e-GP : India Experience

1. e-GP : India Experience Fiduciary Forum (1st – 5th March 2010)

2. 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

3. e – GP India Landscape

4. 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

5. 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

6. Andhra Pradesh example

7. 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 > $25,000) • In 30 months, 8 GoAPdepts, 13 PSUs, 51 Municipalities & 5 Univs ($ 8.5 billion from 12,441 transactions)

8. Salient features (AP)

9. 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

10. 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

11. Karnataka example

12. Overall architecture (GoK)

13. 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

14. Salient features (Karnataka) • Integrated systems: • Supplier registration & Indent management (goods , works) • e-Tendering (Creation, Bid submission, evaluation) • e-Auctions • Contract mgmt • Catalogue mgmt • MIS • Accounting • ePayment

15. 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

16. e-Procurement cell (GoK)

17. 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

18. Status of e-GP Assessment in India by Bank

19. 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

20. 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.

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. 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)

24. Links to e-GP websites : • Karnataka :https://eproc.karnataka.gov.in/eportal/index.seam • Andhra Pradesh : https://tender.eprocurement.gov.in/ • Uttar Pradesh : http://etender.up.nic.in/nicgep/app • Orissa : https://tenders.ori.nic.in/nicgep/app • Madhya Pradesh : http://mpeprocurement.gov.in/Home/index.asp • Chhattisgarh : http://cgeprocurement.etenders.in/cg/index.asp • Tamil Nadu : http://tenders.tn.gov.in/ • Rajasthan : http://eproc.rajasthan.gov.in/Home.do Line Ministries • Ministry of Railways : http://www.ireps.gov.in/cgi-bin/ireps/ireps/home.do • DGS&D : https://dgsnd.govtprocurement.com/

25. Q&A