By JOHN ONAH, Abuja –
In a bid to correct the constant and deliberate attempt in some quarters to present the academic/professional development (training) programmes being implemented under Framework Agreements (MOUs) as procurement contracts, the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund) has explained why Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was adopted instead of contract.
The Executive Secretary of TETFund, Arch. Sonny Echono who gave the explanation in a chat with newsmen in Abuja, disclosed that the Framework Agreements and Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) entails partnering, collaboration and cooperation while contracts are strictly an exchange of equal values.
According to him, under an MOU, TETFund has saved millions of dollar for the country as assistance, support and facilitation were provided without proportionate financial consideration, as with contracts.
He noted that Companies /firms adopt this method as a penetration strategy when they desire to break into new markets, expand market share or build long term relationships.
Also, contracts to him have fixed terms and conditions with respect to scope, duration (contract period) and cost which are binding and enforceable while Framework Agreements/ (MOUs) are more flexible with only a single or few constants making it more favourable for the Nigerian environment and its peculiarities.
Echono further disclosed that, in the the programme entered into through MOU by the fund that has saved the country millions of dollars included;
BLACKBOARD:
Normal cost 12 dollars per user andTETFund got it at 2 dollars 90 cents per user as a result of the MOU for 2million users,
EDUNET:
15 dollars per user per course
TETFund got it at 2 dollars per user, per course (3 courses were taken at 6 dollars per user)
In few illustrations, he further noted that:
(a) In the MOUs for communication skills training and Blackboard digital learning platform, only the tuition/access fees per student/ trainee is fixed, thus allowing variability during implementation, without attendant penalties.
(b) When the MOUs were executed, there were 253 Beneficiary Institutions, which has now increased to 271 i.e scope change. Under a contract an Addendum contract will be required with same or different conditions/cost.
(c) Service contracts involving access or license fees are typically based on availability i,e whether it is used or not and are subject to renewal on an annual basis with the possibility of price adjustment (increase). The MOUs under reference have 3-5 years duration and the cost per trainee remain fixed for the entire period. Both parties in an MOU are also interested in the utilization/consumption of the product and work collaboratively to achieve the project objectives.
“The implementation of the ICT Road Map which commenced in 2016 was predicated on the Report of a study on the state of readiness and relative level of adoption of ICT by beneficiary institutions. It showed that various schools were at different levels, with some requiring additional investments in both infrastructure, systems transformation and personnel training. Some schools are in remote locations with little or no broadband penetration”.
It is also common knowledge that Nigerians are slow in accepting and adapting to change. (recall slow response to INEC voters registration and collection of PVCs, BVN, NIN, drivers license, passports and constant appeals for extension of time for JAMB UTME registrations, WAEC and NECO examinations etc), he said.
He stated that it will therefore not be in the national interest to enter into annual fixed contracts, when there is every likelihood of slow start/default with stiff penalties adding that Nigeria is replete with examples of such wastage.
Another challenge identified was, it is widely accepted that the country has a serious problem with getting accurate data in a timely manner as “anybody who has tried to obtain his transcript from his alma mata will attest to this, which is why the present Administration prioritized data collection and management in the Education Sector Road Map”.
“Predictably, the biggest challenge with the implementation of the two (2) projects is getting credible students data, particularly current email addresses. Those presented at the point of registration have mostly been changed but the records were not updated resulting in multiple back and forth. The challenge is now being addressed by involving the DICTs, Registrars and Students Union Government of each beneficiary institution to update the students records and speed up implementations.
“The constant and deliberate attempt in some quarters to present these academic/professional development (training) programmes being implemented under Framework Agreements (MOUs) as procurement contracts is designed to draw parallels with the provisions of the Public Procurement Act on approval thresholds and payment terms for contracts. The goal is to insinuate wrongdoing, he added.
Echono urged the public to ignore the constant and deliberate attempt in some quarters to present these academic/professional development (training) programmes being implemented under Framework agreements (MOUs) as procurement contracts designed to draw parallels with the provisions of the Public Procurement Act on approval thresholds and payment terms for contracts, as the goal was to insinuate wrongdoing.
DISCLAIMER
The OPINION / COLUMN is authored by independent contributors to the National Accord Newspaper. While contributors adhere to our editorial guidelines, they are not employed by the National Accord Newspaper. The perspectives and opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not represent the views of the National Accord Newspaper or its staff.