Southtowns Record

East Aurora Union Free School District - Procurement (2023M-125)

Government
East Aurora Union Free School District
Posted by publisher
Jan 5, 2024
Kind
State audit
Topics
Audits and oversight

Publisher's summary

The Board of Education (Board) and District officials did not always procure goods and services in a competitive manner. Officials did not update the procurement policy or ensure that employees followed New York State General Municipal Law (GML) when procuring goods and services. As a result, goods and services were purchased without the benefit of competition, resulting in the increased risk that taxpayer dollars were not expended in the most prudent and economical manner.

Original document

Text · page 4 of 13

Procurement
Each department in the District initiated the procurement of its own goods
and services as needed. As part of this process, the department sought out
competition for goods and services, determined which vendor to use, and retained  …[W]hen
any records if competition was sought. The department’s requisitioner input  procuring
purchase requisitions in the financial system to be approved by the Business
Administrator, as the purchasing agent, before the goods or services on the  goods and
requisition could be ordered.  services
How Should School District Officials Procure Goods and Services?  through State
School district (district) officials must comply with GML Section 103 that generally
  contracts,
requires districts to solicit competitive bids for purchase contracts that exceed  officials are
$20,000 and contracts for public work that exceed $35,000. In determining
whether the dollar threshold will be exceeded, officials must consider the  responsible
aggregate amount reasonably expected to be spent on “all purchases of the  for ensuring
same1 commodities, services or technology to be made within the twelve-month
period commencing on the date of the purchase,” whether from a single vendor or  that the
multiple vendors.
  prices
In lieu of seeking competitive bids, a district is authorized to “piggyback,” which  paid are in
allows the district to procure certain goods and services through the use of other
governmental contracts. In some cases, group purchasing organizations (GPOs)  accordance
may advertise the use of such governmental contracts to other local governments.
This “piggybacking” exception allows districts to benefit from the competitive
  with those
process already undertaken by other local governments. However, when  contracts.
procuring goods and services in this manner, officials must review the contract
to determine that: (1) the contract was awarded by another governmental entity;
(2) the contract was made available for use by the other governmental entity; and
(3) the contract was originally awarded to the lowest responsible bidder or on the
basis of best value in a manner consistent with GML Section 103. Although not
required under the District’s policy, officials should perform a cost-benefit analysis
before using the exception. This will help ensure that the District is furthering the
underlying purposes of the exception, and that the procurement is consistent with
the purposes of competitive bidding.

District officials may also choose to purchase goods and services off New York
State contracts (State contracts) instead of competitively bidding. This exception
to bid requirements allows a district to benefit from the competitive process
already undertaken by the State without the cost-benefit analysis and steps
required for “piggybacking.” However, when procuring goods and services through
State contracts, officials are responsible for ensuring that the prices paid are in
accordance with those contracts.

1 For this purpose, commodities, services or technology that are similar or essentially interchangeable should
be considered “the same.”

2  Of f ic e of t he New York State Comptroller