NaCSA In Procurement Irregularities Over Community-Driven Development Project

The National Commission for Social Action (NaCSA) fails to follow procurement procedures in the construction of community infrastructure valued at NLe21,164,271.40 under the Community-Driven Development Project (CDDP).
This was captured in the recently published audit report by the protector of the Sierra Leone public purse, Audit Service Sierra Leone (ASSL).
The report maintained that the performance security was not made available for audit inspection even when the contract periods had elapsed since September 2023 and May 2024.
The audit noted that if the contractors abandon the work or execute substandard work, the government will have nothing to fall on to recoup the funds invested in the contracts noting that it is contrary to Regulation 127(3) of the Public Procurement Regulations, 2020.
“Upon review of the corrected BoQ for eight contracts, we observed that the contingencies figure on these contracts were increased by NLe79,193.83 (from NLe687,310.79 to NLe766,504.54) without any justification,” the report stated.
That notifications to unsuccessful bidder(s) were not submitted for audit inspection contravening section 27 of the Public Procurement Act, 2016.
In their response, the Commission sated that the clause was not inserted into the bidding document approved by the NPPA and that they invited contractors to submit since the contracts were ongoing.
“Contingencies on contracts are provisional sum which cannot be use by NaCSA except we receive approval from the Ministry of Finance (MoF) and the NPPA. NaCSA has yet to pay any contingencies to contractors. The final contingencies amount will be shared with the NPPA and MoF for their approval,” NaCSA stated.
The Commission added that both successful and unsuccessful bidders were notified before contracts were awarded, though the unsuccessful bidders were difficult to come and collect their letters and that there were no complaint relating to the procurement process.
The audit maintained that performance security was not submitted for audit verification.
That no justification was given for the increase of the contingencies amount on the signed contracts.
That evidence of notification letters to unsuccessful bidders was not submitted, noting that the issues remain unresolved.