Evaluator-to-Beneficiary Conflict Prohibition Applied to Engineer A Road Design
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/105#Evaluator-to-Beneficiary_Conflict_Prohibition_Applied_to_Engineer_A_Road_Design
Properties
Instance of
Evaluator-to-BeneficiaryConflictProhibitioninPublicContracting
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Evaluator-to-BeneficiaryConflictProhibitioninPublicContracting
Applied to
Engineer A's attempt to accept Smithtown road design contract following Engineer B's termination
Balancing with
Client Loyalty
Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits
Concrete expression
Engineer A served in a public advisory role with authority to evaluate Engineer B's performance and recommend or concur in termination; Engineer A is prohibited from accepting the road design contract that became available as a direct result of that termination
Confidence
0.92
Importance
high
Interpretation
The evaluator's authority over the contractor's fate creates an irreconcilable conflict of interest that taints any subsequent competitive benefit derived from the adverse outcome, making Engineer A ineligible for the design contract under NSPE Code Section II.4.e
Invoked by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Tension resolution
The conflict prohibition is categorical and cannot be cured by disclosure or procurement law compliance
Source Evidence
Source text
it is implied under the facts of this case that Engineer A is an officer or principal of his engineering firm, and thus according to NSPE Code of Ethics, section II.4.e, is not eligible to provide engineering services to Smithtown for the local road project
Text references
The Board does not believe that the disclosure of any further circumstances (e.g., private work in town for a developer, reviewing its own work) would be sufficient to avoid a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest
This conclusion is based upon the language in Section II.4.e and is irrespective of whether the town's procurement laws are scrupulously followed
it is this Board's view that there are serious ethical constraints that would preclude the selection of Engineer A by the town to perform the road design work
TTL
@prefix case105: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/105#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case105:Evaluator-to-Beneficiary_Conflict_Prohibition_Applied_to_Engineer_A_Road_Design a proeth:Evaluator-to-BeneficiaryConflictProhibitioninPublicContracting,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Evaluator-to-Beneficiary Conflict Prohibition Applied to Engineer A Road Design" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's attempt to accept Smithtown road design contract following Engineer B's termination" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Client Loyalty",
"Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "Engineer A served in a public advisory role with authority to evaluate Engineer B's performance and recommend or concur in termination; Engineer A is prohibited from accepting the road design contract that became available as a direct result of that termination" ;
proeth:confidence "0.92" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "105" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-28T08:37:40.867958+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "105" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-28T08:37:40.867958+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The evaluator's authority over the contractor's fate creates an irreconcilable conflict of interest that taints any subsequent competitive benefit derived from the adverse outcome, making Engineer A ineligible for the design contract under NSPE Code Section II.4.e" ;
proeth:invokedby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:principleclass "Evaluator-to-Beneficiary Conflict Prohibition in Public Contracting" ;
proeth:sourcetext "it is implied under the facts of this case that Engineer A is an officer or principal of his engineering firm, and thus according to NSPE Code of Ethics, section II.4.e, is not eligible to provide engineering services to Smithtown for the local road project" ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The conflict prohibition is categorical and cannot be cured by disclosure or procurement law compliance" ;
proeth:textreferences "The Board does not believe that the disclosure of any further circumstances (e.g., private work in town for a developer, reviewing its own work) would be sufficient to avoid a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest",
"This conclusion is based upon the language in Section II.4.e and is irrespective of whether the town's procurement laws are scrupulously followed",
"it is this Board's view that there are serious ethical constraints that would preclude the selection of Engineer A by the town to perform the road design work" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 105 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T08:46:32.092056"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 105 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
105
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-28T08:37:40.867958+00:00
First case
105
Generated
2026-02-28T08:37:40.867958+00:00
Attributed to
Case 105 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-28T08:46:32.092056
Generated by
ProEthica Case 105 Extraction