Former Minister of Public Infrastructure, David Patterson, yesterday said that the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB) was made aware of Kares Engineering failing to honour its contractual obligation since 2015 and questioned the decision to award the $566.9 million contract for the rebuilding of the North Ruimveldt Secondary School to the company.
Since the signing of the contract on August 24, there have been criticisms over the decision to award Kares Engineering the project given its disastrous history with the Kato Secondary School. NPTAB has since justified the award of the contract stating that Kares’ bid was the lowest responsive one.
The North Ruimveldt Secondary School was destroyed by fire on June 19, 2021. The new building will measure 432 feet (length) x 30 feet (width) x 42 feet (height). It will have three stories and will accommodate 450 to 500 students. The school will be fitted with science laboratories, information technology laboratories, new classrooms, teacher accommodations, a sanitary block, and a modern external structure. The project period is 14 months.
At a press conference yesterday, Patterson said that the Alliance For Change (AFC) has noted a series of questionable awards made and is calling on the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) to conduct a full investigation into the operations of NPTAB.
“Special attention should be paid to the bid evaluation and contract award process. Commencing August 2020 several contracts have caught the public’s attention ranging from the award of a school in Region 10 to a company that has no track record in construction… the award for the construction of a fire station to a company whose main business activity is in the mining sector… the completion of Hunter Street was awarded to a company whose principal previous experience was in the motor racing arena… The recent award for the rebuilding of the North Ruimveldt Multilateral School is yet another example of the questionable evaluation award process arising from NPTAB.”
The former Minister of Public Infrastructure reminded reporters of Kares Engineering’s track record with the Kato Secondary School in Region Eight. He also reminded that it was under the tenure of current Minister of Education Priya Manickchand that the Kato School project was undertaken.
Back in 2012, Kares Engineering was awarded the $728 million contract for the construction of a new secondary school at Kato in Region Eight (Potaro-Siparuni). The new school was constructed to ease overcrowding at Paramakatoi Secondary.
The school was not occupied for a long period after it was found to be riddled with major defects after construction ended in 2015. An audit by Rodrigues Architects Limited subsequently found that the building was unsafe for children and that at least $144 million would be required to fix the defects. Kares was subsequently allowed to complete all corrective works on the school, at no cost to the government, under the supervision of Vikab Engineering, which was selected to oversee the works at a cost of $29.2 million.
The school was officially commissioned in March of 2019 – some 7 years after work started.
“One can recall the last time this contractor was awarded a contract with the Ministry of Education headed by the current minister, they jointly produced the Kato Secondary School project. A project riddled with [so many] defects that it was deemed unsafe [for] occupation and extensive remedial works to be undertaken. A recent inspection revealed several issues related to the poor construction of the Kato School still exist,” Patterson lamented.
During the signing and sod-turning ceremony for the North Ruimveldt Secondary, Minister Manickchand said that an engineer and Education Officer will be attached to the project. In this case, the design and supervising consultant is Marcel Gaskin.
However, yesterday Patterson said that the provision of an independent engineer brings no comfort that quality work would be done. He reminded that an independent consultant was also attached to the Kato project which was riddled with poor construction.
“The AFC has been compiling a list of all these questionable contract awards, and will be formally submitting a request to the Public Procurement Commission to conduct further investigations into these awards,” Patterson related.
NPTAB knew
In its series of reports, Stabroek News has reported that NPTAB claims that it had not formally received any complaints against Kares Engineering and as such it could not have prevented the award. A senior source at the Tender Board also told the publication that the blacklisting of a contractor is done by the PPC and then communicated to NPTAB to take into consideration during the evaluation of bids.
For the North Ruimveldt Secondary, the following bids were received – Platinum Investments Inc $679,122,111; Dry Rock Construction Inc $687,163,051; QCD Construction Inc $521,690,454; M&P Investment $606,636,675; S&K Construction Consultancy Service & General Supply $595,000,000; Dundas Construction Inc $ 620,000,000; CB General Contracting Service Inc $531,787,715; Builders Hardware General Supply & Construction $614,853,630 and Kares Engineering Inc $566,975,350.
A statement from NPTAB said that the two lowest bidders did not satisfy the criteria as outlined in the bidding document.
Yesterday, Patterson questioned the rationale of NPTAB’s decision explaining that he had written to them back in 2015 informing them of Kares’ infractions.
He explained that when the APNU+AFC took office in May 2015, about 80% of the monies for the Kato School was already paid to Kares despite numerous complaints over the standard of work. Based on the complaints, the procuring entity – the Ministry of Education – enlisted the expertise of the Ministry of Public Infrastructure to conduct an assessment of the project.
“We sent up our engineers [to Kato]. That was the engineers within the Ministry including the engineers in the materials department. They did an investigation of the structure the building the works, etc and they produced a report which was sent to the contractor and report was quite clear that the concrete was substandard. The requirement I think was 4000 psi and when they use the Schmidt Hammer tests it was 1700. The contractor at that time disputed the results claiming that the ministries report was biased and [claimed] victimization,” Patterson told reporters.
He added “At that stage, to avoid any prolonged dispute over a much-needed school, we commissioned an independent survey and it’s headed up by Rodrigues Architects Limited in association with civil engineering consultants as well as other consultants, I think electrical and plumbing, and we invited the contractor to be present… the report was produced… that report was sent the contractor to say look, this is an independent report, please see what it is. He once, again, queried the authenticity or the validity of that report and at that stage Cabinet advised that NPTAB should be written to advising that the contractor has not fulfilled its contractual requirements and this is prior to the Public Procurement Commission coming in. We said that we would have an objection to any awards made to him until such time as the defects were satisfactorily corrected. I did write to NPTAB saying specifically that on behalf of the Cabinet so for them that they were not aware, it’s not true.”
Patterson said that the letter was dispatched at the end of December in 2015 to NPTAB.
A Cabinet note stemming from a meeting held on December 15, 2015, and seen by Stabroek News mandated that Kares be asked to rectify the defects and that no other contracts would be granted to him. It was that note that also mandated that the NPTAB be written to by the Minister of Public Infrastructure.
A subsequent Cabinet note dated July 06, 2017, identified the issues highlighted in the independent consultants’ report in relation to the Kato School. It identified nine issues namely – design and contract supervision severely lacking; consultants inadequately qualified; selection was cost based over professional competence; engineering design information incomplete and unreliable for construction; bills of quantities were scant, very imprecise and not reflective of the known hinterland project location; prospective consultants often sought out qualified consultants to sign off drawings/documents done by others; technical support teams needed to be appropriately qualified and experienced; deviation from internationally recognized form of building contracts can lead to many pitfalls; higher standards of professionalism in an environment where minimum qualifications are clearly defined and adhered to.
The team found that – the quality of reinforced concrete and other elements were deemed substandard – 44% below the specified strength. All the concrete members were below the specified strength of 3,500 psi. The areas of concern were the first floor with 1335 psi and the stairs with1,517 psi. Other defects noted were the corridor floor slab which had a thickness of 3 inches instead of 5, and the steel reinforcement ⅜ inch diameter at 10 inch x 10 inch compared with ½ inch at 6 inch x 6 inch.
As a consequence, the recommendation was for the corridor to be partially demolished and reconstructed with galvanized metal decking and for the stairways to be demolished and replaced with suitably designed timber. In conclusion, it was felt that the construction was poorly done to maximise profits and the level of oversight by the engineers was severely lacking while the Clerk of Works was negligent in the execution of his duties.
The report stated that the site planning/orientation and design were not reviewed and corrected by the engineers and as a consequence habitable spaces were in hot areas while the sanitary block was in cool areas. There was no thorough ventilation in the dorms and the windows were along the corridor resulting in a lack of privacy and noise nuisance. The Matron’s Quarters bedrooms had no windows and there was a wardrobe on the external wall. The kitchen/dining area was inadequate for the number of students which was estimated to be between 300 and 500. The School Block and the dormitory washrooms had inadequate wash basins.
“From all indications, it was felt that the project design and construction did not have the benefit of a professional architectural input,” the Cabinet note stated.
Yesterday, Patterson said that the NPTAB and Kares were made aware of the issues. He said that Kares questioned the validity of the report.
“…he continued bidding and NPTAB informing him that this is an issue that you have, as it is in the bidding documents [that is a statement of pending] litigation, previous work, you know things like that. He subsequently, about a year after, made the offer to complete the school at his cost,” Patterson explained.
He added that after the defects and liabilities period was over, Kares wrote to him asking to retract the complaint made to NPTAB. However, Patterson said that he directed the company to the Ministry of Education since they were the procuring entity. He added that he cannot say whether the complaint was retracted since it was in the hand of the MoE.
Reinstatement
In a letter dated April 12, 2018, and addressed to then Minister of State Joseph Harmon, Kares Engineering asked to be reinstated as eligible to receive government contracts.
The letter signed by Managing Director Radesh Rameshwar started “I now hereby respectfully request that my Company be re-instated to the status of one that is eligible to bid for Government Contracts and you can be assured that Kares Engineering will endeavour to provide our usual high quality of service for which we are reputed.”
Rameshwar outlined that prior to the Kato School debacle his company “has completed dozens of schools and other projects as a Government Contractor and has never been accused or cited for major defective work.”
He also listed a number of private sector work he had completed during the period of ineligibility.
“All of the contracts that my Company has been awarded in the Oil and Gas Sector have been on the basis of “onward recommendations by Companies based on the quality of our work. I have also been awarded a Sub-contract by China Railway First Group to construct all the bridges and culverts for the East Coast Demerara Highway Extension Project and continue to be the leading supplier of Pre-stress concrete piles and other components in Guyana,” he had boasted.
In an exclusive interview with Stabroek News on Monday, President Irfaan Ali said that he is satisfied with the government’s handling of the Kares contract that noted that all awards for government contracts follow the law which also has room for adjudication.
Former Auditor General Anand Goolsarran has flayed the government for its handling of the contract. Goolsarran however pointed out that at varying points of the procurement process, the Ministry of Education, NPTAB, and the Cabinet that the President presides over, should have taken action to safeguard public spending. Goolsarran has said that the Ministry of Education, NPTAB, and Cabinet, all failed in their duty to the public by not acting to stop Kares Engineering Inc. from securing the $566.9 million North Ruimveldt Secondary School contract considering its previous poor performance on an even larger project.
In his accountability column, last Sunday, Goolsarran said that after the Evaluation Committee of NPTAB had concluded its work and recommended Kares, the procuring agency – the Ministry of Education – had an obligation to take account of Kares’ disastrous work on the $728 million Kato Secondary School project of 2012. Goolsarran said that Section 5 of the Procurement Act sets out the responsibilities of the procuring entity in relation to the criteria to be used in determining the qualifications of contractors and suppliers. “Included in the list of criteria is the requirement that past performance substantiated by documentary evidence would commend the concerned contractor or supplier for serious consideration for the award of the contract. The Ministry of Education therefore had the obligation of ensuring that Kares Engineering met this criterion before consideration of its tender”, he contended.
Another procurement specialist told this newspaper that the procuring entity, the Ministry of Education “should have, as a rule, ensured that their tender document asked questions about previous performance and this was a glaring one since it was the same Ministry that had that experience with the disastrous Kato School.” The specialist agreed with Goolsarran saying that, “The NPTAB also erred badly or looked the other way.”
