CEBU, Philippines - The Commission on Audit has questioned the propriety of the payments to consultants for ecotourism development of the Muni-cipality of Aloguinsan, Cebu amounting to P 256,400.00 due to the absence of supporting documents.
In its 2012 audit report, COA found out that consultancy contracts included provisions for advance payment as well as per diems and travel expenses, thus prejudicing the interest of the government.
The municipality has adopted community-based sustainable ecotourism as a strategy for sustainable development.
In connection therewith, it entered into nego-tiated procurement for the services of two different consultants to act as project directors for the Kantabogon Ecotourism Development Project and the Bojo River Ecotourism Center.
During the year, various consultancy contracts were executed with Joselito R. Costas for the Kantabogon Ecotourism amounting to P150,000 and P120,000.
Likewise, on May 23, 2012, the municipality also signed another consultancy contract with Architect Margret Mae T. Franco for the development of Bojo River for P212,800, of which P 106,400 or 50 percent was paid upon contract signing.
The contract also provides a P 3,000.00 per diem for every site visit as well as free transportation and accommodation.
Auditor’s review of contract disclosed that hi-ring of consultant did not undergo public bidding; the contract executed on December 20, 2012 was not notarized; and there was no approval from the Sanggunian Bayan for the hiring of consultant.
The contract provided that the consultant will be free of transportation and accommodation expenses. A total of P147,799 was spent for van rental and accommodation for the year and the accomplishment of the consultant.
It was also found out that the project accomplishment reports were not submitted to support validity of the disbursements; provisions of the contract were vague or not specific as to the scope of work and expected outputs; and the contracts have been renewed without any supporting document other than the consultancy contract.
“The non-submission of the perfected contract and its supporting documents within the time frame set by law caused difficulty in ascertaining the reaso-nableness of the contract cost of consultancy servi-ces. Also, the granting of advance payment and travel expenses to the Consultants is not only unfavorable to the government but a violation of laws and regulations,†read the audit report.
COA has recommended the municipality to submit the documents (in addition to the consultancy contract) to support propriety of the costs of consultancy services totaling P256,400.
These include that copy of the detailed breakdown of the approved budget for the contract; statement of the scope of work, expected outputs/ deliverables and expected time frame; minimum requirements on the expertise of the consultants and the qualifications of individual personnel necessary for the undertaking; and copy of the approved program of work/project schedule.
Additional documents required include copy of the consultant’s request for time extension and approved extension; copy of evaluation report by the agency concerned establishing the need for time extension; copy of the notice to proceed showing date of receipt by the consultant; and copy of COA technical evaluation report. (FREEMAN)