Department of Education Race to the Top Assessment Program January 14, 2009 Public Meeting Procurement Issues Mark D. Colley 555 Twelfth Street, NW. Washington,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1. Regulatory Requirements 2. Written Policies & Procedures 3. Documentation of Expenses 4. Managing Cash 5. Efficient Accounting System 6. Budget Controls.
Advertisements

DRAFT GUIDANCE NOTE FOR MEMBER STATES ON FRAUD RISK ASSESSMENT
Fixed price contract: A contract that provides a price for each procurement item obtained under the contract.
DME PANEL CONTRACTS John Fisher Program Manager – Procurement.
Tendering Yuck!.
USDA Child Nutrition Programs.  Procurement (purchasing rules) must apply to all purchases that are supported, in whole or in part, with non-profit food.
Standards Aligned Systems MANDATE WAIVER PROGRAM 2008.
ICS 417: The ethics of ICT 4.2 The Ethics of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in Business by Simon Rogerson IMIS Journal May 1998.
Using Prevent Defense: Mitigating Legal Risk in Procurements Presented by Richard Pennington John Westrick.
Marcy Mealy Procurement Specialist CDBG Program
THE BIGGEST WINNER FISCAL EDITION. Test Your Fiscal Fitness Fiscal Basics Property & Facilities Cost Allocation Nonfederal Share Records & Reports
Congress and Contractor Personal Conflicts of Interest May 21, 2008 Jon Etherton Etherton and Associates, Inc.
Area Commissions Purpose Area commissions are established to afford additional voluntary citizen participation in decision-making in an advisory.
National Contract Management Association – Norfolk Chapter Contracting Ground Rules.
1 EFCA - 21th March 2002 Raul Mateus Paula. 2 This presentation underlines: The key objectives of the Relex Reform The division of the responsibilities.
OH 2-1 Agenda Sign in for all classes to earn credit for class Sign up for Presentations A test final test question will come from each of the group presentations.
THE PROJECT TEAM TYPICAL REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PROJECT TEAM TRADITIONAL TEAM ORGANIZATION AND VARIATIONS THE OWNER’S TEAM THE DESIGN.
Office of Business Development Training
Partnership Agreements Delegation of SBA’s Contract Execution Authority to other Federal Government Agencies.
1 CDBG Procurement Requirements For Local Officials.
TUTORIAL Grant Preparation & Project Management. Grant preparation What are the procedures during the grant preparations?  The coordinator - on behalf.
Deciding How To Apply NEPA Environmental Assessments Findings of No Significant Impact Environmental Impact Statements.
Guiding principles for the Federal acquisition system
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Pre-Proposal Conference Sourcing and Contracts Management System (CMS) Solution Request for Proposal FQ
1 Department of Education Race to the Top Assessment Program Procurement Strategy Discussion Dr. Allan V. Burman President Jefferson Solutions
Internal Auditing and Outsourcing
Collaborating with Others? If so, why and how? OSP AWARENESS MARCH 5, 2015 OSP.SYR.EDU
A SOUND INVESTMENT IN SUCCESSFUL VR OUTCOMES FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT.
ACE, ECCE & EFCA SEMINAR 21 October 2004 New EU Public Procurement Directive: EUROPEAN HARMONISATION OF PROCUREMENT PRACTICES IN THE SECTOR OF THE ENGINEERING.
School District Purchasing. Purchasing Authority Arizona Statutes Arizona Statutes Arizona Administrative Code Arizona Administrative Code  Primary source.
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Overview
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency How do you know how far you have got? How much you still have to do? Are we nearly there yet? What – Who – When.
Frameworks agenda Definition Advantages, features
To teach specification preparation  the importance of well-prepared specifications in procurement  the different types of specifications  basic writing.
I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e Headquarters U.S. Air Force 1 Fulfilling Air Force R&D Mission Needs William H. Anderson Associate.
Multiple Award Contracts Training Presented by Jennifer Salts State of Utah - Division of Purchasing 1.
Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act 2002 (PPEA) Joe Damico.
SBIR Budgeting Leanne Robey Chief, Special Reviews Branch, NIH.
The Doha Declaration and the Protocol amending the TRIPS Agreement Islamabad, 28 November 2007 Octavio Espinosa WIPO.
Main Requirements on Different Stages of the Licensing Process for New Nuclear Facilities Module 4.1 Steps in the Licensing Process Geoff Vaughan University.
1 Asset Management Steering Committee Briefing on Senate Bill 408 (Access Management) August 2013 Harold Lasley, P.E. Access Management Program.
Programme Objectives Analyze the main components of a competency-based qualification system (e.g., Singapore Workforce Skills) Analyze the process and.
Policies and procedures for developing acquisition plans; determining whether to use commercial or Government resources; whether it is more economical.
Special Railways Phase III Proposed approach to regulatory changes Jakarta 16 May 2011.
July 14, Rural Electric Cooperatives Procurement/Contracting Guidance Roger Jones Region VIII Disaster Assistance Division.
Watershed Management Act ESHB 2514 by 1998 Legislature RCW Voluntary Process Purpose: to increase local involvement in decision-making and planning.
National Institutes of Health U.S. Department of Health and Human Services NIEHS SRP Annual Meeting November 18 – 20, 2015 George Tucker Chief, Grants.
1 Voluntary and Community Sector Review Voluntary & Community Sector Review Grants Strategy Working Party Participative Session 28 September 2006 Appendix.
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GOVERNOR ’ S TASK FORCE ON CONTRACTING AND PROCUREMENT REVIEW Report Overview PD Customer Forum September 2002.
© 2004 The IPR-Helpdesk is a project of the European Commission DG Enterprise, co-financed within the fifth framework programme of the European Community.
SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS. KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF A SEP Projects must improve, protect or reduce risks to public health or environment. Projects.
Race to the Top Assessment Competition Public & Expert Input Meetings Procurement Washington, DC January 14, 2010.
MARINE CORPS INSTALLATIONS EAST CONTRACTING DIVISION DEFINING REQUIREMENTS.
Handling Appeals of PRRs and other Contested Issues ERCOT Board Retreat February 21, 2007.
Connecting for Health Common Framework: the Model Contract for Health Information Exchange Gerry Hinkley com July 18, 2006 Davis Wright.
Stockton University Purchasing and Grants 11/4/15.
OMB Circular A-122 and the Federal Cost Principles Copyright © Texas Education Agency
Introduction to Procurement for Public Housing Authorities Getting Started: Basic Administrative Requirements Unit 1.
ANRE The Regulator’s role with Small and Large Consumers - Romania Lusine Caracasian Head of Public Relations&Cooperation Office
1 Consent to Subcontract Breakout Session # D12 Name: Rita Wells Daniel Johnson Anthony Simmons Date:July 12, 2011 Time:11:15 – 12:30.
Douglas Richins, C.P.M. January 14, 2010 Washington D.C.
Processes and Procedures for Contracting at UO
Subrecipient Monitoring
Light Rail Transit Project
Processes and Procedures for Contracting at UO
Bidding Requirements Review Questions.
Managing Outgoing Subawards April 18, 2017
How Does a State Make an Award to Eligible Providers?
Facility Operations Contracting Support… Request for Proposals
CRA Training – Contracts
Presentation transcript:

Department of Education Race to the Top Assessment Program January 14, 2009 Public Meeting Procurement Issues Mark D. Colley 555 Twelfth Street, NW. Washington, D.C

How will state procurement rules impact consortium management and design?  States will need to have authority to act via a consortium –Cooperative purchasing –Common, but not uniform or universal –Waivers and approvals may be necessary  Potentially greater impact on the conduct and design of the vendor selection than on the consortium management and design –Test design –Vendor selection criteria and procedure –Specific state issues Procurement requirements Testing requirements/preferences 2

How will state procurement rules impact consortium management and design?  Most issues relate to surrender of autonomy and control –Source selection –Consortium management--leadership, meetings, administrative –Technical direction to vendors –Contract changes and modifications  Important to give early consideration to consortium relationship and governance –State procurement and legal officials not accustomed to such arrangements Most cooperative purchasing is for generic supplies or standardized services Sharing of programmatic decision-making take this out of the ordinary –Confronting and overcoming these issues early can avoid later delays and problems 3

How will state procurement rules impact consortium management and design?  Consider making this an element for consideration in consortium selection for funds –Has the consortia assessed the applicable state procurement rules of its members, and addressed/accommodated the differences? –Has the consortia developed and agreed to a sound management construct for making decisions and administering the consortia? 4

How best to facilitate state access to vendor information and ideas?  Many options for the states –RFIs –Draft RFP/specs –Industry meetings  Guidance from OCI law developments at the Federal level –Key is openness and transparency –Firewalls and mitigation –Public notice 5

How best to facilitate state access to vendor information and ideas?  Distinguish between technical advice contractors and test development contractors  Expect vendors to have some reluctance to share proprietary details in advance of contract award, particularly without assurances of protection from disclosure 6

How to structure the funding application to enable competitive state procurements?  Competitive procurement should be assumed –Consistent with Federal principles and requirements in nearly all states –Exceptions would not apply to this sort of a procurement  Do not worry too much over the particular methodology or procedure adopted –States have established procurement systems and practices; legal requirements for fairness, transparency, etc. –If multiple participating states find an approach acceptable, that should be a sufficient check –ABA Model Procurement Code can serve as a guide 7

How to structure the funding application to enable competitive state procurements?  Consider requesting in the application a description of the procurement process the consortium has agreed to follow, and make it part of the selection criteria –This will force the member states to confront and resolve the differences in their procurement systems in advance –Early involvement by responsible procurement and legal authorities within each state will be essential The differences can be overcome and accommodated, but considerable negotiation and review may be required Confirm approval by procurement and legal authorities 8

How to design a process flexible enough to accommodate challenges the States might encounter ?  Require that the consortium address concerns rather than meet strict requirements –Limit grant selection criteria to how states recognize and propose to address broad goals –For example, the judgment regarding “appropriate accommodations” may vary state-to-state –Likewise with “appropriate use of technology” states vary with regard to what’s “appropriate” (i.e. calculators) disparity as to technology available or funded variations in desired use of test results can affect scoring timing 9

How to design a process flexible enough to accommodate challenges the States might encounter ?  Many of the “required characteristics” for the “Design of Assessment Systems” appear to relate to what the vendors will do, rather than what the consortium will do— –How much of this will “flow down” into the criteria the consortia apply in vendor selection –Who decides what’s most important (i.e. weighting the criteria)? –How “customizable” will the tests be; options per state? –Need to address the tension over who decides how the funds will be spent, and against what criteria. 10

How to design a process flexible enough to accommodate challenges the States might encounter?  Fulfilling requirements may depend on Intellectual Property ownership –Government typically owns the IP that it pays to develop –Test developers may use proprietary software/systems that they have developed themselves Government will not pay for and own that IP But, the test items developed may not work on other systems or with different software –Alternatives Developed tests may be “Vendor specific” Recognize or work around the limitations  licensing rights Is there some sort of “Open Architecture” in this industry to specify in the procurement specifications? 11