Audit reveals procurement failures at UHWI

Exposing a glaring practice by the University Hospital of the West Indies (UHWI), of utilising a retrospective process to validate procurements, Auditor General Pamela Monroe Ellis says this action by the institution served to corrupt the process engaged to procure goods, services and works.

In a damning report on the procurement practices of the UHWI, which was tabled in Parliament on Tuesday, the auditor general said the after-the-fact procurement process was initiated, inviting suppliers to bid for the supply of goods and the execution of works that had already been supplied or completed.

In these cases, said Monroe Ellis, the bid invitations implied that a legitimate competitive procurement process had taken place.

According to Monroe Ellis, the intended outcome was to select suppliers who had previously provided the goods or completed the work, “which was indeed the case in these instances”.

This forms part of a litany of breaches unveiled by the auditor general in a performance audit of the UHWI.

The auditor general says she expected the UHWI to enter into formal contract agreements outlining critical terms and conditions prior to the supply of goods and services and the execution of works.

In a startling revelation, the auditor general said her department identified instances where contractors either carried out works or supplied goods and services without contracts, outlining the financial commitments and performance deliverables.

“The lack of formal procurement process and the absence of formal contracts impaired transparency, accountability, and proper financial oversight in the management of UHWI’s procurement activities,” she said.

The audit pointed out that the UHWI bypassed the procurement process on two separate occasions during the purchase of 41 laptops, from a supplier, for the Health Information Management Systems (HIMS) project – 16 in the first instance and 25 in the second, demonstrating a pattern of breaching the procurement guidelines.

According to the report, the procurement process for the acquisition of the initial 16 laptops began with a proforma invoice dated September 4, 2023, from the selected supplier for $5.6 million.

The following day, September 5, 2023, UHWI generated a purchase requisition signed by the chief executive officer (CEO), Fitgerald Mitchell, for the 16 laptops in keeping with the supplier’s proforma invoice.

The CEO, in a letter to the senior director, procurement dated September 22, 2023, requested the immediate procurement of the laptops for the HIMS project.

The auditor general said, “Whereas the CEO indicated that the HIMS ‘implementation team have meticulously defined the specification of the laptops required for this project’, we found no evidence of the stated specifications on the procurement records”.

Further, the auditor general noted that the senior director, procurement, responded on September 26, 2023, requesting Mitchell’s approval to utilise a single-source methodology to procure the laptops.

Subsequently, an invitation to bid was issued and a bid was received from the selected supplier, on the same day as the request for the approval to use the single-source methodology – September 26, 2023.

In addition, a purchase order was issued on September 26, 2023, and, on the following day – September 27, 2023, an invoice originating from the supplier was received by UHWI.

The goods were delivered and received by UHWI on September 29, 2023, prior to the formal approval by the Evaluation Committee and the CEO, both of whom approved the procurement on October 12, 2023.

“This sequence of events suggests that there may be irregularities in the procurement process and breach of procurement protocols,” the auditor general said, adding that payments totalling more than $4.8 million (excluding GCT) were made in four instalments, two on November 27, 2023, and the others on January 2 and 31, 2024, respectively.

Of note, the auditor general said Mitchell requested the purchase of the laptops, justified the immediate procurement and subsequently approved the procurement using the single-source method.

“Notably, it was not customary for the CEO to be involved at the level of requesting the purchase of items and justifying the use of the immediate procurement method,” the report stated.

Typically, this responsibility should fall to the HIMS project manager, said Monroe Ellis, noting that the CEO’s role was generally limited to approving the purchase and the chosen procurement methodology, rather than initiating or justifying the procurement process itself.