Presentation on theme: "E-GP : India Experience Fiduciary Forum (1 st – 5 th March 2010)"— Presentation transcript:
e-GP : India Experience Fiduciary Forum (1 st – 5 th March 2010)
e-GP India Landscape Union level –Mission mode project of eGP (under National eGovernance Plan) –Agency specific systems – DGS&D, Railways, NIC State level –Roll out: AP, Karnataka, Orissa, UP, TN –Pilots: Gujarat, MP, Chattisgarh, Delhi –Plans: HP, Kerala, Assam, Punjab Department/ PSE level –Several examples with different models of implementation
e – GP India Landscape STATES using e- GP CENTRAL PSUs using e- GP LINE MINISTRIES using e-GP E-GP system assessment done by World Bank Andhra PradeshONGCMinistry of Railways GoAP e-GP System (Jan-Feb’2008) KarnatakaSAILDGS&DBWSSB, Karnataka (July’2008) Uttar PradeshBHELGoK e-GP System (e- proc) (May’2009) Madhya PradeshHPCLGoMP e-GP System (July 2009) Tamil NaduGAILSJVN, HP (October 2009) Orissa
Our e-GP Strategy National Dialogue on e-GP Research and knowledge sharing Leadership, management and oversight structures State State specific strategies, with management structures Implementation plans in sync with national standards Building capacity Framework to monitor progress/improvement Linking to PFM dialogue/systems
Our e-GP Strategy Project Assessment of existing systems Guidance on ways to improve Conducting e-GP pilots Exploring pathways to integrate project-department implementations to the State strategy
Salient features (AP) Started in Yr 2000 as one of the several IT initiatives led by the Chief Minister First state-wide e-GP system in India PPP model: –Pilot = 4 departments –In 9 months, developed templates for various prevalent procurement practices –Executive orders issued mandating use in the pilot departments (value > $250,000) –Limit lowered to $125,000 –All remaining departments (value > $25,000) –In 30 months, 8 GoAP depts, 13 PSUs, 51 Municipalities & 5 Univs ($ 8.5 billion from 12,441 transactions)
Benefits as documented Tender cycle time –90-135 days to 42 days Transparency –Suppliers –Public at large Cost savings –20% in 2003-04 and 12% in 2004-05 –Cost of advertising –Cost of MIS Supplier participation –3 to 4.5
Key learnings (AP) Reform initiative was largely IT driven, at the cost of improving outcomes Gains largely in efficiencies, which have plateaued Risks related to service provider Could not develop into an end to end integrated e GP system
Salient features (Karnataka) Second state wide system - PPP model HP as the service provider Led by Center of e-Governance (separate department headed by a Principal Secretary) Learnt lessons from AP experience Preparation time = 3-4 years
Pilot statistics (GoK) – May’ 09 3000 users (1000 GoK & 2000 contractors) 75 users per week being added Over 1200 tenders in the system A set of 150 estimates/indents 25 departments using the system Training program for buyers and suppliers
Key learnings (Karnataka) Pilot strategy well thought through covering IT, BPR & change management Scale up is challenging – Procurement law being modified; State procurement capacity is low
Status of e-GP Assessment in India by Bank STATEPROJECTSERVICE PROVIDER STATUS KarnatakaKMRP (BWSSB) AntaresUnder pilot KarnatakaKSHIP-IIHP Sales India Assessment has been done. Final report has been shared with the Client. Client confirmation awaited on 4 critical gaps. Madhya Pradesh MPWSRPWipro- NexTenders Assessment has been done and first draft report has been shared with the Client. Himachal Pradesh SJVNITIAssessment completed in October 2009. First draft report has been shared with Client.
e – GP initiatives : Developed a Role Matrix in line with guidance note from OPCS Checklist for review of procurement documents for Clients using e-GP Web-page on e-GP progress in India BBL on e-GP
Key Issues observed in GoK assessment Virus Scanning of documents by the bidders before uploading into the system Option of manual mode of bid submission for ICB Conflict of Interest: HPs participation in GoK tenders Time difference between bid submission and bid opening Third party audit report Bidder is required to withdraw the bid in case he wishes to modify the same before deadline for bid submission.
Key Issues observed in GoMP assessment Standardization of processes Registration fee Option of manual mode of bid submission for ICB Bid modification before deadline for bid submission Time difference between bid submission and bid opening Contract award publication.
Key Issues observed in SJVN e-GP assessment Registration fee Option of manual mode of bid submission for ICB Time difference between bid submission and bid opening Contract award publication.
Challenges we face Several implementing agencies, each proposing it’s own e-procurement process to be used in Bank Projects Demand for exclusive use of e-procurement system irrespective of method of procurement Efforts required to convince implementing agencies of the MDB assessment needs of Bank before it’s use for Bank funded Project Registration fee (systems developed using PPP model)