable and reasonable ground where the award of the contract will not redound to the benefit of the government as defined in the IRR.


If any of those situation was ascertained by the HOPE to be existing within that particular procurement, he/she may not sign the award (as signing is not ministerial under the GPRA), thereby nullifying the bidding process. This must be in hand, expressly included in the "Invitation to Apply for Eligibility and to Bid".


  • And, in relation to the June 2008 1 million peso construction contract that is now being rebidded, there were no representatives from the COA and a sectoral representative. Does this mean that the proceedings could be declared nullified?

Absence of COA or any observer (even bidders) do not nullify the procedure as long as they were invited in writing of the procurement activity. But the discretion of the HOPE, once he/she decided not to award the contract based on justifiable reasons aboveforermentioned, will effectively nullify the proceedings. Even if the HOPE decided to sign the contract anyway, it has been exceeding months away from the maximum allowable period from the opening of bids to the signing of the contract. Also, since Annual Budgets are replenished every year, and in the absence of awardee in the procurement, the funding cannot be used for the same purpose, thereby making it a "savings" in the 2008 subject for appropriation for 2009.
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Sun Apr 05, 2009 1:43 pm

It is difficult to answer the query for lack of pertinent info and for being sub judice (is it? Very Happy ).

Let me provide the possible scenario, anyway. After being declared by the BAC as the SCRB and recommended for award to the HOPE, the latter did not approve the recommendation. He may have exercised his power under Sec. 41 of the GPRA and IRR-A, which is also contained in the Invitation to Bid as the Reservation Clause. (That is the value of the Reservation Clause which some procuring entities take for granted or do not adopt the standard reservation clause in the Philippine Bidding Documents.)

Of course, that disapproval should have been communicated to the BAC and the bidder subsequently informed of a “failure of bidding.” If there is a rebidding this year, the appropriation may still be valid since the procuring entity is a national government agency, not an LGU. That appropriation may still be valid until the end of this year.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by engrjhez® on Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:31 pm

RDV wrote:...If there is a rebidding this year, the appropriation may still be valid since the procuring entity is a national government agency, not an LGU. That appropriation may still be valid until the end of this year.
In clarification of...
engrjhez wrote:...Even if the HOPE decided to sign the contract anyway, it has been exceeding months away from the maximum allowable period from the opening of bids to the signing of the contract. Also, since Annual Budgets are replenished every year, and in the absence of awardee in the procurement, the funding cannot be used for the same purpose, thereby making it a "savings" in the 2008 subject for appropriation for 2009.
In citing the underlined, I am pertaining to LGU's budget replenishment. If the agency is re-bidding (2nd time) then the prior (failed )bidding must have been resolved long before the 2nd one is advertised.

By the way, if the maximum allowable periods from opening of the bid is reached (and exceeded) what will happen next? What are the legal implications?
study Maybe it is always better to wait for more details before we can make a sound pre-judice of the issue. study
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by riddler on Sun Apr 05, 2009 10:01 pm

Hello.

there are other things which needs to be clarified on the question posed by rene;

1. Is the project a "Capital Outlay"? If it is a capital outlay, we in our LGU do not automtically revert the budget for the following year unless the program holder request for reversion. No matter how many failures of bidding happenED to the outLAY.

2. Does the HOPE's inaction properly noted by the BAC? (This was the bone of my discussion before with RDV, regarding the inaction of the HOPE on the AWARD and NTP)

In my opinion, the BAC should inform the HOPE of their recommendation of the AWard on the 1st Bidding. If the HOPE disapproved the Award, it must anchored on the the grounds set forth by the GPRA as explained by engrjhez (Sec. 41) in "black and white". iF THEre is a "SILENT" inaction on the part of the HOPE, then it is incumbent for the BAC to get the attention of the HOPE to settle the problem on the 1st bidding before proceeding to re-bid the project.

3. bIG MISTAKE for the Sole Bidder to rejoin the bidding, it mean that he/she approves of the action made by the procuring entity. Why would he complain?
avatar
riddler
Board General
Board General

Male Number of posts : 598
Company/Agency : lgu
Occupation/Designation : endyeenel
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Mon Apr 06, 2009 1:07 am

engrjhez wrote:[justify]
RDV wrote:...If there is a rebidding this year, the appropriation may still be valid since the procuring entity is a national government agency, not an LGU. That appropriation may still be valid until the end of this year.
In clarification of...
engrjhez wrote:...Even if the HOPE decided to sign the contract anyway, it has been exceeding months away from the maximum allowable period from the opening of bids to the signing of the contract. Also, since Annual Budgets are replenished every year, and in the absence of awardee in the procurement, the funding cannot be used for the same purpose, thereby making it a "savings" in the 2008 subject for appropriation for 2009.
In citing the underlined, I am pertaining to LGU's budget replenishment. If the agency is re-bidding (2nd time) then the prior (failed )bidding must have been resolved long before the 2nd one is advertised.
I know, engrjhez, that your answer pertains to LGUs but I am pretty certain rene is from an NGA, that is why I qualified that he may be referring to an NGA, the appropriation for MOOE and CO of which is valid up to the next calendar year.

engrjhez wrote:[b]By the way, if the maximum allowable periods from opening of the bid is reached (and exceeded) what will happen next? What are the legal implications?
The maximum period of validity of bids and bid security is 120 c.d. from bid opening, therefore, the bid of sole bidder is no longer valid at this point in time. The procuring entity can no longer award the project to him/her. If the project is still to be pursued, then a rebidding is really necessary, unless the conditions are present to justify resorting to any of the alternative methods of procurement.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by engrjhez® on Mon Apr 06, 2009 1:23 am

Wow! 12:07 in the morning: Still awake and kicking. cheers

(so am I Very Happy )
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

To bid or not to re-bid, the on-going NFRDI 2009 experience

Post by rene geraldo ledesma on Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:59 pm

Dear engrjhez and RDV,
We at the National Fisheries Research and Development Institute thank you for your prompt reply! Your inputs are valuable. This April 13, 2009 we are scheduling the rebidding of the Capital Outlay Project for our Batangas Marine Hatchery. As per our cordial discussion with the Ombudsman representative on March 27 with the bidder, the HOPE and the former BAC Chairman (Mr. Santos; our new BAC Chairperson is Mrs. Mutia, the former 2008 BAC members have been replaced), a win-win solution was proposed by the said representative. In order to give justice to the bidder and comply with the proposal, on March 30, said bidder was called and invited to join the forthcoming April 13 bidding, but to date he has not responded. We are in the dark if he plans to file charges against the HOPE and the BAC. We will keep you informed.

I have read your comments, and to fill in the info gaps, here are the following info:
1. The project is titled construction of 2nd phase marine hatchery (Butong, Taal Batangas).
2. First published at PHILGEPS on May 7, 2008, ABC Php 985,118.00.
3. Pre-bidding for first publication was on June 2, 2008; Bidding was on June 16, 2008.
4. Typhoon Frank changed the contour of the hatchery on June 21 - 22, 2008.
5. On June 24, 2008, a BAC resolution awarding the contract to concerned bidder was drafted, with a Notice of Award (the Notice was not signed by the HOPE).
6. Current publication at PHILGEPS on March 16, 2009, Philippine Star April 9, 2009, ABC Php 985,500.00. The bidder learned about this and requested a meeting with the Ombudsman.
7. The bidder would like the 2009 contract to be awarded to him without entering the government bidding procedures, because he spent a lot of money and time to complete the documentary requirements, as he mentioned during the March 27 Ombudsman meeting. The new NFRDI BAC believes that he should undergo the bidding process once more, hence he should join the April 13 bidding schedule.

Magandang case study ito sirs, we will keep in touch. Thanks and more power! Laughing
avatar
rene geraldo ledesma
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 3
Company/Agency : NFRDI
Occupation/Designation : senior aquaculturist/BAC member
Registration date : 2009-04-03

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:23 pm

rene geraldo ledesma wrote:Dear engrjhez and RDV,
We at the National Fisheries Research and Development Institute thank you for your prompt reply! Your inputs are valuable. This April 13, 2009 we are scheduling the rebidding of the Capital Outlay Project for our Batangas Marine Hatchery. As per our cordial discussion with the Ombudsman representative on March 27 with the bidder, the HOPE and the former BAC Chairman (Mr. Santos; our new BAC Chairperson is Mrs. Mutia, the former 2008 BAC members have been replaced), a win-win solution was proposed by the said representative. In order to give justice to the bidder and comply with the proposal, on March 30, said bidder was called and invited to join the forthcoming April 13 bidding, but to date he has not responded. We are in the dark if he plans to file charges against the HOPE and the BAC. We will keep you informed.

I have read your comments, and to fill in the info gaps, here are the following info:
1. The project is titled construction of 2nd phase marine hatchery (Butong, Taal Batangas).
2. First published at PHILGEPS on May 7, 2008, ABC Php 985,118.00.
3. Pre-bidding for first publication was on June 2, 2008; Bidding was on June 16, 2008.
4. Typhoon Frank changed the contour of the hatchery on June 21 - 22, 2008.
5. On June 24, 2008, a BAC resolution awarding the contract to concerned bidder was drafted, with a Notice of Award (the Notice was not signed by the HOPE).

The HOPE may have his reason for not awarding the contract, despite the recommendation of the BAC, under Sec. 41 of GPRA and IRR-A. The reason might be in Item 4 above. Whatever the reason is, the proper way is that it should be communicated by him to the BAC, thru the BAC Chairman, which made the recommendation, and the BAC shall communicate the same to the bidder concerned.

rene geraldo ledesma wrote:6. Current publication at PHILGEPS on March 16, 2009, Philippine Star April 9, 2009, ABC Php 985,500.00. The bidder learned about this and requested a meeting with the Ombudsman.
7. The bidder would like the 2009 contract to be awarded to him without entering the government bidding procedures, because he spent a lot of money and time to complete the documentary requirements, as he mentioned during the March 27 Ombudsman meeting. The new NFRDI BAC believes that he should undergo the bidding process once more, hence he should join the April 13 bidding schedule.

Magandang case study ito sirs, we will keep in touch. Thanks and more power! Laughing

What the bidder would like to do is to award the new contract to him, by Negotiated Procurement. Sec. 53 provides for the conditions for which that alternative method of procurement may be resorted to, subject to the recommendations of the BAC and approval of the HOPE.

If the conditions are not present, then there is no other recourse but to proceed to Public Bidding. Of course, if he wants to join the bidding process, he should have submitted his Letter of Intent within 7 c.d. from the last day of publication and/or posting. I am just confused because you have 2 dates, PhilGEPS-March 16 and Phil. Star-April 9. Since your bid opening is Apr. 13, I would assume the March 16 as the first day of posting. Last day of posting would be March 23, therefore, you should have receive the LOI by that bidder NLT March 30. If he has not yet submitted his LOI by this time, then you could be pretty sure that he will not be participating.

If he does not want to participate, I see no reason also for not proceeding with the rebidding.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

To bid or not to re-bid, the on-going NFRDI 2009 experience

Post by rene geraldo ledesma on Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:21 pm

Dear RDV,

Thank you for your quick reply! Laughing

I just looked at PHILGEPS, the date created was March 16, 2009, and it was published in PHILGEPS March 17, 2009. Thank you for looking into the April 9, 2009 Philippine Star Issue, dapat sabay sana and date of publication in the newspaper with the date it appears at PHILGEPS.

Yes, probably the bidder wants to enter into a negotiated contract with NFRDI. However, there was no Notice of Award signed by the Procuring Entity in 2008. The bidder cannot go into negotiated contract because this is only the second time that the project will be rebidded this 2009, right?

Thank you and God bless. Laughing
avatar
rene geraldo ledesma
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 3
Company/Agency : NFRDI
Occupation/Designation : senior aquaculturist/BAC member
Registration date : 2009-04-03

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:37 pm

rene geraldo ledesma wrote:Dear RDV,

Thank you for your quick reply! Laughing

I just looked at PHILGEPS, the date created was March 16, 2009, and it was published in PHILGEPS March 17, 2009. Thank you for looking into the April 9, 2009 Philippine Star Issue, dapat sabay sana and date of publication in the newspaper with the date it appears at PHILGEPS.

Actually, I have not seen your April 9 newspaper advertisement, if there is any, you just mentioned it earlier in your post. But remember that newspaper advertisement is not mandatory in the case of NFRDI since the ABC is only P985,000. I think the controlling date is the posting in the PhilGEPS.

rene geraldo ledesma wrote:Yes, probably the bidder wants to enter into a negotiated contract with NFRDI. However, there was no Notice of Award signed by the Procuring Entity in 2008. The bidder cannot go into negotiated contract because this is only the second time that the project will be rebidded this 2009, right?
Thank you and God bless. Laughing
I am not referring to Negotiated Procurement due to failed bidding for the 2nd time (Sec. 53.a) since there was only first failure of bidding. But even in case of two failed biddings, you have to invite at least 3 bidders pa rin, you cannot negotiate directly with that sole bidder before. That is not allowed under our rules.

Going back to your rebidding, did you change the scope of work? Why did you change the ABC? You cannot change the ABC after first failure of bidding.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

To bid or not to re-bid, the on-going NFRDI 2009 experience

Post by rene geraldo ledesma on Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:48 pm

Dear RDV,

Thank you again for your quick reply! Smile

Yes, the ABC was increased from Php 985,118.00 in 2008 to Php 985,500 in 2009. But the title of the Project: CONSTRUCTION OF 2ND PHASE MARINE HATCHERY FACILITY is the same.

Thanks and Dod bless. Razz
avatar
rene geraldo ledesma
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 3
Company/Agency : NFRDI
Occupation/Designation : senior aquaculturist/BAC member
Registration date : 2009-04-03

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:56 pm

rene geraldo ledesma wrote:Dear RDV,

Thank you again for your quick reply! Smile

Yes, the ABC was increased from Php 985,118.00 in 2008 to Php 985,500 in 2009. But the title of the Project: CONSTRUCTION OF 2ND PHASE MARINE HATCHERY FACILITY is the same.

Thanks and Dod bless. Razz

Do you know that under GPPB Guidelines, you cannot change the ABC after first failure of bidding? http://www.gppb.gov.ph/issuances/Resolutions/2005/07-2005.pdf

I am hoping you changed the scope of work, since "Typhoon Frank changed the contour of the hatchery", but you should have maintained the ABC of P985,118.00.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by mbdr on Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:24 pm

Sir RDV gdpm.

In this case, if the BAC wants to change the ABC of the said requisition, is it legal that the BAC recommends amendment of the said PR by changing its ABC( thru a Resolution) then procure the same thru negotiated procurement?

We have similar case before but that was only a small procurement (I mean , with small ABC). The only difference LGU kami at pnadalhan namin ng communication (right away) ang supplier/s involved if in case award or PO is not realized or approved. Yun lang safe na ang BAC sa supplier/s.


Last edited by mbdr on Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:49 pm; edited 1 time in total

mbdr
Active Poster
Active Poster

Female Number of posts : 84
Age : 49
Company/Agency : LGU
Occupation/Designation : Govt. Employee/BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-02-23

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:41 pm

mbdr wrote:Sir RDV gdpm.

In this case, if the BAC wants to change the ABC of the said requisition, is it legal that the BAC amend the said PR by changing its ABC( thru a Resolution) then procure the same thru negotiated procurement?

We have similar case before but that was only a small procurement (I mean , with small ABC). The only difference LGU kami at pnadalhan namin ng communication (right away) ang supplier/s involved if in case award or PO is not realized or approved. Yun lang safe na ang BAC sa supplier/s.

In both cases, you did wrong.Sad . Let us go over the possible scenarios that procuring entity may undertake under the situations:

Scenario No. 1: After first failure of bidding, procuring entity can change the specification or scope of work of the project, but cannot change the ABC (even thru a BAC Resolution). A 2nd bidding proceeds with the same or different scope of work of the project but with the same ABC.

Scenario No. 2: There was 2nd failure of bidding. Procuring entity adjusts the ABC after 2nd failure. After adjusting the ABC, procuring entity proceeds to 3rd rebidding. (Procuring entity cannot resort to Negotiated Procurement under Sec. 53(a), unless it maintains the ABC and the same terms and conditions.)

Scenario No. 3. There was 2nd failure of bidding. Procuring entity maintains the ABC after 2nd failure, hence may proceed to Negotiated Procurement with at least 3 eligible bidders under Section 53(a)[b]

The procuring entity, therefore, cannot adjust the ABC and then proceed to Negotiated Procurement under Sec. 53(a).
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by mbdr on Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:00 pm

Thanks for your reply sir!

But what if the BAC recommends cancellation of said PR (after declaring the 1st bidding a failure)? Then make another PR in liue of that with a higher ABC then resort to altenative mode of procurement considering the necessity of the item sir?

mbdr
Active Poster
Active Poster

Female Number of posts : 84
Age : 49
Company/Agency : LGU
Occupation/Designation : Govt. Employee/BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-02-23

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:12 pm

mbdr wrote:Thanks for your reply sir!

But what if the BAC recommends cancellation of said PR (after declaring the 1st bidding a failure)? Then make another PR in liue of that with a higher ABC then resort to altenative mode of procurement considering the necessity of the item sir?

I will answer your questions with another set of questions:

  • Is the new PR for a different item or the same set of item(s)?

  • What is the alternative mode of procurement resorted to?

  • What was justification for considering that alternative mode? If it was "necessity of item", that is nowhere to be found among the conditions for alternative mode. The general reason for procurement is because the item or services you are procuring is necessary, but that could not justify the alternative mode.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by engrjhez® on Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:51 pm

mbdr wrote:Thanks for your reply sir!

But what if the BAC recommends cancellation of said PR (after declaring the 1st bidding a failure)? Then make another PR in liue of that with a higher ABC then resort to altenative mode of procurement considering the necessity of the item sir?
Cancellation of PR's need not reach BAC's doorstep as it does not involve any bidding, awards, or any of the functions of the BAC as defined by the IRR. Even so, such recommendation would be highly possible due to the versatility and flexibility of LGU's. I guess it is because of LGU's inherent independence of their budgets. But that would not be as easy as 1-2-3 if we are maintaining an Annual Procurement Plan (APP). Such changes (although a few hundred pesos) must reflect on the amended APP. (It is actualy very easy without the APP)

If there would clearly reflect any violation of a provision, will the BAC be held liable? Only until when somebody filed a complaint and if the substance permits so.

Only time will tell. (so why frown? peace!) Very Happy
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by mbdr on Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:48 am

Good day to Sir RDV , Engrjhez and to all!

Sir RDV, yes, I got your point na. It's true sir na marami rin kaming lapses sa LGU. The job od the BAC and its secretariat is notthat easy. Hirap sir , thats why palagi akong nakamonitor dito sa forum to get your ideas.

I hope I can continue this...... I am (only) a member of the BAC Secretariat and I am doing this of course for the BAC. Sana marami kaming magtiaga dito sa forum para everybody will learn.

By the way, talking of honorarium, wala kaming mga members sa Secretariat. Only the head, since I am from an office (not GSD) , pinul -out dahil sa creation sa BAC and its Secretariat. Other members sa secretariat are from the GSD Office. Ok lang walang honorarium..... The job is challenging and Im learning. Pero sir, ang hirap. Parang ayuko na. I hope other people in the LGU be assigned here (in our post).

Sir thanks again. Its nice to have you in this forum. for sir Engjhez ty din. More power to all !

mbdr
Active Poster
Active Poster

Female Number of posts : 84
Age : 49
Company/Agency : LGU
Occupation/Designation : Govt. Employee/BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-02-23

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:31 am

engrjhez wrote:
mbdr wrote:Thanks for your reply sir!

But what if the BAC recommends cancellation of said PR (after declaring the 1st bidding a failure)? Then make another PR in liue of that with a higher ABC then resort to altenative mode of procurement considering the necessity of the item sir?
Cancellation of PR's need not reach BAC's doorstep as it does not involve any bidding, awards, or any of the functions of the BAC as defined by the IRR. Even so, such recommendation would be highly possible due to the versatility and flexibility of LGU's. I guess it is because of LGU's inherent independence of their budgets. But that would not be as easy as 1-2-3 if we are maintaining an Annual Procurement Plan (APP). Such changes (although a few hundred pesos) must reflect on the amended APP. (It is actualy very easy without the APP)[color=green]

Disagree, in the sense that before a change in the procurement method, from public bidding to alternative mode of procurement, could happen it still has to pass thru the BAC. Remember that it is the BAC which will recommend, subject to HOPE approval, the change in the mode of procurement and the APP modified accordingly.

engrjhez wrote:If there would clearly reflect any violation of a provision, will the BAC be held liable? Only until when somebody filed a complaint and if the substance permits so.

Only time will tell. (so why frown? peace!) Very Happy

Well, just like mr. rene geraldo ledesma, who is afraid right now that after one year of inactivity, when they decided to conduct a rebidding, the sole bidder who participated in the first bidding could possibly go to court if they do.

I know mr rene is apprehensive because he is afraid that they violated the provisions of the GPRA and IRR-A. (I am afraid, too.)

Right, only time will tell, but shouldn't it be better to do the process properly now, so you are not afraid that 'time' will catch up on you.
(I am actually smiling Very Happy, in fact
lol!)
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Wed Apr 08, 2009 12:47 pm

mbdr wrote:
By the way, talking of honorarium, wala kaming mga members sa Secretariat. Only the head, since I am from an office (not GSD) , pinul -out dahil sa creation sa BAC and its Secretariat. Other members sa secretariat are from the GSD Office. Ok lang walang honorarium..... The job is challenging and Im learning. Pero sir, ang hirap. Parang ayuko na. I hope other people in the LGU be assigned here (in our post).

It is understandable that the other members of the BAC Secretariat coming from the GSD are not paid honoraria, since, normally in LGUs, the GSD is the Procurement Unit.

But, why is it that only the head of the BAC Secretariat is paid honoraria? Just like the head, you are also pulled out from another office and do not come from the GSD, right? Considering that the responsibility is over your regular job from a non-procurement office in your LGU, then are supposed to be entitled to honoraria, unless you are now permanently functioning as a BAC Secretariat.

Just keep a positive attitude. Mahirap ang trabaho pero if you see it as a challenge, that is a good attitude to keep.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by mbdr on Wed Apr 08, 2009 2:29 pm

Yup... I was pulled out from one office to function permanently as member of the Secretariat. Thats why wala na rin akong claim for such honorarium. Pero sir parang unfair sa iba diyan, other Secretariat there na parang walang pakialam just because of the said honorarium. And sad to say,there are even members of the BAC na parang walang dedication sa work nila inspite of the "jury duty" function demanded from them.

Hehhehe sir , sori , pero happy ako na nandito kayu sa forum. Na po pour out namin (ko) ang aming sentiments sa aming work. At least, it lightens the load.....

going back to the issue sir... Yes I agree with you na it shall pass through the BAC. Afterall the BAC's function is only recommending. it's up for the HOPE to approve or not the BAC's recommendation.

Thank you. Thank you! Peace to every body and again more more power , Sir RDV , also to sir enrjhez and to others there! Please speak up and share your views... para sa lahat na nangangailangan! I love you bounce sunny

mbdr
Active Poster
Active Poster

Female Number of posts : 84
Age : 49
Company/Agency : LGU
Occupation/Designation : Govt. Employee/BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-02-23

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by engrjhez® on Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:47 am

RDV wrote:
engrjhez wrote:Cancellation of PR's need not reach BAC's doorstep as it does not involve any bidding, awards, or any of the functions of the BAC as defined by the IRR...

Disagree, in the sense that before a change in the procurement method, from public bidding to alternative mode of procurement, could happen it still has to pass thru the BAC. Remember that it is the BAC which will recommend, subject to HOPE approval, the change in the mode of procurement and the APP modified accordingly.
What I meant in the underlined is that the cancellation of PR is not a direct function of the BAC. What is proper is that, the BAC receives request for amendment in the (PPMP and) APP (and not the cancellation/renewal of PRs) before such cancellation is enforced. The cancellation shall be executed by the PMO (requesting office) after the amended APP (as recommended by BAC) is already approved by the HOPE.

RDV wrote:Well, just like mr. rene geraldo ledesma, who is afraid right now that after one year of inactivity, when they decided to conduct a rebidding, the sole bidder who participated in the first bidding could possibly go to court if they do.

I know mr rene is apprehensive because he is afraid that they violated the provisions of the GPRA and IRR-A. (I am afraid, too.)

Right, only time will tell, but shouldn't it be better to do the process properly now, so you are not afraid that 'time' will catch up on you.
(I am actually smiling Very Happy, in fact
lol!)

AGREE.

I like the way you answered our group in the concern of "who shall we follow if conflicts arise?":

  • "It's all up to you. If you follow the law, you may be "unprotecting" yourself from career possibilities; But by doing an "apprehensive act" to follow superiors, you are "unprotecting" yourself from the law - thereby joining the waitlists of Club 6115!

    The choice is always yours."
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by engrjhez® on Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:24 pm

mbdr wrote:Yup... I was pulled out from one office to function permanently as member of the Secretariat. Thats why wala na rin akong claim for such honorarium. Pero sir parang unfair sa iba diyan, other Secretariat there na parang walang pakialam just because of the said honorarium. And sad to say,there are even members of the BAC na parang walang dedication sa work nila inspite of the "jury duty" function demanded from them.

Hehhehe sir , sori , pero happy ako na nandito kayu sa forum. Na po pour out namin (ko) ang aming sentiments sa aming work. At least, it lightens the load.....
I guess that happens in MOST of the time considering the BAC members' superior positions. With a bulk of responsibilities and multiple taskings, the heads of different departments may not be able to dedicate time and effort in the professionalization of the BAC. (Why not make the BAC and the Secretariat composed of the rank and file employees with known integrity, dedication, and professional achievements then? pirat )

mbdr wrote:going back to the issue sir... Yes I agree with you na it shall pass through the BAC. Afterall the BAC's function is only recommending. it's up for the HOPE to approve or not the BAC's recommendation.

Thank you. Thank you! Peace to every body and again more more power , Sir RDV , also to sir engrjhez and to others there! Please speak up and share your views... para sa lahat na nangangailangan! I love you bounce sunny

Thank you too. That is why I like it more here than in the office forum. Other people appreciates the effort in the pursuit of professional development thru inter-agency discussions and sometimes, constructive criticisms. Back in the office, everyone on his own. But, they all rely on you for procedures and rulings but will never listen as an emissary of the law. Maybe it is some sort of "insecurity", or a simple negligence of the job they think "a few good men" can handle. "Why care when somebody else cares already?" - they may say. I say, "let's try to switch jobs..."

Would you believe that the entire BAC (including the Secretariat, and, uh, the TWG) is not yet receiving honoraria since November 2008 (that includes me). But who cares? I can still stand and perform my duties and obligations - even without the honoraria. As an attending member, I have surpassed both my functions as Supervisor in our Agency, and as the Head of the BAC Secretariat without remorse or regrets. As I have stated in the other posts: "Honorarium should remain as a privilege, NOT a compensation". (Kawawa lang yung ibang staff ko which I felt responsible in depriving them what is for them. Sad)

And believe me, I can still extend my service until I see that all things are in order. I may not receive monetary equivalents to what I do, but the benefits and legacy of what I would and could establish should already be a lasting reward!

avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: TO RE-BID OR NOT TO RE-BID? That is the question! <rene geraldo ledesma>

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum