Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
FifthAssurance
INFOGRAPHIC SUMMARYSEPTEMBER 2018
of PublicInfrastructure Projects
InfrastructureTransparencyInitiative
The Infrastructure Transparency Initiative (CoST)was born with the goal of helping to raise the standards of transparency and accountability in the country's public infrastructure projects.
2 INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSPARENCYINITIATIVE (CoST Honduras)
I. General Data
PROJECTS INCLUDED IN THE FIFTH ASSURANCE STUDY
1
The Fifth Assurance Study includes a sample of thirteen (13) projects, two (2) of them carried out through public-private partners-hip (PPP) and eleven (11) through traditional public infrastructure projects. The 2018 consultant prequalification study process and
the 2018 construction prequalification process complement the list. The projects are distributed geographically as follows:
INSEP: Construction of the Polyclinic Hospital in Siguatepeque Expansion and Improvement of the La Esperanza-Camasca Highway* Rehabilitation of the Western Highway, Lot 1: La Entrada-Santa Rosa de Copán Rehabilitation of the Western Highway, Lot 2: La Entrada-Los Ranchos Rehabilitation of the Western Highway, Lot 3: Los Ranchos-El Florido
INVEST-H: Mitigation Works for the Rehabilitation of the Millennium Exchange’s Ramp Number 5 Rehabilitation of the CA-3 Highway, section 3, Lot A: Choluteca, Detour to San Bernardo Improvement and Extension, CA-5 Northern Highway, La Barca-Pimienta, Lot A: La Barca-Potrerillos Rehabilitation of the CA-1 Highway, Section 2, Lot A: Jícaro Galán- Santa Helena
PPP: 21st Century Project Tourism Corridor
ENEE: Improvement of the National Dispatch Center (CND)
ENP: Construction of Access Area and Control Booths, Entrance/Exit, Port of San Lorenzo**
1 6 10
11
12
15
7
8
9
2
3
4
5
* Project transferred to INVEST-H as of March 20, 2018.**Project cancelled.Note: Reports 13 and 14 belong to the construction and consultant prequalification processes, respectively.
GUATEMALA
Gulf of Fonseca
Gulf of Honduras
Caribbean Sea
NICARAGUA
6
12
15
97
8
10
11
1
2
4
35
3INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSPARENCYINITIATIVE (CoST Honduras)
6
8 21
1814
25
10
Supervision contracting
Construction contracting
INSEP-DGOP14 companies
INVEST-H39 companies
102 bidding companies
INSEP-DGC39 companies
ENEE10 companies
2
AVERAGE NUMBER OF COMPANIES PARTICIPATING IN SUPERVISION AND CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTING PROCESSES BY INSTITUTION (TRADITIONAL PROJECTS)
Individuals
Companies
Construction prequalification444 requests
Consultant prequalification201 requests
645 participants, including companies and individuals
277 167 109 92
3
AVERAGE NUMBER OF COMPANIES PARTICIPATING IN CONSTRUCTION AND CONSULTANT PREQUALIFICATION PROCESSES
Ammendments
%
Original
Amount of expansion
242
88
8%
56%
106%
-7%
635
960
11981
406
603
881
465
1,0971,065
12
127
Polyclinic HospitalCholuteca-Detour to San Bernardo
La Barca-Pimienta, La Barca-Potrerillos
Jícaro Galán-Santa Elena
La Entrada-SRCLa Entrada-Los Ranchos
Los Ranchos-El Florido
La Esperanza-Camasca
Improvement of the National Dispatch
Center
Millenium Exchange’s Ramp
Number 5
4
COST OF PUBLIC INVESTMENT PROJECTS: ORIGINAL AMOUNTS AND AMMENDMENTS(IN MILLIONS OF LEMPIRAS)
4 INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSPARENCYINITIATIVE (CoST Honduras)
Polyclinic Hospital
Choluteca-Detour to San Bernardo
La Barca-Pimienta,La Barca-Potrerillos
Jícaro Galán-Santa Elena
La Entrada-SRC
La Entrada-Los Ranchos
Los Ranchos-El Florido
La Esperanza-Camasca
Tourism Corridor
Millenium Exchange’s Ramp Number 5
Ammendments
%
Original
Amount of expansion
15
36
14
15
18
18.3
18.3
24206
42%
56%
67%
18
610
74
23
51
5
IMPLEMENTATION TIMES OF PUBLIC INVESTMENT PROJECTS ACCORDING TO ORIGINAL CONTRACT AND AMMENDMENTS (IN MONTHS)
6
DISCLOSURE OF CoST DATA STANDARD (IDS) BY ENTITY
APP-SAPPGlobal Index APP-Coalianza ENEE Insep-DGC Insep/DGOP Invest-H
Proactive disclosure
Reactive disclosure
Evaluated projects61%
99%
72.1%
95.3%
87%
98%
68%
99%100%
90%
98%96%
14 4122
A. Between Invitation and Allocation
B. Between Project Allocation and Beginning of Works
C. Between Priority Note and End of Project
D. Between Priority Note and Executor’s Call for Bids
Average Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum
Los Ranchos-El Florido
Choluteca-San Bernardo
La Esperanza-Camasca
Jícaro Galán-Santa Elena
La Esperanza-Camasca
La Barca-Pimienta,Potrerillos
La Entrada-SRC,La Entrada-LosRanchos, Los
Ranchos-El Florido
La Barca-Pimienta,Potrerillos
4.96months
6.8months
3.5months
3.64months
5.73months
1.4months
4.94months
8.91months
3.07months
23.6months
29.8months
10.7months
7
AVERAGE TIME OF ROAD PROJECTS STAGES
5INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSPARENCYINITIATIVE (CoST Honduras)
GENERAL MANAGEMENT OF ROADS (DGC) - INSEP AND INVEST-H
PROJECT FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS
2
La Esperanza-Camasca Highway
In the bidding process, the following was observed: (i) The confidentiality principle was violated. In answering the questions, the source of the questions was revealed. (ii) It was established that the bid range should be 10% above or below the base budget, which led to the elimination of the lowest bid. (iii) No evidence of arithmetic bid review was found.
Execution deadlines for construction and supervision contracts have expired.
Design modification implied the following:i) A 106.35% increase in the contract amount, equivalent to USD 22.0 million; ii) negotiation of new unit prices for some concepts; iii) a 25.5-month suspension in the execution of works; iv) insufficient financing; iv) managing the National Congress’ approval of modification No. 1 and extending the term of execution of the supervision services, whose contract amount was also increased by 70.6%, equivalent to USD 1.7 million.
Premature cracking has occurred in 4.22% of hydraulic concrete slabs without being subjected to any load. Controversy has arisen over different positions of supervision and the contractor before the contractor on who should assume responsibility, so the case will be submitted to the Dispute Abjudication Board (DAB).
For INVEST-H: Formalize contract modifications No. 5.
• Designs must be updated starting from project planning to ensure that bids are made according to real values, thus avoiding addenda and modifications in time and money. • Institutions should notcarry out bids without updatingdesigns, thus avoiding exaggerated prolongation of execution times.
For INVEST-H: • Ensure that cracked slabs havebeen repaired or replaced.• Conclude technical analyses, taking into account all back-updata provided by INSEP and supervision, and set up the DAB in accordance with the contractual procedure.
•
For future processes during bidding stage: • There must be confidentiality during the Q&A process. Clarifications must be made without revealing the source.• When bidding opens, the base budget must be made known, accompanied by the unit price sheet.
3.
1.
2.
3.
II. Findings and RecommendationsGENERAL BUREAU FOR PUBLIC WORKS (DGOP) - INSEP
PROJECT FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS
1
Polyclinic Hospital
Differences observed between evaluated sub-criteria and criteria established in supervision contest bases; in addition, these were not assigned scores in the bases.
The prequalification notice for the winning construction company did not agree with the results shown in the evaluation report, and is dated May-7-2014, prior to the date May-19-2014 of the evaluation report containing the prequalification results.
During planning stage in all processes, objective evaluation criteria and sub-criteria must be prepared, evaluated in accordance with the methodology established in the competition rules.
Establish a review system to ensure that reporting of results is in strict compliance to the evaluation report.
1.
2.
6 INICIATIVA DE TRANSPARENCIAEN INFRAESTRUCTURA (CoST Honduras)
INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSPARENCYINITIATIVE (CoST Honduras)
LOT 3: according to the last schedule, physical advance executed is 15.73%, greater than the scheduled 13.80%; however, it has been noticed that 55.6% of the contractual time has elapsed, so there is risk of not finishing the works on January 9, 2019, when the contractual term expires.
The civil society members who accompanied the assurance visit disagree with the socialization process. However, there is evidence that this process was carried out.
• Carry out continuous monitoring of the work program and enforce compliance according to contract. • Determine and disclose thereasons for the delay.
• Design a concerted manual on the socialization processes of infrastructure projects, which includes theparticipation of the three sectors: government, civil society andprivate enterprise.
3.
4.
GENERAL MANAGEMENT OF ROADS (DGC)
PROJECT FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS
3
Western Highway
Lot 1: La Entrada-Santa
Rosa
Lot 2: La Entrada-Los
Ranchos
Lot 3: Los Ranchos-El Florido
LOT 1: 60.11% of contractual time has elapsed as of May 31, 2018, whereas physical progress made is only 11.00%, so there is a high risk that works will not be completed on January 4, 2019, the date of expiration of the contractual term.
LOT 2: It has been noticed that 60.11% of the contractual time has elapsed as of May 31, 2018, whereas only 20.53% of physical execution has been finished.
• Determine the real reasons for the delay and disclose them. Apply to the contractor, if applicable, the penalty or term extension resulting from the analysis.
1.
2.
INVEST-H
PROJECT FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS
4
Rehabilitation of Millenium Exchange’s
Ramp Number 5
CA-3 Highway, Section 3, Lot A:
Choluteca-Detour to San Bernardo
CA-5 Northern Highway, La
Barca-Pimienta, Lot A: La
Barca-Potrerillos
CA-1 Highway, Section 2, Lot A:
Jícaro Galán-Santa Elena
Signing of the executive agreement for the approval of supervision and construction contracts, in compliance with Article 5 of Decree PCM-024-2016 and Article 9 of the State Contracting Law, has not taken place.
The monitoring company prepared and included in the final report a detailed maintenance plan for the project for five (5) years, without specifying the entity responsible for its implementation.
According to the initial supervision report, the design documentation provided does not correspond to a final construction design.
Completion date and supervision term disclosed differ from the physical documentation.
During project execution, design modifications and adjustments were made to the amounts of additional works not identified during design stage.
• Sign the agreement immediately and send the contracts to the Supreme Court of Auditors.
• Define the entity responsible for implementing and enforcingthe plan.
• The entity must not allocate the work until the final designis available.
• Make corrections at SISOCS to provide citizens with correct and timely information.
• Review the key design components through specialists, prior to approval and bidding.
1.
2.
1.
1.
1.
National Dispatch Center
The disclosed priority note is neither dated nor signed by Sefin’s official in charge.
• Disclose the note with the date and signature as issued by Sefin.• Ensure that the informationdisclosed at SISOCS is complete, truthful, adequate and timely, as established in the Law on Transparency and Access to Public Information.
1.
PROJECT FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS
NATIONAL ELECTRIC ENERGY COMPANY (ENEE)
7
6
The Tourism Corridor Project
Four ammendments to the contract were made before the execution of works began. Ammendment No. 4 contains substantial changes to a large number of clauses in the concession contract, including clause 17.1, whereby the State undertakes to pay the IMAG with no possibility of suspending it for any reason. In addition, the inner workings of the negotiations that led the concessor to approve changes that now harm the State are unknown.
The socioeconomic and traffic studies found at the time of the review of the disclosed information are dated after the signing of the contract, so it is not known with which traffic and entry data the concessionaire formulated its financial model.
As stated by some actors involved in the project, the main socialization efforts were carried out at the beginning of the demonstrations against toll collection.
For Coalianza:• Structuring the concessioned projects with as much detail as possible, in order to avoid substantial changes at the time of work execution.
For Coalianza during planning or structuring stage:• Disclose studies throughwhich the financial model wasformulated prior to contract signing.
For Coalianza during planning or structuring stage of future projects:• Socialize projects andelaborate key studies such as socio-economic studies duringstructuring stage.
1.
2.
3.
COALIANZA AND SAPP – CONCESSOR: INVEST-H (FORMERLY INSEP)
PROJECT FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS
5
San Pedro Sula Road Network
Improvement (21st Century Project)
During concession acquiring process, no evidence was found that Coalianza has published the public interest rating of the project, in accordance with Article 44 of the Regulations of the PPP Act.
SAPP has an open file on the concessionaire because the latter has not accredited the financial closing for years subsequent to year one, in breach of clause XII of the concession contract.
Parties disagree: according to SAPP, the concessionaire must provide maintenance for the entire area of the concessioned good, while the concessionaire says they are only obliged to provide maintenance to the constructed area.
Maintenance plans for the works that have been finished, some of them several years ago, are still not approved because the concessionaire has not incorporated the SAPP observations.
For Coalianza, duringacquisition stage: Carry out the publication in accordance withlaw and disclose it in SISOCS PPPaccording to the established.
For SAPP:• Ask the concessionaire to resolve the project’s financial closure to ensure the flow of resources and apply penalties.
For Coalianza, INVEST-H and SAPP:• Submit the case to a technical and legal analysis and proceedas dictated.
SAPP must identify and apply sanctions to remedy this situation, in order to implement such plans.
1.
2.
4.
3.
7INFRASTRUCTURE TRANSPARENCYINITIATIVE (CoST Honduras)
GENERAL MANAGEMENT OF ROADS (DGC)’S SPECIAL PROJECTS
1.
2.
3.
4.
2018 Construction Prequalification
Process
Participant consultations and responses were handled as if they were a single construction and consultant prequalification process.
Scores were established for criteria that must be mandatory, e.g. minimum construction equipment.
Field staff resumes were requested and criteria were established to evaluate secretaries, accountants, field staff and the like, which is not congruent with article 36 of the Regulations of the State Contracting Law (RLCE).
Scores are given to facilities (offices and laboratories), but this information is not requested in the forms section and the basis for qualification is not known. It is not indicated whether the offices and laboratories will be inspected, as stated in article 94 of the RLCE.
For future processes, the queriesare to be answered separatelyaccording to each process.
For future processes, compliance criteria are to be established forcompanies to comply with andevaluate them according to thecomplies/does not comply method.
Adhere to what is established in article 36 of the RLCE.
Carry out installation inspections as established in article 94 of the RLCE in the case of non-recognized companies, prior to being prequalified for large-scale projects.
PROJECT FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS
8
2018 Consultant Prequalification
Process
9
CoST Honduras Multisectorial Group
@CoSTHonduras
For more information and details of the study, you can consult the general report of the Fourth Assurance of Public Infrastructure Projects on our website: www.costhonduras.hn
