Q = Question; A = Answer
Is there a checklist of items we need to adhere to in these cooperative purchases? I believe as long as we can show they were competitively bid, we complete a price analysis, and we append the final contract signed with the vendor to include the FTA clauses and requirements, we would satisfy the FTA's competitive procurement requirements. This is based on the circular as I could not find a PSR checklist for State, GSA or Local Government Cooperative Purchases.
We were told recently that we violated the requirements for piggybacking as these cooperative procurement master agreements did not contain minimums and maximums as required in piggybacking/IDIQ contracts. But I believe these contracts were mistakenly categorized as piggybacking/IDIQs.
A. State GSA type contracts awarded competitively for the benefit of all State agencies are not considered "piggybacking/IDIQ" actions and do not require minimum and maximum quantities or assignability clauses. You may use these contracts if you include all FTA required clauses and certifications with your first purchase order issued under the State contract. If you are buying a product that is other than the lowest offered price for that product under all State contracts, you must document the file as to why the higher priced product must be purchased. You must also determine that the State contracts were awarded with full and open competition and were not subject to geographical preferences (e.g., giving in-state vendors a bidding preference - as some states have such practices that are prohibited by FTA). (Posted: January, 2013)
Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Venture Letter (PDF) (Posted: July 30, 2013)
A. FTA Circular 4220.1F, Chapter VI, paragraph 6, requires a cost or price analysis for every procurement and the starting point for the analysis is the preparation of an ICE. For commercial items the ICE would be based on recent prices established in the open market under competitive pricing conditions. If the State procurement office performed a price analysis for the award of their contracts, you may accept that analysis if you determine it is adequate. If you select a product from the State contract that is higher priced than other items of the same nature on the State contract, you will have to document your reasons for requiring the higher priced product.
FTA would expect you to review the State procedures used to award the various State contracts and determine that they complied with FTA procedures in 4220.1F with respect to full and open competition. This would include a determination that no local geographical preferences were used in awarding the contracts, such as giving Iowa State companies preferential pricing treatment.
If the State contracts do not include required FTA clauses, including Buy America, you may add these clauses and certifications when you place your first order under the State contract.
You must document the procurement files with a “record of the procurement history,” including the analysis that you performed of the State contract for compliance with FTA policies, and how you arrived at your determination that the price being paid is fair and reasonable. (Posted: November, 2013)
A. FTA grantees located outside of a State's borders are not permitted to purchase from that State's schedule. This policy is in accordance with FTA Circular 4220.1F, Chapter V, paragraph 4.
We would also refer you to a decision letter issued by the FTA Chief Counsel's office in connection with the State of Minnesota's Cooperative Purchasing Contract (CPV), which may be found at the FTA web site: Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Venture Letter (PDF). The FTA letter discusses a number of important issues that affect the use of contracts awarded by other agencies, which you should be familiar with. (Posted: December, 2013)
A. FTA has not changed its policies regarding State GSA-type contracts that are awarded for the benefit of subordinate government agencies. If the State contract does not include Federal clauses, such as Buy America, the clauses may be added by the grantee with the first purchase order issued to a vendor under the State contract. The FTA policy may be found in FTA Circular 4220.1F, Chapter V, paragraph 4.c. (Posted: December, 2014)
A. FTA Circular 4220.1F, Chapter V, paragraphs 4 and 7 discuss FTA requirement pertaining to State Purchasing Schedules and assignment of contract rights held by others.
A State Purchasing Schedule that is awarded for the benefit of subordinate government agencies within the State is not required to contain minimum and maximum quantities. The FTA requirement for minimum and maximum quantities applies to grantees acting alone or jointly with other known grantees for a particular acquisition. In this case the contract must reflect the reasonably expected needs of the parties, and excess quantities may not be added for the purpose of allowing other agencies that are not part of the original buying group to "piggyback" the contract after award. (Posted: December, 2014)
A. WATA's use of the State contract is permissible, assuming the contract was awarded for the benefit of subordinate State agencies. For your information, when grantees use State Purchasing Schedules, FTA does not classify the action as "piggybacking," and rules established for "piggybacking" do not apply to State Purchasing Schedules. "Piggybacking" as used by FTA refers to the assignment of unanticipated excess contract rights by one agency to a grantee that was not known at the time of the original contract award. FTA rules for piggybacking are contained in paragraph 7, "Existing Contracts," of Chapter V of 4220.1F. (Posted: December, 2014)
A. The State contract is exempt from having to include minimum and maximum quantities. (Posted: December, 2014)
A. As already noted, WATA may use the State contract. (Posted: December, 2014)