La Investigada fue adjudicada en dos contratos para el servicio de hosting y servicio de infraestructura e implementación de soporte en el marco del Programa para el Mejoramiento del Servicio de Información Presupuestaria de Planillas del Sector Público (el “Programa”).
Code
PE
El Investigado fue ejecutivo de una firma que participó en los procesos de selección para la adjudicación de contratos en el marco del Programa de para el Mejoramiento del Servicio de Información Presupuestaria de Planillas del Sector Público (el “Programa”).
In the context of the Public Sector Payroll Budget Information Service Improvement Program (the "Program"), the individual respondent (the "Respondent") acted as coordinator of one of the Program's projects and president of the selection committee for the awarding of Consulting Contracts. The Office of Institutional Integrity (“OII”) submitted a Statement of Charges and Evidence against the Respondent, among others, for allegedly engaging in a collusive practice related to the Program.
The Respondent was a partner and legal representative of a firm that was a member of a consortium, which was awarded a Consulting Contract (the “Contract”) in connection with the Water and Sanitation Improvement Program in Peru (the “Program”). The Office of Institutional Integrity (“OII”) submitted a Statement of Charges and Evidence against the Respondent and the other consortium members for allegedly engaging in fraudulent practices related to the Program.
The Respondent was a member of a consortium, which was awarded a Consulting Contract (“Contract”) in connection with the Water and Sanitation Improvement Program in Peru (the “Program”). The Office of Institutional Integrity (“OII”) submitted a Statement of Charges and Evidence against the Respondent and the other consortium members for allegedly engaging in fraudulent practices related to the Program.
The Office of Institutional Integrity submitted a Statement of Charges and Evidence against a principal respondent firm for allegedly engaging in fraudulent practices related to the Program. The Sanctions Officer (“SO”) determined that it is more likely than not that the principal respondent firm engaged in fraudulent practices.
The Individual Respondent (“Respondent”) was a partner and operations manager of a firm subcontracted by a consortium, which was awarded a Consulting Contract (the “Contract”) in connection with the Water and Sanitation Improvement Program in Peru (the “Program”). The Office of Institutional Integrity (“OII”) submitted a Statement of Charges and Evidence against the Respondent, the subcontractor and the parties composing the consortium, for allegedly engaging in fraudulent practices related to the Program.
The Individual Respondent (“Respondent”) was a partner and general manager of a firm subcontracted by a consortium, which was awarded a Consulting Contract (the “Contract”) in connection with the Water and Sanitation Improvement Program in Peru (the “Program”). The Office of Institutional Integrity (“OII”) submitted a Statement of Charges and Evidence against the Respondent, the subcontractor and the parties composing the consortium, for allegedly engaging in fraudulent practices related to the Program.