cluster_labels
int64 0
99
| chunks
stringlengths 7
4.26k
| point_ids
stringlengths 36
36
|
|---|---|---|
7
|
Payments to contractor
S/No
Item Description
Date Certified
Expected latest
1
Advance Payment
2
Advance Payment
3
IPC No. 1
14 th
December 2021
13 th
January
2022
5 th
January 2022
None
OK
4
IPC No. 2
Not availed
Not availed
-
5
IPC No. 3
4 th
May 2022
3 rd
June 2022
16 th
May 2022
None
OK
6
IPC No. 4
30 th
June 2022
30 th
July 2022
Payment pending
|
38953aca-2af2-45a1-a819-9f7694b2aed1
|
7
|
7.5 Delayed supply and installation of irrigation equipment
Paragraph 4.2 sub-section 14 of the Grant, Budget and Implementation GuidelinesMicro Scale Irrigation 2020 requires the supply and installation of equipment.
A review of the contract documentation revealed that the supply and installation of irrigation equipment by Ferest investments was beyond the expected delivery and installation date.
1, Supplier = Mayega Lawrence. 1, Co-Payment date(A) = 18/2/2022. 1, Installation completion date (B) = 16/5/2022. 1, Months late = 3 months. 1, Remarks = Delayed supply and installation. 2, Supplier = Kimbowa John. 2, Co-Payment date(A) = 13/5/2022. 2, Installation completion date (B) = Not yet. 2, Months late = 1.5 months. 2, Remarks = Delayed supply and installation. 3, Supplier = Musuuza Patrick. 3, Co-Payment date(A) = 23/5/2022. 3, Installation completion date (B) = Not yet. 3, Months late = 1 month. 3, Remarks = Delayed supply and installation. 4, Supplier = Mirundi sam. 4, Co-Payment date(A) = 4/4/2022. 4, Installation completion date (B) = 16/5/2022. 4, Months late = 2 months. 4, Remarks = Delayed supply and installation. 5, Supplier = Nanyonga Lucy. 5, Co-Payment date(A) = 19/5/2022. 5, Installation completion date (B) = Not yet. 5, Months late = 3 months. 5, Remarks = Delayed supply and installation
This fails the purpose for which the funds were disbursed and poor implementation of the program during the financial year under review.
The Accounting Officer explained that the supplier had challenges relating to finances to install the equipment's however, he has taken action by engaging the supplier and the installation works have commenced.
20
I advised the Accounting Officer to liaise with the suppliers to ensure that the irrigation equipment is delivered to the beneficiary farmers and payments should be done on a timely basis.
|
e7317f4c-b56a-4230-bade-bad7c9d2eccf
|
7
|
a) Lack of Contract implementation plans
Regulation 119(3) of the PPDA Local Government Regulations, 2006 requires a contract supervisor to prepare a contract implementation plan upon receipt of a copy of the contract.
However, I noted that there were no contract implementation plans for procurements reviewed worth UGX.9, 618,167,451 Appendix 20 refers.
As a result, there is a risk that the contract may not be implemented according to the agreed terms and conditions in the contract.
|
bf6220d4-56da-4557-b1f5-2b24b60a3344
|
7
|
3) Expiry of Performance Securities Prior to Completion of Works
Failure to maintain valid performance securities constitutes a fundamental breach of contract and exposes the DLGs to the risk of financial loss in the event the contractors fail to perform.
|
c95c6405-9c1d-4d45-8526-4a4104fe4ac8
|
7
|
i. Preparation and submission of quarterly reports
Sec 8.0 of the District rural water supply and sanitation conditional grant budget and implementation guidelines for Local Governments (LGs) FY. 2022/2023, April 2022 states that; Local government are required to prepare quarterly reports in the format provided by the Ministry of Water and Environment to the DLGs. The report should be submitted to MWE on the 10th Day of the first month of the preceding quarter.
13
The deadlines for submission of Quarter one report is 10th October, Quarter 2: 10th January, Quarter 3: 10th April and 10th July for Quarter four.
|
45707785-7659-480f-9647-d4a6fc891bb6
|
7
|
Comparison of Actual and reported performance of quarterly performance reports
1, Details = Quarter One. 1, Deadline submission = 31/10/2019. 1, Actual date of submission = 26/12/2019. 1, Comment (submitted in time/ delayed) = Delayed. 2, Details = Quarter Two. 2, Deadline submission = 31/01/2020. 2, Actual date of submission = 26/02/2020. 2, Comment (submitted in time/ delayed) = Delayed. 3, Details = Quarter Three. 3, Deadline submission = 30/04/2020. 3, Actual date of submission = 11/05/2020. 3, Comment (submitted in time/ delayed) = Delayed. 4, Details = Quarter Four. 4, Deadline submission = 31/07/2020. 4, Actual date of submission = 13/10/2020. 4, Comment (submitted in time/ delayed) = Delayed
|
3461c0cd-31bf-4093-86dc-54ee9e481ae0
|
7
|
3.6.3 Implementation of projects
Paragraph 7.3.2 of the POM requires Program funds to be used to finance investments stipulated in the work plans submitted to MLHUD.
I reviewed the contract management files and observed the following irregularities: Delays in project implementation.
I noted that six (6) projects delayed beyond their completion dates. It was noted that contracts implementation is behind schedule with extensions averaging to 120 days as detailed below;
|
46022268-9a80-4242-b12d-69cc09316e09
|
7
|
3.6.2.2 Procurement
Section 4.1.7 of the Transitional Development Ad Hoc Grant implementation guidelines states that LGs should ensure that all health contracts are procured and managed as per Section 58 (4) of the PPDA Act. I reviewed the procurement process of the health contracts and noted the following;
|
1325cc30-93b6-47dc-85dd-1a0307c6a3be
|
7
|
4.2.3 Project Implementation (current year 2022/23)
In a letter dated 25 th July 2022 Ref No.EPD 192/335/01, the district was given clearance by the Ministry with no objection to the request of the Entity to enter into a two-year Contractual agreement with the Bidder (M/S Geses Uganda Limited), upon clearance by the Office of the Solicitor General. The works commenced on 23 rd August 2022 and is expected to end on 23 rd August 2024.
|
8ed4bd45-83bf-432b-a7ab-1624d0e0379d
|
7
|
4.1.4 Review of the Procurement process
Paragraph 7.2 of the District rural water supply and sanitation conditional grant budget and implementation guidelines for LGs FY 2022/2023, April 2022 requires that adverts should be made at the end of the last quarter of the preceding financial year, contract awarded by 31 st of October, and that LGs should follow the procurement procedures in the prevailing PPDA guidelines.
I reviewed procurement files and noted the following;
a) A review of Advertisements of procurements revealed that three (3) projects were advertised after 30 th June 2022, as shown in the table below;
1., Project = Construction of Kitutu Water Supply system, pump station, civil works, transmission mains, distribution mains, water reservoir. 1., Amount = 496,900,314. 1., Date of advertisement = 15/09/2022. 2., Project = Drilling 6 boreholes. 2., Amount = 153,748,849. 2., Date of advertisement = 15/09/2022. 3., Project = Extension of piped water supply from Imara to Kikedi. 3., Amount = 100,000,000. 3., Date of advertisement = 15/09/2022. , Project = Total. , Amount = 750,649,163. , Date of advertisement =
b) A review of contract documents of procurements revealed that three (3) projects contracts were awarded after 31 st October 2022, as shown in the table below;
1., Project = Construction of Kitutu Water Supply system, pump station, civil works, transmission mains, distribution mains, water reservoir. 1., Amount = 496,900,314. 1., Date of Contracts Award = 02/02/2023. 2., Project = Drilling 6 boreholes. 2., Amount = 153,748,849. 2., Date of Contracts Award = 13/04/2023. 3., Project = Extension of piped water supply from Imara to Kikedi. 3., Amount = 100,000,000. 3., Date of Contracts Award = 23/11/2022. , Project = Total. , Amount = 153,860,392. , Date of Contracts Award =
Delayed procurement affects timely implementation of planned activities.
|
bfde2bb3-37c3-4b0b-ac2f-2944dfb0381d
|
7
|
3.16.3Payments to UPDF Engineers Brigade for Construction Works
The MoH and MoLG signed a MoU on 5 th November, 2021 with the Ministry of Defence & Veterans Affairs (MoDVA) to undertake construction of Health facilities using the UPDF Engineers Brigade.
To operationalise the arrangement, the LGs were also required to sign implementation agreements/MoUs with the Engineers Brigade, in which;
The LGs were to advance 30% funds for the total project cost to the Engineers Brigade.
Payments to the Engineers Brigade should be supported by certification of previous works by the LG and requisitions for subsequent works done as agreed in the drawings, price schedule and BoQs.
The Engineers Brigade submits a Project Implementation Schedule to Project Management Teams of the LGs prior to commencement of works, to enable progress monitoring.
During my audit, I noted the following;
|
06aaa379-b589-49a4-8cb1-d4639639a230
|
7
|
iv. Mitooma HC IV Upgrade to Hospital.
Contract start date was 15/08/2023 and end date was 12/04/2024. However, full advance payment was made before close of the financial year.
All the funds were paid in advance to the Engineering brigade including the Monitoring and supervision fees
Monitoring and supervision funds should be left at the District, however funds are requested for from the Engineering Brigade that pays them in cash. This is against the government guidelines about cash management.
Construction is at its very early stages like excavating the land.
Failure to implement planned activities affects service delivery to the community.
The Accounting Officer explained that;
At Kigyende HC 111, there was change of site which caused unnecessary delays of works to start. Currently, the works are at slab level.
Relatedly, the delays at Rutookye Hc 111, were caused by land acquisition conflicts, which have been settled and construction works are now on going and the project is now at roofing level.
Full advance payment to UPDF was made based on the request made by Ministry of Defence so as to commence on the works.
Works did not commence not until the district transferred funds. Since MOD was a government entity as well, we transferred the funds.
For delayed works the district engaged UPDF on the issue and also wrote warning letters
|
b3289866-3b61-4b65-aad5-ad550e755a4a
|
7
|
4.1.2.2 Timeliness of procurements
Para. 7.2 of the District rural water supply and sanitation conditional grant budget and implementation guidelines for Local Governments (LGs) FY. 2022/2023, April 2022 requires that adverts be made at the end of the last quarter of the preceding financial year and that contract awards should be made by 31 st of October.
My review of procurement files revealed that no advert was published by 30 th June 2022 as the guidelines prescribe. The advert for construction of 7 public rain water harvesting tanks was placed on 29/12/2022 and the contract signed on 15/3/2023.
Delayed procurement causes delayed implementation hence hampering service delivery.
The Accounting Officer did not comment on this matter.
|
000a180d-a39f-4121-8dec-fae43d7c7eb7
|
7
|
b) Failure to submit a performance security as per the contract terms
GCC 61.1 of the contract document dated 19 th October, 2022 between Hoima District and P&D Traders and Contractors LTD requires performance security equivalent to 8 percent of the contract price to be submitted by the contractor. Therefore, this implies that the contractor was meant to submit a performance security of UGX.276, 915,249
A review of the performance security document submitted by the contractor revealed that a performance security of UGX.234, 673,940 was submitted contrary to the required performance security of UGX.276, 915,249.
As a result, the district is at risk of not being able to effectively handle costs of failure to complete the contract in the event of non-compliance with contract terms and conditions.
|
4bcb2398-265b-44a9-a845-250cd0286974
|
7
|
Appendix II: Summary of Audit Findings per project
, 1 = works; some of the workers of the contractor did not have appropriate Personal Protection Equipment (PPE's) Quality of Works; Despite on-going works on the base layer, test results for the gravel used on the sub-base and base layers were not seen. In addition, the contractor had stockpiled K1-60 emulsion bitumen and MC-30 cutback; however, test results of these were not availed . , 1 = Quantity Verification; A comparison of the quantities of the items assessed by the audit team and those certified for payment revealed inconsistencies in some of the quantities of the measured items resulting in an overpayment of UGX. 20,852,440. , 1 = Supervision of Works; Apart from the progress report of. , 1 = August 2019, all the other progress reports availed to the audit team for verification were found to be lacking as they missed out essential information. 9 Low Cost Sealing of, 1 = . , 1 = established that a number of items that are specified as non- separately measurable/payable items within the specifications had been included in the BoQs Delayed Commencement of Works; The contractor was ordered to commence works a month later than the stipulated contractual commencement date Delayed Submission of Performance Security; Review of related correspondences showed that the contractor submitted the performance guarantee 223 calendar days late contrary to clause 52.1 of the contract Irregular/Unjustified Extension of Time; The extension of time of 68 days granted to the contractor was considered unjustified because;. , 1 = The contractor was granted an extension of time despite his failure to maintain a performance guarantee for the entire There was no evidence of consideration of the. , 1 = performance of the contractor in the assessment of. , 1 = his consideration for the extension of time Slow Progress of Works; The intended completion date was extended by 68 days from 1 st October 2019 to 9 th
34
|
b909051d-31fd-4ba9-b760-b47d7c2c9fc8
|
7
|
c) Review of Contract Supervision and Monitoring
It is a good project management practice to hold monthly site meetings to discuss issues pertaining to execution and progress of works. The project duration was over 120 days as per SCC 22, implying at least four (4) site meeting records were expected. Review of the project management file revealed that Three site meeting minutes dated 26 th March 2021, 26 th April 2021,, Cause = NA NA. Presence of minutes of site meetings It is a good project management practice to hold monthly site meetings to discuss issues pertaining to execution and progress of works. The project duration was over 120 days as per SCC 22, implying at least four (4) site meeting records were expected. Review of the project management file revealed that Three site meeting minutes dated 26 th March 2021, 26 th April 2021,, Implication = NA. Presence of minutes of site meetings It is a good project management practice to hold monthly site meetings to discuss issues pertaining to execution and progress of works. The project duration was over 120 days as per SCC 22, implying at least four (4) site meeting records were expected. Review of the project management file revealed that Three site meeting minutes dated 26 th March 2021, 26 th April 2021,, Recommendation = . Presence of minutes of site meetings It is a good project management practice to hold monthly site meetings to discuss issues pertaining to execution and progress of works. The project duration was over 120 days as per SCC 22, implying at least four (4) site meeting records were expected. Review of the project management file revealed that Three site meeting minutes dated 26 th March 2021, 26 th April 2021,, Recommendation = . Clause 52 of PPDA regulations of 2014 requires the Accounting Officer to appoint a Contract Manager to manage the contract. Reviewing the project management records, indicate that the Contract, Cause = N/A. Clause 52 of PPDA regulations of 2014 requires the Accounting Officer to appoint a Contract Manager to manage the contract. Reviewing the project management records, indicate that the Contract, Implication = OK. Clause 52 of PPDA regulations of 2014 requires the Accounting Officer to appoint a Contract Manager to manage the contract. Reviewing the project management records, indicate that the Contract, Recommendation = OK. Clause 52 of PPDA regulations
|
fd8c5ec3-5488-426c-826a-a9e06188b785
|
7
|
I reviewed procurement files and noted the following;
1, Subject = Construction of piped water scheme at Akashayi -Phase 2-Kyampagara S/C. 1, Contractor = FLECO Holding Ltd. 1, amount = 474,290,077. 1, date of procureme nt advert = 26/07/2022. 1, date contract was awarded = 12/01/2023. 2, Subject = Supply of borehole spare parts (for the rehabilitation of 15No.deep boreholes). 2, Contractor = Mwetrust & 4P Enterprises Ltd. 2, amount = 23,588,200. 2, date of procureme nt advert = 26/07/2022. 2, date contract was awarded = 28/04/2023. 3, Subject = Siting and drilling of 4 No.boreholes and 1No.production well. 3, Contractor = ICON Projects Ltd. 3, amount = 143,990,000. 3, date of procureme nt advert = 26/07/2022. 3, date contract was awarded = 14/11/2022. 4, Subject = Renovation of 10 No. Institutional rain water harvesting tanks. 4, Contractor = Kihani Modern Contractors Ltd. 4, amount = 49,993,331. 4, date of procureme nt advert = 26/07/2022. 4, date contract was awarded = 16/01/2023
None of the 4 projects had their procurement adverts published by 30 th June 2022.
None of the projects 4 out of 4 (100%) of the projects had their procurement contracts awarded by 31 st October 2022.
Delayed procurement causes delayed implementation hence hampering service delivery.
The Accounting Officer acknowledged the shortcoming and promised to improve going forward.
|
4e750869-18da-4973-8c0f-f828e68eb834
|
7
|
(i) Percentage of quality progress reports
prepare monthly progress reports. At the time of audit (4 th August 2022), twelve (12) months of project execution had elapsed implying that at least twelve (12) monthly progress reports and four (4) quarterly progress reports were expected. All the expected twelve (12) monthly progress report and four (04) quarterly progress reports were available and they were of good quality as they included information such as: contract data, programme and scope of works, contractual issues, personnel and equipment mobilization, physical works and time progress, financial matters, quality control, meetings/reporting, Gender/HIV/AIDS, occupational health and safety, weather, = Cause. prepare monthly progress reports. At the time of audit (4 th August 2022), twelve (12) months of project execution had elapsed implying that at least twelve (12) monthly progress reports and four (4) quarterly progress reports were expected. All the expected twelve (12) monthly progress report and four (04) quarterly progress reports were available and they were of good quality as they included information such as: contract data, programme and scope of works, contractual issues, personnel and equipment mobilization, physical works and time progress, financial matters, quality control, meetings/reporting, Gender/HIV/AIDS, occupational health and safety, weather, Implication = . prepare monthly progress reports. At the time of audit (4 th August 2022), twelve (12) months of project execution had elapsed implying that at least twelve (12) monthly progress reports and four (4) quarterly progress reports were expected. All the expected twelve (12) monthly progress report and four (04) quarterly progress reports were available and they were of good quality as they included information such as: contract data, programme and scope of works, contractual issues, personnel and equipment mobilization, physical works and time progress, financial matters, quality control, meetings/reporting, Gender/HIV/AIDS, occupational health and safety, weather, Recommendation = . challenges and recommendations. (ii) Presence of minutes of site meetings It is a good project management practice to hold regular site meetings at least on a monthly basis to discuss issues pertaining to project execution and progress.,
|
07c7a8a3-fb4d-4ec0-a2ae-8b481600b9b2
|
7
|
ii. Delays in completion of design reviews
I advised the Accounting Officer to ensure that the consultant submits required deliverables within contractual timelines. The UNRA project management team should be held responsible for delays without appropriate justification.
|
82d9f200-7dea-4bb0-89a7-604d17e81133
|
7
|
3.18.4Non-verification of monthly returns by MEMD
Regulation 53 of the Mining Regulation 2004 provides that every holder of a mineral right shall submit or lodge mineral returns not later than fourteen days after the month reported on. These returns are self-assessed.
I noted a weakness in that MEMD is not required to undertake verification process to ascertain whether the mining parties declare the true results of their mining operations.
This encourages under-declaration of the volume and value of minerals mined by the mining parties.
I advised the Accounting Officer to engage the MEMD to consider emphasising verification of mineral returns to ensure that the Central government, District and land owners receive rightful revenue share from royalties declared and paid by the mining parties.
|
2f0bba2b-2919-4a73-9772-654ab4e3bcfb
|
7
|
1.1 Failure to Exit the Public Investment Plan (PIP)
Paragraph 4.1 of the Project Development Committee Guidelines 2016 requires that the Development Committee shall undertake an annual review of all on-going projects in the Public Investment Plan in order to; assess the performance of ongoing projects, clean up the PIP of ineligible interventions especially those that are best implemented under the recurrent budget, ensure that projects that reach the end of their implementation phase exit the PIP to create fiscal space for new projects, and guide on change in project scope and phase.
Review of the Budget Execution Circular issued by the PSST for the financial year 2022/2023 revealed that this project should have exited the Public Investment Plan by 30 th April 2023, however, at the time of audit (October 2023), there was no evidence that the project had exited.
This not only contradicts the Guidelines but also negatively affects the entity's ability to take on new projects.
The accounting officer explained that ARSDP was a multisectoral project with Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development being the lead Agency and therefore the final exit from PIP, rests with the lead implementing agency (MoLHUD).
|
f5209e50-e088-4707-af18-6110ee6f5045
|
7
|
(i) Procurement of Design Consultant
I was not availed any documentation pertaining to the procurement of the design consultant for the Kanara Water Supply Project. As such, I could not determine whether the procurement of the design consultant followed the PPDA regulations and guidelines.
Basing on the documentation availed to me regarding the procurement of the design consultant for the construction of Kikazi Street and Ntara Circular road, I established that the procurement of the consultant generally followed the PPDA regulations and guidelines.
|
c32fec3a-fe32-4b4d-af0f-1449a0644eb4
|
7
|
c) Procurement of ICT equipment, Laboratory kits, and chemical reagents
The guidance on procurement of ICT equipment, science kits, and chemical reagents for seed schools by the Ministry of Education and Sports to all Accounting Officers on 28 th August 2020 referenced EPD 192/335/01; which required the procurement to be conducted after successful completion and handover of the facilities.
I noted that ICT equipment, Science kits and chemicals were procured for seed schools that had not been completed. The equipment were instead being kept in inappropriate storage facilities exposing them to a risk of obsolescence.
The Accounting Officers pledged to engage the contractors to ensure that construction works on the laboratories are completed.
I advised the Accounting Officers to ensure that procurements for the equipment are only effected when the construction works have been
completed. I also urged the Accounting Officer to ensure that items are properly stored.
|
1bddefe2-f420-4dab-8a5f-1c9db450df8b
|
7
|
(c) Review of Contract Supervision and
Monitoring Arrangements
|
5aa7c5b3-2b3b-4cd6-9eb7-c95c1ad7a8e1
|
7
|
ANNEXURE III: SUMMARY ENTITY FINDINGS AND OPINIONS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
4 quarterly performance reports were submitted after the quarterly deadlines respectively. I also noted inaccuracies in these quarterly performance reports.. 14, 1 = Qualified. 14, 2 = I noted that COVID procurements to a tune of UGX.0.033Bn were undertaken but evaluation reports and contracts for the procurements reviewed were never
|
414863c8-4596-49b1-9f46-4e60deb79f30
|
7
|
5.2 Failure to enforce submission of performance securities
Review of Solicitation Documents and signed contracts revealed that they required suppliers to provide a Performance Security of 10%.
However, this requirement was not complied with by the contractors for procurements worth UGX.497,265,890.
In the absence of performance securities, the hospital had no fall-back position in the event of the contractors' failure to perform as per the contract terms.
The Accounting Officer pledged to enforce the performance security requirement going forward.
14
|
7fa5d5c0-9e3a-4f84-a65a-e6aeceaba40f
|
7
|
3.2 Delay in Clearance of Contracts
1, Time taken = 0 - 14 days. 1, Number of contracts cleared in the FYR 2022/2023 = 554. 1, Percentage = 30%. 1, Performance the 2021/2022 = 59%. 1, in FYR = . 2, Time taken = 15 - 30 days. 2, Number of contracts cleared in the FYR 2022/2023 = 654. 2, Percentage = 36%. 2, Performance the 2021/2022 = 34%. 2, in FYR = . 3, Time taken = 31 days - 6 months. 3, Number of contracts cleared in the FYR 2022/2023 = 605. 3, Percentage = 33%. 3, Performance the 2021/2022 = 7%. 3, in FYR = . 4, Time taken = Over six months. 4, Number of contracts cleared in the FYR 2022/2023 = 18. 4, Percentage = 1%. 4, Performance the 2021/2022 = 0%. 4, in FYR = . , Time taken = Total. , Number of contracts cleared in the FYR 2022/2023 = 1831. , Percentage = . , Performance the 2021/2022 = . , in FYR =
Delay in the approval of contracts implies delays in the conclusion of procurement processes by the respective entities, resulting in delayed implementation of activities and delivery of services to the intended beneficiaries. It may also lead to government incurring avoidable expenditures, including contract variations arising from price adjustments due to delays and the failure to absorb availed funds for projects funded using disbursed loans.
The Accounting Officer explained that any request for legal advice should be dealt with and disposed of within 14 days from the date of the first stamp. The Accounting Officer further explained that a circular was issued to all Accounting Officers listing the documentation that must accompany every request and the timeline within which the Accounting Officers are supposed to respond to the queries raised. However, this has not been fully adhered to.
|
eac6ce15-68e0-40d1-a8ab-eb3e06f57841
|
7
|
i. Preparation and submission of quarterly reports
Sec 8.0 of the District rural water supply and sanitation conditional grant budget and implementation guidelines for Local Governments (LGs) FY. 2022/2023, April 2022 states that; Local government are required to prepare quarterly reports in the format provided by the Ministry of Water and Environment to the DLGs. The report should be submitted to MWE on the 10th Day of the first month of the preceding quarter. The deadlines for submission of Quarter one report is 10th October, Quarter 2: 10th January, Quarter 3: 10th April and 10th July for Quarter four.
|
d77d2cea-75b3-4bf3-91e2-9416308dcd6d
|
7
|
b) Lack of review of feasibility study report from CCCC during procurement of works
Review of documents revealed that the EPC Contractor CCCC pre-financed the feasibility study for the Design and Build of the Upgrading and Expansion of Entebbe International Airport Project. The feasibility study report (technical proposal) submitted to CAA in December 2013 costed Phase 1 of the project at USD 200,000,000 which later culminated in a contract between CAA and CCCC on October 2014 for USD.200,000,000.
It was however noted that there was no independent review of the feasibility estimates by CAA during procurement stage which would have informed Government on the reasonableness and accuracy of the cost estimates prior to agreeing to CCCC securing the funds from Exim bank of China. Accordingly the CAA contracts committee approved the project cost in the feasibility study on 23 rd September 2014 without undertaking an independent evaluation of these costs but rather sought for PPDAs clearance of the contract on 2 nd October 2014, contrary to sec 3 PPDA regulations 2014.
|
93c7f574-eab7-44dc-8dcc-e57520c0c740
|
7
|
3.3.2.1 Failure to undertake mitigation measures for Projects/programs with related environmental and social impacts
Section 6.2.3.1 of the Planning, Budgeting and Implementation Guidelines for Local Governments for the Education and Sports Sector 2021 also requires that contracts should include a) measures to mitigate environmental and social risks identified in the checklist as the responsibility of the contractor; and b) standard clauses in the contract outlining the contractor's responsibilities in terms of mitigating environmental and social risks.
|
94ce02d6-374d-4e28-aa2e-d8e4a8d4d1c8
|
7
|
Details are in the table below;
1., Contract Details = Supply of 500,000 doses of FMD Quadrivalent; Call Off Order dated 5/11/2019; M/s Kenya Veterinary. 1., Doses Remarks = 500,000 Contract delivery date was 15/12/2019; However, items delivered on 3/4/2020 - 3 1/2 months delay. That is 70% of the vaccines delayed for 4 months. 2., Contract Details = Institute ( KEVEVAPI) Supply of 200,000 doses of FMD Quadrivalent; Call Off Order dated 4/02/2020; M/s Botswana Vaccines Institute ( BVI ). 2., Doses Remarks = 200,000 Contract Delivery date by 04/04/2020 however delivered on 13/04/2020 -10 Days delay. , Contract Details = . , Doses Remarks = 700,000. 3., Contract Details = Total in FY 2019/20 Supply of 2,311,000 doses of FMD Quadrivalent; Call Off Order dated 22/05/2020; M/s Kenya Veterinary Vaccines Production Institute ( KEVEVAPI). 3., Doses Remarks = 2,311,000 Contract delivery date by 22/07/2020; However, no vaccines were delivered by end of the delivery period. The following was noted; -1,200,000 doses (52%) were delivered during the year i.e. on 25/08/2020 (500,000) and on 12/01/2021 (700,000) doses -On 22/07/2021, 500,000 doses were delivered.
I noted that several delivery extension dates ranging from 19 th July 2020 to 15 th July 2021 were given to the supplier even though contract agreement stipulated delivery within two months and by the time of this report the supplier had failed to fully deliver the 611,000 doses. The supplier cited challenges with sourcing and transporting test animals.
The continued presence of the FMD and the inadequate response in terms of vaccine availability has denied Ugandans opportunities to export livestock and livestock products to the international market and significantly curtails the Ministry's ability to achieve its mandate.
12
|
daca2a3b-3ba3-44a5-a5bd-c8fcf4c599b3
|
7
|
4.1.4 Review of the Procurement Process
None of the 4 projects had their procurement adverts published by 30 th June 2022.
Only 1 out of 4 (25%) of the projects had their procurement contracts awarded by 31 st October 2022.
Delayed procurement causes delayed implementation hence hampering timely service delivery.
The Accounting Officer explained that the procurement process delayed because of issues of funding as there was no release for Quarter one funds for investment
14
costs to cater for the advert. However, the district committed itself to timely implementation of the procurement process in subsequent financial years.
|
788399c6-2f9a-4e4c-b2f0-5ad8edca92c0
|
7
|
6.3 Construction of a water Borne Toilet
I also inspected the construction of a water borne toilet/ Bathroom and observed the following;
A construction for a water borne toilet/ bathroom had been completed with finishes and plastering done to completion.
Painting, installation of toilet fittings and water equipment had been done but no provision of flowing water was available.
The project duration was one month and three weeks but because of having no water flow provisions, it appeared the hand over would delay, which also delays service delivery to the stakeholders;-
Handover of the structure was to be done on 13 th December 2022 but this was yet to be achieved. The pictorial below refers:
1, no. Picture = . 1, = Description Toilet side with metallic doors
24
Delayed completion of this project cripples service delivery in the district.
I advised the Accounting Officer to ensure the project is satisfactorily completed.
|
f7bb043d-0296-4a9e-910d-f493b6357e34
|
7
|
11.2.4Attendance of Contracts Committee member at Bid Opening
Regulation 17(b) of the Local Government PPDA Regulations, 2006 states that a Contracts Committee shall nominate a Contracts Committee member to attend and witness pre-tender meetings, tender openings and tender closings.
However, a review of the record of bid opening noted that there was no representative of contracts Committee members. Details are in the table below;
1, PROCUREMENT REFERENCE = HOIM834/WRKS/ 2022-23/000019. 1, Particulars = Rehabilitation Of District Medical Stores At Headquarters. 1, Contractor = Basingo Construction Co. Limited. 1, Contract Amount = 35,265,527. 2, PROCUREMENT REFERENCE = HOIM834/WRKS/ 2022-23/000014. 2, Particulars = Rehabilitation Of Two Staff Quarters At Kigorobya HC IV. 2, Contractor = Aliko Consults Limited. 2, Contract Amount = 40,795,026
46
Total
76,060,553
As result, effective oversight of the integrity of the bid opening process was hindered thus creating an opportunity for manipulation of bids or bid tampering.
|
5d6b2851-511a-46ad-bec1-26fe8e41839d
|
7
|
ii. Failure_to Perform on Emerqency Supply
GCC 12 of the Contract provided that delivery shall be within 8 calendar weeks from the date of contract signing. The contract was signed on 19th June 2020 with expected delivery of 19t August 2020. It was observed that by the time of this audit, December 2020, the contract was to be performed 4 months behind schedule. There is a likelihood that the motor boat may not serve the purpose for which it was procured. yet
Management explained that failure to perform on emergency supply was occasioned by Covid 19 pandemic. The lock affected the production and movement of cargo globally .
The Accounting Officer is advised to ensure adequate PDU guidance in adherence to the procurement regulations.
John F.S. Muwanga AUDITOR GENERAL KAMPALA 30th December , 2020
|
d5601903-5231-4d84-b37a-263bb30465bf
|
7
|
d) Absence of Contracts Committee member at Bid Opening
Regulation 17(b) of the Local Government PPDA Regulations, 2006 states that a Contracts Committee shall nominate a Contracts Committee member to attend and witness pre-tender meetings, tender openings and tender closings.
However, a review of the record of bid opening noted that no representative of Contracts Committee attended bid opening for procurements worth UGX.168, 985,587. Appendix 23 refers.
As result, effective oversight of the integrity of the bid opening process was hindered thus creating an opportunity for manipulation of bids or bid tampering.
|
88b9f198-d910-4947-ab52-a1c759ca72a5
|
7
|
risks
Section 6.2.3.1 of the Planning, Budgeting and Implementation Guidelines for Local Governments for the Education and Sports Sector 2021 also requires that contracts should include a) measures to mitigate environmental and social risks identified in the checklist as the responsibility of the contractor; and b) standard clauses in the contract outlining the contractor's responsibilities in terms of mitigating environmental and social risks.
A review of contract documents of ten (10) projects funded at UGX.622, 770,911 revealed that there were no measures to mitigate environmental and social risks as well as standard clauses in the contract outlining the contractor's responsibilities in terms of mitigating environmental and social risks. Details of projects are summarized in the Appendix 12.
Failure to include mitigating measures of environmental and social risks negatively affects, the environment and social wellbeing of the communities where work is executed.
|
5fa6e85c-0e5e-41c0-a7b2-7ff9294bf253
|
7
|
8.0.1 Composition of the Contracts Committee
Regulation 15 (1) of the PPDA Local government regulations 2006 stipulates that the contracts committee shall consist of five members nominated by the chief administrative officer in the case of a district contracts committee or the town clerk in the case of a municipal contracts committee from among the public officers of the procuring and disposing entity and approved by the Secretary to the Treasury
However, I noted that the contracts committee of Kaberamaido District was only composed of four members, which is contrary to the regulations.
Failure to abide by the regulations may lead to lack of balance of skills and experience among members.
The Accounting Officer explained that the fifth officer who was approved got a promotion and left the Town Council and they were in the process of nominating another officer for vetting by the office of secretary to the treasury.
I advised the Accounting Officer to ensure that the district abides by the PPDA Local government regulations.
|
2234f7bd-9c6f-41ae-9b77-53109f8139d4
|
7
|
3.1.2 Areas of improvement
Section 6.2.3.2 of the Planning; Budgeting and Implementation Guidelines for Local Governments for the Education and Sports Sector, 2021 requires that it's important to file all critical documentation related to the Project Site meetings. The Contract Manager (DEO) should ensure that proper site Minutes are prepared and made readily available alongside critical documents such as site visit reports. All these reports should be kept at the District Education Office with copies available at the site.
|
135920fa-6293-4ac1-b2dd-a218d0cff4a4
|
7
|
b) Review of the Procurement Process
Paragraph 7.2 of the water supply and sanitation conditional grant that adverts should be made at the end of the last quarter of the preceding financial year, contract awarded by of October , and that LGs should follow the procurement procedures in the prevailing PPDA guidelines. 31st
I reviewed procurement files and noted the following;
Only 1 out of 5 projects had their procurement contracts awarded by 31s October 2022. Appendix 9 refers.
None of the 5 projects had their procurement adverts published by 30t June 2022. Appendix 9 refers.
Delayed procurement causes delayed implementation hence hampering service delivery .
The Accounting Officer attributed the shortcoming to:
Inadequate funds that led to delays in publishing the adverts for 4 projects while, the delay in publishing the advert for the Busira RGC project was due to the resistance faced from land owners to the transmission pipes passing through their land.
Delayed approval and submission of the design by the Ministry of Water which led to contract award after the specified date of 31t October 2022 for the 2 projects of Busira and Ntinkalu contracts was due to.
The Accounting Officer should liaise with MOFPED to ensure that funds are availed in time to enable timely publishing of the adverts. In addition, the Accounting Officer the Accounting Officer should liaise with Ministry of Water to ensure that project designs are approved and submitted on time so that implementation takes place.
|
bea422ca-308a-4a06-a9a1-5aff9fafe14f
|
7
|
3.4.2.3 Monitoring
Sec 8.0 of the District rural water supply and sanitation conditional grant budget and implementation guidelines for Local Governments (LGs) FY. states that; Local government are required to prepare quarterly reports in the format provided by MWE to the DLGs. The report should be submitted to MWE on the 1Oth of the first month of the preceding quarter. The deadlines for submission of Quarter one report is 1Oth October, Quarter 2: 1Oth January, Quarter 3: 1Oth April and 1Oth July for Quarter four. Day
|
e948e2a9-09df-490b-8cb7-aebf6fb05861
|
7
|
4.3.4.2 Absence of site visit Minutes
Section 6.2.3.2 of the Planning, Budgeting and Implementation Guidelines for Local Governments for the Education and Sports Sector, 2021 requires that it's important to file all critical documentation related to the Project Site meetings. The Contract Manager (DEO) should ensure that proper site Minutes are prepared and made readily available alongside critical documents such as site visit reports. All these reports should be kept at the District Education Office with copies available at the site.
I noted that ten (10) Projects worth UGX.622, 770,911 did not have site visit Minutes. Details are in Appendix 14.
As a result, this may cause delays in interventions where necessary.
|
0d4c047a-7c08-49fc-a1e4-9bab70f3ef8c
|
7
|
4.1.4 Review of the Procurement Process
Paragraph 7.2 of the District rural water supply and sanitation conditional grant budget and implementation guidelines for LGs FY 2022/2023, April 2022 requires that adverts should be made at the end of the last quarter of the preceding financial year, contract awarded by 31 st of October, and that LGs should follow the procurement procedures in the prevailing PPDA guidelines.
|
4e91c9b2-9c91-453b-8fad-3443fb2e11dc
|
7
|
ii. Unimplemented National ID project deliverables
Source: Management status report as of 22 nd June 2020
I further noted that the implementation contract had expired in 2012. Subsequently, a Support and Maintenance contract was signed had also been terminated and the vendor had left the site by the time of the audit.
This may be attributed to the lack of a contract manager/management team as required by Section 52 (1) of the PPDA (contracts) Regulations 2014.
Management explained that the contract was signed between the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Muehlbauer ID services GmbH in 2010, but implemented in 2014 following the Cabinet approval of the project team consisting of a policy committee comprising of Ministers chaired by the Prime Minister, a Steering Committee chaired by the Minister of Internal Affairs/Projector Coordinator, and Project Implementation Team chaired by a Project Manager.
The system was built and was able to deliver the objectives of the project i.e., registration of citizens (16+ years) and achieved over 90% of the targets. This led to the enactment of ROPA 2015 and the establishment of NIRA to consolidate the achievements of the project.
Subsequently, with the establishment of NIRA, all contracts were assigned, Contract Managers.
I advised the Accounting Officer to always streamline the management of the projects, by timely appointing the contract management team in accordance with PPDA regulations and industry best practices to facilitate effective project management. In addition, the Accounting Officer should explore ways of recovering costs relating to unimplemented deliverables.
|
48dc284c-0d77-4617-8365-a8b731db8bab
|
7
|
Appendix 4 (a) - Procurements under Water grant
Ltd. 4, ADVERT DATE = 1 st Sept 2022. 4, DATE OF AWARD = 16 th Nov 2022. 4, CONTR ACT IN USHS = 237,373, 567. 5, PROCUREM ENT/ DISPOSAL NO. = Kyen/530/SR VS/2022- 23/0008. 5, SUBJECT OF PROCUREMENT = Consultancy Services for Design of water supply system, feasibility study and tender document for Mahasa- Kawaruju in Kihuura sub county. 5, METHOD OF PROCUR EMENT = Open Bidding. 5, PROVIDER = Aquatech Enterprises Ltd. 5, ADVERT DATE = 1 st Sept 2022. 5, DATE OF AWARD = 16 th Nov 2022. 5, CONTR ACT IN USHS = 49,950,0 00
|
ac5caaf4-9f4d-476a-b554-43035941ea9f
|
7
|
3.1.6 Preparation and submission of quarterly reports
Sec 8.0 of the Grant Guidelines (2022/2023) states that; Local government are required to prepare quarterly reports in the format provided by MWE to the DLGs. The report should be submitted to MWE on the 10th Day of the first month of the preceding quarter. The deadlines for submission of Quarter one report is 10th October, Quarter 2: 10th January, Quarter 3: 10th April and 10th July for Quarter 4.
I noted that the District delayed to submit performance reports for all the four (4) quarters. Details are in the table below;
1, Details = Quarter One. 1, Deadline for submission = 10 th October, 2022. 1, Actual date of submission = 18 th October, 2022. 1, Comment = Delayed. 2, Details = Quarter Two. 2, Deadline for submission = 10 th January, 2023. 2, Actual date of submission = 16 th January, 2023. 2, Comment = Delayed. 3, Details = Quarter Three. 3, Deadline for submission = 10 th April, 2023. 3, Actual date of submission = 22 nd May, 2023. 3, Comment = Delayed. 4, Details = Quarter Four. 4, Deadline for submission = 10 th July, 2023. 4, Actual date of submission = 3 rd October, 2023. 4, Comment = Delayed
Delayed preparation and submission of quarterly reports causes delays in taking corrective measures hence negatively affecting implementation timeliness and quality. The Accounting Officer acknowledged the anomaly and promised to ensure compliance is adhered to in the subsequent quarters.
13
|
44de2986-c15e-44ae-b662-7b81ddab3194
|
7
|
a) Delayed Construction of the Laboratory Tower
NDA is undertaking a Laboratory Tower Construction project at a total contract sum of UGX. 35,849,057,474. The start for the works was 11 th October 2019 and the original completion date was 11 th October 2021. The completion was revised to 07 th March 2022 because of delays. By the time of inspection, UGX 11,847,043,442 had been paid to the contractors. The implementation of the contract was not sufficiently managed leading to delayed works.
I also noted that changes were made to the original building plans to cater for the adjustments to the outdoor and building basement parking and though the Contract Management Team and the Authority (NDA) had approved the adjustments and works had commenced by the time of audit in August 2021, the amended building plans had not yet been approved by the Metropolitan Physical Planning Authority. Implementation of unapproved building plans poses a risk of loss of the NDA funds in case the responsible Authority (Metropolitan Authority /KCCA) rejects the plans and directs demolition of the works.
The Accounting Officer explained that the delays in the completion of works were due to the COVID-19 lockdown that took two phases in 2020 and 2021 which interrupted staff movement, manufacturing of inputs globally and transportation. The Accounting Officer also explained that the consultant submitted the revised drawings on 3rd August 2020 and no response had come through despite numerous follow-ups including that of 15th April 2021. Management promised to continue reminding KCCA to approve the submitted adjusted plans.
I advised the Accounting Officer to liaise with the contractors to scale up project works to ensure that the project is completed within reasonable timelines. I advised the Accounting Officer to follow up with the Physical Planning Authority/KCCA to ensure that the building plans are approved as soon as possible.
|
3e0a09ef-ca26-46a4-9469-3af5cb4efc37
|
7
|
a) Inaccurate Evaluation reports
Regulation 78 (3) of the Local Governments PPDA Regulations, 2006 states that the detailed evaluation shall compare the details of the bid received with the terms, conditions and criteria stated in the bid documents.
A comparison of evaluation reports and Bid documents of two (2) procurements revealed that the Bid Amounts quoted in the evaluation reports were not consistent with those provided in the respective bid documents of the bidders. Appendix 12 refers.
There is a risk that ineligible bidders were awarded contracts and as a result, it could have led to financial loss or destruction of the public image of the district due to lack of transparency.
|
b10142b1-cb3f-4486-8a2b-bf640c9f6780
|
7
|
5) Delayed Engagement the Supervising Consultants
A review of supervising consultants' contracts revealed that consultants were engaged after significant progress had already been made on the projects as detailed in the table below;
Table 68: Delayed Engagement of Supervising Consultants
|
9ed750f9-b455-4436-83fd-39f39fa358ee
|
7
|
Appendix 7: Failure to Implement Monitoring and Evaluation Recommendations
remaining Date: The Officer warning = . , provider to use the balance on works and make good the defects so that the facility can be put to use by the = respond. , to construct the stated contractor insufficiently done. = . , responded by making good the defective work The Accounting Officer gave him seven days to inform his office in writing why some elements specified in instruction no. 3 (three) are not executed up to date contractor never responded remaining Date: The Officer warning = . , provider to use the balance on works and make good the defects so that the facility can be put to use by the = him. , to construct the stated contractor insufficiently done. = . , responded by making good the defective work The Accounting Officer gave him seven days to inform his office in writing why some elements specified in instruction no. 3 (three) are not executed up to date contractor never responded remaining Date: The Officer warning = . , provider to use the balance on works and make good the defects so that the facility can be put to use by the = be. , to construct the stated contractor insufficiently done. = . , responded by making good the defective work The Accounting Officer gave him seven days to inform his office in writing why some elements specified in instruction no. 3 (three) are not executed up to date contractor never responded remaining Date: The Officer warning = . , provider to use the balance on works and make good the defects so that the facility can be put to use by the = to. , to construct the stated contractor insufficiently done. = . , responded by making good the defective work The Accounting Officer gave him seven days to inform his office in writing why some elements specified in instruction no. 3 (three) are not executed up to date contractor never responded
|
f47bab78-c157-4313-b737-124a96172720
|
7
|
a. Projects with incomplete approvals
Paragraph 43 of the Budget Execution Circular 2020/2021 required the new projects that were given conditional approvals and issued codes to enable them access the budget for financial year 2020/2021 due to their strategic nature and finalization of negotiations for external financing to fast track the completion of relevant approval stages in line with Public Investment Management System (PIMS) framework.
13
However, I noted that three development projects did not complete the mandatory approval stages i.e. lacked a project profile, prefeasibility study and a detailed feasibility study as shown in the table below;
Code, 1 = Name. Code, 2 = Start Date. Code, 3 = . Code, 4 = End Date. Code, 5 = Stage. 1663, 1 = China-Uganda South-South Project Phase III. 1663, 2 = Cooperation. 1663, 3 = 07/01/2020. 1663, 4 = 30/06/2022. 1663, 5 = Concept. 1696, 1 = Development of Sustainable cashew nut Value chain in Uganda. 1696, 2 = . 1696, 3 = 07/01/2020. 1696, 4 = 30/06/2025. 1696, 5 = Concept. 1698, 1 = Establishment of Value Processing Plants in Uganda. 1698, 2 = Addition and. 1698, 3 = 07/01/2020. 1698, 4 = 30/06/2025. 1698, 5 = Concept
Failure to comply with this requirement will lead to freezing of the respective project codes.
Management explained that the Ministry prepared the project profiles which will be submitted to MFPED for approval.
I advised the Accounting Officer to undertake all the mandatory stages of project approvals and obtain Development Committee approval of these projects.
|
c69d7c29-a379-4eec-baa8-6a35e81f704e
|
7
|
g) Delayed payment of IPCs
A review of the payment certificates revealed that all the IPCs were not paid within the stipulated time period as provided for in the contract with h IPC No 7 submitted on 10 th November 2017 yet to be paid,
102
Delays in payments to the contractor lead to disruptions of contractor cash flow and affects ability of the contractor to execute works efficiently.
|
6b1cddd7-c2c2-4fb1-ab62-692ce6410a58
|
7
|
4.3.4.3 Failure by internal Auditors to audit Education Development grants Projects
Section 6.2.3.2 of the Planning, Budgeting and Implementation Guidelines for Local Governments for the Education and Sports Sector, 2021 also requires that the Project manager will issue payment certificates for works satisfactorily executed and these shall be endorsed by the Internal Auditor among others.
A review of payment certificates of 10 Projects revealed that there were no endorsements by the Internal auditor. Appendix 15 refers.
As a result, inflated works may be paid for resulting into financial loss to the district
27
The Accounting Officer explained that the Engineers' Payment certificate will be amended to provide for a place for the Internal Auditor' endorsement.
|
1e326a78-61b6-4dbb-8a96-7e110c8bdcc7
|
7
|
a) Award of contracts to Sole bidder
Regulation 43 (3 and 4) of the LGPPDA regulations, 2006 requires that all procurements and disposals should be conducted in a manner that maximizes competition and achieves value for monies.
However, test checks revealed one sole bidder who was awarded contracts worth UGX.497,044,910
without competition and the district may not get value for money spent in terms of cost and quality .
The Accounting Officer acknowledged the observation and further explained that this contract was phased out due to lack of sufficient funds.
The Accounting Officer should always encourage competition in order to achieve value for money.
|
c27a486f-1903-457d-b589-7f22ccba8d72
|
7
|
b) Delayed supply and installation of irrigation equipment
Paragraph 4.2 sub-section 14 of the Grant, Budget and Implementation GuidelinesMicro Scale Irrigation, 2020 requires the supply and installation of equipment.
A review of the completion certificates revealed that the supply and installation of irrigation equipment was not completed on time. Details are in the table below ;
1, Contract = Supply irrigation equipment. 1, Contract = of. 1, Contract amount = 12,489,238. 1, Contract Date = 10/04/202 3. 1, Start date = 06/06/202 3. 1, Expected End Date = 08/06/202 3. 1, Actual delivery date = 30/06/202 3. 1, Delay (Days) = 22 days. 2, Contract = Supply irrigation equipment. 2, Contract = of. 2, Contract amount = 12,489,238. 2, Contract Date = 10/04/202 3. 2, Start date = 06/06/202 3. 2, Expected End Date = 08/06/202 3. 2, Actual delivery date = 30/06/202 3. 2, Delay (Days) = 22 days. , Contract = Total. , Contract = . , Contract amount = 24,978,476. , Contract Date = . , Start date = . , Expected End Date = . , Actual delivery date = . , Delay (Days) =
Delayed delivery and installation of irrigation equipment negatively affected timely demonstrations to the beneficiaries thus also affecting expected increase in farming yields.
The Accounting Officer attributed this to the delays in obtaining pre-qualified suppliers from another district since they did not have any in their list.
|
7a21c207-014b-469d-a6e0-84e05f70eef6
|
7
|
e) Absence of Contract Implementation Plans
Regulation 119(3) of the PPDA Local Government Regulations, 2006 requires a contract supervisor to prepare a contract implementation plan upon receipt of a copy of the contract.
However, I noted that there were no contract implementation plans for procurements reviewed worth UGX.648, 095,026. Appendix 24 refers.
There is a risk that the contract may not be implemented according to the agreed projected time frame.
|
999962cc-7a2a-4df6-9e33-95ad9f6e883a
|
7
|
4.6.2.4.1 Late Disbursement of funds
Section 2.4 of the Transitional Road Rehabilitation Grant implementation guidelines for FY 2022/2023 clearly sets out implementation timelines and requires funds to be available by 1 st October 2022 during commencement of works.
I noted that Transitional Road rehabilitation Grant funds were received between 15 th November, 2022 and 17 th May 2023 contrary to the Guidelines. Appendix 18 refers.
Late disbursement of funds delays completion of works within the financial year thus delaying intended delivery of good road network services.
The Accounting Officer explained that this was beyond them since MoFPED releases Development Grants in the second quarter as opposed to prior periods when the grants would be disbursed from Quarter one.
32
|
93ce65fa-a7c0-4db3-8c2a-3a4af854e2b0
|
7
|
4.1.2.2 Failure to undertake mitigation measures for Projects/programs with related environmental and social impacts
Section 6.2.3.1 of the Planning, Budgeting and Implementation Guidelines for Local Governments for the Education and Sports Sector 2021 also requires that contracts should include a) measures to mitigate environmental and social risks identified in the checklist as the responsibility of the contractor; and b) standard clauses in the contract outlining the contractor's responsibilities in terms of mitigating environmental and social risks.
|
bec5dfa1-256c-427a-893d-2d8f0f7830c3
|
7
|
c) Non-communication of Arithmetic errors corrections during Evaluation
Regulation 74 (3) of the Local Governments PPDA Regulations, 2006 states that a request for clarification, including the correction of arithmetic errors, shall be addressed to a bidder in writing by the procuring and disposing entity.
I noted that the district made arithmetic error corrections of UGX.115, 078,047 in three procurements without writing to the affected bidders. Details are in the Appendix 16 .
As a result, the contract price may have been inflated thus causing a financial loss to government.
|
4f5bd83e-d409-48dc-a132-7ebc5c14a5b9
|
7
|
Recommendation
I advised the Accounting Officer to ensure that staff are adequately trained on how to use the system so that the capacity gaps are addressed to ensure that activities are fully quantified to facilitate measurement of performance.
I noted that out of the supply and installation of irrigation equipment to the 5 planned demonstration sites, only one site was supplied and completed at the time of audit as shown in the table below.
, Contractor = Adritex (u) Itd. , Details = Design supply and installation of microscale irrigation systems at 5 demonstration sites. , Expected delivery and installation date = 7th July-2023. , Completion date = Not completed. yet. , Remarks = Works still in progress by the time of Inspection on 4/10/2023 and Supplier not
This fails the purpose for which the funds were disbursed and poor implementation of the program during the financial year under review.
The Accounting Officer explained that this was due to the delayed procurement process that led to late installation and the incapacity of the contractor that necessitated award of works to a new contractor.
I advised the Accounting Officer to ensure that procurement processes are streamlined to enable early procurement initiations and proper evaluation of bidders before contracts are awarded.
|
f7e20211-e031-4a63-909d-f69df8e1f923
|
7
|
4.0 Delays in the procurement process
Table 11showing delays in the procurement process
MAAIF- ACDP/SUPLS/2021- 2022/00213- Supply of 2,000 tablet computers for Agricultural Cluster Development Project. (ACDP), Contra ct of Amoun t (000') = 1,796,0 00,000. MAAIF- ACDP/SUPLS/2021- 2022/00213- Supply of 2,000 tablet computers for Agricultural Cluster Development Project. (ACDP), Date of initiation (A) = 19/05/202 2. MAAIF- ACDP/SUPLS/2021- 2022/00213- Supply of 2,000 tablet computers for Agricultural Cluster Development Project. (ACDP), Date of bid opening (B) = 26/08/20 22. MAAIF- ACDP/SUPLS/2021- 2022/00213- Supply of 2,000 tablet computers for Agricultural Cluster Development Project. (ACDP), Date of evaluati on (C ) = 13/09/20 22. MAAIF- ACDP/SUPLS/2021- 2022/00213- Supply of 2,000 tablet computers for Agricultural Cluster Development Project. (ACDP), Date of Contrac t signing (D) = 01/03/20 23. MAAIF- ACDP/SUPLS/2021- 2022/00213- Supply of 2,000 tablet computers for Agricultural Cluster Development Project. (ACDP), Days taken (days) (D-A) = 297
|
dc862156-9316-4770-ad84-933ac8d51d87
|
7
|
3.1.2.3 Review of the Procurement Process
Paragraph 7.2 of the District rural water supply and sanitation conditional grant budget and implementation guidelines for LGs FY 2022/2023, April 2022 requires that adverts should be made at the end of the last quarter of the preceding financial year, contract awarded by 31 st of October, and that LGs should follow the procurement procedures in the prevailing PPDA guidelines.
I reviewed procurement files and noted the following;
None of the 8 projects had their procurement adverts published by 30 th June 2022. Appendix 6 refers .
None of the 8 projects had their procurement contracts awarded by 31 st October 2022. Appendix 6 refers .
Audit noted that one (1) procurement for construction of Kalibu GFS in Kilembe Sub County worth UGX.19,778,758 awarded to M/s Maja Agency Ltd was not executed.
Delayed procurement causes delayed implementation hence hampering service delivery and non-execution of procurements affects service delivery and can also lead to diversion of funds.
18
The Accounting Officer acknowledged the anomaly and pledged to ensure that adverts are made within the recommended timelines.
He added that the contract was awarded however, contractor declined on the basis that the allocated amount was not enough and the project was not executed.
The Accounting Officer should abide by the issued guidelines by ensuring that the procurement process is commenced early enough so as to achieve timely implementation.
The Accounting Officer should also ensure that the unimplemented project is rolled over to the next FY.
|
f3dc3d77-6c95-428a-a358-84199e96f8bc
|
7
|
Appendix IX: Delayed completion of procurements
9, MOH/SUPLS/20 22-2023/00018 = MOH/NCONS/20 22-2023/00038. 9, Procurement of Brochure for Health workers, flyers for Parents and Public in English Language and Flyers for Parents in Local Language for the Yellow Fever Prevention Mass Vaccination Campaign in 6 regions = Procurement of an Events Company for the National. 9, Restricted Domestic Bidding Method = Request for Quotations/Pro posals. 9, Evaluation of Applied Providers = Bid Awarding. 9, 198,990,000 = 57,700,000. 9, Kadijan International (U) Limited = Solfit Solutions Limited. 9, 232,651,632 = 56,824,300. 9, Evaluation concluded on 24th May 2023 however contract not signed by 9th November 2023 pending Solicitor General approval = Evaluation concluded on 30th May 2023 however contract not signed by 9th November 2023. 10, MOH/SUPLS/20 22-2023/00018 = MOH/NCONS/20 22-2023/00034. 10, Procurement of Brochure for Health workers, flyers for Parents and Public in English Language and Flyers for Parents in Local Language for the Yellow Fever Prevention Mass Vaccination Campaign in 6 regions = Physical Day 2023 Equipment Maintenance, Servicing and Repairs - Procurement of Oxygen plants Maintenance contracts. 10, Restricted Domestic Bidding Method = Open Domestic Bidding Method. 10, Evaluation of Applied Providers = Evaluation of Applied Providers. 10, 198,990,000 = 1,299,999,988. 10, Kadijan International (U) Limited = Silverbacks Pharmacy Ltd. 10, 232,651,632 = 2,266,725,435. 10, Evaluation concluded on 24th May 2023 however contract not signed by 9th November 2023 pending Solicitor General approval = Evaluation concluded on 18th June 2023 however contract not signed by 9th November 2023. Total, MOH/SUPLS/20 22-2023/00018 = . Total, Procurement of Brochure for Health workers, flyers for Parents
|
1dfb0615-6510-4073-b02a-16b4db445e37
|
7
|
4.1.2.2 Preparation and submission of quarterly reports
Sec 8.0 of the Grant Guidelines (2022/2023) states that; Local government is required to prepare quarterly reports in the format provided by MWE to the DLGs. The report should be submitted to MWE on the 10th Day of the first month of the preceding quarter. The deadlines for submission of Quarter one report are 10th October, Quarter 2: 10th January, Quarter 3: 10th April and 10th July for Quarter four.
I noted that the entity submitted performance reports for all the 4 quarters after the deadlines given for submission of the reports as shown in the table below;
Quarter One, Deadline for submission = 10 th October, 2022. Quarter One, Actual date of submission = 04 th November, 2022. Quarter One, Comment = Delayed. Quarter Two, Deadline for submission = 10 th January, 2023. Quarter Two, Actual date of submission = 11 th January, 2023. Quarter Two, Comment = Delayed. Quarter Three, Deadline for submission = 10 th April, 2023. Quarter Three, Actual date of submission = 24 th April, 2023. Quarter Three, Comment = Delayed. Quarter Four, Deadline for submission = 10 th July, 2023. Quarter Four, Actual date of submission = 28 th July, 2023. Quarter Four, Comment = Delayed
Delayed preparation and submission of quarterly reports causes delays in taking corrective measures hence negatively affecting implementation timeliness and quality.
The Accounting officer explained that the reports were prepared in time only that submission delayed due to the delay by Ministry of finance in picking payments that are meant to facilitate the submission process.
|
7c9e9846-1335-4668-b604-34ed750f6fe7
|
7
|
Amendment of the PPDA Act
The PPDA Amendment BilL 2020 was by Parliament on 1s February , 2020 and assented to by His Excellency the President in July 2020. The amended act is intended to improve procurement common user goods; reduce the cost of procurement while benefiting from economies of scale. It also incorporates emerging practices and project delivery models such as Engineering Procurement Contracting (EPC), Contractor Facilitated Financing, Design and Build for complex and high value projects. Unlike thê existing procurement legal framework, the amendment strengthens governance by teducing ambiguity in the procurement system roles and segregation of policy, regulatory and operational functions. Passed good good
|
e79b907c-5580-44b2-94a6-216317aa0cd8
|
7
|
3.5.2.3 Procurement
Section 4.1.7 of the Transitional Development Ad Hoc Grant implementation guidelines states that LGs should ensure that all health contracts are procured and managed as per Section 58 (4) of the PPDA Act. I reviewed the procurement process of the health contracts and noted the following;
|
d7d39d7c-8a67-4a2d-a83a-55f37798e5b6
|
7
|
Appendix 4: Details of other procurement Observations
Bn = . 5 6, Irregular Initiation.No. = . 5 6, Irregular Initiation.Value (UGX) Bn = . 5 6, Failure to Carry out Market Assessments No.. = . 5 6, Failure to Carry out Market Assessments No..Value (UGX) Bn = . 5 6, Delayed procurement processes No. Value Delays.(UGX) Bn = . 5 6, Procurements without Performance Security.(Months) No. = 2. 5 6, Procurements without Performance Security.Value (UGX) Bn = 1.42. 5 6, = . Kabale DLG Kanungu DLG, Unplanned Procurements Procurement.No = . Kabale DLG Kanungu DLG, Unplanned Procurements Procurement.Value (UGX) Bn = . Kabale DLG Kanungu DLG, Split.No. = . Kabale DLG Kanungu DLG, Split.Value (UGX)
|
31a0b3cf-2467-43a5-aea9-0272acc0d349
|
7
|
Monitoring
Section 8.0 of the District rural water supply and sanitation conditional grant budget and implementation guidelines for Local Governments (LGs) FY.2022/2023, April 2022 states that; Local government are required to prepare quarterly reports in the format provided by MWE to the DLGs. The report should be submitted to MWE on the 1Oth of the first month of the preceding quarter. The deadline for submission of Quarter one report is 1Oth October, Quarter 2: 1Oth January, Quarter 3: 1Oth April and 1Oth July for Quarter four. Day
|
02e90ca0-4ec0-4844-b600-eed352dc3c23
|
8
|
Appendix 16: Licensing of PDM SACCOs Under the Microfinance Institutions Money Lenders Act
Licenced. Kywankwanzi DLG, money 2016? Remarks = 14. Kywankwanzi DLG, Vote Name = Kamucope Parish. Kywankwanzi DLG, Parish Name = Kamucope-Kigando PDM SACCO. Kywankwanzi DLG, Name of SACCO = No. Kywankwanzi DLG, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions lenders act (Yes/No) = SACCO not Licenced. Kywankwanzi DLG, money 2016? Remarks = 15. Kywankwanzi DLG, Vote Name = Kigando Parish. Kywankwanzi DLG, Parish Name = Kigando-Kigando PDM SACCO. Kywankwanzi DLG, Name of SACCO = No. Kywankwanzi DLG, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions lenders act (Yes/No) = SACCO not Licenced. Kywankwanzi DLG, money 2016? Remarks = 16. Kywankwanzi DLG, Vote Name = Kakindu Parish. Kywankwanzi DLG, Parish Name = Kakindu-Kigando PDM SACCO. Kywankwanzi DLG, Name of SACCO = No. Kywankwanzi DLG, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions lenders act (Yes/No) = SACCO not Licenced. Kywankwanzi DLG, money 2016? Remarks = 17. Kywankwanzi DLG, Vote Name = Bulamula Parish. Kywankwanzi DLG, Parish Name = Bulamula-Butemba PDM SACCO. Kywankwanzi DLG, Name of SACCO = No. Kywankwanzi DLG, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions lenders act (Yes/No) = SACCO not Licenced. Kywankwanzi DLG, money 2016? Remarks = 18. Kywankwanzi DLG, Vote Name = Lwendagi Parish. Kywankwanzi DLG, Parish Name = Lwendagi-Butemba PDM SACCO. Kywankwanzi
|
5ab632f2-a25d-4daa-89cb-3ce582fdf205
|
8
|
Appendix 15: Confirmation of PRF Loan Disbursements to Households
, Vote Name = Namayingo. , Parish Name = Syanyonja. , Name of SACCO = Syanyonja Buyinja PDM SACCO. , Name of PRF Beneficiary = Bentasio Tawada. , Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 500,000. , Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank information reports, Bank statement, etc ) = 500,000. 2, Vote Name = Namayingo. 2, Parish Name = Syanyonja. 2, Name of SACCO = Syanyonja Buyinja PDM SACCO. 2, Name of PRF Beneficiary = Lucy Nyongesa. 2, Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 300,000. 2, Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank information reports, Bank statement, etc ) = 300,000. 3, Vote Name = Namayingo. 3, Parish Name = Syanyonja. 3, Name of SACCO = Syanyonja Buyinja PDM SACCO. 3, Name of PRF Beneficiary = Benard Wabwire. 3, Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 500,000. 3, Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank information reports, Bank statement, etc ) = 500,000. , Vote Name = Namayingo. , Parish Name = Syanyonja. , Name of SACCO = Syanyonja Buyinja PDM SACCO. , Name of PRF Beneficiary = Nabwire Esther. , Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 500,000. , Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank information reports, Bank statement, etc ) = 500,000. 5, Vote Name = Namayingo. 5, Parish Name = Gondohera. 5, Name of SACCO = Gondohera Buyinja PDM SACCO. 5, Name of PRF Beneficiary = Onyango Sumson. 5, Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 700,000. 5, Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank
|
aad81ba9-cc32-44b6-a24f-2c3dbd380552
|
8
|
Appendix 26: Transfer of PRF to SACCOs without PRF financing agreement
DLG. 25., WARD B = NORTHERN. 25., WARD B-KIGUMBA PDM SACCO = NORTHERN- KIRYANDONGO PDM SACCO. 25., Not seen = Not seen. 25., 10/10/2022 = 10/10/2022. 25., Not seen = Not seen. 25., Signed financing agreement not availed = Signed financing agreement not availed. 26., Kiryandongo DLG = Kiryandongo DLG. 26., WARD B = NORTHERN. 26., WARD B-KIGUMBA PDM SACCO = NORTHERN-BWEYALE PDM SACCO. 26., Not seen = Not seen. 26., 10/10/2022 = 10/10/2022. 26., Not seen = Not seen. 26., Signed financing agreement not availed = Signed financing agreement not availed. 27., Kiryandongo DLG = Kiryandongo DLG. 27., WARD B = KAHARA. 27., WARD B-KIGUMBA PDM SACCO = KAHARA-KYANKENDE PDM SACCO. 27., Not seen = Not seen. 27., 10/10/2022 = 10/10/2022. 27., Not seen = Not seen. 27., Signed financing agreement not availed = Signed financing agreement not availed. 28., Kiryandongo DLG = Kiryandongo DLG. 28., WARD B = KARUNGU. 28., WARD B-KIGUMBA PDM SACCO = KARUNGU- KICHWABUGINGO PDM SACCO. 28., Not seen = Not seen. 28., 10/10/2022 = 10/10/2022. 28., Not seen = Not seen. 28., Signed financing agreement not availed = Signed financing agreement not availed
3
|
bd02aeaa-c7f0-4b04-9d57-789c1c525b6e
|
8
|
Appendix 26: Transfer of PRF to SACCOs without PRF financing agreement
Name = KITWARA. 10., Name of SACCO = KITWARA- KIRYANDONGO PDM SACCO. 10., Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = Not seen. 10., Date funds were received = 10/10/2022. 10., Date agreement was signed = Not seen. 10., Remarks = Signed financing agreement not availed. 11., Vote name = Kiryandongo DLG. 11., Parish Name = SOUTHERN. 11., Name of SACCO = SOUTHERN-BWEYALE PDM SACCO. 11., Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = Not seen. 11., Date funds were received = 10/10/2022. 11., Date agreement was signed = Not seen. 11., Remarks = Signed financing agreement not availed. 12., Vote name = Kiryandongo DLG. 12., Parish Name = WARD C. 12., Name of SACCO = WARD C-KIGUMBA PDM SACCO. 12., Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = Not seen. 12., Date funds were received = 10/10/2022. 12., Date agreement was signed = Not seen. 12., Remarks = Signed financing agreement not availed. 13., Vote name = Kiryandongo DLG. 13., Parish Name = KADUKU. 13., Name of SACCO = KADUKU-MASINDI PORT PDM SACCO. 13., Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = Not seen. 13., Date funds were received = 10/10/2022. 13., Date agreement was signed = Not seen. 13., Remarks = Signed financing agreement not availed. 14., Vote name = Kiryandongo DLG. 14., Parish Name = KIIGYA. 14., Name of SACCO = KIIGYA-KIGUMBA PDM SACCO. 14., Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = Not seen. 14., Date funds
|
5f79d149-2f98-4b46-8962-d5003572f7b6
|
8
|
Appendix 16: Utilization of PRF at household level (Inspections carried out)
, Parish Name = Namayin go Central Ward. , Name of SACCO = Namayin Central Ward PDM SACCO. , Name of PRF beneficia ry = Mugeni Herman Jackson. , Loan Amou nt as per SACC 0 record = . , Loan Amoun tas per househ old eviden ce provid ed = 1m. , Project funded = Piggery. , Status of the project = . , Remark = Purchased 3 pigs at UGX.500,000 Balance for feeding & treatment:. ~No record keeping. 2, Parish Name = Namayin go Central Ward. 2, Name of SACCO = Namayun ju Poultry PDM SACCO. 2, Name of PRF beneficia ry = Nandera Naume. 2, Loan Amou nt as per SACC 0 record = 1m. 2, Loan Amoun tas per househ old eviden ce provid ed = . 2, Project funded = Poultry. 2, Status of the project = . 2, Remark = Purchased 100 birds at 600,000. Balance for feeding and treatment.. , Parish Name = Syanyonj Parish. , Name of SACCO = Syanyonj Buyinja PDM SACCO. , Name of PRF beneficia ry = Nyongesa Lucy. , Loan Amou nt as per SACC 0 record = 300,00. , Loan Amoun tas per househ old eviden ce provid ed = 300,000. , Project funded = Piggery. , Status of the project = . , Remark = Purchased 2 Piglets at 200,000. Balance for treatment & food. , Parish Name = Gondohel a Parish. , Name of SACCO = Budimo Cassaava PDM Enterpris. , Name of PRF beneficia ry = Abo Lydia. , Loan Amou nt as per SACC 0 record = . , Loan Amoun tas per househ old eviden ce provid ed = . , Project funded = Cassava. , Status of the project = . , Remark = No record
|
69e34a60-3732-4ec2-a70f-97c9a53e34b8
|
8
|
Appendix10: Transfer of PRF to SACCOs without PRF financing agreement
1, Vote Name = RUKUNGIRI DLG. 1, Parish Name = Kyamakanda. 1, Name of SACCO = Kyamakanda-Buyanja PDM SACCO. 1, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = YES. 1, Date funds were received = 29/06/2022. 1, Date agreement was signed = 26/07/2022. 2, Vote Name = RUKUNGIRI DLG. 2, Parish Name = Nyabiteete. 2, Name of SACCO = Nyabiteete-Buyanja PDM SACCO. 2, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = YES. 2, Date funds were received = 29/06/2022. 2, Date agreement was signed = 26/07/2022. 3, Vote Name = RUKUNGIRI DLG. 3, Parish Name = Nyakaina. 3, Name of SACCO = Nyakaina-Buyanja PDM SACCO. 3, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = YES. 3, Date funds were received = 29/06/2022. 3, Date agreement was signed = 26/07/2022. 4, Vote Name = RUKUNGIRI DLG. 4, Parish Name = Rwakirungura. 4, Name of SACCO = Rwakirungura-Buyanja PDM SACCO. 4, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = YES. 4, Date funds were received = 29/06/2022. 4, Date agreement was signed = 26/07/2022. 5, Vote Name = RUKUNGIRI DLG. 5, Parish Name = Katojo. 5, Name of SACCO = Katojo -Buyanja T/C PDM SACCO. 5, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = YES. 5, Date funds were received = 29/06/2022. 5, Date agreement was signed = 26/07/2022. 6, Vote Name = RUKUNGIRI DLG. 6, Parish
|
94eb6665-9ae2-47b8-ba2b-0d639bffcdba
|
8
|
Appendix 5 (c): Non Licensing of PDM SACCOs Under the Microfinance Institutions Money Lenders Act
2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = Not registered. , Vote Name = Alebtong DLG. , Parish Name = Apado Ward. , Name of SACCO = Apado Ward Alebtong Town Council PDM SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = Not registered. , Vote Name = Alebtong DLG. , Parish Name = Awori. , Name of SACCO = Awori Abako PDM SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = Not registered. , Vote Name = Alebtong DLG. , Parish Name = Nakabela Ward. , Name of SACCO = Nakabela Ward Alebtong Town Council PDM SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = Not registered. , Vote Name = . , Parish Name = Te-Iconga Ward. , Name of SACCO = Te-Iconga Ward Aloi Town Council PDM SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = Not registered
|
fa6f21d2-de9d-493c-a9b9-d7802e7bb846
|
8
|
Appendix 13: Failure to follow the stipulated loan application and approval process
., Vote Name = . ., Parish Name = KATOJO WARD. ., Name of SACCO = KATOJO - BUYANJA T/C. ., Name PRF beneficiary = Atuhaire Peace. ., of Was beneficiary from approved PDM enterprise = Yes. ., the the Date loan was obtained = Apr-23. ., Loan Amount = 1,000,000. ., Were loan beneficiaries selected through PDMIS = No. ., the the Were they vetted by a village meeting convened by the enterprise groups = Yes. ., Remarks = Loan not disbursed through PDMIS. , Vote Name = . , Parish Name = . , Name of SACCO = . , Name PRF beneficiary = Twesigye Marriasel. , of Was beneficiary from approved PDM enterprise = Yes. , the the Date loan was obtained = Apr-23. , Loan Amount = 1,000,000. , Were loan beneficiaries selected through PDMIS = No. , the the Were they vetted by a village meeting convened by the enterprise groups = Yes. , Remarks = Loan not disbursed through PDMIS. ., Vote Name = . ., Parish Name = KYAMAKANDA WARD. ., Name of SACCO = KYAMAKANDA -BUYANJA T/C PDM SACCO. ., Name PRF beneficiary = Kyogyendo Sandurah. ., of Was beneficiary from approved PDM enterprise = Yes. ., the the Date loan was obtained = Apr-23. ., Loan Amount = 1,000,000. ., Were loan beneficiaries selected through PDMIS = No. ., the the Were they vetted by a village meeting convened by the enterprise groups = Yes. ., Remarks = Loan not disbursed through PDMIS. , Vote Name = . , Parish Name = . , Name of SACCO = . , Name PRF beneficiary = Kyampire Enid. , of Was beneficiary from approved PDM enterprise = Yes. , the
|
e85b0669-71fe-40f9-b084-690a393b4d32
|
8
|
Appendix 17: Insurance policy for farming enterprises:
, Vote Name = Mubende DLG. , Parish Name = Kalama. , Name of SACCO = Kalama_Butologo Pdm Sacco. , Number of PDM enterpris es = 13. , many enterprises are registered as CBOs How = 13. 2, Vote Name = Mubende DLG. 2, Parish Name = Kabulamuliro. 2, Name of SACCO = Kabulamuliro Madudu Pdm Sacco. 2, Number of PDM enterpris es = 30. 2, many enterprises are registered as CBOs How = 22. 3, Vote Name = Mubende DLG. 3, Parish Name = Butuuti. 3, Name of SACCO = Butuuti Kasambya Pdm Sacco. 3, Number of PDM enterpris es = . 3, many enterprises are registered as CBOs How = . , Vote Name = Mubende DLG. , Parish Name = Muyinayina. , Name of SACCO = Muyinayina Kasambya Pdm Sacco. , Number of PDM enterpris es = . , many enterprises are registered as CBOs How = 13. 5, Vote Name = Mubende DLG. 5, Parish Name = Kasambya. 5, Name of SACCO = Kasambya_ Kasambya TIc Pdm Sacco. 5, Number of PDM enterpris es = . 5, many enterprises are registered as CBOs How = . , Vote Name = Mubende DLG. , Parish Name = Kasolokamponye. , Name of SACCO = Kasolokamponye Kiruuma Pdm Sacco. , Number of PDM enterpris es = . , many enterprises are registered as CBOs How = . , Vote Name = . , Parish Name = Lubona Ward. , Name of SACCO = . , Number of PDM enterpris es = . , many enterprises are registered as CBOs How = . , Vote Name = Mubende DLG. , Parish Name = Madudu. , Name
|
7bc23fea-fa84-49aa-b151-9cadcac82609
|
8
|
Appendix 13: Licensing of PDM SACCOs under the Microfinance Institutions Money Lenders Act
PDM SACCO. Masindi DLG, Name of SACCO = . Masindi DLG, Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders act = No. Masindi DLG, SACCO under money 2016? = SACCO not Licensed. Masindi DLG, Remarks = 14. Masindi DLG, Vote Name = Katugo parish. Masindi DLG, Parish Name = KATUUGO KIRUULI PDM SACCO. Masindi DLG, Name of SACCO = . Masindi DLG, Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders act = No. Masindi DLG, SACCO under money 2016? = SACCO not Licensed. Masindi DLG, Remarks = 15. Masindi DLG, Vote Name = Kibangya parish. Masindi DLG, Parish Name = KIBANGYA KIMENGO PDM SACCO. Masindi DLG, Name of SACCO = . Masindi DLG, Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders act = No. Masindi DLG, SACCO under money 2016? = SACCO not Licensed. Masindi DLG, Remarks = 16. Masindi DLG, Vote Name = Kibibira parish. Masindi DLG, Parish Name = KIBIBIRA KIRUULI PDM SACCO. Masindi DLG, Name of SACCO = . Masindi DLG, Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders act = No. Masindi DLG, SACCO under money 2016? = SACCO not Licensed. Masindi DLG, Remarks = 17. Masindi DLG, Vote Name = Kigulya parish. Masindi DLG, Parish Name = KIGUULYA MIIRYA PDM SACCO. Masindi DLG, Name of SACCO = . Masindi DLG, Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders act = No. Masindi DLG, SACCO under money 2016? = SACCO not Licensed. Masindi DLG, Remarks = 18. Masindi DLG, Vote Name = Kihaguzi parish. Masindi DLG, Parish Name = KIHAGUZI
|
6ff00902-6129-4ddb-b253-45db87181dc9
|
8
|
Appendix 7 Transfer of PRF to un-licensed SACCOs
7, 1 = Kyamahungu. 7, 2 = Kyamahungu-Engaju PDM Sacco. 7, 3 = YES. 7, 4 = Not Licenced. 8, 1 = KAMUHIGA. 8, 2 = Kamuhiga-Nyakishana PDM sacco. 8, 3 = YES. 8, 4 = Not Licenced. 9, 1 = NYAMIHIRA. 9, 2 = Nyamihira-Kyahenda PDM sacco. 9, 3 = YES. 9, 4 = Not Licenced
|
a54a9fe8-c3e2-4ed7-bc36-f21de3621edd
|
8
|
Appendix 5(h); Follow up on the stipulated loan application and approval process
picture s) = Yes. , Vote Nam e = . , Parish Name = . , Name of SACCO = . , Name of PRF beneficiary = OLISHABA. , Wa s the ben efici ary fro m the app rov ed PD M ent erpr ise = Yes. , Date loan was obtain ed = 06/06/2. , Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 1,000,000. , Loan Amount as per househo ld evidence provided (Intervie w notes, Bank informatio n report, bank statement etc.) = 1,000,000. , Were the loan bene ficiar y selec ted throu gh the PDMI S = Yes. , Were they vetted by a village meeti ng conve ned by the enterp rise groups = No. , If the loan is for a farmin g operati on, did the borrow er obtain an agricul ture insuran ce policy under the Ugand a Agricul ture = N/A. , Is the project in existe nce? (Take picture s) = Yes. 5, Vote Nam e = Kyenj ojo DLG. 5, Parish Name = Rwamuk oora Parish. 5, Name of SACCO = Rwamuk oora- Katooke
|
3a22d618-70c6-49f2-9c74-2eb8d066f671
|
8
|
Appendix 4(c): Transfer of PRF to unlicensed SACCOs
= PAGORO. 10, = PAGORO -LAMOGI PDM SACCO. 10, 2016? = No. 10, = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 11, = Amuru DLG. 11, = OTICI. 11, = OTICI -GURUGURU PDM SACCO. 11, 2016? = No. 11, = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 12, = Amuru DLG. 12, = LAMOLA. 12, = LAMOLA- GURUGURU PDM SACCO. 12, 2016? = No. 12, = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 13, = Amuru DLG. 13, = TORO. 13, = TORO -AMURU PDM SACCO. 13, 2016? = No. 13, = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 14, = Amuru DLG. 14, = AMORA. 14, = AMORA- GURUGURU PDM SACCO. 14, 2016? = No. 14, = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 15, = Amuru DLG. 15, = PARWACA. 15, = PARWACA- ATIAK PDM SACCO. 15, 2016? = No. 15, = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 16, = Amuru DLG. 16, = LORIKOWO WARD. 16, = LORIKOWO WARD- ELEGU TOWN COUNCIL PDM SACCO. 16, 2016? = No. 16, = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 17, = Amuru DLG. 17, = CERI. 17, = CERI- POGO PDM SACCO. 17, 2016? = No. 17, = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 18, = Amuru DLG. 18, = GAYA. 18, = GAYA ¿PABBO PDM SACCO. 18, 2016? = No. 18, = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 19, = Amuru DLG. 19, = PACILO. 19,
|
3e61752d-a3a5-461c-8d80-67b683476ecd
|
8
|
Appendix 16: Utilization of PRF at household level (Inspections carried out)
keeping. Planted Cassava on half acre garden. Spent 700,000 on ploughing & planting. Balance to be used on weeding and fertilisers.. 5, Parish Name = Nambug Ward. 5, Name of SACCO = Nambug Ward Namayin Council PDM SACCO. 5, Name of PRF beneficia ry = BUKHOSI PHILLY. 5, Loan Amou nt as per SACC 0 record = . 5, Loan Amoun tas per househ old eviden ce provid ed = . 5, Project funded = Cassava & maize. 5, Status of the project = . 5, Remark = Planted cassava & maize on 1 acre at 800,000. Balance for weeding & fertilisers.. 6, Parish Name = Syanyonj a Parish. 6, Name of SACCO = Syanyonj Buyinja PDM SACCO. 6, Name of PRF beneficia ry = Rose Ajiambo. 6, Loan Amou nt as per SACC 0 record = . 6, Loan Amoun tas per househ old eviden ce provid ed = 1m. 6, Project funded = Piggery. 6, Status of the project = . 6, Remark = Purchased Imale & 3 female pigs at 400,000. Balance to be spent on feeding & treatment.. , Parish Name = Nambug u Ward. , Name of SACCO = Nambug u Ward Namayin. , Name of PRF beneficia ry = Nakyema Nuulu. , Loan Amou nt as per SACC 0 record = 1m. , Loan Amoun tas per househ old eviden ce provid ed = 1m. , Project funded = Maize & Cassava. , Status of the project = . , Remark = Hire of 1 acre of land 500,000. Balance on ploughing
'
'
1
1
|
41aaad3c-bb54-4961-882f-af59211625fa
|
8
|
Appendix10: Transfer of PRF to SACCOs without PRF financing agreement
Appendix 11: Transfer of PRF to SACCOs without submission of attestation forms by the Accounting Officer (AO)
form? = . 5, Remarks = . 6, Vote Name = . 6, Parish Name = Karuhembe. 6, Name of SACCO = Karuhembe - Kebisoni PDM SACCO. 6, Was the SACCO Name included in the AO's attestation form? = . 6, Remarks = . 7 8, Vote Name = . 7 8, Parish Name = Kiigiro. 7 8, Name of SACCO = Kiigiro- Kebisoni PDM SACCO. 7 8, Was the SACCO Name included in the AO's attestation form? = . 7 8, Remarks = . 9, Vote Name = . 9, Parish Name = Mabanga. 9, Name of SACCO = Mabanga- Kebisoni PDM SACCO. 9, Was the SACCO Name included in the AO's attestation form? = . 9, Remarks = . 10, Vote Name = . 10, Parish Name = Nyeibingo. 10, Name of SACCO = Nyeibingo- Kebisoni PDM SACCO. 10, Was the SACCO Name included in the AO's attestation form? = . 10, Remarks = . 11, Vote Name = . 11, Parish Name = Eastern. 11, Name of SACCO = Eastern - Kebisoni T/C PDM SACCO. 11, Was the SACCO Name included in the AO's attestation form? = . 11, Remarks = . 12, Vote Name = . 12, Parish Name = Kafunjo. 12, Name of SACCO = Kafunjo - Nyakishenyi PDM SACCO. 12, Was the SACCO Name included in the AO's attestation form? = . 12, Remarks = . 13, Vote Name = . 13, Parish Name = Katonya. 13, Name of SACCO = Katonya - Nyakishenyi PDM SACCO. 13, Was
|
8e4ebc23-3f89-4670-bc53-e6a3252e39de
|
8
|
Appendix 10: Siqning of PRF financing agreement
5, Date funds were receiv ed = . 5, Date agreem ent was signed = . 5, Remarks = The SACCO Chairperson did not sign PRF financing agreement with the AO. 6, Vote Name = Gomba DLG. 6, Parish Name = Kifampa. 6, Name of SACCO = Kifampa Kifampa. 6, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = No. 6, Date funds were receiv ed = . 6, Date agreem ent was signed = . 6, Remarks = The SACCO Chairperson did not sign PRF financing agreement with the AO. 7, Vote Name = Gomba DLG. 7, Parish Name = Koome. 7, Name of SACCO = Koome Kanoni TC. 7, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = No. 7, Date funds were receiv ed = . 7, Date agreem ent was signed = . 7, Remarks = The SACCO Chairperson did not sign PRF financing agreement with the AO.. 8, Vote Name = Gomba DLG. 8, Parish Name = Butiti. 8, Name of SACCO = Butiti Kabulasoke. 8, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = No. 8, Date funds were receiv ed = . 8, Date agreem ent was signed = . 8, Remarks = The SACCO Chairperson did not sign PRF financing agreement with the AO.. 9, Vote Name = Gomba DLG. 9, Parish Name = Kyaayi. 9, Name of SACCO = Bugula Kyaayi. 9, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = No. 9, Date funds were receiv ed = . 9, Date agreem ent was signed = . 9, Remarks = The SACCO Chairperson did not sign PRF financing agreement with the AO_. 10, Vote Name = Gomba DLG. 10, Parish Name =
|
91e819c8-dec5-4f6b-a6e4-ee33438545c9
|
8
|
Appendix 23: SACCO Committees and Sub Committees
Appendix 24: Licensing of PDM SACCOs Under the Microfinance Institutions Money Lenders Act
lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = Not Licensed. KIBAALE DLG, Remarks = 27. KIBAALE DLG, Vote Name = KEZIMBIRA. KIBAALE DLG, Parish Name = KEZIMBIRA MUGARAMA PDM SACCO LTD. KIBAALE DLG, Name of SACCO = No. KIBAALE DLG, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = Not Licensed. KIBAALE DLG, Remarks = 28. KIBAALE DLG, Vote Name = BUKONDA. KIBAALE DLG, Parish Name = BUKONDA KABASEKENDE PDM SACCO LTD. KIBAALE DLG, Name of SACCO = No. KIBAALE DLG, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = Not Licensed. KIBAALE DLG, Remarks = 29. KIBAALE DLG, Vote Name = MAISUKA. KIBAALE DLG, Parish Name = MAISUKA KYAKAZIHIRE PDM SACCO LTD. KIBAALE DLG, Name of SACCO = No. KIBAALE DLG, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = Not Licensed. KIBAALE DLG, Remarks = 30
|
7e5640fd-e5e3-40b4-aa3b-3ca9d701a4d7
|
8
|
Appendix 36: Non-functionality of SACCO committees and sub-committees
Appendix 38: Licensing of PDM SACCOs Under the Microfinance Institutions Money Lenders Act
North East Kigorobya. 21 22, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No No. 23, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 23, Parish Name = South East. 23, Name of SACCO = South East, Kigorobya. 23, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 24, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 24, Parish Name = South West. 24, Name of SACCO = South West Kigorobya. 24, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 25, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 25, Parish Name = Northern. 25, Name of SACCO = Northern, Kigorobya. 25, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 26, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 26, Parish Name = Kyabanati. 26, Name of SACCO = Kyabanati Buraru. 26, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No
|
84667cef-1234-40ef-b790-0cf209179980
|
8
|
Appendix10: Transfer of PRF to SACCOs without PRF financing agreement
received = 29/06/2022. 16, Date agreement was signed = 25/07/2022. 17, Vote Name = RUKUNGIRI DLG. 17, Parish Name = Ndago. 17, Name of SACCO = Ndago- Nyarushanje PDM SACCO. 17, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = YES. 17, Date funds were received = 29/06/2022. 17, Date agreement was signed = 25/07/2022. 18, Vote Name = RUKUNGIRI DLG. 18, Parish Name = Central. 18, Name of SACCO = Central - Bikurungu T/C PDM SACCO. 18, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the AO? = YES. 18, Date funds were received = 29/06/2022. 18, Date agreement was signed = 26/07/2022
16
|
d2ff402b-94a5-4648-beae-7e91ae2eb2a5
|
8
|
Appendix 4(c): Transfer of PRF to unlicensed SACCOs
SN, 1 = Vote Name. SN, 2 = Parish. SN, 3 = SACCO Name. SN, 4 = Was the SACCO. SN, 5 = Remarks. , 1 = Vote Name. , 2 = . , 3 = . , 4 = registered with the micro finance Money Lenders act. , 5 =
11
|
144848f4-8686-4570-a9ae-fd314c4a909f
|
8
|
Appendix 11; Transfer of PRF to un-licensed SACCOs
, Vote Name = Kalangala DLG. , Parish Name = Kalangala TC Ward A. , Name of SACCO = Kalangala Ward A Kalangala Pdm SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = Not licensed. 2, Vote Name = . 2, Parish Name = Mazinga. 2, Name of SACCO = Butulume Mazinga Kalangala Pdm SACCO. 2, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 2, Remarks = Not licensed. 3, Vote Name = . 3, Parish Name = Kyamuswa. 3, Name of SACCO = Buzingo Kyamuswa Kalangala Pdm SACCO. 3, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 3, Remarks = Not licenced. , Vote Name = . , Parish Name = Bubeke. , Name of SACCO = Jaana Bubeke Kalangala Pdm SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = Not licensed. , Vote Name = . , Parish Name = Lulamba. , Name of SACCO = Lulamba Bufumira Kalangala Pdm SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = Not licensed. 6, Vote Name = . 6, Parish Name = Bwendero. 6, Name of SACCO = Bwendero Bujumba Kalangala Pdm SACCO. 6, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 6, Remarks = Not licensed. 8, Vote Name = . 8, Parish Name = Mugoye.
|
eb2492a9-1903-40ee-a3e5-de0735dc1185
|
8
|
Appendix 15: Parishes that selected flagship projects that were inconsistent with the LG selected priority commodities
Appendix 16: Farmer enterprise/households implemented projects that are not from the priority commodity list
MIIRYA PDM SACCO. , Name of PRF beneficiary = Julius Aganyira. , Was the benefici ary from the approve d PDM enterpri se = Yes. , Date loan was obtain ed = 11/10/2 023. , Loan Amount = 1,000,000. , Were the loan benef iciari es select ed throu gh the PDMI = Yes. , Were they vetted by a village meeting convene d by the enterpri se groups = Yes. , Remarks = The loan was approved through PDMS. , Vote Name = 5 Masindi DLG. , Parish Name = Kabango ward. , Name of SACCO = KABANGO KABANGO PDM SACCO. , Name of PRF beneficiary = Nyangoma Sunny. , Was the benefici ary from the approve d PDM enterpri se = Yes. , Date loan was obtain ed = 14/09/2 023. , Loan Amount = . , Were the loan benef iciari es select ed throu gh the PDMI = . , Were they vetted by a village meeting convene d by the enterpri se groups = . , Remarks = The loan was approved through PDMS. , Vote Name = Masindi. , Parish Name = Kabango. , Name of SACCO = KABANGO KABANGO PDM SACCO. , Name of PRF beneficiary = Sunday Georey. , Was the benefici ary from the approve d PDM enterpri se = . , Date loan was obtain ed = . , Loan Amount = 1,000,000. , Were the loan benef iciari es select ed throu gh the PDMI = Yes. , Were they vetted by a village meeting convene d by the enterpri se groups = Yes. , Remarks = The loan was approved through PDMS. , Vote Name = 6 DLG. , Parish Name = ward. , Name of SACCO = KIBIBIRA
|
6f463d1c-a85a-486e-bbdf-5d0ea8f1ebf6
|
8
|
Appendix 4 (e) : Registration of SACCOs
KITGUM, Parish Name = KITENY. KITGUM, Name SACCO = KITENY. KITGUM, of Is the SACCO registered under Cooperative Societies Act? (Yes/No) = Yes. KITGUM, the Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders act (Yes/No) = No. KITGUM, SACCO under money 2016? = . KITGUM, Remarks = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended. DLG, Parish Name = LUGWAR. DLG, Name SACCO = LUGWAR. DLG, of Is the SACCO registered under Cooperative Societies Act? (Yes/No) = Yes. DLG, the Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders act (Yes/No) = . DLG, SACCO under money 2016? = No. DLG, Remarks = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended. KITGUM, Parish Name = PALUBA. KITGUM, Name SACCO = PALUBA. KITGUM, of Is the SACCO registered under Cooperative Societies Act? (Yes/No) = Yes. KITGUM, the Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders act (Yes/No) = No. KITGUM, SACCO under money 2016? = . KITGUM, Remarks = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended. KITGUM, Parish Name = PALWO. KITGUM, Name SACCO = PALWO. KITGUM, of Is the SACCO registered under Cooperative Societies Act? (Yes/No) = Yes. KITGUM, the Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders act (Yes/No) = No. KITGUM, SACCO under money 2016? = . KITGUM, Remarks = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended. KITGUM, Parish Name = OKOL. KITGUM, Name SACCO = OKOL. KITGUM, of Is the SACCO registered under Cooperative Societies Act? (Yes/No) = Yes. KITGUM, the Is the registered Microfinance Institutions lenders
|
be163dbb-1e52-4d56-9131-d83662682489
|
8
|
Appendix 6 b; Annual General Meeting
1, Vote Name = Bundibugyo DLG. 1, Parish Name = Ngite Parish. 1, Name of SACCO = Ngite-Ngite
|
f2c27360-376e-4264-b043-a0535fa18574
|
8
|
Appendix 4 (e) : Registration of SACCOs
act (Yes/No) = No. KITGUM, SACCO under money 2016? = . KITGUM, Remarks = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended
32
LUMULE, 1 = LUMULE. LUMULE, 2 = Yes. LUMULE, 3 = No. LUMULE, 4 = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended. PACHUA, 1 = PACHUA. PACHUA, 2 = Yes. PACHUA, 3 = No. PACHUA, 4 = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended. PUDO, 1 = PUDO. PUDO, 2 = Yes. PUDO, 3 = No. PUDO, 4 = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended. PUGODA EAST, 1 = PUGODA EAST. PUGODA EAST, 2 = Yes. PUGODA EAST, 3 = No. PUGODA EAST, 4 = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended. MELONG, 1 = MELONG. MELONG, 2 = Yes. MELONG, 3 = No. MELONG, 4 = SACCOs registered and the Cooperative Society Act 2020 as amended
33
|
4788ee08-04f0-452f-a981-faa429dc7e30
|
8
|
Appendix 36: Non-functionality of SACCO committees and sub-committees
Appendix 38: Licensing of PDM SACCOs Under the Microfinance Institutions Money Lenders Act
1, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 1, Parish Name = Bulyango. 1, Name of SACCO = Bulyango Kitoba. 1, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 2, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 2, Parish Name = Kibanjwa. 2, Name of SACCO = Kibanjwa Kitoba. 2, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 3, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 3, Parish Name = Budaka. 3, Name of SACCO = Budaka Kitoba. 3, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 4, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 4, Parish Name = Kiryangobe Kitoba. 4, Name of SACCO = Kiryangobe Kitoba Sacoo. 4, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 5, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 5, Parish Name = Kiragura. 5, Name of SACCO = Kiragura Kitoba. 5, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 6, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 6, Parish Name = Birungu. 6, Name of SACCO = Birungu Kitoba. 6, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 7, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 7, Parish Name = Kiryandongo. 7, Name of SACCO = Kiryandongo Kiganja. 7, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance
|
dd0220c0-4373-4c28-b34d-79b72c770c15
|
8
|
Appendix 13; Transfer of PRF to un-licensed SACCOs
money lenders act 2016 awaiting guidance from the PDM Secretariat.. 2, Parish Name = Bukewa. 2, Name of SACCO = BUKEWA BUHEMBA PDM SACCO. 2, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 2, Remarks = . 3, Parish Name = Sinde. 3, Name of SACCO = SINDE BUHEMBA PDM SACCO. 3, Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. 3, Remarks = . , Parish Name = Buwongo. , Name of SACCO = BUWONGO BUHEMBA PDM SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = . , Parish Name = Buhemba. , Name of SACCO = BUHEMBA BUHEMBA PDM SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = . , Parish Name = Syanyonja. , Name of SACCO = SYANYONJA BUYINJA PDM SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = . , Parish Name = Kifuyo. , Name of SACCO = KIFUYO BUYINJA PDM SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = . , Parish Name = Lwangosia. , Name of SACCO = LWANGOSIA BUYINJA PDM SACCO. , Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Institutions money lenders act 2016? (Yes/No) = No. , Remarks = . , Parish Name = Gondohera. , Name of SACCO =
|
31866014-e9c5-4de9-b630-f5ac42a05705
|
8
|
Appendix 3: Transfer of PRF to un-licensed SACCOs
1., Vote Name. = SHEEMA DLG. 1., Parish Name. = RWEIBARE. 1., Name of SACCO. = RWEIBAARE KAKINDO PDM SACCO. 1., Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Remarks.Institutions = NO. 1., Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Remarks.money = NO. 1., Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Remarks.lenders act = NO. 1., Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Remarks.2016? = NO. 1., Is the SACCO registered under Microfinance Remarks. = Not registered under
32
|
e98f86b6-d8a3-45f5-9d41-49e4a5f92738
|
8
|
Appendix 4(c): Transfer of PRF to unlicensed SACCOs
COUNCIL PDM SACCO. 44, No = No. 44, SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016 = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 45, Amuru DLG = Amuru DLG. 45, OLINGA = PUKUMU. 45, OLINGA- POGO PDM SACCO = PUKUMU OPARA PDM SACCO. 45, No = No. 45, SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016 = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 46, Amuru DLG = Amuru DLG. 46, OLINGA = PUPWONYA. 46, OLINGA- POGO PDM SACCO = PUPWONYA- ATIAK PDM SACCO. 46, No = No. 46, SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016 = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 47, Amuru DLG = Amuru DLG. 47, OLINGA = OKIDI. 47, OLINGA- POGO PDM SACCO = OKIDI ATIAK PDM SACCO. 47, No = No. 47, SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016 = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 48, Amuru DLG = Amuru DLG. 48, OLINGA = PALUKERE. 48, OLINGA- POGO PDM SACCO = PALUKERE- OPARA PDM SACCO. 48, No = No. 48, SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016 = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 49, Amuru DLG = Amuru DLG. 49, OLINGA = LALEM. 49, OLINGA- POGO PDM SACCO = LALEM- OPARA PDM SACCO. 49, No = No. 49, SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016 = SACCO not registered with micro finance money lenders act 2016. 50, Amuru DLG = Amuru DLG. 50, OLINGA = OKUNGEDI-. 50, OLINGA- POGO PDM SACCO
|
6f3a1221-1594-4907-9b57-edc624e3c133
|
8
|
APPENDIX 14: Licensing of PDM SACCOs and Enterprise Groups
5, 1 = Rwampara DLG. 5, 2 = Nyaruhandagazi. 5, 3 = Nyaruhandagazi - Bugamba PDM SACCO. 5, 4 = NO. 5, 5 = Not licensed under microfinance institutions to lend money still on probation.. 6, 1 = Rwampara DLG. 6, 2 = Nyarubungo. 6, 3 = Nyarubungo - Kinoni PDM SACCO. 6, 4 = NO. 6, 5 = Not licensed under microfinance institutions to lend money still on probation.. 7, 1 = Rwampara DLG. 7, 2 = Mirama. 7, 3 = Mirama - Rugando PDM SACCO. 7, 4 = NO. 7, 5 = Not licensed under microfinance institutions to lend money still on probation.. 8, 1 = Rwampara DLG. 8, 2 = Bujaaga. 8, 3 = Bujaaga Ward PDM SACCO. 8, 4 = NO. 8, 5 = Not licensed under microfinance institutions to lend money still on probation.. 9, 1 = Rwampara DLG. 9, 2 = Mwizi Central. 9, 3 = Mwizi Central PDM SACCO. 9, 4 = NO. 9, 5 = Not licensed under microfinance institutions to lend money still on probation.. 10, 1 = Rwampara DLG. 10, 2 = Rwetsiga. 10, 3 = Rwetsiga PDM SACCO. 10, 4 = NO. 10, 5 = Not licensed under microfinance institutions to lend money still on probation.
|
b484a90a-4969-4a34-bf44-f146be9885c5
|
8
|
Appendix 15: Confirmation of PRF Loan Disbursements to Households
Beneficiary = Jack Bogere Grace Ojwang. 24, Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 600,000. 24, Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank information reports, Bank statement, etc ) = 600,000. 25, Vote Name = Namayingo. 25, Parish Name = Gondohera. 25, Name of SACCO = SACCO Gondohera Buyinja PDM SACCO. 25, Name of PRF Beneficiary = Anyango David Friday. 25, Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 800,000. 25, Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank information reports, Bank statement, etc ) = 800,000. 26, Vote Name = . 26, Parish Name = . 26, Name of SACCO = SACCO. 26, Name of PRF Beneficiary = Conny Benya Wanyama. 26, Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 600,000. 26, Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank information reports, Bank statement, etc ) = 600,000. 27, Vote Name = Namayingo. 27, Parish Name = Gondohera. 27, Name of SACCO = Gondohera Buyinja PDM. 27, Name of PRF Beneficiary = . 27, Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 700,000. 27, Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank information reports, Bank statement, etc ) = 700,000. 28, Vote Name = Namayingo. 28, Parish Name = Gondohera. 28, Name of SACCO = Gondohera Buyinja PDM SACCO. 28, Name of PRF Beneficiary = Christine Achola. 28, Loan Amount as per SACCO records = 600,000. 28, Loan Amount as per Household evidence provided (Interview notes, Bank information reports, Bank statement, etc ) = 600,000. 29, Vote Name = Namayingo. 29, Parish Name = Gondohera. 29, Name of SACCO = Gondohera Buyinja PDM SACCO. 29, Name of PRF Beneficiary = Charles Masahalya. 29, Loan Amount as per SACCO records
|
b48f68dc-8604-4574-b94e-07cebe5a81a0
|
8
|
Appendix 40: Signing of PRF Financing Agreements
received = 24/06/2023. 15, Date agreement was signed = N/A. 16, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 16, Parish Name = Kabatindule. 16, Name of SACCO = Kabatindule Kisukuma. 16, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the Accounting Oficer? = No. 16, Date funds were received = 24/06/2023. 16, Date agreement was signed = N/A. 17, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 17, Parish Name = Haibale. 17, Name of SACCO = Haibale Kisukuma. 17, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the Accounting Oficer? = No. 17, Date funds were received = 24/06/2023. 17, Date agreement was signed = N/A. 18, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 18, Parish Name = Bukona. 18, Name of SACCO = Bukona Kisukuma. 18, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the Accounting Oficer? = No. 18, Date funds were received = 24/06/2023. 18, Date agreement was signed = N/A. 19, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 19, Parish Name = Kisukuma. 19, Name of SACCO = Kisukuma Kisukuma. 19, Did the SACCO Chairperson sign PRF financing agreement with the Accounting Oficer? = No. 19, Date funds were received = 24/06/2023. 19, Date agreement was signed = N/A. 20, Vote name = Hoima DLG. 20, Parish Name = Karungu. 20, Name of SACCO = Karungu Kigorobya
|
dce054d5-0070-4fb4-82af-077e0d1db15e
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.