Validación de Proveedores de Interventoría de la Infraestructura Vial con relación a Contratos Bajo la Modalidad de Concurso de Méritos Aplicado a la Gobernación del Cesar, Vigencia 2022

Abstract

This thesis analyzes market behavior regarding road infrastructure supervision (interventoría) procurement processes conducted through Open Merit-Based Selection by the Government of Cesar (Colombia) during 2022. The general objective was to evaluate these processes based on information published in the Electronic Public Procurement System (SECOP II), verifying bidders' compliance with technical, legal, and financial requirements, analyzing the evaluation methodology employed, and identifying the most recurrent shortcomings throughout the procurement cycle. The methodology employed a mixed-methods (qualitative-quantitative), non-experimental, descriptive-evaluative, cross-sectional retrospective design. The quantitative component consisted of a systematic documentary review using an evaluation matrix specifically designed to verify eligibility and selection criteria for each process under study. The qualitative component was based on structured interviews conducted with professionals experienced in construction supervision and public procurement, aiming to understand operational dynamics, recurring bidder observations, and critical factors affecting fair competition among participants. Results show that only approximately half of the evaluated bidders fully met the established requirements. The most frequent shortcomings were concentrated in the accreditation of general experience and, particularly, specific experience, undermining merit comparability and increasing the likelihood of disputes and remediation processes. Interviews revealed recurring concerns regarding the clarity of bidding terms, consistency between engineering designs and contractual requirements, technical justification of budgets (including the multiplier factor and indirect cost structures), and perceived barriers that discourage new market entrants from participating in these processes. The discussion concludes that supervision procurement failures stem not solely from market weaknesses but from the absence of a sufficiently clear, traceable, and standardized evaluation framework capable of safeguarding the merit principle and institutional transparency. As its main contribution, the study proposes an improvement plan and a standardized evaluation tool aimed at strengthening traceability, reducing discretion, professionalizing the evaluation process, and enhancing both transparency and efficiency in the selection of supervision consultants.