A government audit of the Ministry of Communications and Works has raised serious concerns about its operations.
It was conducted in 2005 by the Audit Department headed by Anslem Joseph, one year after the devastation caused to the island by Hurricane Ivan.
Current Minister of Tourism and Civil Aviation, Clarice Modeste-Curwen was the Minister of Communication and Works at the time of the survey.
The Director of Audit indicated that government did not get value for money with a number of the contracts that it awarded to some builders on the island.
Following is an edited version of the Executive Summary of the report that was presented to Parliament by the Director of Audit:
The (Ministry of Communications, Works & Transport) MCWT plays a vital role in developing and maintaining the public infrastructure of the country.
During the past two years it has realised a strong demand for its services, which in turn has posed challenges to its ability to perform its duties in an efficient and effective manner.
During that period of time and due to Hurricanes Ivan and Emily, the Ministry exercised an outstanding effort to recuperate and at the same time maintained as many roads and building as possible.
In the year 2005, four thousand one hundred and ninety three (4,193) contracts were awarded; twenty four (24) were for buildings and the remainder for roads.
Approximately EC$17.6 millions and EC$5.9 millions were expended on roads and buildings respectively within the said year.
Several observations were made as a result of the audit and instances where improvements could be implemented to correct and/or prevent inefficiencies or low performance were identified.
Some of these are highlights as follows:
*Most of the contractors were selected through "sole sourcing" and some did not perform the job in an economical, competent and effective manner. There were instances where contractors were paid in full for specific tasks of the contract that were not completed.
*It is the opinion of Audit that Regulations should be reviewed to make allowances for sole sourcing only when there is one supplier and to provide for emergency procurement.
Likewise, contracts of service should be supervised and reviewed on a timely basis and the performance of officers on contract should be appraised before their contracts are renewed.
*There is no database of contractors to assist in the selection process so a comprehensive database of contractors as well as proper selection criteria should be documented and adhered to by the Ministry.
*The Finance and Store Rules governs the awarding of contacts. However, these Rules are not always adhered to. Also, the standard contract form provided for in the Finance and Store Rules which is presently in use, is not adequate.
The Ministry should follow the regulations and should update any supporting documents to ensure effective management control.
*Feasibility Studies (FS) were not carried out for locally funded projects; neither were the needs assessments and analyses documented for most of the projects selected.
*Audit encourages the Ministry to carry out FS to determine the cost benefit of the need identified and the suitability of the site so that informed decisions regarding implementation could be made.
This should be done before drawings and bills of quantities are prepared so as to reduce unnecessary spending and risk.
*The Ministry's budget for 2005 was impractical and inaccurate in some instances. As a result, there were overruns on some projects and no expenditure was incurred on others.
In this regard, the Ministry's budget should be realistic and prepared with due consideration to economy and efficiency.
*The Ministry does not prepare financial reports showing the financial performance of all projects; reconcile its record against the monthly Summary of Capital Expenditure by Vote Report that is sent from the Ministry Of Finance (MOF); nor always adhere to financial procedures and controls.
*Audit encourages the Ministry to review and reconcile the monthly Capital Expenditure report, with the Estimates and respective Vote Book(s) so the financial reports would be a useful management tool for monitoring and control.
*Performance reporting is not standardised. Officers report according to their liking or preference and even some basic reporting requirements are not being met.
In this regard, the MCWT should establish standard reporting formats, which would capture all relevant information, for supervisors and subordinates.
Besides, all pertinent and important information on a project should be documented. The contract document for projects should be adhered to and contractors' work should be monitored to ensure that the Government gets value for money.
*The Government is paying high rental costs in order to house offices and residences for some projects that do not have an estimated start or completion date and for others that were not completed and/or started by the initial estimated date.
The Ministry should state the duration of any project on the scope of works and/or other contract document to ensure compliance and control over expenditure.
*The organisational chart, which was presented to audit, did not reflect a true picture of the organisation with regard to positions and accountability relationships. The organisational chart should be reviewed, finalised and properly adopted.
*The ministry does not have a proper preventive maintenance plan for roads and buildings. It also does not have a disposal policy for tools and equipment.
A proper preventive maintenance plan for roads and buildings/structures should be prepared and utilised. Also proper records including the status of all tools and equipment should be readily available.
*The Ministry does not always address complaints and concerns from users in relation to projects efficiently and effectively. Mechanisms should be developed to collect, document and address users' complaints and concerns.
*The Government may wish to consider different options for having its buildings properly insured including setting up its own insurance for its assets.
*Management accepted the criteria used to perform the audit and most of the proposed observations and recommendations and is in the process of implementing the recommendations relating to the "contracting process"
*The Office of the Director of Audit is devoted to upholding public accountability and transparency in all the entities under its jurisdiction/mandate as a means to encourage and provide better public service, good management, good performance, and achievement or results from the public entitles on behalf of the people of the country.
This audit provides Government and Parliament with an assessment on the performance of its activities; with information, observations and recommendations designed to promote accountability in the government, and ethical and effective public service, good governance and sustainable development.
Further, this audit does not question the merits of the Ministry's/Government's policies. Rather, it examines the Ministry's/Government's management practices, controls and reporting systems based on its own public administration policies and on best practices.
The office reports it findings, which may include areas that are working well and recommendations for improvement where required.
All observations and recommendations that arise from the audit have been discussed with senior management and/or Department Heads to ensure that all concerned have prior knowledge of, and opportunities to challenge and respond.
By formulating recommendations for improvement, and bringing those recommendations to the attention of those who can resolve the problems, the audit seeks to promote improvements in the Ministry's policies and systems.
In reality this type of audit involves a communication approach with the entity's management.
The Office of the Director of Audit chose to audit the Project Management and Implementation Function of the Ministry as this involves supervising and managing the reconstruction and repairs of private and public infrastructure, ensuring that required standards are observed and maintained and value for money obtained.
It also mainly involves contracting of a technical nature, which allows the Office of the Director of Audit to address the issues of economy, efficiency and effectiveness.
