Text · page 5 of 13
A district’s board must comply with GML Section 104-b that requires the board to adopt written policies and procedures governing the procurement of goods and services that are not subject to statutory bidding requirements, such as professional services. Such policies and procedures help ensure the prudent and economical use of public money and guard against favoritism, extravagance, waste, fraud and abuse. Written procurement policies and procedures also provide guidance to employees involved in the procurement process and help ensure that competition is sought in a reasonable and cost-effective manner. These policies and procedures should indicate when officials must seek competition and outline procedures for determining the competitive method that will be used by the district. For example, competitive methods could include issuing a request for proposal (RFP) or obtaining written or verbal quotes. The procurement policy may also set forth circumstances when or types of procurement for which, in the sole discretion of district officials, the solicitation of alternative proposals or quotes will not be in the best interest of the district. The purchasing agent should establish procedures for monitoring purchasing and ensuring all goods and services are procured in the most prudent and economical manner possible and in compliance with statutes and established policies and procedures. This includes ensuring officials have obtained responses to an RFP or the appropriate number of quotes prior to approving a purchase, as well as maintaining adequate documentation to support and verify the actions taken. Officials Did Not Always Comply with Competitive Bidding Requirements We reviewed 17 purchases totaling approximately $4.9 million that were subject to the competitive bidding requirements of GML Section 103. We determined that 13 purchases totaling $4.7 million were properly procured. However, two purchases totaling $90,718 were obtained through a GPO but officials did not perform a cost- benefit analysis to determine whether procuring the goods and services through a GPO was cost effective and for two purchases totaling $63,433 officials did not comply with competitive bidding statutes. These purchases included 2,000 laptop cases totaling $35,780 and copy paper totaling $27,653. The Director of Informational and Instructional Technology, who approved the order for the laptop cases, stated that because they were purchased using federal grant funding, she did not consider that the purchase should have been competitively bid. However, that is not an exception for competitively bidding the purchase. The Assistant Director of the Buildings and Grounds Department (Assistant Director), who ordered the copy paper, stated that the paper was needed quickly, and because the purchase was made through three separate orders, department officials did not realize that the aggregate amount would be over $20,000 and required competitive bids. However, had officials considered Of f ic e of t he New York State Comptroller 3