National Commission for Privatization

NCP PRESS STATEMENT

WEDNESDAY 1ST AUGUST 2012

Below are the reasons and justification as to why the report submitted by the appointed evaluation committee which included representations from external stakeholders was rejected by the Commission based on the RFP requirements.

The Commission stands by its decision in canceling the procurement process as there is overwhelming evidence to show that the process was fatally flawed and that Consolidated Logistics International (CLI) was not responsive. Part A shows extracts of NCP’s analysis based on the original submitted documents by CLI and Part B shows further analysis by the Commission on the resubmitted documents from CLI after the evaluation committee had asked CLI to submit several important documents when concerns were raised by the Commission on the objectivity of the process.

                    —————————————————————

PART A

BID SECURITY –RFP Requirement of $100,000: CLI submitted $50,000, and ATPMS submitted $100,000. Thereby CLI were unresponsive on the bid security.

COMPANY BACKGROUND: In the bid documents submitted, CLI is stated as a subsidiary of Salmad Ocean Lines and Logistics (mainly freight forwarding activity). The company is a limited liability company with a  sole member being Amadu Jah. There are no details as to the legal relationship between the two companies (Salmad and CLI) or the percentage or share. There are statements of 25yrs experience with worldwide operations in no less than 7 African countries, experience in various shipping activities and two ongoing long term contract in providing CTN services in the USA. However there is no evidence of the contracts (letter from clients or references) and the financial results does not tally with a company that claims to have two major CTN operation contracts. The Certificate of Organization (Articles of Assoc.) shows CLI has been in existence since May 25th 2011.

ATPMS is a privately owned company based in Belgium, formed 10yrs ago and specializes in the implementation and management of CTN in several countries.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: ATPMS did not submit any financial statements and were non responsive. However CLI submitted some financial information but not complete and proper financial statements that would comply with International financial reporting  standard (IFRS). The statements are for 2008,2009 and 2mths of 2012 (Statement of Assets, Liabilities & Shareholder’s Equity //Statement of Revenues and Expenses). There is no budget shown against expenditures or notes to the account. There is a note starting that the statements are prepared on an income tax basis accounting and that the shareholders will report the corporation’s income on “their individual tax returns”, as the corporation elected to be treated as an S Corporation. The accounts are not signed and the Auditors statement is not signed, which raises questions on the authenticity of the accounts. CLI were also non-responsible.

The auditors statement states “…we have not audited or reviewed the accompanying financial statements and supplementary information….” “Management has elected to omit substantially all of the disclosure ordinary included in financial statements ….if the omitted disclosure were included…..they might influence the user’s conclusion about the Company’s assets, liabilities, equity, revenues, expenses”. The financial statements are inconclusive and do not give any financial or relevant information to form a proper evaluation of  the company’s finances.

PERSONNEL: CV’s submitted with limited experience & skills, with the exception of one employee with a lot of knowledge of various IBM systems and software. Most of the listed CV’s of staffs are employees of Salmad not CLI and there are some inconsistencies such as operations manager undertaking data entry duties. ATPMS showed a list of CV’s of qualified employees with knowledge and experience of the CTN market.

Conclusion

-ATPMS proposal was professional and showed knowledge and experience

-ATPMS are specialist in the field of CTN with evidence of operating CTN in other countries with evidence of operating CTN in other countries with signed references from clients such as the Nigerian Ports Authority

- CLI  is a newly registered company, has no performance history or evidence of undertaking similar contract before or experience in any sector

-ATPMS is a long established corporation with a team of employees and CLI is a small entity with limited scope and employees.

-Both organizations did not provide detailed Audited, signed financial accounts

-CLI fell short of the required amount for the bid bond as stated in the RFP, this is significant as they submitted $50,000 below the stated requirement and ATPMS submitted a bid security of $100,000.

- Insufficient information about Salmad and CLI relationship and shareholding

-Allocation of  marks by members of the evaluation committee for both companies did not reflect the analysis of the submitted bid documents

PART B

Based on the 2nd Documentations submitted by CLI on the request of the Evaluation Committee in March 2012 after the Bid Evaluation and report to the Commission

The following are Documents resubmitted by CLI….

Audited Financial Statements 2008-2010

Letters of board resolution, confirmation of relationship between Salmad and CLI, equipments or service items

Proof of business registration, articles of incorporation, evidence of tax ID, board resolution, subscription agreement

Proof of business registration, company and board resolution, company seal

Current bank statement- February 2012

Evidence of current contract

Brief evidence of CTN operations and documents

Financial Statements-the previous accounts submitted were unaudited and not signed and was done by Hargrave, Freeman, who stated that they had not audited or reviewed the financial statements. The newly submitted accounts for 2008-2010 have been audited by another firm, being Walton C. Bryde who stated that the accounts audited are for both Salmad and CLI

Concerns:

-Salmad was incorporated in March 2009 and CLI in May 2011, however there are accounts for 2008-2010 reflecting activities of both Salmad and CLI

-The 2008 accounts were signed in February 2009 and the 2009 accounts signed in January 2010 and the 2010 accounts signed in February 2011. with the exception of 2010 accounts, all other accounts (as evident from the sign-off dates) were available at the time of bid submission deadline, so why were these accounts not submitted?

-There is no profit and loss or income statement which should be part of the financial statements, the accounts for 2008-2010 are incomplete and the notes do not give any explanations as would be the normal accounting practice and standards.

-The previous accounts submitted were not financial statements as they fell below the requirements of the RFP. The second submitted accounts are missing very important accounting statements expected within audited accounts.

Letters of board resolution, confirmation of relationship between Salmad and CLI, equipment or service items

Proof of business registration, articles of incorporation, evidence of tax ID, board resolution, subscription agreement

Proof of business registration, company and board resolution, company seal

The above listed documentations shows that Pacific Atlantic Lines was incorporated in Atlanta, Georgia on 21st June 2006  and its name later changed on 20th March 2009 to Salmad Ocean Lines and in July 2010 a board resolution was passed to incorporate CLI for CTN operations, CLI was then incorporated 25th May 2011.

The share capital at incorporation of Pacific Atlantic Lines was $500. The resubmitted documents further show that the only members of the company to date is Amadu Jah who is the sole shareholders, president, director, CEO and the only board member.

Current bank statement –February 2012

The bank statements provided shows that within 10 days in February 2012 monies were deposited in the CLI bank accounts totaling $333,007 with no other banking activities.

Concerns:

-Why were bank statements to show financial resources not submitted at the time of evaluation as it is important to show their financial capacity

-Where these monies deposited for the specific purpose of showing liquidity at a point in time and will we see the same liquidity in other statement preceding this

-Why were the no other banking activities during this period

-A snapshot of one month is not reliable evidence of financial capacity

Evidence of current contract

Brief evidence of CTN operations and documents

The copies of contracts are shipping contracts for movement of goods-heavy cargos such as vehicles and other large items, keeping in mind that in their previous submission they had mentioned 25years experience and two major lucrative contracts in the United States for managing and operating CTN operations from March 2009 to June 2015 and October 2003 December 2017, with no evidence shown. The period of the contracts  for shipment of heavy goods to various countries in West Africa (Nigeria, Togo, Benin) shows dates of October to December 2011/March to November 2011 and January 2012 to March 2012. in 2010, The Nigerian Government had passed a regulation that all shipment of vehicles and heavy goods to Nigeria should have Cargo Tracking Note (CTN).

The paperwork submitted as evidence of CTN operations from a company called Africa CTN is an invoice. In the research conducted, Africa CTN’s website states “Africa CTN USA was established to provide experience representation for the issuance of cargo tracking (CTN) certificate required by the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA)”. The website also allows users to complete the CTN application online.

In effect after completing the form and submitting the payment, a CTN number and certificate will be sent to show that the goods are being tracked as per the regulation of NPA and other Port Authorities.

Another paperwork attached is that of a certificate stating the CTN number for the shipping consignment.

It has the logo of the Nigerian Ports Authority and ATPMS(the other bidders who operates CTN in Nigeria).

This is in no way evidence of CTN operations.

Concerns: There is a disconnect between the statements made at the first submission and the evidence provided now, as there is no evidence of the long-term CTN contracts that CLI claims to have with the United States authorities. There are no contracts because neither CLI nor Salmad operates or have any experience in CTN, except that of freight and forwarding experience. The contracts are invoices for processing of CTN documentation and certificate from Africa CTN.

The brief evidence of CTN operations is that of an excel spreadsheet listing cargo tracking numbers of goods shipped by Salmad. This shows that they are adhering to the regulation of CTN when shipping goods to various countries in West Africa.

These additional submissions raise further doubts and inconsistencies to the integrity and credibility of the company and the authenticity of documents from both Salmad and CLI. The original bid submission was for CLI with Salmad mentioned as being its parent company. The additional documents resubmitted shows operations and activities of Salmad and not CLI.

Evaluation Committee…If the resubmitted documents listed above were pertinent to the bid process and in forming an opinion of the company, this should have been reflected in the markings of the evaluation committee. The resubmitted documents prove that the original bid evaluation done was flawed and the original documents were not responsive. In addition, CLI also (in email communication and advice from the evaluation committee) proceeded to resubmit a revised bid security of $100,000 in replacement of the previous one. The appointed evaluation committee’s role is to evaluate submitted bids in line with the RFP, which is the first stage of the process and is not mandated to award any contracts.

Finally it is not usual practice of the Commission to discuss evaluations after the process, however due to the recent articles and published letters by the bidder, the Commission has been left with little option but to refute the allegations through this statement.