{"references": ["1.\tAngeles C., (2017). \"Taxonomy of Buying Decision Approaches\". Journal of Marketing. American Marketing Association. 2.\tArjan M., (2016). Using effective supplier appraisal techniques to improve the supply chain. 3.\tBailey U., (2014). Introduction to the Philosophy of Methodology. London: Sage Publications. 4.\tChen R. and Paulraj A., (2017). Contracts, relationships, and integration: Towards a model of the procurement of complex performance. International Journal of Procurement Management. 5.\tChurchhill S., (2017). Qualitative Research: Issues of Theory, Method and Practice, Third Edition. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi, Singapore: Sage Publications 6.\tEuropean Union (2017). Purchasing Performance: Measuring, Procurement, and Selling the Purchasing. 7.\tFavre L., et al., (2014). Supplier evaluation and performance excellence: a guide to meaningful metrics and successful results. J. Ross Publishing. 8.\tGurdarshan D., (2017). Purchasing and Supply Chain Management: Analysis, Strategy, Planning, and Practice. Andover: Cengage Learning. 9.\tJohnston T. and Lewin G., (2010). The understanding of current business-to-business e-procurement practices by describing the success factors and challenges to its implementation in the corporate setting. Nairobi-Kenya. 10.\tKeith B. and Handley D., (2011). Contracts, relationships, and integration: Towards a model of the procurement of complex performance. International Journal of Procurement Management. 11.\tKendall E., (2012). Fundamentals of Methodology\", a series of papers On the Social Science Research Network (SSRN). 12.\tKrlinger P., (2017). Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative methods. 3rd edition. Alta Mira Press, Walnut Creek, California. 13.\tMurray K., (2018). Purchasing and Supply Chain Management. Cengage Learning. 14.\tPaige H., (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. 15.\tRobert D., (2014). \"Combining qualitative and quantitative research in developing 'indicators' of research\". International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 16.\tRoehrich F., (2016). A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation. MIT Press. 17.\tRPPA, (2018). Procurement and Supply Operations in Rwandan public institutions, 2012. 18.\tShih et al., (2014). Development and validation of a measurement instrument for studying supply chain management practices. Journal of Operations Management 23(6). 19.\tSteven Sin Choon Heong (2020). Procurement in public institutions: An Exploratory Multi-Case Study from Switzerland. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research. 20.\tTirole J., (2015). Understanding supply chain management: critical research and a theoretical framework. International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 42, No. 1, 2004, pp. 131-163. 21.\tWebster N., Wind P., and Sheth D., (2009). The Power to Procure a look inside the City of Austin Procurement Program. Retrieved 26 October 2010. 22.\tWeele Van G., (2019). Procurement practices in retail product management: Buying and Merchandising. 23.\tWill Kenton, (2020). E-Ordering and E-Informing on Supply Chain Performance in Retail Marketing Outlets in Kenya. Journal of Marketing and Consumer Research."]}

Procurement practices have been conceptualized as an overall assessment of service by the customers. It is an important function and a key decision criterion in-service evaluation by the customers in the service sector. Perceived procurement practices are believed to be resulting from a comparison between customers' prior expectations about the service and their perceptions after the experience. The study reviewed the procurement practices and supply chain performance of NGOs in Rwanda, especially in BUFMAR. A descriptive survey design was used, and target population was 96 employees in BUFMAR, questionnaire used in data collection and methods of data analysis were descriptive statistics methods and inferential analysis. The results revealed that there is a significant, and positive strong correlation between procurement planning and supply chain performance of NGOs in Rwanda as Pearson correlation is 0.760** with the p-value of 0.000, which is less than both standard significance levels of 0.05 and 0.01. Findings showed that there is a significant and positive strong correlation between procurement tendering and supply chain performance of NGOs of BUFMAR in Rwanda as Pearson correlation is .752** with the p-value is 0.000, which is less than both standard significance levels of 0.05 and 0.01. The results confirmed that there is a positive and very strong correlation between Supplier selection and supply chain performance of NGOs of BUFMAR as Pearson correlation is 0.746** with the p-value is 0.000, which is less than both standard significance levels of 0.05 and 0.01. The results show that there is a significant and positive strong correlation between contract management and supply chain performance of NGOs of BUFMAR in Rwanda as the Pearson correlation is .754** with the p-value is 0.000, which is less than both standard significance levels of 0.05 and 0.01. Findings generally revealed that the p-value is 0.000 which is less than both standard significance levels of 0.05 and 0.01 as it is an indicator of the existence of the significant relationship between procurement practices and supply chain performance of NGOs of BUFMAR in Rwanda, since, as a Pearson correlation value was 0.762** which is a positive and very strong correlation between two variables (procurement practices and supply chain performance of NGOs of BUFMAR in Rwanda).