The nation has determined that the struggle that has been going on since May is preventing the Department of ICT, Innovation and Youth from handing over a maintenance contract for the Sh.7.2 billion project, which is nearly complete / p>
NOFBI Phase Two, construction of which began in September 2014 by the Chinese company Huawei Technologies, is to complement Phase One, which provides a fiber optic connection to 28 counties. Most sections of the network have already been completed and are in use.
The first phase of the project was completed in 2009 by three contractors – Huawei, ZTE and Sagem, who have jointly rolled out 4,300 kilometers of fiber optic cable and provides Kenya with a backbone Infrastructure that was intended as a launch pad for universal high-speed Internet access.
Phase two, in which an additional 1,600 kilometers of fiber optic cable will be installed, will enable all 47 district headquarters to be connected to the national grid, plus another 500 km for military use. 1,200 km of the 1,600 km long construction work has been completed.
Like the controversy over the maintenance of the first phase, the second phase has also encountered headwinds. So far, due to lack of funds, the national government has not been able to take over the management of the first phase of NOFBI from Telekom Kenya, although the contract expired in 2016.
The auditor general’s office has had time and has again warned that this regulation, the does not contain clear instructions, poses a risk to taxpayers’ money.
“The government has therefore funded the operation of commercial businesses without covering the costs, reflecting a lack of prudent use of public funds,” said the Auditor General in February.
The ICT Ministry wants to avoid falling into a similar loophole in the second phase of the project Maintenance of NOFBI Phase Two on. In order to simplify the management of the critical infrastructure, the project was divided into western and eastern regions.
“The implementation of this project aims to facilitate communication between the counties and the provision of government services for the Citizens, such as applying for ID cards, passports and registering birth and death certificates, “said the ICT ministry when announcing the tender in February.
” The scope of the work includes the operation and the Maintenance of the entire NOFBI II network throughout the country in accordance with the agreed Service Level Agreement (SLA). NOFBI II is part of the broader NOFBI network that serves national and regional government agencies as well as most Internet service providers, “said the ministry of the tender, which won the winner over a period of three years up to 600 million periods.
While the tender for the East Region went smoothly, the West Region was characterized by lawsuits and counterclaims before the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board (PPARB).
The nation is aware that the matter is in the Board has come up at least four times without a solution, as some companies claim that one of the companies that apply for the tender is preferred.
A total of 11 companies have applied for the tender, which the winner at least 200 million Sh. per year to maintain the network that high-speed broadband internet brought to cities like Kabarnet, Baringo, Siaya, Homa Bay, Gilgil, Nyahururu and Maralal.
The companies are Adrian Kenya Ltd, Telkom, Com Twenty One, Prime Telkoms, Broadband Comm, Geonet Tech, Techsource Point, CCS Kenya, Kinde Engineering, Topchoice Surveillance and Decko Connecting Africa.
Nine companies failed the technical assessment, so Com Twenty One and Adrian Kenya Ltd to fight for the fight must enter the tender. Com Twenty One had placed a bid of Sh203,280,000, while Adrian Kenya had bid Sh203,764,532.
Evaluation of the offer
“The evaluation committee recommended Com Twenty One to accept the bid in question Offer Ltd for being the lowest rated bidder with its offer price of Sh203,280,000, “the filings with PPARB on the matter read.
However, the decision to award Com Twenty One was made by some didn’t hit well its competitors who say it is affiliated with a company that received an undue advantage in most ICT Department tenders.
Geonet Technologies in particular has filed a lawsuit with PPARB and the Tender Assessment Specified Committee treated it unfairly in assessing its technical capacity to take down the company.
“The act of twisting the arm of the evaluation committee team to change the results and changing the winning teams are rampant, “said one of the letters filed with PPARB regarding the tender dispute.
Additionally, the tender evaluation com Mittee has failed to identify those who have failed Informing them of the specific reasons why they did not make the cut and only gave them general explanations.
“The Board notes that the first respondent (ICT Ministry) in. was a violation of Section 87 of the Procurement and Disposal Act because the specific reasons why the applicants did not reach the 70 percent mark in the technical assessment were not given, “said PPARB when it was first referred in April.
” That The result of the above findings is that the procurement office did not accept the applicant’s offer in the technical evaluation phase in accordance with Section 80 Paragraph 2 of the Act and the principle of fairness in accordance with Article 227 Paragraph of the Constitution ”, judged the PPARB.
The ministry was then directed to “finalize the tender process to a logical conclusion”.
It was unable to do so.
[emailprotected] < / strong>