All consultant contracts are subject to either the Bank’s prior review or post review, as set forth in the Procurement Plan (see appendix 1 of the Consultant Guidelines).
8.2 Prior Review
The following steps or stages in the review process are subject to the Bank’s prior review and “no objection”:
(a) Proposed assignment cost estimate, RFP, and short list1
(b) Technical evaluation report
(c) Draft final contract, as negotiated and initialed Once Bank staff have reviewed the documents relating to each stage of the selection process and found them to be satisfactory, or suggested amendments have been ef-fected, the Bank issues its “no objection.” The task team leader and the procurement specialists assigned to the project carry out the reviews. The Regional Procure-ment Manager (RPM); the ProcureProcure-ment Policy and Services Group (OPCPR); or the Chief Counsel, Legal Department, Procurement and Consultant Services Unit (LEGPR), become involved as necessary (see OP/BP 11.002). If the Bank refuses to issue a “no objec-tion” to a proposed contract award, but the Borrower decides to go ahead with the award, the Bank will de-clare misprocurement, and its policy will be to cancel that portion of the loan allocated to the consulting serv-ices in question. Examples of Bank’s “no objection” are given in appendix 1.
8.2.1 Short List and Request for Proposals
In reviewing a proposed short list, the Bank will with-hold its “no objection” if it determines that the pro-posed short list includes consultants who lack the
qualifications to undertake the assignment. The “no objection” to the short list will also be denied if it in-cludes consultants who are ineligible to take part in ac-cordance with the provisions on consultant ineligibility spelled out in the Consultant Guidelines. Once the Bank has issued its “no objection” to a short list, the Borrower cannot add or delete names without agree-ment from the Bank. Normally, the Bank does not ac-cept the inclusion of additional firms on a short list that has already received the Bank’s “no objection.”
The documents that constitute the RFP provide consultants with information relating to the assign-ment and instructions on what the Borrower expects of consultants who accept the invitation to submit their proposals. If, in reviewing the RFP, the Bank deter-mines that the RFP documents do not provide ade-quate information or clear enough instructions to enable consultants to submit responsive proposals, or are otherwise inconsistent with the Consultant Guidelines, the Borrower will be asked to amend them as necessary. When conducting its review, Bank staff must also check that the criteria to be used for the eval-uation are appropriate for evaluating the consultants’
technical proposals to be submitted.
The RFP is issued to the invited consultants once the Bank has given its “no objection” to the RFP, in-cluding the short list and the cost estimate.
8.2.2 Proposal Evaluation
On completion of the technical evaluation, the Bor-rower prepares a technical evaluation report and sub-mits it to the Bank for its review and “no objection.” The Bank may also ask to receive copies of the proposals. In reviewing the evaluation report, Bank staff should check that no errors or improprieties leading to questionable outcomes were made during the evaluation on the part of the Borrower’s Evaluation Committee.
Before giving its “no objection,” the Bank may (a) seek clarifications on the technical or financial
evaluation reports (or both) from the Borrower;
(b) require the Borrower to review certain aspects of the evaluation that appear unclear or questionable;
(c) request the reevaluation of the proposals; and/or (d) proceed with its own evaluation (for instance,
using an independent consultant) if it detects major flaws in the Borrower evaluation or re-ceives a justified complaint from a consultant to which the Borrower has not provided an adequate explanation.
Ultimately, the Bank may declare misprocure-ment if matters of contention cannot be resolved in a reasonable period of time.
If the technical evaluation report recommends the rejection of all proposals, the Borrower shall notify the Bank of the reasons for such rejection, but shall obtain the Bank’s “no objection” before proceeding with the rejection and the new selection process. This new process may include a revised RFP, short list, and budget. The revised documents shall require the Bank’s
“no objection” before being issued.
8.2.3 The Contract
After contract negotiations and before the parties sign the contract, the final, initialed draft of the negotiated contract has to be forwarded to the Bank for its review and “no objection.” In reviewing the negotiated con-tract, Bank staff should ensure that its provisions, the scope of services, and the key experts are the same as those in the RFP, and that:
(a) no modifications have been made to the contract general conditions; and
(b) special conditions outlined in the contract are consistent with the requirements of the RFP (that is, they do not present material deviations or changes to the terms and conditions upon which proposals were invited).
If any material changes were made concerning, for example, the scope of services, contract amount, liabil-ity, or conflict-of-interest provisions of the contract, the Borrower has to provide justification for such changes and obtain the Bank’s clearance before they are effected.
Once the final contract is signed and before sub-mitting the first application for disbursement under the contract, the Borrower shall send the Bank a copy of the signed act.
8.2.4 Modifications after Signing the Contract
After the contract is signed, any substantial modifica-tion, extension, or amendment proposed and agreed on between the Borrower and the consultant must be reviewed and cleared by the Bank before it is made.3If, for example, during an assignment, the consultant and the Borrower agree that because of unforeseen events, there is a need to increase the contractual amount by more than 15 percent initially, and by any percentage THE ROLE OF THE BANK 35
Modifications after Signing the Contract 8 . 2 . 4
subsequently, in each case the Borrower must provide the Bank with a detailed justification and obtain the Bank’s clearance before proceeding with amending the contract. The Bank will not provide its clearance (that is, “no objection”) if it determines that the pro-posed modifications would be inconsistent with the Consultant Guidelines and the Loan Agreement.
8.3 Post Review
For contracts not subject to prior review, the Borrower shall retain all documentation about each contract, in-cluding the signed contract original, the evaluation report, and the recommendation for award, for re-view by the Bank or its consultants. The Borrower shall send such documentation to the Bank, upon re-quest. The Bank may declare misprocurement if it determines that the contract was not awarded in ac-cordance with the agreed-on procedures (as reflected in the Loan Agreement and the Procurement Plan) or that the contract itself is not consistent with such procedures.
8.4 Assistance to Borrowers
Bank staff, in particular the task team leader, are fre-quently asked to provide guidance in the selection process. In addition to their review function and upon Borrower’s request, Bank staff shall assist Borrowers during the preparation of the various documents con-stituting the RFP, specifically the TOR, choice of selec-tion method, determinaselec-tion of selecselec-tion procedures, and the type of contract to be used. In providing its as-sistance, Bank staff must not unduly influence the Borrower’s decisions and must ensure that the choice of consultants to be shortlisted remains exclusively the Borrower’s prerogative.
Notes
1. To provide a single “no objection” for the RFP and the short list simplifies the process; however, in practice, separate “no objections” are often issued.
2. OP/BP 11.00, “Procurement under Bank-Financed Operations,” World Bank, July 2001.
3. Appendix 1, para. 3, of the Consultant Guidelines.
36 THE ROLE OF THE BANK
Modifications after Signing the Contract 8 . 2 . 4
9.1 Steps in the Selection Process
When in need of specialized professional and inde-pendent advice or when the permanent hiring of pro-fessional staff is not justified, a Borrower may engage consultants over defined periods of time to comple-ment its in-house capabilities.
Once a project or a program is identified, the Borrower and the Bank agree on the nature and scope of the consulting services needed for preparing the project and for assisting the Borrower supervising its implementation. The number and the scope of the con-sulting services assignments needed will depend largely on the level and quality of prior preparation work, the level of institutional readiness, and the strength and technical knowledge of the Borrower for undertaking the project. Bank staff may also help the Borrower plan the sequence and the contents of the different consult-ing assignments, adopt the most appropriate methods for selecting consultants, and correctly apply the rele-vant procedures. Before issuance of any specific RFP under the project, this shall be sent to the Bank for its review and clearance.1
Depending on the selection method adopted, the process carried out by the Borrower includes the fol-lowing steps:
(a) Preparation of the TOR of the assignment (b) Preparation of the cost estimate or budget of the
assignment
(c) Public invitation of consultants’ expressions of in-terest (EOIs)
(d) Shortlisting of consultants
(e) Preparation and issuance of the RFP to shortlisted consultants
(f) Preparation and submission of proposals by con-sultants
(g) Evaluation of technical proposals—quality evalu-ation
C H A P T E R