000			02482nam a22002177a 4500
001			9774
003			OCLRC
005			20260730103752.0
008			230131t xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aOCLRC
082			_aT 650 2019 350
100			_aAberasturi, Ma. Cristina C.
245			_aRevising procurement process in the mega city by the bay: _bmitigating impediments on efficient public service/ _cMa. Cristina C. Aberasturi.
260			_aParañaque City: _bOlivarez College, _c2019.
502			_aMaster Thesis
520			_aThis study was endeavored to revisit and asses the procurement process implemented in the City of Parañaque. Further, it sought to determined underlying issues related to the process and significant differences in the assessment of the three groups on procurement process in terms of different aspects. This study utilized quantitative descriptive evaluative method using survey questionnaire among 120 respondents consisted of implementers (n=50), end users (n=50), and suppliers (n=20), respectively. Weighted mean and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were the statistical tools utilized for the treatment of data. Results showed that the procurement process in Parañaque City was found to e efficient (GWH=3.11) as assessed by the three groups of respondents, namely: the implementers (WH=3.18), end users (WM=2.89), and suppliers (WM-3.24) in terms of requisition and processing of papers (WM-3.16), budget appropriation (WM=3.25), prioritization (WM-3.13), bids and awards (WM-3.03), and delivery of service (WM=2.99). Some issues were raised related to procurement process as identified by the respondents, such as pricing aspect (WM=4.30), inefficient documentation procedures (WM-4.19), and redundancy in the process (i.e. signatories) (WM-4.18). There is a significant difference in the assessment of the three groups of respondents on procurement process in Parañaque City in terms of requisition and processing of papers (p-value=0.0041), budget appropriation (p-value=0.0033), prioritization (p-value=0.0269), and bids and awards (p-value=0.0305). However, there established no significant difference in terms of delivery of service (p-value=6.6532). A government procurement tool kit was designed as output of this study that would address related concerns.
650			_aRequisition and processing of paper.
650			_aDelivery of service.
650			_aBudget appropriation.
942			_cTHES _jT 650 2019 350
999			_c9774 _d9774