The National Health Insurance Fund is embroiled in a bitter dispute with real estate agents battling to manage premises housing its headquarters, the Carpark Complex and Contrust House in Nairobi.
The Public Procurement Review Administrative Board (PPRAB) has directed the insurer to conduct a fresh evaluation of the caretaker tender.
The ruling followed a suit by NW Realite Valuers and Property Limited challenging the decision by NHIF to award the tender to Gimco Limited.
Others that floated their bids for the caretaker job included Ebony Estates Limited, Crystal Valuers Limited, Regent Management Limited and Laser Property Services.
“The letter of notification of intention to award the contract to Gimco Ltd dated October 3, 2022, with respect to the tender for letting and management services of the NHIF Building, Carpark Complex and Contrust House is hereby nullified and set aside,” the board said in its November 7 decision.
The board chaired by Faith Waigwa further nullified letters of award issued to all the unsuccessful bidders, including that to NW Realite – the petitioner.
“NHIF is hereby ordered to direct the evaluation committee to readmit the applicant’s tender at the technical evaluation stage and conduct a re-evaluation of the tender together with all the other tenders that made it to the technical evaluation stage,” the Waigwa-led team ordered.
NHIF has until next Tuesday to conclude the procurement process and award the successful tenderer.
NW Realite’s case was that its tender was subjected to evaluation parameters that were not defined in the tender document hence cannot be said to have met the fairness test.
It stated that the insurer did not provide the same reasons for the tenders on why their bids were unsuccessful, citing lack of transparency in the process.
“The discordant notification of award and the failure to transmit the same simultaneously to both the successful and unsuccessful tenderers is indicative of a lack of transparency in evalution of the subject tender,” NW Realite alleged.
The firm argued there was “individual and subjective discretion” by members of the evaluation committee in rating its tender; hence there was no fair competition.
NHIF said that NW Realite scored 82.9 per cent in the evaluation, which they held was below the threshold of 85 per cent set in the tender document.
The insurer argued that the firm attached contracts with a similar portfolio of fewer than three years, yet the requirement was that they showed the experience of five years.
NHIF further argued that the firm did not provide details of a caretaker with five years’ of experience and failed to provide details of a mechanical technician.
The insurer said it rejected NW Realite for failing to demonstrate whether it has executed similar assignments from five clients of the size of NHIF.
It was also NHIF’s case that the firm failed to attach payrolls to support the number of its employees.
“Consequently, the applicant (NW Realite) did not attain the 85 per cent threshold of the technical evaluation criteria,” NHIF said.
PPRAB said the Peter Kamunyo-led NHIF should have scored NW Realite’s tender above the set minimum technical score at that stage of evaluation.
The review board said this should have enabled the petitioner to proceed to the financial evaluation stage.
“It is clear the applicants’ tender attained the minimum score of 85 per cent having complied with the technical evaluation requirements,” PPRAB ruled.
“The board finds that the evaluation committee did not evaluate the applicant’s (NW Realite) tender in accordance with the instructions to tenderers and the criteria provided in the technical evaluation criteria.”
“The upshot of the findings is that the instant request for review stands,” PPRAB said.
