Nairobi County spends Sh7 million on tyres without explanation
By Kevin CheruiyotThe Auditor General’s report on the Nairobi County Executive has raised a number of questions in relation to unresolved issues in the financial year ending June 30, 2023.
Among the issues raised is the irregular procurement of tyres for fire tenders amounting to Sh7,502,000 that cannot be accounted for by Governor Johnson Sakaja’s administration.
According to Auditor General Nancy Gathungu, the county paid Sh7,502,000 for the supply and delivery of fire tyres, but verification of the payment voucher and supporting documents revealed a number of anomalies.
It was found that the payment was not supported by a requisition form from the user department for approval by the Head of Procurement Unit and that the existing contract agreement binding the supplier to the procuring entity was not provided.
“The payment was not supported by the required procurement documents, which include the advertisement, the minutes and register of the tender opening, the reports of the tender evaluation committee, the letters appointing the opening and evaluation committee, and evidence that the letters of regret sent to the unsuccessful bidders were not used for audit verification,” the report said.
The county also failed to form the Inspection and Acceptance Committee, which was to inspect, verify, accept or reject the goods and services received to ensure compliance with the terms and specifications of the contract.
The procurement method was also changed from open tender to restricted tender and the change was not approved for audit review.
Ironically, the tyres were delivered on January 7, 2022 and the Inspection and Acceptance Committee certificate was issued on March 9, 2022, indicating that the goods were taken on charge before inspection, a matter of concern.
The report also revealed that the county paid for the maintenance of vehicles belonging to the defunct Nairobi Metropolitan Services (NMS), but the deed of transfer and agreement for the maintenance of the vehicles were not provided for audit.
In another matter, the auditor found that the county paid a supplier Sh7,376,998 for the supply and delivery of oils and lubricants during the year, but the payment was not supported by a requisition form from the user department for approval by the Head of Procurement Unit.
In addition, the county was questioned for an expenditure of Sh100,000,000 for the purchase of vehicles and other transport equipment, but the amount differs from the amounts paid to various motor vehicle dealers during the year, which is Sh771, 589, 099.
“The resulting variance of Sh671,589,099 has not been explained. In addition, the procurement documents and supporting payment vouchers as well as the motor vehicle log books have not been made available for audit confirmation.”