Liquidation Report

Organization Name: National Rural Support Programme

For the Period: November 01, 2013 to January 31, 2014
Project Name: Education in Emergency (EiE) Project
Date Conducted: February 24 to 26, 2014

Detail Amount Rs. Remarks

Total agreed budget
between Plan Pakistan and
National Rural Support
Programme for the agreed
Total approved budget 162,238,513/-
activities is amounting to
Rs 162,238,513/- for the
period August 15, 2012 to
June 30, 2014.
Expenditure incurred to
116,855,999/- As per the NRSP SOE
date
Funds Transferred Till Date
128,147,687/-
(A)
Total SoE submitted for the
period for Rs 20,291,514/-
Total SOE submitted for and un-liquidated
42,809,127/-
liquidation (B) expenses of previous
liquidation is Rs
22,517,613/-
Amount not supported by
Proper Documentation /-
/Current period payables(C)
Amount verified and
liquidated /-
(D) = (B-C)
Funds Requested for the
next quarter No yet received
(E)
Amount required to be
adjusted from next advance
(F)
Amount to be Paid (G)=(E-
F)

Detailed Liquidation Report:

Area &Observation Implication Action Required Who

&Recommendatio &When
n
1. PURCHASES & PAYMENTS Implication &
Recommendation: -

It was agreed in last

PO-F&A
1.1 Payments made for the NRSP should have to
quarterly review 31-03-
trainings of SMC members monitor the budget meeting held at Plan 2014
and total expenditures before going to start Multan office that
charged into this activity is any specific NRSP can utilize the
amounting to Rs 647,122/- activities. Further saving under
 Area &Observation Implication Action Required Who
&Recommendatio &When
n
whereas the total approved NRSP should have to construction heads
budget against this activity get the approval into soft component
where required. In
was amounting to Rs from Plan this regard,
548,928/-. Overspending Management to revised/amended
made by NRSP in this settle this un- budget is proposed
activity for Rs 98,194/-, it liquidated amount. and submitted to
remains un-liquidated Plan. Over spending
will be liquidated
upon addendum.
Implication &
1.2 Expenses charged in the Recommendation: -
activity Meetings with NRSP should have to
provincial and District monitor the budget It was agreed in last
Government for Rs 57,886/- before going to start quarterly review
whereas total approved any specific meeting held at Plan
budget for this activity was activities. Further Multan office that
amounting to Rs 47,564/-. NRSP should have to NRSP can utilize the
Overspending for Rs saving under
get the approval construction heads
10,022/- in this activity from Plan into soft component
remains un-liquidated. Management to where required. In
settle this un- this regard,
liquidated amount. revised/amended
budget is proposed Project co-
and submitted to
Plan. Over spending ordinator,
1.3 NRSP has completed Implication & SPO-PITD
will be liquidated
Recommendation: -
almost all the construction upon addendum.
All the supporting
schemes in the ECCD 31-03-
documents should
centers, work done reports 2014
have to attach with 1.3 Parda wall
have been attached which
the file i.e resolution was added in
was duly verified by the sub-
from the SMC design later on
engineers as well. But there
members in which the request of
was a difference between
additional need SMC Request
revised estimated cost of
(Parda Wall) was Resolution of
the schemes with the cost
suggested by the additional work
mentioned / agreed in TOP.
community. It is (Construction of
This difference reflects due
recommended that Parda Wall
to the additional cost of
addendum of TOP Costing Rs.4508/
Parda Wall for Rs 45,080/-
should be made by on roof of Centre)
which was included in
NRSP with the SMC from SMC will be
scheme estimation later on.
members before the made the part of
There is no any resolution
release of last record.
from the community / SMC
installment to SMC Addendum of TOP
members found, in which
members which will be made with
any change or additional
clearly reflect the SMC for said
need suggested by the
revised estimated revision of cost.
community / SMC.
cost of the scheme.
Furthermore, there is no any SPO-PITD
addendum / intimation made
by NRSP to SMC members
about the revised estimation
cost. Implication &
Recommendation: -
It is recommended
 Area &Observation Implication Action Required Who
&Recommendatio &When
n
that addendum
1.4 ECCD Center GBPS should be made by
Qadoo Khan: Total estimated cost NRSP with SMC 1.4 According to
for the construction of room, toilet, members as per the TOP with SMC
water supply and rehabilitation is revised estimated clause 12 NRSP
for Rs 767,651/- whereas toilet was cost because Engineer can
not constructed in this ECCD community will deduct the
center. Some other rehabilitation claim this additional amount if work is
work added in this scheme instead amount in future as less than SPO-PITD
of toilet with the resolution by the per signed TOP. approved design and
community but TOP reflected or substandard. concerned
additional amount but revised staff.
estimated cost is less than the
amount agreed in the TOP. There is
no any addendum made the SMC Implication &
members to reduce the agreed cost. Recommendation: -
Legal document
1.5 As per the TOP clause no 14, must be filled In the said case
NRSP will charge the damages to properly and all there were certain
SMC if the scheme will not terms & conditional reasons due to
complete on the agreed completion should be defined that physical work SPO-PITD
time. But the completion date is not smartly. could not be 31-03-
mentioned / written on the TOP for started in time 2014
charging of damages. and that is why
the completion
date was not
Implication & mentioned on the
1.6 ECCD Center GGPS Recommendation: - TOP. However in
Sumra Nashaib Janobi: Cement Revised quotations future such
purchased from M/S Barwi should be attached documentation
Building material. Quotations with the file of will be done
attached with the file and lowest scheme to justify the properly.
vendor was M/S Barwi Building increase of cement
Material. As per the quotation from rate.
the selected vendor, M/S Barwi 1.6 The rates of
Building Material agreed to provide cement were
the cement for Rs 488/- per bag to changed a
SMC. But cement bags purchased number of times
for Rs 488/-, Rs 490/- and Rs 500/-
during SPO-PITD
from the selected vendor. During
construction 31-03-
the period of construction, rates of
work. Missing 2014
cement may change / vary but
revised
revised quotations not attached with
quotations will be
the file.
made the part of
file as required.
Implication &
Recommendation: -
1.7 ECCD Center GGPS Revised quotations
Imtiazabad: Cement purchased should be attached
from M/S Javed Traders. As per the with the file of
quotations attached from the scheme to justify the
selected vendor, vendor will increase of cement
 Area &Observation Implication Action Required Who
&Recommendatio &When
n
provide the cement for Rs 490/- per rate. SPO-PITD
bag to SMC. But cement bags 31-03-
purchased for Rs 490/-, Rs 495/- 2014
and Rs 500/- from the vendor. 1.7 The rates of
During the period of construction, cement were
rates of cement may change / vary changed a
but revised quotations not attached number of times
with the file. during
Implication &
Recommendation: - construction
Revised quotations work. Missing
1.8 ECCD Center GGPS Basti revised
should be attached
Kalasra: cement purchased from quotations will be
with the file of
M/S Barwi building material. As made the part of
scheme to justify the
per the quotation attached from the file as required.
increase of cement
selected vendor, vendor agreed to
rate.
provide the cement for Rs 490/- per
bag to SMC. But cement bags
purchased for Rs 490/- and Rs 500/-
from the vendor. During the period 1.8 The rates of
of construction, rates of cement cement were
may change / vary but revised changed a
quotations not attached with the number of times
file. during
construction
work. Missing
revised
quotations will be
made the part of
file as required.

2. BANK ACCOUNT

Implication: -

Recommendation: -

3. PERSONNEL COSTS

3.1 Implication: -

Recommendation: -

 Area &Observation Implication Action Required Who
&Recommendatio &When
n
4. FIXED ASSETS/INVENTORY

4.1 Implication: -

Recommendation: -

5. OVERHEADS

Implication: -
5.1
Recommendation: -

6. OTHER ISSUES

1.1 It is observed that District Implication & Project co-

Recommendation: -
1.1 All TOPs will ordinator,
Coordinators signed the legal be signed by SPO-PITD
All ToPs should be signed
document of TOPs on behalf of by the NRSP officials who NRSP official
Project Coordinator whereas they have Delegation of having the 15-03-2014
did not get any approval from Authority to sign such delegation of
project coordinator / Management document or District
authority.
of NRSP to sign such document. Coordinators should
have to seek the
1.2
approval from
management to sign
such documents.

Khalid Pervaiz, Arafat Majeed,

Manager EiE Project, Programme Manager
SSS,
Plan International-Pakistan National Rural
Support Programme,
Multan Islamabad

Hasnain Afzal Amir Khan,

Acccounts Coordinator, Programme Officer A&F,
Plan International-Pakistan National Rural
Support Programme,
Multan Islamabad