UNICEF is accountable to children and women first, but also to Government and donors.
Every dollar invested should contribute to the development of children and women. Therefore we expect vendors (suppliers, contractors or NGOs) to exhibit the highest sense of responsibility in their discharge of contractual obligations.
In line with this, UNICEF will acknowledge vendors who meet or exceed our expectations. As a result, the Supply and Procurement Section has designed four categories for ranking its vendors. The following criteria apply:
b. Timely delivery
c. Value for money
d. Transparency and honesty
f. Continuous improvement
g. Provision of value added services/goods
Consistently exceeding expectations in most of the criteria.
• A vendor regularly delivers expected products before the standard lead time on the purchase order.
• A vendor reports on the situation of children after a major disaster as a contribution to UNICEF’s mission although this is not required under its contract.
• A vendor is awarded a contract, but recommends useful changes in the contract to achieve the objectives without any financial benefits.
• A vendor provides value added services i.e. installation services for products that require installations at no extra cost.
Satisfactory performance and regularly meeting requirements as contracted.
• A vendor always delivers expected products and/or services as contracted without any deviation.
Inconsistent performance but failures are rectified in a timely manner.
• A vendor always asks for extension to complete an assignment but completes the work within the agreed and negotiated additional time.
• A vendor frequently requests substitution of samples from the originally submitted sample but the alternative sample supplied is satisfactory.
Unsatisfactory performance, dishonest behaviour, lack of transparency and questionable ethical conduct.
• A vendor always fails to deliver on time and is routinely performing poorly.
• A vendor fails to employ the right number/skilled staff on UNICEF project as per its technical proposal, on which basis he was awarded the contract or PCA.
• A vendor provides substandard products compared to the sample agreed to.
• Gross neglect of contractual obligations.
• Gross ethical misconduct and/or fraud.
• No or very limited customer service
Bad vendors will be blacklisted.