You are on page 1of 19


Benchmarking Tool

Working towards a consistent

understanding and application of
the OECD/DAC benchmarking tool.

 OECD/DAC benchmarking tool was

introduced in current form in 2006
 Created through the work of the Joint
Venture on Procurement, a working
group under OECD/DAC’s Aid
Effectiveness Working Party
 JV Procurement includes bilateral
donors, multilateral development banks,
UN, and more than 15 partner countries
Structure of the Benchmarking
 Four Pillars:
 I – Legislative and Regulatory Framework
 II – Institutional Framework/Management
 III – Operations and Market Practices
 IV – Integrity and Transparency

 Twelve Indicators
 Fifty-four sub-indicators – level at which
scoring is undertaken
Purpose of the Tool
 Provide information to the end user “snap shot”
overview of system including how it links with
other PFM/Governance aspects
 Identify gaps with regard to defined and agreed
benchmarks or standards
 Management tool to support development of a
reform/change management strategy
 Supports a capacity development dialog
between government and donors
 Tracks change over time if reform strategy is
PILLAR I Indicator 1 – Legislative
and Regulatory Framework

 Sub-indicator 1(a) – Scope of application

and coverage of the legislative and
regulatory framework.
 Sub-indicator 1(b) – Procurement Methods
 Sub-indicator 1(c) – Advertising rules and
time limits
 Sub-indicator 1(d) - Participation
Pillar I Indicator 1 (continued)

 Sub-indicator 1(e) – Documentation and

 Sub-indicator 1(f) – Evaluation and award
 Sub-indicator 1(g) – Submission, receipt and
opening of tenders
 Sub-indicator 1 (h) - Complaints
PILLAR I Indicator 2- Implementing
Regulations and Documentation
 Sub-indicator 2(a) – Implementing regulations
 Sub-indicator 2(b) – Model documents for goods,
works and services
 Sub-indicator 2(c) – Pre-qualifications
 Sub-indicator 2(d) – Contracting for services
 Sub-indicator 2(e) – User’s guide or manuals
 Sub-indicator 2(f) – General conditions of contract
PILLAR II Indicator 3 – Procurement
is integrated into governance system
 Sub-indicator 3(a) – Procurement planning is part of
budget formulation and contributes to multiyear
 Sub-indicator 3(b) – Budget law supports
procurement, contract execution & payment
 Sub-indicator 3(c) – No procurement initiated w/o
budget appropriation
 Sub-indicator 3(d) – Completion reports prepared
for reconciliation with budget
Pillar II Indicator 4 –
Normative/regulatory body
 Sub-indicator 4 (a) – Status and basis for body
covered in legislative framework
 Sub-indicator 4(b) – Body has a defined set of
 Sub-indicator 4(c) – Body’s funding, staffing and
independence are consistent with responsibilities
 Sub-indicator 4(d) – Responsibilities are clear and
avoid conflict of interest and direct involvement in
Pillar II Indicator 5 – Institutional
Development Capacity
 Sub-indicator 5(a) – System for collecting
and disseminating information
 Sub-indicator 5(b) – System for collecting
and monitoring procurement statistics
 Sub-indicator 5(c) – Sustainable training
strategy and capacity to implement
 Sub-indicator 5(d) – Quality standards for
staffing and to monitor performance
PILLAR III Indicator 6 – Operations
and practices are efficient
 Sub-indicator 6(a) – Level of competency of
procurement officials is consistent with their
level of responsibility
 Sub-indicator 6(b) – Training and
information programs are consistent with
 Sub-indicator 6(c) – Established norms for
safekeeping of records and documents
 Sub-indicator 6(d) – Provision for delegating
PILLAR III Indicator 7 – The public
procurement market
 Sub-indicator 7(a) – Effective mechanisms
for partnerships between public and
private sector
 Sub-indicator 7(b) – Private sector
institutions are organized and able to
facilitate access
 Sub-indicator 7(c) – No major systemic
constraints inhibiting access
PILLAR III Indicator 8 – Contract
administration and dispute resolution
 Sub-indicator 8(a) – Contract administration
procedures are clearly defined and cover
inspection/acceptance, amendments, and quality
 Sub-indicator 8(b) – Contract include dispute
resolution procedures
 Sub-indicator 8(c) - Procedures exist to enforce
the outcome of dispute resolution process.
PILLAR IV Indictor 9 – Effective
Control and Audit Systems
 Sub-indicator 9(a) – Control Framework in place to provide
for internal/external controls and audit
 Sub-indicator 9(b) – Enforcement and follow-up on
findings and recommendations to foster compliance
 Sub-indicator 9(c) – Internal controls provide timely
information to enable management action
 Sub-indicator 9(d) – Internal control system supports
performance auditing
 Sub-indicator 9(e) – Auditors are sufficiently informed
about procurement to conduct quality audits
PILLAR IV Indicator 10 –
Efficiency of Appeals Mechanism
 Sub-indicator 10(a) – Decisions made on basis of
information; final decisions reviewed; enforcement capacity
under the law.
 Sub-indicator 10(b) – Capacity to handle complaints
efficiently and means to enforce remedy
 Sub-indicator 10(c) – System is fair with decisions balanced
and justified
 Sub-indicator 10(d) – Decisions are published and available
to public
 Sub-indicator 10(e) - Complaint review body has authority
and independence
PILLAR IV Indicator 11-
Degree of Access to Information
 Sub-indicator 11(a) – Information is published
and distributed through available media and is
supported by information technology when
PILLAR IV Indicator 12 – Ethics
and Anticorruption measures in place
 Sub-indicator 12(a) – The legal framework
and procurement documents include
provision addressing corruption, fraud,
conflict of interest and unethical behavior
 Sub-indicator 12(b) – Legal system define
responsibilities, accountabilities and
penalties for individuals/firms found to have
engaged in fraud or corruption
 Sub-indicator 12(c) – Evidence of
enforcement exists
Pillar IV Indicator 12
 Sub-indicator 12(d) – Special measures exist with
regard to fraud and corruption in procurement
 Sub-indicator 12(e) – Stakeholders support the
creation of a market known for its integrity and
ethical behavior.
 Sub-indicator 12(f) – Secure mechanism for
reporting fraud and corruption
 Sub-indicator 12(g) – Codes of Conduct and
disclosure for staff in decision-making positions
Some emerging lessons
 Tool is useful and relatively easy to use
 Standardization creates need to use tool flexibly in a given country
– may require customization.
 Some indicators will require adjustment (we have experience from
over 40 countries)
 Use of the tool is an input to a process so don’t focus too much on
scoring but on the information learned and how it can be used to
improve the system.
 Results of benchmarking exercise needs to be more clearly linked
to other tools like PEFA
 Reform strategy must be integrated and prioritized on basis of
overall public sector management and public financial
management strategy.