KenGen General Manager Vincent Mamboleo On The Spot Over Costly Power Plant Consultancy Tender

Kenya Electricity Generating Company (KenGen) Acting General Manager for Supply Chain Vincent Mamboleo finds himself at the center of a procurement storm after endorsing a controversial tender award that has cost taxpayers millions in potential savings and raised serious questions about his stewardship of public resources.

Documents reveal that Mamboleo personally endorsed the award of a €18.16 million (Sh2.7 billion) consultancy contract to Italian firm ELC Electroconsult on March 10, 2025, despite a competing bid from Sintecnica Engineering and Steam joint venture that was €1.37 million (Sh200 million) cheaper.

The decision has now backfired spectacularly, with the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board (PPARB) cancelling the award and ordering a fresh evaluation—a move that has exposed fundamental flaws in KenGen’s procurement processes under Mamboleo’s watch.

According to PPARB documents, the Financial Evaluation Report dated March 3, 2025, recommended ELC Electroconsult for the Olkaria VII geothermal plant consultancy tender. This recommendation was then endorsed by Mamboleo on March 10, 2025, setting in motion a procurement decision that would soon unravel.

The endorsement is particularly troubling given that both bidders had met the minimum technical threshold of 70%, meaning the contract should have gone to the lowest bidder—a fundamental principle of competitive procurement that Mamboleo, as an experienced procurement officer, should have upheld.

Instead, KenGen proceeded to award the contract to the higher bidder, with Mamboleo’s signature appearing on the key documents that justified this decision.

The controversy deepens when examining the evaluation methodology that Mamboleo’s team employed. PPARB found that KenGen’s evaluation committee “improperly introduced an undisclosed sub-criteria and adopted a comparative methodology not contemplated in the tender document.”

This finding directly implicates Mamboleo’s oversight of the procurement process. As the Acting General Manager for Supply Chain, he bears ultimate responsibility for ensuring his evaluation committees follow proper procedures and criteria outlined in tender documents.

The fact that his team introduced undisclosed criteria that favored the higher-priced bidder raises serious questions about the integrity of the evaluation process under his leadership.

The tender was initiated to secure funding from the European Investment Bank (EIB), making adherence to international procurement standards even more critical. EIB funding typically comes with strict requirements for transparent, competitive bidding processes designed to ensure value for money.

Mamboleo’s endorsement of a flawed evaluation process not only violated domestic procurement laws but potentially jeopardized KenGen’s relationship with this crucial development partner. Such funding partners expect rigorous procurement standards, particularly for projects involving public resources.

In court papers filed as KenGen challenges PPARB’s decision, Mamboleo has argued that the board’s ruling “clearly pre-determines the winner” and reduces re-evaluation to mere “rubber-stamping.”

However, this defense appears to miss the point entirely. PPARB’s intervention was necessary precisely because Mamboleo’s original evaluation process had already predetermined the winner through questionable scoring methods that favored the higher bidder.

His claim that the board “usurped the evaluation committee’s powers” rings hollow when the committee under his supervision had already exceeded its mandate by introducing undisclosed evaluation criteria.

This is not the first time questions have been raised about KenGen’s procurement practices. The company has faced previous challenges over tender awards, suggesting systemic issues that require urgent attention.

Mamboleo’s role in this latest controversy raises questions about whether KenGen has the right leadership in place to manage its procurement function, particularly given the company’s ambitious expansion plans requiring multiple high-value contracts.

The financial implications extend beyond the immediate Sh200 million difference between the two bids. PPARB’s intervention has delayed the project, potentially affecting KenGen’s timeline for the 80MW Olkaria VII plant that would increase the company’s geothermal capacity to 879.3MW.

Legal costs, administrative delays, and potential reputational damage with development partners represent additional costs that ultimately burden taxpayers—costs that could have been avoided with proper procurement oversight.

As KenGen awaits Justice John Chigiti’s ruling on July 24, the company faces fundamental questions about its procurement governance.

For Mamboleo, the controversy represents a significant test of his leadership and competence in managing public resources. His handling of this matter will likely influence his future prospects within the organization and the broader public sector.