Professional Development Institute 2009

1. Professional Development Institute 2009 Procurement and Contracting Services

2. Staff

3. Procurement Rules Update Presented by Bob Schur, J.D.

4. Procurement Rules Update • CSU opted out of State of Colorado Procurement Code • Effective January 1, 2008 • What does this mean for CSU? • Dollar thresholds for solicitations remain the same • Protests are now handled internally by CSU • Can participate in Group Purchasing Organizations (GPO’s) • E & I, US Communities, National IPA etc. • At the discretion of the Procurement office • The use of Colorado Correctional Industries for office furniture remains mandated by State Statute • Fiscal Rule requirements are not affected by opt out • View the Colorado State Procurement Code and State Fiscal Rules at: http://www.purchasing.colostate.edu/pages/manuals.asp

5. Fiscal Rules Update Presented by Bob Schur, J.D. and Elizabeth Kelly, J.D.

6. Fiscal Rules Update Effective January 1, 2009 • Fiscal Rule 2-2 Commitment Vouchers • Fiscal Rule 3-1  State Contracts • Related Policies

7. Fiscal Rule 2-2:Commitment Vouchers • Definition: A State approved form • Purchase order • Contract • Travel Authorization • Exclusion: Procurement card (ACARD) • Most CSU cards have a $3K limit with some up to $5K • Commitment Voucher may be used, but is not required for purchases of $5K or less • Supporting documentation may include invoice, receipt or other appropriate document • Unauthorized Purchases • Failure of a person or department to have an approved commitment voucher prior to the purchase of goods or services = Statutory Violation • Unauthorized Purchase Process

8. State Contracts New FR to comply with the Centralized Contract Management System, Personal Services Contracts >$100,000 must include: • Performance measures and standards (objective test) • Vendor accountability standards specified in the contract; can withhold payment until successful completion /achievement of performance standards. • Monitoring requirements to measure both CSU and vendor performance (monitoring must be done by designated contract monitor) •  Processes to resolve situations in which CSU determines noncompliance, including termination of the contract

9. State Contracts • Intergovernmental Agreements may “go silent” on choice of governing law without legal approval • All other changes to Special Provisions still require legal approval (and usually OSC waiver) • Specific prohibition on indemnity by CSU • Monitoring of State Contracts for Personal Services (Sponsored Projects are exempt)

10. State Controller Policies • Review and Approval – Institutions Of Higher Education with Delegation • Sponsored Projects • Statutory violations/ late contracts • Vendor Agreements

11. Senate Bill 07-228 Presented by Frank Krappes and Farrah Bustamante

12. SENATE BILL 07-228 • Legislation that requires formation of Centralized Contract Management System • Personal services contracts in excess of $100,000 • Construction contracts in excess of $500,000 • Centralized Contract Management System will be available to the public via a website maintained by the state • Some sections already in effect; CMS effective date is June 30, 2009 • Establishes policy of fair and open competition, mechanisms for monitoring, evaluating and reporting contractor performance and location of contract performance

13. SENATE BILL 07-228 • Sole Source Contracts for Personal Services: • All must be posted on the BIDS system • Minimum of three (3) business days • If other acceptable contractors are identified, a competitive solicitation must be issued • All sole source contracts for personal services will be reported annually to the Legislative Council of the General Assembly • The justification provided in support of the sole source and all steps taken in the determination of the sole source will be included in the report

14. SENATE BILL 07-228 • Monitoring Contractor Performance: • Requires performance measures and standards developed specifically for the contract • Performance measures and standards must be negotiated with the contractor prior to contract execution • Specifies how CSU and contractor will evaluate each others’ performance, including: • Progress reports • Site visits • Inspections • Review of performance data • Monitoring ensures the results, objectives and obligations of the contract are met

15. SENATE BILL 07-228 • Contractor Evaluation and Reporting: • Evaluating personal services contracts • A standardized form to be completed by the Designated Contract Monitor, including the following: • Name of the Designated Contract Monitor completing the evaluation form • Numerical rating relating to quality • Numerical rating relating to cost • Numerical rating relating to deadlines • Evaluating construction contracts • A standardized form to be completed by the Designated Contract Monitor, including the following: • Name of the Designated Contract Monitor completing the evaluation form • Initial amount budgeted in the contract vs. the actual amount paid • Completion date specified in the contract vs. the actual completion date • Numerical rating that assesses the overall qualitative performance • Numerical rating that assesses the overall safety performance

16. SENATE BILL 07-228 • Contractor Evaluation and Reporting: (continued) • Evaluation submitted to contactor for review and comment in response to the rating • Contractor has dispute rights concerning the evaluation • Evaluation and any response from the contractor is submitted centrally at CSU for recording to the Centralized Contract Management System database • The evaluation must be made public via website • Within thirty days after completion of the contract

17. SENATE BILL 07-228 • Location of Contract Performance: • Prior to contract execution, the contractor must disclose where the work will be performed, including any subcontracts • If any of the work is to be performed outside of the State of Colorado or the United States, including subcontracts • Contractor must provide a statement setting forth why it is necessary or advantageous to go outside of Colorado or the U.S. to perform the work

18. SENATE BILL 07-228 SUMMARY • Formation of Publicly Accessible Centralized Contract Management System • Personal services contracts in excess of $100,000 • Construction contracts in excess of $500,000 • June 30, 2009 Effective Date • All Sole Sources must be posted on BIDS • Minimum of three (3) business days • Competitive solicitation must be done if other vendors are identified • Specifics on how CSU and Contractor will evaluate each other’s performance • Standardized form to evaluate Personal Services contracts • Four (4) items to complete evaluation • Standardized form to evaluate Construction contracts • Five (5) items to complete evaluation • Evaluation submitted to contractor for review • Contractor has dispute rights • Evaluation and Contractor comments submitted to CSU for input into Centralized Contract Management System • Must be posted within 30 days • Prior to contract execution, contractor must disclose where work will be performed • If any work to be performed outside Colorado or United States, vendor must provide statement indicating why it is advantageous to have the work performed outside Colorado or the country • Including subcontractors

19. Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Presented by Farrah Bustamante and Stan Oakland

20. Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP) • A.K.A “green” purchasing • What is environmentally preferable? • “Products or services that have a lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment when compared with competing products or services that serve the same purpose.” • CSU Purchasing Power of $250M+ • We can make a big impact with everyday purchases • CRS 24-103-207.5: • Can apply up to a 5% preference for “green” or environmentally friendly products • Preference may exceed 5% • If cost of ownership life cycle analysis establishes long term savings

21. Environmentally Preferable Purchasing • What is greenwashing? • When a company or organization spends more time and money claiming to be “green” through advertising and marketing than actually implementing business practices that minimize environmental impact. • What can you do on campus to be “green”? • Look for “Eco-labels” or Certifications • Energy Star, Forest Stewardship Council, EPEAT, GreenSeal etc. • Use office paper with a minimum 30% PCW • CSU uses approx. 278,352 pounds of paper per year • 77.5 % (or about 215,641 pounds) of the paper has NO recycled content • Want to know how our paper choices impact the environment? • Paper Calculator shows the environmental impacts of different papers (virgin vs. various PCW) across their full lifecycle • http://www.edf.org/papercalculator/ • Use flat screen monitors • Set office copier to “sleep” when not in use • Saves up to 40% on energy costs • Require all office copiers/printers duplex • Buy Energy Star or EPEAT rated electronics • Use computer/electronics exchange programs • Dell Disposal Service, HP Trade-In Program, Apple Recycling Program • Use “green” cleaning products • And a lot more……

22. Environmentally Preferable Purchasing • What are some other ways to be green? • Planet Partners Program • Toner/ink cartridge recycling program directly with HP • Ensures cartridges do not end up in landfill • Will allow CSU to receive over $50K worth of Energy Star compliant printers/copiers • For more information visit: http://www.purchasing.colostate.edu/pages/planet_partners.asp • Revised delivery schedules for high volume vendors • MWF deliveries for toner/ink cartridges and office supplies • Green products are indicated on SciQuest • Plan ahead and consolidate purchases

23. Maximizing the Value from your Solicitation Presented by Procurement and Contracting Services Staff

24. Maximizing Your Solicitation • How can you maximize your solicitation? • Get PCS involved at the onset of procurements which will require source selection • Planning/Funding Meetings • Funding Review/Recommendation Boards/Committees • Plan ahead and try to consolidate your purchases • Consult with Purchasing Agent to discuss best source selection method (DQ, IFB, RFP, ISS) for your project • Requisition • Dollar Thresholds • Departmental Discretion • Up to $5K for goods or services • Purchasing Agent discretion • Up to $10K for goods and $25k for services

25. Maximizing Your Solicitation • What are the differences between source selection methods? • Documented Quote • DQ • Dollar thresholds • For goods • $10,000 to $150,000 • For Services • $25,000 to $150,000 • More flexible than other source selection method • Generally, short turnaround time • Minimum of three (3) business days • Can evaluate on more than price • Vendor negotiations

26. Maximizing Your Solicitation • Differences between source selection methods (continued): • Invitation for Bid • IFB • For procurements over $150,000 for both goods and services • Not as flexible as DQ • Formal, sealed response • Must be posted for at least 14 calendar days • Evaluate responses on lowest price which meets objective specifications only • Cannot have lock out specifications (proprietary, patented, etc.) • Two Step Invitation for Bid • Explanation

27. Maximizing Your Solicitation • Differences between source selection methods (continued): • Request for Proposal • RFP • Generally for procurements over $150,000 • More complex than DQ or IFB’s • Formal, sealed response • Must be posted for at least 30 calendar days • Must have a committee of at least three (3) evaluators • Cannot include Purchasing Agent • RFP process can take at least 90 days after posting • Can evaluate on other criteria besides price • Objective and subjective criteria • Cannot have lock out specifications (proprietary etc.)

28. Q & A

29. Coming Attractions • Forms for Reporting SB228 Compliance • Web-accessible database for all CSU Contracts • Implementation of a single Contract Request Form in place of many standard contract forms • Small Business Supplier Showcase • February 24, 2009 • Will highlight Small, Minority and Disadvantaged Businesses • SQ/Kuali Integration