Skip to main content

Submission -PAC Procurement Review - Judicial Greffe and Viscount's Department - 12 August 2024

This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.

Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.

PAC: Procurement Review

 

No

Questions relating to Government Processes

Response

1

How often does your department utilise the central procurement system for acquiring goods and services?

Judicial Greffe

PO average per month - 88

Total POs Jan 23 – Jun 24 - 1570

Viscount's Department

PO average per month - 21 Total POs Jan 23 – Jun 24 -386

Please note the data was provided by Commercial Services based on data from January 2023 to end June 2024.

2

At what levels in terms of monetary value (e.g., small, medium, large purchases) do you most regularly engage with the central procurement system most frequently?

Judicial Greffe

Jan 23 – Jun 24 Under £1K 771 £1K - £25K 760 £25K- £100K 39 £100K+ 0

Viscount's Department

Jan 23 – Jun 24 Under £1K 330 £1K - £25K 53 £25K- £100K 3 £100K+ 0

Please note the data was provided by Commercial Services based on data from January 2023 to end June 2024.

.

3

What aspects of the central procurement system work well and what challenges or issues does your department face when using the central procurement system?

Works well

The catalogue is relatively easy to use.

It is simple for the budget holder to approve Purchase Orders.

Issues and Challenges

Catalogue is not comprehensive and purchasing non-catalogue items is time consuming and complex.

Training was insufficient, not rolled out in a timely manner and not fit for purpose which meant that the introduction of the system was disruptive and resource intensive.

The online training continues to be opaque and colleagues find it difficult to find answers to questions and problems quickly.

Aspects of the system continue to cause more work for the Departments. For example, it is unclear which suppliers are engaging with the Ariba Portal to "invoice." The departments' workload has increased as colleagues need to send across individual PDF invoices to achieve the three way match required to ensure payment.

The scheme of delegation is rigid and does not allow for multiple people at one level – this causes bottle necks and delays. It also doesn't work where employees work across more than one department which is the case for some individuals in the Judicial Greffe and Viscount's Department.

There were significant issues with the payment of some suppliers A Goods Receipt/Invoice Receipt (GRIR) report dated 31/12/23 was distributed evidencing that the Judicial Greffe had £500k of unpaid invoices , with £200k long outstanding (90-360 days).

Investigations by the Judicial Greffe revealed that certain types of payments (including Legal Aid Disbursements, Legal Aid Scheme, Panel Member Fees and Interpreter Fees) had not been paid as

 

 

Ariba could not achieve a three way match for a variety of reasons. The relevant orders had to be unreceipted, cancelled and reprocessed via the Ad Hoc process which was very time consuming for the department. These payments have since worked very well using the alternative Ad Hoc process.

Where Ariba Purchase Orders are raised for Services over the year, the financial approval in line with the Scheme of Delegation is processed initially for the purchase order to be raised, Service Sheets are then submitted by suppliers or raised by the department against the purchase order to process payments for services as they are delivered. These Service Sheets are approved by the Team leader of the requisitioning team rather than a budget holder. Service Sheets can be for high values and this is viewed by the Judicial Greffe and the Viscount's Department as a flaw in the system from a control perspective.

It would be helpful to receive training on reports that can be run from SAP by departments detailing departmental purchase orders and the stage that each is at. It would also be helpful for these reports to include the relevant Ariba purchase requisition number which does not appear to transfer over to SAP but is the only search field for approvers in Ariba approved items.

The Viscount's Department currently maintains separate excel records of all Ariba Orders and the Judicial Greffe is moving to do the same. This is to provide a useful point of reference and enable us to quickly resolve queries and ensure the invoices are paid. This is a time consuming process and should not be necessary. However, the departments feel they have no alternative but to do this additional work to save time when there are queries from suppliers.

The fact that GOJ maintains one supplier account for each supplier has caused difficulties whereby suppliers have threatened to withdraw services to one department due to unpaid bills relating to another department. Due to a lack of visibility of the system this is impossible for departments to deal with and requires Shared Services (AP) to resolve. For example the Judicial Greffe did have

 

 

an instance where Thomson Reuters was threatening to withdraw services. This would have affected the ability to use Court bundles and caused significant disruption to the operation of the Court Service. This took months and a lot of departmental resource to resolve.

 At times the process has insufficient flexibility. For example, a quick search by departments can find items that can be purchased far more cheaply from suppliers not in the catalogue.

4

How would you describe your department's relationship with suppliers when using the central procurement system and what feedback have you received from suppliers about their experiences with the central procurement system?

The departments received negative feedback and resistance from suppliers when the system was introduced.

Concerns from suppliers included the complexity of the system, the additional amount of time it takes them, difficulties in getting set up and long delays to payments.

The departments have had to spend inordinate amounts of time supporting suppliers through the system.

This was exacerbated by significant delays to some payments which put the relationship with essential suppliers at risk and was extremely time consuming for the department to resolve.

The departments received emails from suppliers threatening to withdraw their services due to lack of payment.

This has now improved with regular suppliers but it was extremely resource intensive for the department to resolve. In some cases small suppliers were distressed by their experience.

Some regular suppliers are becoming more comfortable with the system but others rely upon the departments to send the invoice to AP or submit service sheets and one off suppliers are still resistant to engaging with it. This is another aspect that causes more work for the departments.

5

Can you provide details on the number of engagements that have been extended above their original value over the past 5 years?

 None. (Based on information provided by Commercial Services)

6

How do you evaluate the delivery and closure of individual procurements within your department?

Clear evaluation criteria are set out at the beginning of a major procurement activity.

Lessons learned process is used e.g. for the Courts.je website project.

The department follows the Public Finance Manual and the Commercial Services guidance and best practice.

7

Does the current level of autonomy provide work well for your procurement needs?

Greater flexibility would be beneficial for suppliers who do not easily fit into categories.

Can be time consuming and delays from commercial services can impact on the business's needs. Timescales from the commercial services team can become elastic which then impacts on project timescales.

Greater visibility of the system would allow the department to resolve issues in a timely fashion.

8

Do you have any additional suggestions or recommendations in order to further enhance procurement processes?

It would be helpful to receive a monthly GRIR report to assist with early identification of any issues causing blockages to the prompt payment of invoices. This would allow us to follow up and resolve concerns much more promptly. This is more pertinent given that departments now have reduced visibility in SAP of the Accounts Payable ledger and supplier accounts compared to the old system (JDE).

On going in-person training both as refreshers and for new starters.

Creation of usable and quick reference manuals and FAQs.

 

 

Expert staff available to answer troubleshooting queries in a timely fashion.

Continued simplification of the process for internal users and suppliers.

Simplification of the language to plain English.

Greater transparency to allow the departments to track procurements and payments.

Courts Digital Programme found Procurement should be able to flex as processes seem designed for commodities rather than systems.

No

Questions relating to Non-Government Processes

Response

1

How does the Judicial Greffe currently ensure that procurement processes align with government regulations and policies, and do you have any processes that sit separately to government regulations and policies?

Can you please clarify what any additional processes that sit outside of Government processes relate to?

What is the decision-making process that you go through in order to decide whether to follow your own procurement processes of the central procurement process?

Subject to the same requirements and processes as other GOJ departments under the Public Finance Manual.

2

What strategies are in place to enhance the transparency of your own procurement processes for suppliers and stakeholders?

As Q1 above

3

How do you assess the effectiveness of your own procurement processes, and what key performance indicators do you use?

As Q1 above

4

What feedback mechanisms do you have in place to gather input from suppliers about your procurement processes, and how do you act on this feedback?

As Q1 above

5

How do you ensure that your procurement requirements are clear and well - communicated to all potential suppliers?

As Q1 above

6

What measures do you have in place to ensure the sustainability and social responsibility of your procurement decisions?

As Q1 above

7

How do you handle disputes or grievances from suppliers regarding procurement decisions from your own processes, and what is your process for resolution?

As Q1 above

8

What are the barriers to engagement that suppliers face in your procurement processes, and how can you work to eliminate these barriers?

As Q1 above

9

How do you ensure that procurement opportunities are widely communicated and accessible to all potential suppliers?

As Q1 above