Procurement red flags — Improve Water Governance

Tendering

Contract went ahead with a single bidder, without a documented reason or re-tender

One bid means no price or quality comparison.

Tender period was unusually short or published with little visibility

Short, quiet tenders limit who can compete.

Specifications appear written around one supplier or product

Narrow specs can exclude fair competitors.

Evaluation criteria or scores were changed after bids were opened

Moving the goalposts undermines a fair award.

Scope changes were made without formal written approval

Unapproved variations are a common route to waste.

Cost overruns were paid without re-approval by the responsible body

The original approval no longer covers the real cost.

Many small variations add up to a large change that was never reviewed as a whole

Splitting changes can avoid oversight thresholds.

Deadlines were extended repeatedly without a recorded reason

Open-ended delays hide performance problems.

As-built drawings and documents are missing or incomplete

Without them, future maintenance and checks are guesswork.

Payments were released before work was inspected or accepted

Paying first removes leverage to fix defects.

Testing and commissioning records are not available

No records means no proof the asset works as specified.

Warranty and defects-liability terms are unclear or not tracked

Defects found later may end up paid by the public.

Conflicts of interest were not declared or recorded

Undeclared links between officials and suppliers erode trust.

Contract documents are not available to the board or public on request

Secrecy makes independent review impossible.

The same people specify, award, and sign off the work

No separation of duties means no internal check.

Concerns raised by staff or residents have no recorded follow-up

Ignored warnings are often the first sign of trouble.

Tip: use Print for a board packet, or download the 4-page Field Guide PDF. Progress stays on this device until you clear it.