Covid-19 irregularities revealed

A COVID-19 audit revealed that personal protective equipment (PPE) was procured by government departments at prices that were higher than market-related rates, as determined by national Treasury.

This revelation was made when a team from the auditor-general (AG) briefed the portfolio committee on health yesterday. There were also irregularities in the distribution of PPE; the purchase, distribution and maintenance of ventilation devices; community screening and testing; and the provision of hospital beds through the erection of field hospitals.

Deputy business executive within the AG’s office Eugene de Haan said the AG had undertaken a comprehensive, multifaceted and risk-based audit of the key initiatives introduced by government, and the management of the multibillion-rand funds made available.

“Our objective with this Covid-19 audit is not to disrupt or stand in the way of the good work that is being done, our role will be to ensure the public confidence that government funds and interventions have reached their intended target focus areas.

“The health sector is at the forefront in the fight to curb the spread of the coronavirus. A number of initiatives were implemented to support the treatment of those affected by the virus, and to manage the spread through the population,” Haan said.

According to Thabelo Musisinyana, a senior manager at the AG’s office, many of the concerns raised included the procurement process – which revealed that competitive processes were not followed, resulting in contracts being awarded to a specific supplier or group of suppliers, without the necessary motivation or approval for such deviations.

“We also saw instances where some procurements were not favouring local producers, so they were not complying with the local content requirements. Some contractors were awarded tenders when their tax affairs were not in order, according to the South African Revenue Service. We also saw some form of discrimination in the evaluation of procurement processes,” said Musisinyana. She added that businesses competing for PPE contracts, across the country, were not treated in a fair and equal manner – as some were disqualified based on not complying with the requirements, while others were not.

Musisinyana also noted that contracts awarded to businesses that did not have a history of providing PPE, resulted in the risk a of non-delivery, unfairness, or conflicts.

Performance auditing manager Jacques Boshoff indicated that PPE was procured at prices that were higher than market-related rates, as determined by national Treasury.

He said poor storage practices, at bulk storage and health-care facilities, were identified. In some instances, PPE was stored in the walkways, outside boxes, and in a disorderly manner.

“Some suppliers delivered PPE that did not meet the required specifications or was not what they had been contracted to deliver, or they under-delivered or delivered late. Despite this, the suppliers were still paid by most of the departments,” said Boshoff.

Boshoff also revealed that poor contract management and significant deficiencies in the ordering, delivery, receipt and payment processes, further exposed the health and education sectors to financial loss, and resulted in health workers not always receiving the PPE they required. He added that poor storage of sanitiser was also highlighted. “PPE stock was stored outside a temporary bulk storage facility, not inside. Sanitisers, which were stored outside the facility, were exposed to the sun and rain.

“Some of these items were damaged due to exposure to direct sunlight, therefore the integrity/quality of the items was compromised.”