Bid Evaluation Committee

The Bid Adjudication Committee failed to exercise due care when considering the evaluation report from the Bid Evaluation Committee regarding the Medicare 24 Tshwane bid.

““The Bid Adjudication Committee did not exercise due care in considering an evaluation report from the Bid Evaluation Committee.””

A person from outside the City called Nico claimed to have given a mandate to the head of the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) to rig a tender in favor of seven companies, and one potential perpetrator admitted to doing this, though Deputy Chief Dhlamini considers this claim may not be truthful.

“someone from outside the City, Nico, had come to you, claiming to have given a mandate to the head of the BEC to rig a tender in favour of seven companies ... You had one potential perpetrator admitting that he had done this ... That is what he claimed, which might not be truthful”

If a third party from outside the City comes as a complainant and lodges a complaint about a mandate to manipulate the bid in favour of seven companies, Deputy Chief Dhlamini would investigate if the complaint is put into a statement.

“if a third party from outside the City came as a complainant and lodge a complaint that Nico ... had said he had given a mandate to the Chair of the BEC to manipulate the bid in favour of seven companies, would you investigate that? Correct ... The third party, I believe, could have reduce it into a statement”

The CFO sits on the Bid Adjudication Committee but not on the Bid Evaluation Committee, which is responsible for compliance checks.

“The CFO sits on the Bid Adjudication Committee. Now, if he sits on the Bid Adjudication Committee, he cannot sit on the Bid Evaluation Committee.”

Deputy Chief Dhlamini maintains that he did not discuss issues related to pricing, bid documents, specifications, or other confidential matters involved in the bid evaluation committee, therefore denying involvement in procurement discussions.

“When it says procurement matters, it is matters either that relates to issues of ensuring that they help me with the document compilation, also discussing pricings and so forth, or transpired within the Bid Evaluation Committee because those matters are confidential and so forth ... I did not discuss matters that relate to procurement.”

BEC interpretation was that the pricing schedule need not have blank spaces, differing from Probitiy's requirement that blanks be filled with numerical figures, resulting in potential selective evaluation and unjustified disqualification of bidders.

“The BEC interpretation is that the pricing schedule need not to have blank spaces. According to Probity report, which its recommendation have changed the initial BEC recommendation, states that blank spaces must be completed with numerical figures. This resulted in potential selective evaluation of bidders and the potential unjustified disqualified bidders.”

There was no consensus or agreement between Probitiy and BEC on the findings, rendering the matter unresolved.

“There is no consensus. ... There is no agreement. This matter could not be resolved.”

Procurement process does not require consensus between Probitiy and BEC; Probitiy submits a report which is considered by BEC but consensus is not mandated by City supply chain policy.

“It is not required in terms of the City's supply chain management policy ... It is not what I meant.”

There was a dispute between BEC and Probitiy on pricing schedule requirements: BEc allows blanks with lines while Probitiy requires blanks to be completed with numerical figures zeros.

“There is a dispute as to what the requirements are between BEC and Probity. Probity say you have got to fill in a zero when your pricing on a certain matter is zero. BEC say provided you do not leave blank spaces, for instance by just drawing a line through the space where you have nothing to price, that is compliant.”

The findings in the Probitiy report were accepted by the BEC, but the irregularities were not cured and the tender needed to be cancelled.

“The findings were accepted, and that is what we are raising. ... The findings stand. The findings were not cured. This tender is irregular. It must be cancelled.”

The Probity report was accepted by the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) and brought to the Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) with acknowledgement of shortcomings, leading BAC to agree to cancellation of the tender due to incurable issues.

“The Probity report was not disputed. The Probity report was already accepted by the BEC included. In actual fact, the report when it came to BAC, it came with an acceptance of the findings and an acknowledgement by BEC of the shortcomings that were there. When it comes to BAC, it does not come with a recommendation, SC. The BEC report already came to BAC having acknowledged the shortcomings that were presented to them by Probity.”

The cancellation resolutions cited difference in interpretation between BEC and BAC and BEC and Probity as the primary reason for cancellation, which was confirmed as accepted by BEC.

“The first reason for cancelling is a difference in interpretation between BEC and BAC, BEC and Probity. You have confirmed that BEC accepted that Probity was right. Can you confirm that ? I can confirm that .”

Mr Mnisi explained to Sergeant Nkosi that he could not check compliance because there was a strict segregation of duties and he had no access to the documents of the Bid Evaluation Committee.

“Chair, I just explained that there is nothing I can do to check compliance.”

The BAC's powers, including the power to refer back to BEC, are delegated through the MFMA and SCM policy to the City Manager who delegates further to the Bid Adjudication Committee including Mr Mnisi as chairperson.

“It is in the delegation of authorities ... the roles and responsibilities of the Bid Adjudication Committee as per the MFMA ... delegated to the City Manager, who further delegates them to myself (chairperson) and other members serving on the Bid Adjudication Committee”

The Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) was not comfortable with the pricing structure 'as and when' which led to the report being referred back to the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) to provide clarity.

“B A C w a s n o t c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g : The pricing per award leads to bid pricing, and some of the pricing in the fee structure are as and when. BAC further notes that as and when is not standard pricing.”

BAC cannot make a determination on why the highest scoring bidder was not recommended due to the need for consensus and proper delegation of authority; directives must allow BEC to finalize matters first.

“In practise, Chair, had the BAC made a determination, there would be a breach in lines in terms of the delegation of authorities... So, we do not make a directive because there will be a breach of process. We have to allow the BEC to make a determination. There must be consensus throughout the process.”

The BEC report was not substantive enough about why the highest scoring bidder, who appears cheapest, was not awarded.

“The report was not substantive in terms of why is this bidder, who appears to be the cheapest, not awarded... That is not attached in the BEC report.”

The policy requires the Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) to ensure the procurement process has no glitches or shortcomings and if issues are found, the matter must be referred back to the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) for clarification.

“the policy makes reference to the BAC performing its function ensuring that the process has been followed to the T without any glitches or shortcomings . If the BAC picks up shortcomings within the process , we are entitled to refer that back for clarification”

BEC must respond to probity concerns and if they do not, the matter is referred back, which happens when answers are not readily available or BEC needs to reconstitute to respond to BAC queries.

“BEC will say , where is the probity report in terms of this bid ? Or the probity raised these concerns , have you addressed them accordingly ? We are not seeing this clearly stated in the BEC report . The BEC is there to answer that question ... when answers are not readily available by the BEC , or whether the BEC themselves need to reconstitute in terms of responding to the BAC on that particular query”

Following these concerns, the BAC resolved to refer the probity report back to the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) for clarity on inconsistencies and to obtain a final probity confirming all issues have been addressed.

“the BAC resolved to refer the report back to BEC on the following directive: [1] Provide clarity on the apparent inconsistency regarding the recommendation of a bidder previously disqualified by the external independent probity team. Obtain and submit a final probity confirming that all issues have been dealt with satisfactorily.”

The BEC improved the clarity and detail of pricing by breaking down blanket amounts into specific articulations for personnel, vehicles, and additional vehicles on an as-and-when basis compared to the previous bid matrix (GM15).

“In the previous GM15 you would have said Region 1, Bidder 15, a holistic price of 25000 for argument's sake. Now it is clearly articulated on what the pricing for personnel is, what the pricing for vehicles is, what the pricing for additional vehicles are, and it is on an as-and-when basis.”

The BAC insisted on a final probity report providing physical evidence and assurance that all concerns, including those related to validity of extensions and disqualifications, were satisfactorily addressed before approval.

“You cannot just tell us by word of mouth, as BEC, that Probity Team have confirmed the report is now fine, you can approve. We need a portfolio of evidence to convince us, as the BAC, that indeed, that certainty was obtained.”

Bidder number 2, Vimtsire Security and Protection Services, was disqualified for not submitting three years audited financial statements and not having a five-tonne truck, yet was recommended for award by the BEC, which raised a major concern with the BAC.

“Bidder number 2, Vimtsire Security and Protection Services, Chair, did not submit three years audited financial statements... However, they were disqualified, indicated that the bidder did not have a five-tonne truck, therefore were disqualified. However, the bidder is being recommended for region 5... major concern that BAC had picked up, BAC had raised, therefore had to refer the matter back.”

The BEC verbally indicated to the BAC that the disqualification matter concerning bidder number 2 was deliberated with the probity team and resolved, but BAC required physical probity confirmation report.

“Remember I indicated, Chair, earlier that the BEC verbally indicated to the BAC that this bidder number 2, the matter was deliberated with the probity team, it was effectively dealt with and they were compliant... However, we could not rely on that, we needed physical evidence in the form of a probity confirmation report as we would normally have.”

The BAC accepted that all issues previously raised by the probity team had been satisfactorily addressed and subsequently approved the BEC recommendations subject to Regulation 43 implementation and tax compliance confirmation through the Centralised Supplier Database System.

“...the BAC finally approved the recommendations of BEC subject to the implementation of Regulation 43. It was further noted that subsequent to verification through the Centralised Supplier Database System, there was confirmation that affected bidders were now tax compliant.”

The BEC resolved that the tender remained valid until end of September, with recent extension as a precaution to ensure validity upon finalization.

“The BEC resolved that the tender remained valid until the end of September and that the recent extension was just a precautionary measure to ensure the validity upon finalisation.”

The bid evaluation committee highlighted the need for greater clarity and transparency, particularly regarding the methodology used to allocate regions in the preference points system which was not clearly articulated in the report.

“The bid evaluation committee also highlighted the need for greater clarity and transparency in the report, particularly regarding the methodology used to allocate regions... The BEC indicated that the bid specifications did not prescribe specific allocation criteria... However, other than limiting bidders to one region, the bid evaluation committee then decided to utilise the preference points system which will be applied in terms of determining allocation of bidders.”

The Bid Evaluation Committee verbally provided assurance they had addressed the probity findings, but the BAC insisted on official written confirmation.

“BEC came and verbally provided this surety. BAC said no, give us an official confirmation from the third party”

Due diligence is done in terms of double checking that the Bid Evaluation Committee has disqualified the correct individuals in line with the schedule provided.

“It also demonstrates that due diligence is done in terms of double checking with the work of themselves that the BEC have in fact disqualified the correct individual s in line with the schedule that has been prepared earlier on .”

The Bid Evaluation Committee, comprised of individuals from all departments within the City, conducts an independent checklist of each remaining bidder.

“the BEC , which is comprised of multifaceted individuals from all departments within the City, then conducts an independent checklist of each bidder that is remaining .”

Minimum bidder requirements include having a PSIRA certificate and providing declarations of interest under oath by BEC members.

“The minimum requirements is firstly, the bidders must have a PSIRA certificate . These bidders have that ? They conduct a checklist , Chair. This is all under oath . There are declarations of interest that are completed by all members of the BEC .”

The physical verification is conducted on site by the Bid Evaluation Committee made up of multifaceted individuals from supply chain management, TMPD, and the user department responsible for utilising the tender.

“...the Bid Evaluation Committee , I am going to reiterate , Chairperson , they are made up of multifaceted individuals across the City from supply chain management , TMPD , as well as the user department that is responsible for utilising this tender . They then must go out on site and conduct physical inspections and validate whether the vehicles that have been provided as part and parcel of the bid are actually those vehicles ...”

The Chief of Police is responsible for providing TMPD individuals to the Bid Evaluation Committee to avoid hand-picking individuals favorable to anyone.

“The Chief of Police will be responsible for providing individuals who are from TMPD to certain , on BEC . If it is Human Settlements who is involved as well , group Human Settlements department must second individuals who will serve in BEC as well .”

The Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) incorrectly disqualified 27 bidders and incorrectly qualified 32 bidders that should have been disqualified, casting doubt on the integrity of the tender process.

“B E C i n c o r r e c t l y d i s q u a l i f i e d 2 7 b i d d e r s f o r a d d e n d u m s n o n - c o m p l i a n c e a n d i n c o r r e c t l y q u a l i f i e d 3 2 b i d d e r s t h a t s h o u l d h a v e b e e n d i s q u a l i f i e d”

Issues in pricing schedules and documentation could not be remedied without document recreation, breaching compliance processes, making those irregularities incurable.

“matters w i t h i n t h e p r i c i n g s c h e d u l e t h a t w e r e n o t c l e a r l y e x p l a i n e d ... w h i c h c o u l d n o t e a s i l y b e c u r e d w i t h o u t t h e r e c r e a t i o n o f d o c u m e n t o f s o m e s o r t , w h i c h i s a b r e a c h o f c o m p l i a n c e 20 p r o c e s s e s .”

There were significant material irregularities that could not be cured, resulting in cancellation of the tender due to those irregularities.

“significant material irregularities that were identified during the process ... results in ... cancellation due to significant material irregularities”

The BEC evaluated the 12 findings, identified which were curable and incurable, then reported to BAC that incurable matters necessitated bid cancellation due to irregularities.

“the BEC went back, evaluated the 12 findings that were received, identified matters that could be cured, identified matters that cannot be cured, came to BAC and said, we cannot cure these matters, hence it must be a cancellation based on irregularities”

The City of Tshwane's procurement process includes segregation of duties across different committees: Bid Specification Committee (BSC), Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC), and Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC).

“there are duties of the Bid Specification Committee. There are duties of the BEC, Bid Evaluation Committee. And then there are duties of the Bid Adjudication Committee, the BAC. And those three sets of duties are segregated so that different committees comprising different people will be responsible for each one of those sets of duties.”

Probitty assurance is an additional step conducted before BAC to validate the work of the BEC and to ensure independence among committee duties in the procurement process.

“Just before you get to BAC, that a probity assurance must be conducted to ensure and to validate the work of the BEC. So that is an additional step I would like to add just before you go to BAC, and that is indeed the process and it assures independence and ensures that there is no interlink between the duties of the various committees.”

Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) documents are kept under lock and key by the Bid Evaluation Committee until they make a recommendation, after which the documents are handed over to the Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC).

“BEC documents are kept under lock and key at the BEC ... documents are formally handed over to them ... still under lock and key”

Only Bid Evaluation Committee members have access to BEC documents until they make a recommendation which is submitted to the Bid Adjudication Committee for consideration.

“only the BEC that has access to those documents until the BEC has made a recommendation”

The Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) was not duly constituted on 25 August 2025 as originally stated; the first record of a BEC meeting is actually on 28 March 2025.

“the date 25 August 2025 is wrong. The first record I have of a BEC meeting is, in fact, 28 March 2025”

The BEC had a succession of meetings starting 1 April 2025 and continuing on various days in April including 11 April 2025, where scoring of bids took place.

“a succession of meetings of the BEC ... 1 April ... 11th of April was the date of the original BEC scoring, that at that meeting, they actually scored the bids”

The BEC meeting on 11 April resolved to continue evaluation of tender TMPD 1-24/25 at the next scheduled meeting; no further minutes after 11 April have been found on record with the City.

“the BEC at its meeting held 11th April, resolved they will continue with the evaluation of TMPD1-24/25 on the next scheduled meeting ... Unfortunately they end at 11 April”

The BEC presented a report to the BAC on 4 September 2025, indicating the BEC must have adopted a report prior to that date to present.

“report from the BEC was presented by Mr Kgopa ... to the BAC at 4 September ... the BEC must have adopted a report prior to 4 September 2025 to be able to report it”

The City Manager was informed of the probity assurance on 4 April 2025 though the BEC meeting with continued evaluation was only on 11 April 2025, meaning the probity assurance notification preceded completion of the BEC process.

“City Manager was informed on the 4th of April 2025 ... we have looked at a minute of the BEC of 11 April ... so how is it that the probity assurance would have been notified even before the BEC process is complete”

The tender discussed is a high risk tender requiring mandatory probity assessment, conducted by the Chief Audit Executive's office who monitor all tenders above a certain monetary threshold.

“this is one of the tenders that has always been deemed high risk, hence probity assessment is mandatory ... by the time BEC completes its work, probity must automatically take over the process and conduct its work ... They check all processes in terms of all tenders that have been finalised ... It is known from the beginning ... it is a tender above 0 million ... It is known beforehand which tenders will be subject to probity”

Deputy Chief Dhlamini describes the contract management process under his division, including project management, contract management support, ensuring bid specifications, and involvement in the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC).

“Under the Finance section has got the project management, that is contract management support, that supports other divisions in terms of ensuring that when they have contracts that they want to undertake with bid specifications... The then after the bid specifications, when the contract goes to the BEC, the Chief of Police nominates people who sits at the BEC together with Supply Chain officials and other appointed people for the BEC.”

The Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) must be composed of officials from departments requiring goods or services and at least one supply chain management practitioner of the municipality or municipal entity.

“Abide evaluation committee must, as far as possible, be composed of officials from departments, requiring their goods or services, and at least one supply chain management practitioner of the municipality or municipal entity.”

If the requirements for the composition of the BEC are not met, there would be issues with the composition of the BEC.

“if any of those requirements are not there, there would be some issue with the composition of the BEC”

The BEC report must be considered by the Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC).

“the BEC report must be considered by the Bid Adjudication Committee”

Director Malatji was involved in all meetings and resolutions of the BEC regarding the same tender, attending meetings and being part of the resolutions taken for TMPT 2 from 2016-2017.

“I was involved in all the meetings and resolutions of the BEC in respect of the same tender”

Both Director Malatji and the BEC found the supply chain management premises unsafe to proceed, resulting in documents being removed.

“the BEC found the supply chain management premises unsafe to proceed. Hence the documents were removed there.”

There was a resignation of an SCM official from the BEC process, contributing to non-compliances and improper constitution of the BEC according to regulations.

“there was non-compliance since there was a resignation of an SCM official from the process, from the BEC”

The BEC failed to execute its duties in accordance with the terms and conditions of the BEC appointment letter, indicating challenges in its functioning.

“The committee failed to execute its duties in accordance with the terms and conditions of the BEC appointment letter”

The integrity of bids handed over to the BEC was maintained in that all bids received were in line with the compiled list, though the bids were not sealed when handed to the BEC, as the unsealing was done by supply chain management administrative officials before.

“The integrity of the bids received handed over to the BEC ... The bids are normally received sealed by supply chain management administrative officials. They get unsealed by supply chain administration to ... before they are handed over to the BEC. As a result, the bids handed to the BEC were not sealed.”

Director Malatji was intimately involved throughout the tender process including development of specifications, being a member of the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC), evaluating bids, preparing reports for bid adjudication, yet claims ignorance of litigation related to missing documents.

“my involvement ... started when I developed the tender document ... I am a member of the BEC ... you do the evaluation ... prepare a report ... tender went to court ... litigation ... I find it very strange ... you are intimately involved from the beginning, through all stages, but just before evaluation... you turn your back and forget the whole thing ... you have no idea what happened”

The tender was evaluated with 22 companies considered successful by the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC), but the entire process was stopped and cancelled due to missing documents and irregularities as per the Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC).

“...there was a total evaluation of 22 companies, and they did the complete evaluation and those 22 companies have been in the BEC the whole time. But when it was then submitted... with a recommendation that that whole process must be stopped and cancelled.”