Reform Description

The Provincial government of South Cotabato has established a dedicated CPES Implementing Unit composed of trained and accredited in-house evaluators. It has also institutionalized the regular use of the Constructor’s Performance Evaluation System (CPES) as a mandatory monitoring tool for provincial government-funded construction projects. This initiative aims to reduce opportunities for corruption by ensuring that contractor performance is objectively and consistently assessed based on standardized criteria, including quality of work, timeliness, safety, and compliance with project specifications.

This reform supports the province’s broader anti-corruption agenda by deterring collusion, poor project implementation, and bias in contractor selection, ultimately ensuring that public funds are used efficiently and projects are delivered to the highest standard.

Problem(s) Addressed by Reform

The implementation of the Constructor’s Performance Evaluation System (CPES) aims to address the following specific problems commonly encountered in government infrastructure projects that contribute to inefficiency, wastage of public funds, and opportunities for corruption:

1. Poor Quality of Infrastructure Project - some contractors deliver substandard work that leads to premature deterioration or safety risks.

2. Delays in Project Completion - infrastructure projects often experience delays due to poor planning, inefficient contractors, or lack of oversight.

3. Lack of Transparency in Contractor Performance - stakeholders (including the public) often have no access to reliable information about how contractors are performing.

4. Recurrence of Poorly Performing Contractors in Government Project - contractors with poor track records are still awarded new projects due to a lack of performance history tracking or favoritism.

5. Weak Monitoring and Evaluation Systems - inconsistent or subjective monitoring of contractor performance leads to limited accountability.

CPES represents a significant step in addressing the problems stated above by:

1. Poor Quality of Infrastructure Projects
Prior to this reform, the performance of the quality of work delivered was not systematically monitored and evaluated. With CPES, contractors are now rated based on workmanship, compliance with technical specifications, and adherence to standards, promoting accountability while improving the quality of the infrastructure projects.

2. Delays in Project Completion
Prior to this reform, contractor timeliness was tracked based on the contractor’s own reports. With CPES, the contractor’s physical performance is tracked more reliably. Contractors with a 15% negative slippage are also recommended for blacklisting, which can lead to contract termination and disqualification from future bids. Additionally, contractors with records of delays receive lower performance ratings, which affect their standing in future engagements with the agency.

3. Lack of Transparency in Contractor Performance
Prior to this reform, there was no documented evaluation of a contractor’s performance. The general public was not aware of how effectively and efficiently a contractor was performing their duties in the implementation of infrastructure projects. With CPES, the contractor’s rating is submitted by the Governor to the Philippine Construction Board – Construction Industry Authority of the Philippines, which in turn coordinates with the Government Procurement Policy Board for publication on its official website, making it readily accessible to the public.

4. Recurrence of Poorly Performing Constructors in Government Projects
Prior to this reform, poorly performing contractors could easily participate in procurement activities due to the absence of a database for contractor performance evaluations and ratings. With CPES, the agency’s Bids and Awards Committee is regularly furnished with CPES results, which are used for pre-qualification/eligibility screening of contractors and the awarding of contracts. The Implementing Office, the Office of the Provincial Engineer, is also provided with the CPES report for use as a reference in monitoring their assigned project engineers. Most importantly, the report is submitted to top management for policy formulation and review, and for adopting measures to further improve contractor performance in the implementation of provincial government projects.

5. Weak Monitoring and Evaluation Systems
There were previously no in-house accredited Constructor’s Performance Evaluators who were technically trained and equipped to undertake CPES evaluations. Monitoring focused only on projects reported with negative slippage. With CPES, monitoring and evaluation are performed by accredited Constructor’s Performance Evaluators who adopt standardized criteria, making evaluations consistent, comprehensive, and reliable. More importantly, CPES monitoring facilitates early detection of issues, allowing timely corrective action.

Relevance to OGP Values

The CPES reform action strongly aligns with the core values of open government in the following ways:

1. Transparency - CPES makes contractor performance data open and accessible, providing clear and objective information about how contractors have performed on past projects.

2. Accountability - By evaluating contractors through a formal and measurable system, CPES ensures that poor performance carries real consequences, including possible disqualification from future projects.

3. Civic Participation - CPES creates opportunities for stakeholders, including citizens and accredited civil society organizations, to access and review contractor performance records and provide feedback when necessary.

Intended Results

1. By streamlining the operations of the CPES-Implementing Unit (CPES-IU)—whether by integrating it under the OPPDC-REM or establishing it as an independent unit under the Office of the Provincial Governor—the CPES-IU will function with greater clarity, efficiency, and autonomy. This will ensure alignment with provincial planning, monitoring, and evaluation goals, prevent conflict of interest by distancing CPES from internal audit functions, and strengthen the overall credibility of contractor performance evaluations.

2. By increasing the number of in-house accredited CPES Evaluators from 4 to 12, the province will be able to conduct more timely and comprehensive evaluations, ensure consistent quality and standards across all evaluated projects, and respond more effectively to the growing number of infrastructure projects.

3. Expanding CPES coverage from 13.45% to at least 52% by 2028 will result in a more  representative assessment of infrastructure project performance, early identification of project issues or contractor deficiencies, an improved contractor compliance and delivery quality through increased scrutiny.

4. Extending CPES evaluation to include subcontractors ensures a more complete picture of actual project implementation on the ground, greater accountability among all parties involved in construction activities, and reduction in quality risks associated with subcontracted work.

5. Engaging accredited civil society observers in CPES activities will foster transparency and accountability in infrastructure evaluation, allow for community-based feedback and citizen oversight, and build public confidence in the integrity of government procurement and project implementation.

6. Publishing CPES reports on the official provincial website and procurement platforms will allow citizens, bidders, and oversight bodies to access objective performance data, encourage healthy competition and performance improvement among contractors, and support evidence-based policy and budgetary decisions related to infrastructure development.

Milestones

1. Conduct organizational review to determine appropriate structural alignment for CPES-IU either to OPPDC or as an independent unit under the Office of the Provincial Governor.

2. Prepare appropriate proposal to operationalize restructuring CPES-IU.

3. Identify and recommend in-house technical personnel preferably Civil Engineer and Architects for CPES Training and Accreditation for the next 3 years.

4. Secure budget allocation for training and accreditation of the additional 8 CPES evaluators for the next three years.

5. Set annual CPES target based on the total number of infrastructure projects implemented until the target of 52% is reached in the next three years.

6. Adopt and implement the revised CPES evaluation tools to include subcontractor performance.

7. Provide formal invitations and participation guidelines for CSO observers during CPES evaluation.

8. Coordinate with the Office of the Provincial Information Officer to establish section on the provincial website for CPES reports and to publish evaluation results on a quarterly basis.

Is Civil Society Involved?

As part of this reform, the Provincial Government will engage accredited civil society organizations to become civil society observers in the CPES evaluation activities to promote citizen oversight and enhance credibility.