Delhi Government monitors procurement after rise in COVID-19
The Delhi government in India has today deployed two officer teams to monitor procurement and medical oxygen supply due to a shortage following a rise in Coronavirus cases in the Indian capital.
According to the newspaper, Delhi on Sunday, COVID-19 cases reached their highest daily levels today, with 25,462 new cases reported and a COVID positivity test rate of 29.74 per cent.
It is also monitoring the administration of the antiviral drug, remdesivir.
In a tweet, the Chief Minister's office said: " The Delhi government will now directly oversee the entire procurement and distribution process of both remdesivir injections and medical oxygen to ensure adequate treatment for corona patients in Delhi."
The two teams of officers will consist of nine members, with one of teams being tasked to oversee oxygen filling plants and operations of medical suppliers, whilst the other will focus its efforts on the entire procurement process of medical oxygen, according to an order issued by the government's health department.
The order stated: "The officers will oversee the entire procurement process of medical oxygen by the filler agency and ensure that the quantity of oxygen procured is properly entered in the dedicated register.
"The team will oversee the distribution of medical oxygen to various hospitals and nursing homes in Delhi. Each officer shall submit a report on a daily basis to the Officer on Special Duty."
The government made clear that the teams will be liable for implementing the order, despite the release of a daily report from the drug inspectors outlining the sale and distribution of the remdesivir injection.
In a second order, the Delhi government assigned 28 inspectors to track the movement of remdesivir injections on a daily basis.
The order stated: "The drug inspectors shall oversee the whole procurement process of remdesivir injection starting from placement of an order and its receipt by distributor or dealer from a company.
"The team will ensure that all supplies received by distributors and dealers are entered in their relevant records and all inventories are properly accounted."
The government in Delhi announced an hour before this story was published that the city is due to go into a week-long lockdown as a result of the surge in COVID cases, starting tonight, Monday 19 April.
AICPA: The State of Risk Management
In the fall of 2020, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)surveyed 420 members of the AICPA’s Business and Industry group who serve in chief financial officer or equivalent senior executive positions representing different sizes and types of organisations— resulting in The 2021 State of Risk Oversight report.
Let’s review its key findings.
First, to ensure a clear understanding of our starting point, let’s review the drivers.
The report states that “risk volumes and complexities are at their highest level in 12 years, increased by significant events tied to COVID-19, social unrest, national elections, extremely low-interest rates, and a host of other risk triggers – no type of organization is immune”.
The supply chain disruptions brought on by the global pandemic changed the nature of top risks, with core operations having been significantly impacted by risk events, highlighting the need for improved risk management and continuity of business plans.
Organisations are also facing further pressures from stakeholders to provide more information on risk and mitigation strategies.
Despite the well-accepted need to better prepare for the unforeseen, only 30% of respondents report they are “mostly satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their organization’s Key Risk Indicators (KRIs).
From JIT to JIC— When in Doubt, Stock
It’s been said that a companies shortcomings can be seen in its safety stocks. Safety stocks or increased inventory levels have their time and place and are a legitimate mitigation tactic. However, companies are often quick to jump from JIT to JIC in place of evaluated, strategic decision making where trade-offs are consciously made based on organisational objectives and values.
Although there is a growing trend towards increasing safety stocks and buffering supply chains, the report states that the majority of organisations have not taken the extra step of aggregating risk information to an enterprise-level inventory of top risks. Organisations continue to struggle in integrating a more formal risk management approach and implement strategic action plans.
Financial services aside, most companies are not considering risk exposure when evaluating possible strategic initiatives or making capital allocations. i.e., risk is not even considered when making some of the business’s most important decisions.
Critically for Procurement, who are often in the position of having to make those critical tradeoffs, most organisations do not formally articulate tolerances for risk-taking as part of their strategic planning activities.
The report also highlights that there is considerable room for improvement when it comes to mitigating reputation and brand risk.
ERM— We’ve come some of the way, baby…
- • While progress has been made in implementing complete ERM processes, more than two-thirds of organizations surveyed still cannot claim they have “complete ERM in place.”
- • Public companies and financial services organisations exhibit the biggest move towards ERM in 2020.
- • With the exception of non-profit organizations, most types of organisations believe their risk management oversight is more robust or mature than any of the prior four years. But we aren’t quite there yet...
- • Fewer than half of respondents describe their organisation’s approach to risk management as “mature” or “robust.”
The Impact Culture on Risk
Some organisations believe other priorities stand in the way of more advanced risk management and that risk is managed in more informal ways, impeding the move to ERM.
The report also indicates that most organisations fail to provide training or guidance on risk management. This can potentially lead to a lack of understanding of the imperativeness of proactive risk management efforts and their ability to improve a companies performance.
Furthermore, risk management is not incentivised, with few organisations embedding risk management incentives into performance compensation arrangements.
There seems to be a misalignment between a companies tolerance for risk and its risk management actions. Despite the majority of organisations describing their risk culture as “strongly risk-averse” to “risk-averse”, only a minority of respondents describe their risk management processes as “mature” or “robust.”
So, it would seem, organisations are aware of the heightened need for risk management, consider themselves to be “risk-averse”, even perhaps strongly so, yet have immature risk management processes and a culture that impedes progress.
The question remains, what, if anything, will companies do about it?
For a detailed analysis that provides helpful perspective and benchmarking on risk management, download the 2021 State of Risk Oversight report.