Missing Records Undermine Transparency

This article is an excerpt from?The Art of Tendering: A Global Due Diligence Guide, which is available for?purchase .

In its January 2022 report entitled?Compliance Review of ARPA Funding Eligibility Process, the Las Cruces City Auditor found that the City of Las Cruces administered a flawed Request for Proposal (RFP) process that lacked proper record-keeping. The audit reviewed an RFP for funding awards under the?American Rescue Plan Act. The audit found that “the eligibility process followed was not sufficiently designed or documented to support clear, consistent, and transparent eligibility determinations.” Noting that proper procurement records serve as the cornerstone for transparent and reviewable contract award decisions, the audit concluded that “the consistency and appropriateness of the eligibility review process followed could not be confirmed.”

In fact, the City Auditor found that the RFP selection and evaluation process did not include documentation for defining and reviewing eligibility criteria and requirements and that evaluators “did not record the existence, non-existence, applicability, or waiver of eligibility criteria and requirements” and that “applicable sections of the Procurement Code related to the RFP Process were not followed.”

As the City Auditor recommended, “to ensure consistency and transparency in the eligibility determination process, a clear and complete listing of requirements that must be evaluated to determine eligibility should be documented and provided to all applicants and committee members to ensure eligibility determinations are fair, complete, consistent, and transparent.” More specifically, the City Auditor recommended that “the eligibility criteria should be documented using a matrix, checklist, or evaluation sheet that lists all applicable criteria, requirements, calculations, parameters, etc. that must be reviewed, measured, evaluated, considered, and/or confirmed to determine eligibility for each application received.”

The audit also found that the City failed to clearly define its appeals process, and that “applicants who had direct contact with elected officials to raise concerns about the eligibility process disqualified themselves by doing so.” The City Auditor recommended that City management remedy the governance gap in its Procurement Code by establishing clearer bid protest procedures so that losing bidders do not improperly escalate their concerns directly to elected officials.

As this case study illustrates, evaluation records serve as a cornerstone for the defensibility of evaluation and award decisions. Those decisions should also be supported by clear bid protest procedures so that these procedures are transparent to all bidders.

By?Paul Emanuelli