GovPro - August/September 2012
36
AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012 www.govpro.com Buying Local in Oregon Help From Big Green Data Forum Awards Roundup Fred Marks on T&M Contracts How do I choose? Who has the best price? What about local preferences? Coop Meeting of the Minds A PENTON MEDIA publication The official publication of NIGP: The Institute for Public Procurement PLUS:
description
The official publication of NIGP.
Transcript of GovPro - August/September 2012
AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012www.govpro.com
Buying Local in Oregon
Help From Big Green Data
Forum Awards Roundup
Fred Marks on T&M Contracts
How do I choose? Who has the best price?
What about local preferences?
Coop Meeting of the Minds
A PENTON MEDIA publication
The official publication of NIGP: The Institute for Public Procurement
PLUS:
SUBSCRIPTIONS: Free subscriptions to Government
Procurement (ISSN 1078-0769) are limited to public-sector
purchasing professionals. Those qualified may apply by
calling 847-763-9670 or visiting http://www.govpro.com.
Subscriptions for others are available, subject to publisher’s
acceptance, at these rates: U.S. and U.S. possessions, $35/1
year, $45/2 years, $7/single copy; Canada, $40/1 year, $60/2
years, $8/single copy; international, $45/1 year, $70/2 years,
$10/single copy. Send subscription payment (by check or
credit card) to Penton Media Customer Service, Government
Procurement, PO Box 2100, Skokie, IL 60076-7800. For all
customer service inquiries, call 847-763-9670; fax to
847-763-9673; e-mail [email protected]; or
visit: http://www.submag.com/ sub/gp. Buy positive
microfilm or microfiche copies of out-of-print issues from
National Archive Publishing Co. (NAPC), 300 N. Zeeb Rd.,
PO Box 998, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-0998;
phone: 734-302-6500 or 800-420-6272, ext. 6578.
LIST RENTALS: To rent circulation lists of Government
Procurement, contact Merit Direct, 333 Westchester Ave., White
Plains, NY 10604; Website: http://www.meritdirect.com/market
COPYING: Permission is granted to users registered with the
Copyright Clearance Center Inc. (CCC) to photocopy any article
(except for those in which separate copyright ownership is indicated
on the first page of the article), for a base fee of $1.25 per copy
of the article plus 60 cents per page paid directly to CCC, 222
Rosewood Dr., Danvers, MA 01923. (Code No. 1078-0769/07
$1.25 + .60).
REPRINTS: For customized article reprints, contact:
Wright’s Media, phone: 877-652-5295;
email: [email protected]
PUBLISHED: Government Procurement (ISSN 1078-0769) is
published bi-monthly by Penton Media Inc., 9800 Metcalf Ave.,
Overland Park, KS 66212-2216. Canadian Post Publications
Mail agreement No. 40612608. Canada return address: Bleuchip
International, PO Box 25542, London, ON N6C 6B2. Canadian
No. R126431964. Copyright© 2012 by Penton Media Inc.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Government
Procurement, PO Box 2100, Skokie, IL 60076-7800.
Periodicals postage paid at Shawnee Mission, KS, and at
additional mailing offices.
SALES OFFICES ARE LISTED ON PAGE 4.
CONTENTSAUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
VOLUME 20, NO. 4
IN DEPTH
12 Cooperative PurchasingCOOP MEETING OF THE MINDSRepresentatives of various cooperative purchasing organizations share insights on issues facing the government market as cooperatives grow in size and infl uence – and increase in number. Based on a discussion at NIGP Forum in Seattle, the article addresses common questions procurement professionals face when navigating the evolving world of cooperative purchasing.
24 Forum Review LOOKING BACK ON NIGP’S 67TH ANNUAL FORUM AND EXPOSITIONNIGP: The Institute for Public Procurement hosted the NIGP Forum at the Washington State Convention and Trade Center in Seattle, Wash., Aug. 18-22. Here is a roundup of awards presented in recognition of procurement professionals “reaching new heights.”
PERSPECTIVES
2 Guest Editorial: Greening
government fl eets.
4 Procurement Ponderable:
Taking on a tough new job.
HOT TOPICS
7 Buying Local: Flexible price
agreement reshapes local market.
10 Green Purchasing: Data
tools provide more detail
to guide purchases.
PEOPLE
27 UPPCC Testing Data: On
latest CPPO/CPPB exams.
28 Meet the Pros: UPPCC
new certifi cation list.
BACK PAGES
31 Ad Index
32 Fred Marks: On managing time
and materials (T&M) contracts.
2 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
PERSPECTIVES [guest column]
PENTON MEDIA INC.
6151 Powers Ferry Road NW, Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30339 Phone: 770-618-0112 FAX: 913-514-3887
http://www.govpro.com
EDITORIAL STAFF
Bill Wolpin Editorial Director [email protected]
Larry Anderson Editor [email protected]
Lindsay Isaacs Managing Editor [email protected]
Kim Blaski Production Manager [email protected]
Joan RoofAudience Marketing Manager [email protected]
Wes Clark Art Director [email protected]
THE INSTITUTEfor PUBLIC PROCUREMENT
151 Spring St. Herndon, VA 20170-5223 Phone: 703-736-8900 Fax: 703-736-2818
Brent Maas Marketing Director [email protected]
Cathie Patin Communications Editor [email protected]
EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD
Debbie Field, CPPO, VCO Virginia Department of General Services
Yolanda C. Jones, C.P.M., APP Clark County, Nev.
Jay T. McCleary, CPPB City of Red Wing, Minn.
challenge of implementing greener practices is the simple
– yet, complex – question of “Where do I begin?”
With a focus on greener off-road and heavy equipment fleets, the
Association of Equipment Management Professionals (AEMP) has
developed its Green Fleet Initiative to guide the way. Still in its early
stages, the initiative encourages and recognizes fleet managers in
their mission toward a cleaner fleet, and lets them see the benefits of
a greener fleet. Fuel savings, employee wellness and public perception
are among the numerous benefits of implementing greener practices.
Whether the goal is cost savings, enhancing grant availability or
simply to be seen as a more responsible fleet, voluntary investment
in greener practices is on the rise. Working together, fleet managers
and procurement professionals can take a more active approach
to cleaning up fleets, and be recognized for their efforts.
Through its Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum levels, the AEMP program
gives fleet managers a clear idea of what types of practices are crucial
to a greener fleet. Three of the four levels require upgrading to engines
meeting either Tier 2 or Tier 3 emissions standards, which requires the
purchasing manager to work with the fleet manager to make things happen.
The City of Euless, Texas, was the first public fleet to receive AEMP’s
Green Fleet status, and achieved it at the Silver level. The quest towards
Green Fleet Certification began with efforts to utilize alternative
fuels and implement a written idle policy. To achieve the Silver level
distinction, Kyle McAdams, Euless fleet and facility administrator,
also had to upgrade at least 50 percent of his fleet to Tier 2.
In addition to recognizable benefits such as reduced fuel consumption
and maintenance cost, greening a fleet also offers benefits not apparent
on a balance sheet. In the case of the City of Euless, McAdams’ team
plans to use AEMP’s Green Fleet certification to help distinguish them
in the ongoing grant process for further alternative energy efforts.
Similarly, Lee County Fleet Management in Florida pursued a greener
fleet for more than just the obvious benefits. There’s a common – and
unfair – view among the general public that heavy equipment fleets are
leading contributors to pollution and greenhouse gas emission. Responding
to this perception, Marilyn Rawlings, Lee County fleet manager, was
driven to greener practices, and set a high standard for others to follow.
Rawlings is a firm believer in helping others green and improve
their fleets in order to positively impact and boost the image of
the industry as a whole. “There needs to be somebody who sets the
standard, someone who throws down the gauntlet and challenges
other governmental fleets to take action,” she says. “We want to
raise the bar and hopefully encourage others to do the same.”
Lee County Fleet Management is the first government fleet in the United
States to be recognized as an AEMP Platinum-certified Green Fleet.
Lee County’s heavy equipment fleet currently meets all governmental
requirements for emissions, while the Platinum certification honors it for
meeting all criteria designated by AEMP in its Green Fleet program.
To achieve AEMP’s Green Fleet Bronze Level, either at least 50
A
Greening government fleets
By Stan Orr
Continued on page 4
4 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
Government Procurement welcomes your feedback.
Send letters to: [email protected] or Government Procurement,
6151 Powers Ferry Road NW, Suite 200, Atlanta GA 30339, Attn.: Bill Wolpin.
We reserve the right to edit all letters for clarity, brevity, grammar, punctuation, syntax and style.
PERSPECTIVES [discussion]
GROUP OFFICERS
Gregg Herring Group Publisher [email protected]
Susie Barroso Group Marketing Director [email protected]
Joanne Romanek Online Advertising Specialist [email protected]
ADVERTISING SALES
Dave Gibson Northeast Region Sales [email protected] Phone: 216-931-9469 NY, NC, NJ, OH, MA, CT, Wash-ington DC, VA, MD, VT, DE, ME, NH, RI, Canada (Eastern), SC, GA
Bill Perry Midwest Region Sales [email protected] Phone: 770-618-0453 IL,WI, PA, MN, WV, AK, TN, MS, AL, FL
Ron Corey Midwest Region Sales [email protected] Phone: 248-608-0994 MI, MO, IA, KY, IN, ND, SD, AR, LA, TX, OK
Julie Fincher Western Region Sales [email protected] Phone: 913-981-6139 CA, KS, CO, AZ, UT, NE, OR, WA, NV, MT, HI, ID, NM, WY, Canada (Western)
CORPORATE OFFICERS
David Kieselstein Chief Executive Officer [email protected]
Nicola Allais Chief Financial Officer Executive Vice President [email protected]
Bob MacArthur Senior Vice President [email protected]
PROCUREMENT PONDERABLE
The goal of Government Procurement is to stimulate thought
and discussion on significant issues in the profession, to
foster collaboration and community, and to encourage creative
solutions to common challenges. In that spirit, this issue of Government
Procurement presents a hypothetical scenario describing a challenge that
procurement professionals might face in the course of their careers.
The following scenario was created by Stephen B. Gordon,
PhD, FNIGP, CPPO, who is the Director of the Graduate
Certificate Program in Public Procurement and Contract
Management at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Va.
If you feel moved to respond – and we hope that you do – we’ll publish
your comments in an upcoming issue of Government Procurement.
You have been named the Director of Procurement for the XYZ Urban County
Government. The government has a long-standing and well-deserved reputation
for corruption and poor business practices generally. You were brought in by
the newly-elected County Executive to create, implement and institutionalize
a world-class procurement program. Not all stakeholders in the current
program are excited that you will be coming on board. It is unclear whether the
stakeholders who say they support the County Executive’s goal actually do.
Given that you had a very nice “job-for-life” in a very well-run city
halfway across the country, why did you agree to take on this challenge?
What is your time frame for institutionalizing the
world-class procurement program?
What are the principal elements of your strategy for creating,
implementing, and institutionalizing the world-class program?
percent of the fleet must be Tier 2 or better OR a written idle policy must be
in place and enforced. Fulfilling both these requirements earns a Silver level
certification. The Gold level requires at least 50 percent of the fleet to be Tier
3 or better AND that a written idle policy be in place and enforced. To earn
Platinum certification, a fleet must also show 10 percent or more of the fleet
uses diesel particulate filter (DPF), diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) or interim
or final Tier 4 technologies (in addition to meeting the Gold requirements).
Government fleets interested in applying for AEMP Green Fleet status can view
details on the program at aemp.org. A few standard guidelines apply, and all diesel
vehicles 25 horsepower and greater need to be included in the fleet application.
On January 1, 2013, changes go into effect for AEMP’s Green Fleet program.
These include new standards for meeting the qualifications on each level. It’s
AEMP’s plan to redefine parameters every two years in an effort to encourage
fleet managers to stay head of the curve, set goals and continue best practices.
Additionally, certain fleets certified in 2011 will need to be re-certified, as the
program will be coming up on its two-year anniversary of existence.
STAN ORR, CAE, is president and chief strategy officer of the Association
of Equipment Management Professionals (AEMP), Colorado Springs, Colo.
Continued from page 2
ADVANCING CONVENIENCE ADVANCING COMMERCE
% ! !!
# "#
'!"
!" !" & "!" " !!" " " "
!""!"!&%"!" !" &
#&# !"! #!"!&" "!%" "!" !!!" !"
"!$&# &!# $"&&"!&!!!
#"! "!" ! !" !
"!! !%&!" ""
Learn more at mastercard.com/payroll.
XXXHPWQSPDPNrGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT | 7
HOTTOPICS [buying local]
OREGON GROCERY CONTRACT RESHAPES LOCAL MARKET By Greg Hopkins
regon legislators want government agencies, such as
schools, to have the option of buying local agricultural
products. Oregon’s Procurement Office has responded with a
highly flexible price agreement that includes local producers.
The grocery contract is open to all state and local agencies. Through
a cooperative purchasing agreement, local agencies from Oregon,
Washington and Idaho become “authorized purchasers” by paying an
annual fee based on their yearly budget. The fees, which range from
$50 to $5,000, also open the door to all statewide price agreements
including copy machines, janitorial supplies, industrial supplies,
lawn and garden equipment, and many other goods and services.
Local providers on the contract include Childers Meat, Charlie’s
Produce, Spring Valley Dairy, and Umpqua Dairy. National suppliers,
Sysco and Food Services of America (FSA), are also on the contract
and compete with local providers. For orders of less than $5,000,
agencies can buy from local farms of their choice, although agencies
receiving USDA Child Nutrition Funds who do this must get two or
three quotes. Agencies can even spend up to 10 percent more for local
food compared to food coming from out of state, although contract
manager Dave Reynolds reports “there hasn’t been a single instance”
when this allowance was needed. “The local prices have been the same
or even lower than the prices from the large carriers,” he said.
O
With the MasterCard
Payroll Card,®
Omni Hotels
& Resortseliminatedmore than128,000*
paper checksin one year—andall the processing fees
and printing costs that
came along with them.
©2012 MasterCard.
See how Omni Hotelssimplified payday with
MasterCard.
Download the case study atmastercard.com/payroll.
*MasterCard, “Payroll Card Saves Time and Money for Omni Hotels & Resorts and Its
Associates,” Case Study (2011): 4.
Dave Reynolds, contract manager for Oregon Procurement’s grocery contract, checks out product quality at the source.
8 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
HOTTOPICS [buying local]
Suppliers on the price agreement comply with
the requirements of the Federal Child Nutrition
Funds, which “encourages” doing business with local
sources and requires fair and open competition. Since
the grocery contract encourages price comparison
among providers, free market competition is created
that keeps prices competitive and reduces the hassle
of dealing with requests for price increases.
Agency buyers can request new items on the delivery
list from Sysco or FSA if they meet a minimum order
requirement of about five cases a week. In one example,
an agency wanted grains from Bob’s Red Mill and was
able to have these products added to regular deliveries.
Reynolds worked with Todd Pommier, food
service manager at the Oregon State Hospital, and
other agency buyers to iron out the details. Reynolds
said his main question was “How do we set up a
contract that will generate ongoing competition?”
In addition, Reynolds wanted a contract that would
allow an agency to buy a load of carrots from a local
farm – or fresh local meat – without shipping it from
two states away. The grocery contract with multiple
suppliers makes these goals possible – and more.
RESULTS EXCEED EXPECTATIONS
Since the contract launched in 2008, quarterly sales
have increased at least 250 percent to about $8 million
annually. Agencies realize the advantages of using
the contract, rather than creating their own bids, and
prices can’t be beat. One school was paying over a
dollar per pint for milk. Now they pay about a quarter
of that, which quickly repays their annual fee to use
the contract. Across the board, the grocery contracts
have experienced a 4.59 percent cost reduction since
2011. Negotiations under way currently are for deeper
cost reductions on fresh fruits and vegetables.
The number of agencies using the contract
also is growing. Recently, two large school
districts in Washington with a combined annual
spend of more than $2 million have signed
on. The Department of Corrections, with a
huge annual spend, is also evaluating potential
cost savings by switching to the contract.
RURAL BUYERS BENEFIT
Because of the large number of agencies using the
contract, extending delivery routes into remote
areas is feasible for the large carriers. Lori Smith
buys food supplies for the school in Dayville, Ore.,
which has a population of 111 people, is 39 miles
from the closest town, and has 65 children in the
entire school system. Previously, Smith has had a
$5,000 minimum for food deliveries, which meant
twice a year she ordered items that could be frozen.
Recently, thanks to the new contract, she has
been able to get regular food deliveries from Food
Services of America for a $400 minimum order.
“When we achieved that, I considered it a
milestone in the contract,” Reynolds said.
In a small place like Dayville, the person doing
the buying might be stocking shelves in the morning
and driving a bus in the afternoon. The plug-and-
play price agreement takes several headaches away.
LESSONS LEARNED AND NEXT STEPS
There has been some market reshuffling due to
the aggressive pricing and ease of use of the new
contract. A large supplier consortium that acts as
a broker to schools has lost some schools who have
decided to order directly from the contract. A few
suppliers bumped from long-established ties are
not happy. However, overall the contract has had
few problems and has generated many benefits.
The next contract rebid will likely be in
the summer of 2013. Reynolds is analyzing
ways to make the contract even better. A few
of the changes he hopes to see include:
> Foods that meet the USDA Child
Nutrition Certification clearly tagged in
catalogs so school purchasers know what
qualifies for Federal reimbursement.
> An efficient, wider delivery network. There
may be a way to use empty space on trucks
that are already going to delivery destinations,
especially in remote areas. Another idea is to
explore more efficient distribution hubs.
> A way to accept and distribute donated food.
> Improved process for setting up accounts
and viewing suppliers’ catalogs.
> Increased outreach to schools and other
food buyers to inform them of the contract,
how it works and what other price
agreements from which they can benefit.
> More vendors on the contract,
especially local producers.
> More specific guidance on making
direct buys from local farms, dairies,
orchards, and meat packers.
For those contemplating a similar contract,
Reynolds has one piece of advice: “Listen to your
customers and design the contract to meet their needs.
And don’t listen to all of the people who say you can’t
implement your ideas. They’re usually wrong.”
GREG HOPKINS is training specialist,
procurement services, for the state of Oregon.
Ensuring citizen safety and supporting critical business operations are important even during tough economic times. At GSA we offer direct access to a wide range of quality local and global contractors offering products and services at pre-negotiated ceiling prices. Our online tools and customer support specialists are available and ready to help you respond quickly to your state and local needs. GSA helps you generate efficiencies and savings for the American people.
To learn more, call 703-605-9155 or visit www.gsa.gov/stateandlocal.
Law Enforcement & Security
Information Technology
Emergency Response & Recovery
Firefighting Protection
Time, Money, and Lives.Solutions That Save
10 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
HOTTOPICS [green purchasing]
Big Green DataEMERGING TOOLS GIVE GOVERNMENT PURCHASERS BETTER ACCESS TO ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION By Scot Case
overnment agencies looking to buy greener
products and services are examining new
tools to provide greater flexibility to define and
identify greener choices. GoodGuide, which was
recently purchased by UL Environment, collects
publicly available environmental information on
more than 175,000 products. Government purchasers
are beginning to experiment with ways to use the
information to make greener purchasing decisions.
Traditional environmental standards such as
those developed by Green Seal and UL Environment
(including the EcoLogo and GREENGUARD
standards also owned by UL Environment) provide
government purchasers with a binary decision
point – products are either certified as meeting
the relevant environmental standard or not.
GoodGuide and other big data-driven solutions
such as Greencurement and the EPEAT (Electronic
Product Environmental Assessment Tool)
registry allow government purchasers to review
more detailed information and make additional
distinctions among the products. More data
also makes it possible for different organizations
with different definitions of green to identify
greener products using a common data source to
identify products meeting their unique needs.
The State of California, for example, focuses
on different environmental considerations than
Georgia. The City of San Francisco defines green
differently than Kalamazoo, Mich. All of them,
however, can base purchasing decisions on
information from a common data repository.
GoodGuide and other similar approaches
make it possible for each entity to define its
own environmental requirements and quickly
identify products meeting those requirements.
STANDARDS MAKE GREEN PURCHASING EASIER
Back in 1999 when the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts was evaluating bids for greener cleaning
products, it received boxes and boxes of hard copy
information from suppliers claiming to provide
greener cleaning products. The Commonwealth had
requested information on more than a dozen different
environmental criteria such as aquatic toxicity, pH,
biodegradability, and the results of eye and skin
irritability tests. Reviewing and comparing all of
the information proved incredibly challenging.
To avoid the challenge of wading through reams
of data for future solicitations, Massachusetts
and hundreds of other government purchasing
professionals began requiring cleaning products to
be certified to the Green Seal or EcoLogo standards.
Requiring certification drastically
simplifies the solicitation process, but there
are several challenges with this approach:
> All certified products are treated as equally
good. While this is true for all standards
and certifications, it does not make it
easy to compare products to see which
of the certified products is “greener.”
> Standards and certifications are not available for
all of the products and services governments buy.
> Traditional environmental standards need to
be updated on a regular basis because scientific
understanding of the risks and benefits of
various materials, chemistries, and technologies
changes. Not all environmental standards,
however, are updated as frequently as needed.
BIG DATA CAN MAKE GREEN PURCHASING EASIER
Environmental data management tools like
GoodGuide (goodguide.com), Greencurement
(greencurement.com), or the EPEAT registry (epeat.
net) provide purchasers with the ability to compare
products based on a variety of environmental
data points. They permit purchasers to identify
and prioritize the environmental features they
care most about and use those preferences to
identify products meeting their requirements.
Big data solutions also make it possible for
government purchasers to have near-instantaneous
information about the latest environmental benefits
and concerns of their purchasing specifications.
There is no need to wait for standards to be
updated. Purchasing specifications can be quickly
updated based on the latest information.
Had this technology been available in 1999
when the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
was initially seeking greener cleaning products,
the reams of data Massachusetts suppliers
submitted could have been managed easily
G
XXXHPWQSPDPNrGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT | 11
in a system that permitted Massachusetts purchasers to
sort products based on their environmental profiles.
ENHANCEMENTS UNDER WAY
As government purchasers begin examining big data tools,
they are suggesting enhancements that will make the tools
even more useful. One enhancement is providing additional
assurance about the accuracy of the data contained within
the systems. Government purchasers now rely on the
certification results from organizations like Green Seal and
UL Environment that investigate products to ensure they meet
relevant environmental standards. Systems like GoodGuide,
Greencurement, and the EPEAT registry rely on data that has
not been subjected to the same level of scrutiny. Concerns
about data quality are being addressed by integrating third-
party validation into the data collection processes.
Another significant enhancement is merging the environmental
filtering capabilities of these data tools into existing online
purchasing systems. This makes it possible for government
purchasing cooperatives or other suppliers with online ordering
systems to present purchasers with greener products meeting
their local environmental purchasing requirements.
SCOT CASE has been researching and promoting responsible
purchasing for 17 years. He is market development director
for UL Environment. Contact him via e-mail at scot.case@
ulenvironment.com or in Reading, PA, at 610-779-3770.
GREEN DATA SOURCES
EPEAT – epeat.net. Focused exclusively on desktop and
laptop computers and monitors (with plans to expand into
other electronic product categories), EPEAT provides detailed
environmental information on more than 2,000 products. The
products are ranked as bronze, silver, and gold based on the
IEEE 1680 standard. The database also provides additional
product information permitting purchasers to compare
products based on things like energy efficiency, recyclability,
and the environmental practices of the manufacturer.
GoodGuide – goodguide.com. Provides environmental,
health, and social data on more than 175,000 products
and 5,000 companies by compiling information from more
than 1,000 different sources. GoodGuide helps purchasers
identify safe, healthy and socially responsible products and
companies. It currently offers detailed product information
for personal care, household chemical, and food products,
as well as appliances, apparel, and automobiles. It allows
users to find and choose products quickly, easily, and
according to personally customizable search criteria.
Greencurement – greencurement.com. With
product, environmental, and health information on tens of
thousands of commercially available products aggregated
from dozens of data sources, Greencurement makes it
possible to search for products with specific environmental
benefits. Greencurement also offers a variety of consulting
services to help government purchasers use the data.
1-3$FRQWUDFWVDUHFRPSHWLWLYHO\ELGRQ\RXUEHKDOIDQGZLOOFRQQHFW\RXWRQDWLRQDOO\OHYHUDJHGFRQWUDFWSULFLQJ$QRFRVWQRREOLJDWLRQRUOLDELOLW\0HPEHUVKLSLVDOO\RXQHHGWR´VZHHSμXSWKHVDYLQJV
<RXUÀUVWVWHS"-RLQWRGD\DWZZZQMSDFRRSRUJ
ZZZQMSDFRRSRUJ_3XEOLF:RUNV&RQWUDFW3XUFKDVLQJ6ROXWLRQV
D´&/($1(5μZD\WRSXUFKDVH
A L i q u i d i t y S e r v i c e s M a r ke t p l a ce
12 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
IN DEPTH [coop purchase]
Representatives of cooperative purchasing
refl ect on its growing impact on government procurement
ith so many coops, how can I
choose the best one? How do I
know if a coop follows my local
legal requirements? How do I
deal with local preferences? Am
I really getting the best price?
Such questions are common with the proliferation of
cooperative purchasing in the government procurement
sector. Th e rise of coops has provided both a wealth of
benefi ts and more than a little confusion for procurement
professionals tasked with maximizing the usefulness of
the various cooperatives for their local governments.
To provide insight, representatives from several
cooperatives gathered at NIGP Forum in Seattle last month
for a meeting of the minds moderated by Bill Wolpin,
editorial director of Government Procurement magazine.
Here are some edited excerpts from that discussion, covering
several issues facing the government market as cooperatives
grow in size and infl uence – and increase in number.
TOO MANY COOPS: HOW DO YOU CHOOSE?
Peter Torvik, managing director, U.S. Communities
Government Purchasing Alliance: We know from Chinese
restaurants and mutual funds that choice isn’t something
that helps in every situation. Th is is an industry that has had
no barriers to entry over the last fi ve years. We are looking
forward to a period of searching and consolidation and
standard-setting and taking this whole thing to the next
level. We know you cannot solve your agency’s budgetary
problems buying a pencil 10 percent cheaper. We need to look
for things that have real budgetary impact, that really save
your department time and money and are transparent and
clear. We’re going to just have to innovate faster as a group.
David Yarkin, whose consulting company
Government Sourcing Solutions helps governments save
money by using cooperatives: Th ere is nothing in your
statute that says you have to compare each and every single
cooperative purchasing agreement out there for everything
you will use them for. If you do that, it defeats one of the
purposes of cooperative purchasing, which is to shorten the
procurement cycle and make it less labor intensive for your
staff . [When I was chief procurement offi cer in Pennsylvania,]
we would fi nd a cooperative that met our legal requirement,
solved a business need, and, most important, saved us
real hard dollars. If you do that, you have no obligation
to go to every cooperative out there. Your obligation is to
the taxpayers. Don’t be intimidated by all the options.
Duff Erholtz, membership manager, National Joint
Powers Alliance: At the end of the day, there isn’t one
consortium with a comprehensive set of solutions to serve
you. I’m not sure, collectively, we have a comprehensive set
of solutions. Don’t get hung up on what type of a coop or
what type of a program. If you need a specifi c brand, say
Toro, you have a limited number of options. Some things
everyone has. Some companies everyone has. But for the
majority [of products], there will be [fewer choices].
Coop Meeting
of the Minds
XXXHPWQSPDPNrGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT | 13
THE OUTSOURCING ASPECT OF
COOPERATIVE PURCHASING
Wayne Casper, group director, National
Intergovernmental Purchasing Alliance (National
IPA): What you’re doing when you use a cooperative
is, in a sense, you’re substituting your source selection
process with the source selection process by somebody
else. What you need to think about is: Who awarded
that contract, who bid it, who administered it? Are you
confident with their procurement processes and that
they did as good a job as you would do yourself?
Tim Hay, state of Oregon, member of Western States
Contracting Alliance (WSCA): With the WSCA/NASPO
(National Association of State Procurement Officials) model,
outsourcing isn’t really the key. We use a collaborative effort
and work with all the states in the development of the RFP. One
state is designated as the lead state that actually releases the
RFP, but we work in collaboration with five or six states that
comprise the WSCA sourcing team for a particular commodity.
Right now there are 38 WSCA or NASPO combination
contracts, and a procurement professional participated from
each state on the sourcing team. We are more about in-
sourcing than outsourcing, and we use resources and talent
of each of the states to develop the cooperative agreements.
David Yarkin: You can’t outsource the entire
procurement function to a cooperative. You can break the
world of piggybacking into two buckets on the government
side – the large entities, for whom the large coop contracts
won’t be good enough, and then other, smaller governments
for whom the basic pricing from a cooperative contract are
pretty good, and better than they could do in their own.
One idea to take advantage of cooperative prices, while
promoting competition, would be to hold a “bakeoff” and
allow multiple cooperatives to compete based on price and
other qualitative factors instead of doing a full-fledged
RFP. You can shave a lot of time off a procurement cycle.
Peter Torvik: We don’t believe that all cooperatives follow
the same procedures. After 15 years in the business, there is
still confusion out there and there still isn’t the confidence
we would like to see to use any of the cooperative contracts
presented to you. This is an embryonic industry; it’s way
less than a percent of your discretionary spend across the
country. If it even went to 5 or 10 percent, it would save
governments tens of billions of dollars a year. We want to see
the industry go to the next level and find a set of standards you
can all understand and be confident in. Then we all benefit.
Every dollar you spend in a coop should save you money,
and that’s the atmosphere we’re looking for in the future.
DEALING WITH LOCAL PREFERENCES
Wayne Casper: The broader question of local preferences
[is one] that everybody in public procurement has dealt
with from day one. That issue will always come up. My
experience has been that when the economy is down, you
get more of it. All of a sudden there are more local vendors
than there were when everything was going well. But part
of it will vary by cooperative contract. Some contracts are
national contracts that sell directly. But you have your big-
three office supply companies – Office Depot, OfficeMax
and Staples, for example. In most cities they have local
big-box stores where they hire a lot of people. A lot of the
cooperative contracts are with major manufacturers, and they
are resold through local dealers. That’s the case with office
furniture, copiers and equipment. Some heavy equipment
contracts have local dealers that have been in business in the
local community for 50 or 60 years; they are very strong in
the local community. It’s going to depend on the contract
itself, but you can work around it with many contracts.
Tim Hay: Depending upon the commodity and the
political sensitivity, there are some contracts that are let
that have both a national presence as well as a regional
preference. When we did the sourcing team for express mail
and small package delivery services, we actually had local
components for in-state delivery services in both California
and Alaska. We are sensitive to that need, and if there are
needs for local preferences, it is built into the solicitation.
Peter Torvik: We get letters forwarded from local vendors
and politicians. It started out in the office supplies business
from day one. The most recent I remember is a plywood
vendor in Florida called up and was mad because our HD
Supply contract was a much better deal than he could provide
locally. It was a woman-owned or minority contract, I can’t
remember which one, so there was a lot of political fireworks
for that politician. It was actually a Congressman. But what
it came down to was the local vendor didn’t like the effect on
his profit margin, and he was blaming the U.S. Communities
contract for affecting that. But really, any competitor in that
market, whether it was the Home Depot store down the road
or another lumber yard, could affect that pricing and profit
margin. I don’t know how you justify continuing to charge
excessive prices. The bottom line, the city or county can do
whatever it wants to do. They don’t have to purchase from
a coop. If they have that political need (to buy locally), and
it’s worse in some places than others, it can be handled.
GETTING THE BEST PRICE
Peter Torvik: From our standpoint, volume is very
important. You have to have eventual volume to get
manufacturers to push the prices where they need to be.
We try not to do anything where we aren’t seeing 50 or 100
million dollars in eventual sales for that contract, although
we don’t always get there. We have a best price guarantee, so
you don’t see a manufacturer with six contracts with various
prices on them. Then you have to audit those contracts to
make sure they live up to that price guarantee. The fantastic
part is that our collective activities here are repricing entire
industries, office supplies being one. Whether they are
buying from a coop or not, they are buying office supplies
10 percent cheaper than they were 15 years ago. That’s a
goal we all have, which is to reprice entire industries.”
Chris Penny, vice president of sales, The Cooperative
Purchasing Network (TCPN): One of the positives resulting
14 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
IN DEPTH [coop purchase]
from the expansion of cooperatives, both in the amount
of use coming through a cooperative and the number
of cooperatives, is that the suppliers to the vendors are
becoming more astute and aware of cooperative purchasing.
HP, for example, is now saying they will give a cooperative
discount, to lower the basis points on their toners and offer
the pricing [to the various coop contracts]. Some of the
major suppliers are becoming aware and lowering overall
government prices regardless of what platform you use.
WHEN TO USE A COOP
David Yarkin: There are 31 different flavors of cooperative
purchasing. You make a mistake by defining it too narrowly.
When I was in Pennsylvania, we were going out for bid on
a commercial off-the-shelf software. As we were working
on the RFP, we saw that Massachusetts had a contract. So
we analyzed the contract on software in Massachusetts and
compared its prices with the prices we were paying currently.
We saw we would save $4 million by piggybacking on it. We
did it. We got a tiny bit of pushback from a couple of local
suppliers that faded away after a couple of weeks. We took the
$4 million in savings and put it in the bank. My job was to the
get the best deal for my taxpayers, as long as it met the legal
requirements. There are a lot of different ways to look at this.
Phil Vasquez, independent consultant on cooperative
contracting: Cooperatives in general have gotten pretty
standard in the ways they do things. You have to ask how
the contract meets your agency’s needs. At the end of the
day, it has to make sense for your taxpayers. You have
to do your due diligence and be a good steward for the
citizens and look at what contract makes the best sense.
ENSURING COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL LAWS
Tim Hay: WSCA is very conscientious about contacting
each state before we release a solicitation so they are aware
of what we are doing regarding future contracts to give
them the opportunity to advertise that solicitation. Some
states have very strict solicitation laws, so if they didn’t
originally advertise it, they can’t participate in it. We
want to make sure they have the opportunity to advertise.
WSCA’s model is that states collaborate with each other,
down to the end-users, to make sure those states’ needs are
met in the solicitation. Ninety-five percent of the time, the
states in the sourcing team have the same needs as states
not on the sourcing team, so all their needs are met.
Paul Stembler, WSCA/NASPO Cooperative
Development Coordinator: The issue you want to start with is
who comes closest to following the process you have to follow.
You have to deal with people inside your jurisdiction. Those are
the issues you need to look at. What kind of level of response
Our most popular product is compliance.Shop at PSS and you can piggyback on a growing list of competitively solicited contracts by lead public agencies in compliance with generally accepted public procurement standards. PSS is the place to find what you need and a better way to buy it:
s4HEEASIESTFASTESTWAYTOSAVEON everything from office supplies and computers to furniture and flooring.
s.OPARTICIPATIONFEE
s0ARTOF%DUCATIONAL)NSTITUTIONAL#OOPERATIVE0URCHASINGA YEAR OLDNOT FOR PROlTGROUPPURCHASINGORGANIZATION
s,EVERAGEOURBUYINGPOWERANDSTREAMLINEcompliant purchasing.
Visit www.publicsourcing.org to start saving on the things you need.
Furniture
Office Supplies
Technology
Flooring
Maintenance
Compliance
and process do you need in this case? Each one of you is
different. There are 56 members of NASPO and 56 sets of rules.
Tom Post, president of AEPA (Association of
Educational Purchasing Agencies): With AEPA, all of our
organizations are represented in 26 states, and we advertise and
solicit in each individual state. We give the local manufacturer
or distributor an opportunity to bid on any of our contracts.
TRANSPARENCY AND HANDLING COMPLAINTS
Wayne Casper: National IPA has a business review
meeting quarterly with all vendor partners to go through any
issues during the last quarter [including the lead agency].
Tom Post: If you have a complaint with one of
the vendors we selected, we would get involved and
go to that vendor and solve the problem. We would
find out what that problem is and make sure you’re
satisfied. That’s our job, that’s part of what we do.
Duff Erholtz: We do an annual review, but we would get
involved at any time. Vendors have a lot at stake because of
their award of a national cooperative; they are not going to let
one complaint jeopardize what could be a much larger [sale].
Every [coop] has a web site where all the documentation is
available, you can see the solicitation, the advertisement, all
the information you need, and dedicated staff can help you
[navigate] the web site and get you where you need to go.
Tim Hay: At least from WSCA, we have all the
[RFPs and supporting documents]. They all meet
that lead state’s requirements for documentation and
keeping the documentation forever, almost.
Peter Torvik: If you’re dealing with the sales department
[related to complaints], that’s not who we’re dealing with.
That’s a real advantage for our coops, especially at the local
level. We are dealing with higher-ups, such as presidents
or executive directors, people who are responsible for
the contract and take it very seriously. It’s a large part
of their sales. It’s not left to the local distribution.
Paul Stembler: If there is a problem, we need
to know about it. Waiting six or eight months or a
year or two or four years doesn’t accomplish much
for us. We need to know about it now and have the
facts so we can proceed to solve the problem.
WHAT’S NEXT?
Peter Torvik: We have a fully operational e-commerce
site that allows you to choose a lightbulb from HD Supply
or Graybar, for example. The suppliers aren’t always happy
about that, but I think it represents the first step in the
direction [of offering a web-based system to compare
coop prices]. When you buy from Amazon, you can see
all these different booksellers. Amazon has taken the
central role of guaranteeing a satisfactory transaction.
We are a few years from someone taking that central role.
The first job is to make sure of compliance and that you
could buy with confidence from everyone represented,
and then the price takes care of itself after that.
Transparent Procurement Process:
(1) The development of the solicitation, evaluation of the responses and award determination are performed by public employees of a political subdivision* that is separate from and independent of the cooperative organization. (Lead Public Agency)
(2) A National Evaluation Team of public procurement professionals from multiple political subdivisions* participate in the creation, evaluation and award process.
(3) All decisions regarding the awarded master agreement, pricing changes etc., are made by the Lead Public Agency NOT the staffof the cooperative.
*A political subdivision is generally defined in most states as local governments created by the states to help fulfill their obligations. Political subdivisions include counties, cities, towns, villages, and special districts such as school districts, water districts, park districts, and airport districts
Some questions you may want to ask prior to using a cooperative that’s “just like U.S. Communities”
s7ERETHESOLICITATIONEVALUATIONANDAWARDALLperformed by employees of a political subdivision that is independent of the cooperative organization?
s7ASTHEPROCUREMENTPROCESSSUBSTANTIALLYsimilar to the process your agency is required to use?
s7HATKINDOFINDEPENDENTOVERSIGHTOFTHEcooperative is in place?
s$OESTHISCONTRACTMEETTHELEGALrequirements of my agency and state?If in doubt ask your attorney.
Oversight and Accountability:
(1) An Advisory Board of over 20 public procurement professionals to ensure processes and methods used are of the highest standards
(2) A Supervisory Board of National Public Associations to oversee the cooperative and to ensure the interests of their public agency members are served and protected.
(3) Annual independent third-party supplier audits to ensure contract compliance.
Public Agency Protection & Supplier Contract Compliance:
(1) Quarterly performance reviews with supplier executives and the Lead Public Agency to evaluate performance and compliance.
(2) Commitments: Corporate, Pricing, Economy& Sales.
(3) Field Program Managers focused on supporting public agencies and resolving problems or concerns.
Visit uscommunities.org/coopstandardsfor a due diligence check list
All CooperativesAre Not the Same
7HAT-AKES53#OMMUNITIES$IFFERENT
7EREJUSTLIKE53#OMMUNITIES
For more than 15 years, U.S. Communities has been a leader in providing public agencies and nonprofits the best value in the procurement of goods and services. In doing so, U.S. Communities has never wavered in putting the public agency participants interests first during the solicitation process. We enforce our four key commitments expected of each supplier which separates U.S. Communities from all other cooperatives. Although some suppliers complain U.S. Communities commitments are “too onerous,” we are dedicated to protecting a participating public agency’s ethical, legal, and financial interests at all times.
Some questions you may want to ask prior to using a cooperative that’s “just like U.S. Communities”
s$OESTHECOOPERATIVEMANAGETHESUPPLIERS/RDOTHESUPPLIERSMANAGETHECOOPERATIVE
s7HATKINDOFPUBLICAGENCYPROTECTIONSAREREQUIREDOFTHESUPPLIERS
s(OWMANYSUPPLIERSDOESTHECOOPERATIVEHAVEANDHOWMANYCOOPERATIVESDOESTHESUPPLIERBELONGTO
s(OWDOESTHECOOPERATIVEMANAGESUPPLIERCOMPLIANCENATIONWIDE
s(OWMANYSTAFFDOESTHECOOPERATIVEHAVE
s(OWMANYSTAFFPERSUPPLIERDOESTHECOOPERATIVEHAVE
Corporate Commitment: 4HISENABLES53#OMMUNITIESTOACCESSTHETOPSUPPLIEREXECUTIVESTORESOLVEPROBLEMSANDIMPROVEPRODUCTSSERVICEANDPRICINGONBEHALFOFOURPUBLICAGENCYPARTICIPANTS
Pricing Commitment:9OUCANHAVEPEACEOFMINDKNOWINGTHATYOUAREACCESSINGTHESUPPLIERSLOWESTOVERALLPRICINGTHATTHEYOFFERTOPUBLICAGENCIES9OUWONTFINDOUTLATERTHATYOUCOULDHAVEGOTTENABETTERDEALBYGOINGTOBIDORACCESSINGADIFFERENTCONTRACTVEHICLEHELDBYTHATSUPPLIER
7HATSINACommitment?
!LLOFTHESEAREMYBESTDEAL
Visit uscommunities.org/coopstandardsfor a due diligence check list
Economy Commitment:4HISENSURESTHATTHESUPPLIERISWILLINGANDABLETOPROVIDEYOUWITHTHENECESSARYDATADOCUMENTATIONANDANALYSESTHATYOUNEEDTOVALIDATEYOURDECISIONTOUTILIZETHEIR53#OMMUNITIESCONTRACT
Sales Commitment:4HISREQUIRESTHESUPPLIERSSALESFORCETOBEAWAREOFANDKNOWLEDGEABLEABOUTTHEIR53#OMMUNITIESCONTRACT4HISENSURESTHATYOUWILLBEABLETOGETTHEINFORMATIONYOUNEEDANDANSWERSTOYOURQUESTIONSFROMYOURLOCALSALESREPRESENTATIVEREGARDINGTHEPRODUCTSSERVICESPRICINGANDGENERAL4#SCOVEREDUNDERTHECONTRACT
XXXHPWQSPDPNrGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT | 19
PROUD U.S. COMMUNITIES SUPPLIERS,COMMITTE
D TO SERVING PUBLIC AGENCIES
20 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
Helping to Balance Your Workload
www.Applied.com/uscommunities
1-866-482-4152
Enjoy the benefits of working with one supplier that can make purchasing MRO supplies easy, fast and affordable at negotiated contract pricing - Applied Industrial Technologies – a proud supplier partner of U.S. Communities.
» No bid processNationally solicited; competitively awarded contract
» 1 supplier partnerSimplifying purchasing of your MRO products
» Multiple buying optionsOnline, over the phone or in person
» Full service and supportRecommending solutions to increase efficiencies
» 4 million partsMaking sure your people get the right MRO supplies to complete the job
PROUD U.S. COMMUNITIES SUPPLIERS, COMMITT
ED TO SERVING PUBLIC AGENCIES
XXXHPWQSPDPNrGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT | 21
PROUD U.S. COMMUNITIES SUPPLIERS,COMMITTE
D TO SERVING PUBLIC AGENCIES
Copyright © 2012 Insight Direct USA, Inc. All rights reserved. Insight and the Insight logo are registered trademarks of Insight Direct USA, Inc. All other company and product names are trademarks or service marks of their respective owners.
ENHANCING PERFORMANCETHROUGH INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS
1.800.INSIGHT W IPS.INSIGHT.COM
INSIGHT | INSIGHT ENTERPRISES INC | @INSIGHTENT
MOBILITY | OFFICE PRODUCTIVITY | UNIFIED COMMUNICATIONS & COLLABORATION
NETWORK & SECURITY | DATA CENTER | VIRTUALIZATION | DATA PROTECTION | CLOUD
Insight Public Sector is proud to have served as a trusted technology advisor to public entities for more than 20 years.
Insight offers hardware and software products from the world’s leading manufacturers and publishers, in addition
to advanced IT services and solutions. Our mission is simple: to assist state, local and federal government agencies,
educational institutions, public safety entities and nonprofit organizations in leveraging technology to cost-effectively
deliver on their mission to the public.
Insight Public Sector – in partnership with U.S. Communities – simplifies the procurement, implementation and
management of the solutions and technologies your organization needs. By taking advantage of Insight’s competitively-
solicited U.S. Communities Contract for Technology Products/Equipment and Services/Solutions, you’re assured of
Insight’s best available price on our full portfolio of products and solutions.
To learn more ways Insight can help you deliver on your mission to the public, contact us at 1.800.546.0578 or at
[email protected]. Or visit us online at www.ips.insight.com/uscommunities.
Contract 11019
hdsupplysolutions.com | 1-855-526-9473
Shop online for more than 5,000
new safety products!
FREE.
Delivered by professionals. For professionals.
To save you time and
money, our government
support team will help you
reduce procurement lead
times, lower administrative
costs, and take advantage
of our competitively
solicited U.S. Communities
contract—all while providing
free, next-day delivery*
on over 22,000 quality
maintenance and repair
products and services.
It’s an honor to serve you.
ADV-12-6597
Proud Supplier:
* On most orders to most areas. © 2012 HDS IP Holding, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
PROUD U.S. COMMUNITIES SUPPLIERS, COMMITT
ED TO SERVING PUBLIC AGENCIES
XXXHPWQSPDPNrGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT | 23
IN DEPTH [NIGP awards]
> Created a Certification
Reward Program. All members
obtaining certification have
their chapter membership dues
paid for the following year.
> Led the way in use of social media,
educating other chapters on its use
and engaging their members. Also
launched the chapter blog as a portal
for procurement-related topics,
chapter surveys and chapter library.
Portal is linked to various social
media outlets. The chapter’s social
media RRS feed allows deployment
of content to five sites at once.
> Established the “Bring a
Guest Program” to improve
member recruitment.
Category: Large Chapter –
201 or more members
Winner: Virginia Association
of Governmental Purchasing
Chapter of NIGP
> Developed and implemented
the Leading Light Agency Award
Program to recognize an agency
that has taken the “Lead” with
innovative ideas and achievements
to “Light” the way for other public
procurement professionals.
> Legislative Committee developed
a Legislative Survey to gather and
analyze what Commonwealth of
Virginia agencies spend on legal
newspaper advertisements required
for Request for Proposals. The
information will be used for VAGP’s
2012 legislative strategies, including
working to eliminate mandatory
newspaper advertisements.
> Developed and implemented a
new Certification Scholarship to
reimburse a minimum of 12 members
for UPPCC exam fees each year.
Procurement professionals from federal, provincial,
state and local governmental agencies in the
United States and Canada gathered for the 67th
Annual Forum and Products Exposition hosted
by NIGP: The Institute of Public Procurement
at the Washington State Convention and Trade
Center in Seattle, Wash. Awards presented at
NIGP Forum Aug. 18-22 recognized procurement
professionals “reaching new heights.”
NIGP’s 67th Annual Forum and Products Exposition
2012 NIGP CHAPTER OF THE YEAR AWARDS
Category: Small Chapter –
less than 80 members
Winner: Copper Chapter of NIGP
> Expanded access to professional
development programs by purchasing
the NIGP Signature Series to meet
member needs for educational
scholarship opportunities.
> Provided recertification
scholarship to nine individuals.
> Set up conference calls for
monthly chapter meetings to
allow participation by members
constrained by time or travel.
Category: Medium Chapter
– 81 to 200 members
Winner: Central Florida
Chapter of NIGP
24 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
IN DEPTH [NIGP awards]
NIGP AWARD WINNERS
Darin L.
Matthews,
FNIGP, CPPO,
C.P.M., Director
of Business
Operations, North
Clackamas School
District, Ore.,
won the Albert H. Hall Memorial
Award, NIGP’s top honor. This award
recognizes a former or present member
who has made outstanding contributions
to NIGP over an extended period of
time. Established in 1977, the Institute
named the award in honor of NIGP’s
founder, Albert H. Hall, who served
as the organization’s first Executive
Vice President from 1944 to 1975. As
a writer, author and teacher, Darin
Matthews is recognized everywhere
as a true professional who constantly
promotes cutting edge practices and
regularly pushes the envelope.
Carol Hodes, CAE, Director of
Professional Development at NIGP
(left), received the 2012 Anne
Deatherage Meritorious Service
Award in honor of NIGP’s Deputy Chief
Executive Officer, Anne Deatherage,
who served the Institute in a variety of
leadership capacities from 1972 to 2005.
Presenting the award (right) is Marcheta
Gillespie, NIGP’s first vice president.
NIGP presented the Distinguished
Service Award (DSA) to three
outstanding professionals: Lynda
Allair, CPPO, Retired, BPS Supply
Chain Secretariat, Cavan, Ontario
(left); Dr. Guy Callender, FCIPS,
Professor and Chair in Leadership of
Strategic Procurement, Curtin School of
Business, Perth, Australia (center); and
Judy Meisel, CPPO, CPPB Purchasing
Manager, City of Olathe, Kan. (right).
Laurie M. Roberts, CPPB, District
School Board of Pasco County, Fla. (left),
received the 2012 Professional Buyer
of the Year Award recognizing
non-supervisory professionals who have
made significant contributions to
purchasing, professional development,
their entity, their chapter, and the
Institute. NIGP’s Third Vice President
DeWight Dopslauf (right) presented the
award.
Carrie F. Woodell, CPPO, CPPB,
CFCM, C.P.M., A.P.P., City of Winter
Park, Fla., (left) won the 2012
Professional Manager of the Year
Award recognizing management
professionals who have made
significant contributions to purchasing,
professional development, their
entity, their chapter, and the Institute.
NIGP’s First Vice President Marcheta
Gillespie (right) presented the award.
Spirit of NIGP Awards recognize
three unsung heroes of the profession
who have played a significant role in
shaping the organization. Winners are
Ken Babich, BCom, CPPO, Director,
Purchasing Services, University of
Victoria (left); Jay Jackus, CPPO,
CPPB, Purchasing Administrator, City of
Tarpon Springs, Fla.(center); and Pam
McComb, NIGP photographer. (right)
The 2011 Lewis E. Spangler
Purchasing Professional Award
from the International Federation of
Purchasing and Supply Management
(IFPSM) was presented to Mike Bevis,
CPPO, J.D. CPPO, CPSM, C.P.M., PMP,
purchasing director, City of Naperville,
Ill. (left), for outstanding commitment to
the profession of Purchasing and Supply
Management by evidence of successful
contribution to the bottom line and
by support given to collaborators in
the area of education and training.
Don Buffum, NIGP’s second vice
president (right), presented the award.
New this year, the Measure Up Award
recognizes one NIGP agency member
best using the free member tool called
Measure to capture and report savings
and efficiency gains through procurement
activities. The inaugural recipient of
this award is the Washington State
Department of Transportation,
which documented almost $10
million of savings and efficiency gains
last fiscal year through demand,
supplier and process management
Multnomah County Purchasing,
Ore., won the NIGP Innovation
Award for developing an in-house,
low-cost computer-based platform
to train those with procurement and
contract development roles throughout
the organization. Using off-the-shelf
computer-based course development
software and a freeware learning
management system, they were able
to achieve a 69 percent savings over
contracting for the work. In addition,
the computer-based training provides
Contract Administrators access to greatly
needed educational resources that are
flexible to their individual schedules.
This procurement training solution was
made available to support the training
needs of other agency departments.
Sound Transit Procurement and
Contracts Division, Seattle, Wash.,
won the Pareto Award of Excellence
in Public Procurement. The Pareto
Award is the pinnacle award for public
procurement excellence. It is tantamount
to the Malcolm Baldridge National
Quality Award and the Deming Prize for
&T ,BS-OMENT2ATING,B-AXIMUM#APACITY
,)&4-//2%S4RUCK-OUNTED#RANE
,)&4-//2%S4RUCK-OUNTED#RANE
&T ,BS-OMENT2ATING,B-AXIMUM#APACITY
s&T0OWER%XTENSIONs#ONTINUOUS2OTATIONs(EX"OOMs7IRELESS2EMOTE#ONTROLs(IGH3PEED0LANETARY'EAR7INCHs!LLSTANDARDFEATURESOFTHISNEWCRANE
,IFTMOOREMANUFACTURESELECTRICANDHYDRAULICCRANESWITHCAPACITIESTO,BS
(OUSTON4EXASs &!8 WWWLIFTMOORECOM
,)&4-//2%).#,)&4-//2%).#
Quality. The Pareto Award accreditation
is earned only by OA4 accredited
agencies who have undergone extensive
evaluation by a third party review team
and met all performance requirements.
Kelly Okken, CPPB, VCO, James
Madison University, Va., won the
NIGP Diversity Essay Award
for “Can Diversity Be Evaluated in
Public Sector Procurement Process?”
Ruth Estrada, CPPB, City of Tucson,
Ariz., won the NIGP Ethics Essay
Award for “Even Superman Has a
Weakness: What is Your Kryptonite?”
OA4 ACCREDITATION AWARD RECIPIENTS
Achievement of OA4 accreditation is
awarded based on successful completion
of an agency self-evaluation process that
assesses performance in 12 key functional
areas. Obtaining OA4 accreditation is a
prerequisite to qualifying for the pinnacle
agency accreditation in public procurement,
the Pareto Award of Excellence.
Arizona Department of Transportation
Atlanta Public Schools, Ga.
Chesterfield County, Va.
City and County of Honolulu, Hawaii
City of Chandler, Ariz.
City of Richmond, Va.
Cobb County School District, Ga.
Cobb County, Ga.
Colorado Springs School
District 11, Colo.
Denver Public Schools, Colo.
Fulton County, Ga.
Gwinnett County, Ga.
Howard County, Md.
Loudoun County, Va.
Miami-Dade County, Fla.
Pima County, Ariz.
Region of Peel, Ontario
Texas Department of Transportation
26 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
IN DEPTH [NIGP awards]
A smarter way to meet sustainability goals.Staples Advantage,® the contract division of Staples, offers sustainable products for the best office solutions that support your environmental objectives and your budget.
UÊÊ«>ÀÌiÀÊVÌÌi`ÊÌÊÞÕÀÊÃÕÃÌ>>LÌÞÊ>Ã
UÊÊ"ÛiÀÊ£ä]äääÊ«À`ÕVÌÃÊÜÌÊÀi`ÕVi`ÊiÛÀiÌ>Ê«>VÌ
UÊÊÕiivwViÌÊ`iÛiÀÞÊÌÀÕÊ>iiVÌÀVÊÌÀÕVÃ]Êëii`ÊÀi`ÕVÌÊ>`ÊÀi
UÊÊ,iVÞVÊÃiÀÛViÃÊvÀÊÌiÀÊ>`Ê]ÊiÜ>ÃÌi]ÊViÊ«iÃÊ>`ÊvÕÀÌÕÀiÊ«À`ÕVÌÃ
To learn more or to become a customer, visit StaplesAdvantage.com/statelocalgov
Bright. Green.
2012 CERTIFIED AGENCIES
Alaska Department of General Services
Anderson County, Tenn.
Anne Arundel County Schools, Md.
Arizona Offi ce of Tourism
City of Ames, Iowa
City of Cedar Rapids, Iowa
City of Chandler, Ariz.
City of Dunwoody, Ga.
City of Clearwater, Fla.
City of Goodyear, Ariz.
City of Fort Collins, Colo.
City of Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
City of League City, Texas
City of Longmont, Colo.
City of Miami Gardens, Fla.
City of Naperville, Ill.
City of Olathe, Kan.
City of Oviedo, Fla.
City of Raymore, Mo.
City of Port St Lucie, Fla.
City of Red Wing, Minn.
City of Sparks, Nev.
City of Tarpon Springs, Fla.
City of Venice, Fla.
City of Wheaton, Ill.
City of Winter Park, Fla.
Glendale Elementary
School District, Ariz.
Hinds Community College, Miss.
Johnson County, Kan.
Kentucky Division of Engineering
and Contract Administration
King George County, Va.
Larimer County, Colo.
Little Rock Wastewater, Ark.
Livingston County, Mich.
Louisiana Dept of Transportation
and Development
Maricopa County, Ariz.
Nashville Electric Service, Tenn.
Ohio Department of Aging
Ohio Lottery Commission
Old Dominion University, Va.
Polk State College, Fla.
Santa Rosa Co School Board, Fla.
Technical College System of Georgia
Texas Racing Commission
Town of Marana, Ariz.
Town of Oro Valley, Ariz.
Unifi ed Purchasing Cooperative
of the Ohio River Valley, Ohio
Village of Glenview, Ill.
Village of Niles, Ill.
Warren County, Miss.
Wichita Public Schools, Unifi ed
School District 259, Kan.
NOTE: Bold text indicates
Sterling Agency Award Recipient.
Through its Agency Certifi cation Award
program, the Universal Public Purchasing
Certifi cation Council (UPPCC) identifi es
organizations that have earned the
distinguished and unique honor of
achieving and/or maintaining a UPPCC
fully certifi ed public procurement
staff. This program was developed
to recognize those organizations that
have made a concerted effort to
achieve procurement excellence.
Sterling Agencies have maintained
Certifi ed Agency standing for three
or more consecutive year. Visit www.
uppcc.org to learn what it takes
to become a Certifi ed Agency.
XXXHPWQSPDPNrGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT | 27
PEOPLE [cppo/cppb]
The Snocrete® name was adopted by
Fair Mfg. Inc., as a word used to de-
scribe the snow of the Dakotas. Any
snowblower can blow light fluffy
snow, but Snocrete® Snowblowers are
engineered to move the hardest snow
and ice, and endure the harshest condi-
tions expected of them.
The Snocrete® line is available in a
variety of sizes, each featuring twin fan
impellers with ice chopper bars. To see
why Snocrete® Snowblowers are truly
the best built and performing snow-
blowers on the market, call or visit our
website today.
PO Box 536
Menno, SD 57045
(605) 387-2389
www.fairmfg.com
®
uccessfully completing UPPCC certifi cation
exams in May 2012 were 208 individuals,
including 151 who earned the CPPB certifi cation and 57
who earned the CPPO. To date, 8,921 CPPB and 2,125
CPPO certifi cations have been awarded by the UPPCC.
(See complete list of May certifi cants on page 28.)
Th e Certifi ed Public Purchasing Offi cer (CPPO) and
Certifi ed Professional Public Buyer (CPPB) are globally
recognized credentials off ered exclusively by the Universal
Public Purchasing Certifi cation Council (UPPCC). Th e
certifi cation programs systematically raise the level of
professionalism within the public procurement profession
by off ering recognition to those individuals who meet
an established standard of competency for public
procurement demonstrated through a rigorous application
process and superior examination performance.
A comprehensive written examination (specifi c to
each certifi cation) is required to confi rm the candidate’s
mastery of a variety of public procurement concepts
found in the UPPCC Body of Knowledge.
Th e UPPCC has released key performance
data from the May 2012 examinations:
Overall Scoring/Passing Rates. Sixty-one
percent of the 94 total candidates who tested for the
CPPO passed, while 57 percent of the 264 candidates
who tested for the CPPB passed. Mean passing scores for
CPPB candidates were 36 points higher than for CPPO.
Testing Time. Th e total testing time permitted for
both examinations is 3.5 hours. Th is equates to a total of
210 minutes for 190 questions (175 operational or scored
and 15 pre-test questions), or on average 1 minute and
10 seconds for each test question. For CPPO, the average
completion time was 2.70 hours with a range from 3.5
hours maximum to .75 hours minimum. For the CPPB,
the average completion time was 2.63 hours with a range
from 3.5 hours maximum to 1.05 hours minimum.
Exam Content. Content for both the CPPO
and CPPB examinations are dictated by the 2008
UPPCC Body of Knowledge (BOK). A total
of 10 domain areas comprise the BOK:
1. Administration Aspects of Purchasing
2. Procurement Requests
3. Solicitation and Evaluation of Bids/Proposals
4. Supplier Analysis
5. Negotiation Process
6. Contract Award and Administration
7. External/Internal Relationships
8. Materiels Management
9. Human Resources/Personnel
10. Forecasting and Strategies
Th e UPPCC reports that for both CPPO and CPPB,
candidates performed the best in Domain 6: Contract
Award and Administration. CPPO candidates performed
the poorest in Domain 4: Supplier Analysis and Domain 8:
Materiels Management. Conversely, CPPB candidates had the
most diffi culty in Domain10: Forecasting and Strategies.
Candidate Preparation. UPPCC reports that
most candidates indicated, via a post examination survey,
spending between three and six months preparing for their
respective examinations. Th e organization also reports
that CPPO candidates who indicated spending one month
or less preparing experienced the highest rates of passing
compared to other timeframes of preparation; however,
in evaluating CPPB candidate performance, preparation
times between one and three months, as indicated by high
passing rates, appeared to be the optimal timeframe.
PERFORMANCE DATA ON THE LATEST CERTIFICATION EXAMS
S
28 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
PEOPLE [meet the pros]
> UPPCC new certificationsMay 2012—The Universal Public Procurement Certification Council (UPPCC) announces that 196
individuals successfully completed the spring 2012 UPPCC certification examinations administered May
7-19, 2012.The Certified Public Procurement Officer (CPPO) and Certified Professional Public Buyer
(CPPB) credentials are recognized throughout the public procurement profession as demonstration
of an individual’s comprehensive knowledge of public procurement. Of the 208 newly certified
individuals, 151 earned the CPPB certification and 57earned the CPPO certification. This newest class
of professionals brings the total number certified for CPPB and CPPO to 8,921 and 2,125 respectively.
CPPOAlice C. Bailey, CPPO, C.P.M. City of Sumter, S.C.
Daphne A. Burch, CPPO, GCPA, GCPCA Armstrong Atlantic State University, Ga.
Stephanie H. Chen, CPPOSan Diego Convention Center, Calif.
Sandra E. Clifford, CPPO, J.D. Maryland Port Administration
James W. Cockrell, CPPOState of Illinois Procurement
Bruce D. Collins, CPPOCity of El Paso, Texas
Michelle L. Comeau, CPPO, CPPB Halifax Regional Water Commission, Nova Scotia, Canada
Randy M. Cross, CPPOCity of Miramar, Fla.
Rufus G. Crowder, CPPO,CPPB County of Galveston, Texas
Kenneth Crutcher, CPPOState of Illinois Procurement
Marilyn J. Douglas, CPPO,CPPB City of Longwood, Fla.
Christopher M. Flynn, CPPO State of Illinois Procurement
Karen S. Forbes, CPPOCity of Pasadena, Texas
Laurie A. Gaudet, CPPO, CPPB Corporation of the County of Simcoe, Ontario, Canada
Sherry George, CPPOPort Chester-Rye School District, N.Y.
Jon W. Hopkins, CPPO, A.A.,B.A. County of Amador, Calif.
Karen D. Hubbard-Washington, CPPO, C.P.M.Washington, DC
Dean P. Hudson, CPPOCoastal Carolina University, S.C.
Courtney A. Hunt, CPPO, CPPB Fulton County Schools, Ga.
Robert P. Jones, CPPO, CPPB Oregon Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development
Cheral A. Jones, CPPO, CPPB Washington - Department of Enterprise Services, Contracts and Legal Services – Master Contracts and Consulting
Philip C. Kaufmann, CPPO State of Illinois Procurement
Terri L. Kindsfather, CPPO, CPPB, CPIM City of Lakewood, Colo.
Pamela A. Lange, CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M. Clark County School District, Nev.
Mark W. Lutte, CPPOState of Maine, Maine
Robin A. Lynes, CPPO, CPPB Wichita Public Schools, Kan.
Paula K. Mah, CPPO, CPPBCity of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Adam P. Manne, CPPOPrince William County, Va.
Yetta S. Meadows, CPPOMarshall University, W.V.
Wendy L. Miller, CPPO, CPPB St. Johns River Water Management District, Fla.
Elizabeth H. Moss, CPPO, J.D. Howard Community College, Md.
Cathie L. Nash, CPPO, CPPB Maryland State Retirement Agency
Rey A. Palma, CPPO, CPPB, MPA Georgia Building Authority, Ga.
Catherine A. Payne, CPPO, CPPB Corporation of the County of Simcoe, Ontario, Canada
Kathy W. Perry, CPPO, CPPB Texas Department of Transportation
Loralei M. Poll, CPPO, CPPB Valley Metro Rail Procurement Department, Ariz.
John E. Red Horse, CPPO, CPPB Pinal County, Ariz.
Christine A. Rewis, CPPO, CPPB, FCCM Polk County Board of County Commissioners, Fla.
Ronald R. Rowland, CPPOState of Ohio
Maria J. Salvatierra, CPPO, CPPB, MBA City of North Miami Beach, Fla.
Jennifer D. Sanchez, CPPO Town of Orange Park, Fla.
Amadu Sankoh, CPPOOhio Department of Education
Kevin M. Scheirer, CPPOState of Maine
Billie F. Smith, CPPO, CPPB City of Huntsville, Texas
Edward L. Smylie, CPPOCity of Farmington, N.M.
Laura Stephens, CPPO, CPPB Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Ky.
Julie Taylor, CPPO, CPPBSan Mateo County Transit, Calif.
Brandon D. Thomas, CPPO Utah Valley University, Utah
David R. Tincher, CPPOWest Virginia Department of Administration
XXXHPWQSPDPNrGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT | 29
Roberta Wagner, CPPO, CPPB, CPIM West Virginia Department of Administration
Dave D. Wells, CPPO, CPPB Toronto District School Board, Ontario, Canada
Michael A. Wenzel, CPPOState of Maine
Angela C. White, CPPOPrince William County Service Authority, Va.
Lezlye S. Williams, CPPOBroward County Sheriff ’s Office, Fla.
Michael J. Woodall, CPPODistrict School Board of Pasco County, Fla.
Dwayne A. Young, CPPO, CPPB, VCCO, VCO Old Dominion University, N.C.
Yu Zhu, CPPO, C.P.M.Montgomery Community College, Va.
CPPBDeborah J. Adams, CPPBCity of Punta Gorda, Fla.
Scott A. Agnello, CPPBCorporation of the City of Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Amy Almanzar, CPPBBroward County Board of County Commissioners, Fla.
Cynthia Alonzo, CPPBCity of Denton, Texas
Lori A. Andrews, CPPBState of Illinois Procurement
Colleen T. Bailey, CPPBCity of Yakima, Wash.
Debbie L. Bakker, CPPBCorporation of the City of Brantford, Ontario, Canada
Sherry-Ann Besla, CPPBRegional Municipality of Peel, Ontario, Canada
Kayci E. Bohlen, CPPBState of Illinois Procurement
Tara K. Bohnsack, CPPBHernando County, Fla.
Bambi L. Brenden, CPPBArizona Department of Administration
Christopher L. Bresley, CPPB Loudoun County, Va.
Delia Bridges, CPPBCity of Macon, Ga.
Adrian Brown, CPPB,JDCity of Palo Alto, Calif.
Guinevere A. Bruner, CPPB County of Bucks, Pa.
Joanna Brzezicki, CPPBRegional Municipality of Peel, Ontario, Canada
Steven R. Burns, CPPBSt. Mary’s County Government, Md.
Tracie A. Byrne, CPPBCity of Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Holly G. Cafferata, CPPBGwinnett County, Ga.
Warivone (Vonnie) Caporiccio, CPPBRegional Municipality of Halton, Ontario, Canada
Michael S. Carter, CPPBMohave Educational Services Cooperative, Ariz.
Deborah M. Castaldo, CPPB Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, Md.
Colleen L. Caton, CPPBState of Illinois Procurement
Michelle E.Charnoski, CPPB City of Dallas, Texas
Jason K. Chernecky, CPPBYork University, Ontario, Canada
Christopher C. Cohen, CPPB Washington State Department of Transportation
Mitchell P. Cohen, CPPBBroward County Board of County Commissioners, Fla.
Nancy L. Colbaugh, CPPBMohave Educational Services Cooperative, Ariz.
LaSonya Collins, CPPBCity of Indianapolis, Ind.
Kristen L. Collora, CPPBFlagler County Board of County Commissioners, Fla.
Edward (Ted) F. Coyman, CPPB Sarasota County, Fla.
Mirjana Maryanne Cucuz, CPPBCity of Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Nyesha Daley, CPPBSmyrna, Ga.
Gerrell Y. Dangerfield, CPPB Berkeley County, S.C.
Michael F. Dauta, CPPBCity of Boynton Beach, Fla.
Alfredo De Luna, CPPBCounty of Los Angeles, Calif.
Eduardo (Ed) F. DeLaVega, CPPBVillage of Wellington, Fla.
Teresa Donsbach, CPPB,CTPS City of Indianapolis, Ind.
Belinda G. Dunn, CPPBDeKalb County, Ga.
Karma L. Durre, CPPBPolk County Sheriff ’s Office, Fla.
Victor C. Emenanjor, CPPB New York City Human Resources Administration
Debra A. Espinoza, CPPBEl Paso Community College, Texas
Tiffany M. Evans, CPPBFairfax County Public Schools, Va.
Wanda R. Farmer, CPPB, M.B.A. City of Newport News, Va.
Susan (Su) A. Fennern, CPPB, OPBC Oregon Department of Education, Ore.
Jeannette D. Ferrell, CPPB, MBA Broward County Board of County Commissioners, Fla.
Krista S. Ferrell, CPPBWest Virginia Department of Administration
Jo-Anne L. Filipkowski, CPPB Hauppauge Public Schools, N.Y.
Robin F. Friefield, CPPBCity of Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Kathleen P. George, CPPBOregon State Lottery
Toby W. Giddings, CPPBOregon Department of Administrative Service
Janielle M. Graham, CPPBState of Illinois Procurement
Stacy Gregg, CPPBRichland County School District One, S.C.
Christine A. Grommons, CPPB Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, Nev.
Joetta Gross, CPPBUniversity of Missouri System, Mo.
Marlys K. Hagen, CPPB, C.P.M. State of Alaska
Harold W. Hamby, CPPBPolk County School Board, Fla.
James L. Hanney, CPPBHillsborough County Department of Procurement Services, Fla.
Mary K. Harper, CPPBCity of Columbus, Ohio
Mark M. Haywood, CPPBDeKalb County, Ga.
Kathleen A. Herman, CPPB San Diego Unified School District, Calif.
James H. Hoagland, CPPBDelaware Department of Transportation, DE
Rebecca C. Hoffman, CPPB Fairfax County Government, Va.
PEOPLE [meet the pros]
Anthony Holt, CPPBCentral Contra Costa Sanitary District, Calif.
Eileen M. Hunt, CPPBSchool Board of Broward County, Fla.
Lenika A. Hutchens, CPPBWashington County , Ore.
Nicole Jensson, CPPBOlmsted County, Minn.
Anne Jewell, CPPBState of Maryland
Jeannine C. Joergensen, CPPB San Diego Unified School District, Calif.
Jennifer M. Jolley, CPPBOregon Department of Revenue
Rachelle L. Jones, CPPBHernando County, Fla.
Edward M. Jordan, CPPBCounty of Ulster, N.Y.
Chad M. Jorissen, CPPBWhatcom Transportation Authority, Wash.
Maye E. Kelsey, CPPBState of Illinois Procurement
Kellye Keyes Jackson, CPPB State of Illinois Procurement
Jonathan Klinkenberg, CPPB Saint Paul Public Schools ISD #625, Minn.
John C. Knittle, CPPBState of Illinois Procurement
Nancy B. Knudsen, CPPBMaryland State Highway Administration
John W. Kohut, CPPBCity of Dallas, Texas
Yuliana Konovalova, CPPBMetro Transit Authority, N.Y.
Laura R. Langston, CPPBHouston County Board of Education, Ga.
Sau Lee, CPPBCounty of Los Angeles, Calif.
Javon S. Lewis, CPPBMontgomery County Department of Job and Family Services, Ohio
Susana Liang, CPPBTown of Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
Christina D. Lochbaum, CPPB Ohio Department of Public Safety
Yvonne A. Lucas, CPPBCity of Long Beach, Calif.
Patrice D. Luehring, CPPB, BS Little Rock National Airport, Ark.
Christopher J. Maher, CPPB City of Mesa, Ariz.
Tesfamichael Makonnen, CPPB State of Ohio
Janet L. Malloy, CPPBYork Regional Police, Ontario, Canada
Frederick P. Mannino, CPPB City of Biloxi, Miss.
Sheila R. Mansell, CPPBFlorida Department of Military Affairs, Fla.
Erick A. Martinez, CPPBMiami Dade County Internal Services Department, Fla.
Miguel A. Martinez, CPPB,FCCM Orlando, Fla.
Michael J. Marzullo, CPPBLoudoun County, Va.
Mansfield W. Matthewson, CPPB, C. P. M. Grand Rapids Community College, Mich.
Joan M. McCarty, CPPBRegion of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
MAKE MOLEHILLS
OUT OF MOUNTAINS.
The Cushman 1600XD lives to conquer any job.
There’s no task too big for the 22-hp diesel engine,
1,600-lb payload and massive cargo bed. And no
matter where work needs to be done, you’ll get
there thanks to user-selectable 4WD, a locking rear
differential and 4-wheel independent suspension.
So, whether you’re moving mountains or driving
over them, the 1600XD is ready for action.
LET’S WORK.
www.cushman.com© 2012 Textron Inc. All rights reserved.
XXXHPWQSPDPNrGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT | 31
Clare A. McGrane, CPPBPinellas County, Fla.
Molly McLoughlin, CPPBBoulder Valley School District, Colo.
Betty (Elizabeth) Miller, CPPB City of Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Jolena K. Missildine, CPPB, CCM Washington State Department of Transportation
Terry V. Nicholson, CPPBCity of Austin, Texas
Catherine A. Nocco, CPPB Sachem Central School District, N.Y.
Jamie D. Oakley, CPPBRegional Municipality of York, Ontario, Canada
Jacqueline Osti, CPPBCounty of Wellington, Ontario, Canada
Lisa A. Parkison, CPPBWayne-Finger Lakes BOCES, N.Y.
Carrie D. Parks, CPPBPlacer County Water Agency, Calif.
Carrie A. Patrick, CPPBHarris County, Texas
Michael A. Pfister, CPPBCounty of Santa Clara, Calif.
Wanda G. Pleasant, CPPBHouston Community College, Procurement Operations Department, Texas
Monica Powery, CPPBCity of Greenacres, Fla.
Darlene D. Reynolds, CPPB District of Columbia Superior Court, DC
Cynthia J. Rigby, CPPBQueensbury Union Free School District, N.Y.
Zaida Riollano, CPPB,CCABroward College, Fla.
Vearnetta N. Rivers, CPPB Fulton County - Department of Purchasing, Ga.
Jesus D. Rosario, CPPB, C.P.M. Sacramento Job Corps Center, Calif.
Gustavo M. Rossell, CPPBAlbuquerque Public Schools, N.M.
Sarah L. Roth, CPPBOregon Secretary of State, Ore.
Kate H. Rouse, CPPBHillsborough County Public Schools, Fla.
Adrian C. Ruger, CPPB, C.P.M. State of Utah, Division of Purchasing, Utah
Lisa S. Ryals, CPPBCollege Center for Library Automation, Fla.
Cyndee D. Sams, CPPB,FCCN,FCCM Florida Department of Children and Families, Fla.
Sandra S. Sanchez, CPPB,C.P.M.,A.P.P. Albuquerque Public Schools, N.M.
Claudia Sanchez, CPPBMontebello Unified School District, Calif.
David E. Schlueter, CPPBCity of Minneapolis, Minn.
Denise Schulsinger, CPPBHernando County, Fla.
Doug W. Schwartz, CPPBPublic School Retirement System of Mo.
Debra L. Scott, CPPB,OBPC,OPMA Oregon Department of Administrative Service
Richelieu M. Sese, CPPBCity of Independence, Mo.
Jennifer L. Shaefer, CPPBState of Ohio
Sarah S. Shanmugam, CPPB Regional Municipality of Peel, Ontario, Canada
Cathrine A.Sheckell, CPPB Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County, Ind.
Terri A. Smith, CPPBCity of Virginia Beach, Va.
Aimee O. Storm, CPPBPlano, Texas
Peter G. Taylor, CPPBChignecto-Central Regional School Board, Nova Scotia, Canada
Eric J. Thompson, CPPBUniversity of Wisconsin Madison SSEC
Gayle A. Thomson, CPPBKitsap Transit, Wash.
Marina L. Tuileta, CPPBSuperior Court of California, County of Orange
Life A. Verlooy, CPPBSt. Louis County - Purchasing Division, Minn.
Candace J. Vis, CPPBTown of Queen Creek, Ariz.
Adam Walker, CPPBCity of Ottawa, Ontario
Rose M. Weaver, CPPBCity of Virginia Beach, Va.
Solomon Wedderburn, CPPB Corporation of the City of Brantford, Ontario, Canada
Karl L. Wendt, CPPB,CPSM Iowa Dept of Administrative Services
Guy A. Werner, CPPBMaryland State Retirement Agency
Amy M. Wheeler, CPPBNashville Electric Service, Tenn.
Robert D. Wicker, CPPBCity of Jacksonville – Fla.
Larry L. Woo, CPPBPinal County, Ariz.
Beverly M. Yount, CPPBCity of Piqua, Ohio
Andrew M. Yunt, CPPB,BA/BS Commission for Children with Special Health Care Needs, Ky.
Elizabeth J. Zink, CPPBPinal County, Ariz.
ADVERTISER INDEX
ADVERTISER .......................................................PAGE
APPLIED INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES ......... 20
ARI FLEET .................................................................BC
ELECTRALED, INC. ................................................. 15
E-Z-GO ........................................................................ 30
FAIR MANUFACTURING, INC. ............................ 27
FORD MOTOR COMPANY ....................................... 3
HD SUPPLY FACILITIES MAINTENANCE ......... 22
IMAGING SUPPLIES COALITION .......................... 5
INSIGHT ENTERPRISES, INC. .............................. 21
INTIRION-MICROFRIDGE .................................. IBC
JOHN DEERE ...........................................................IFC
LIFTMOORE INC. ..................................................... 25
MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL ..................... 6, 7
NATIONAL JOINT POWERS ASSOCIATION.... 11
PUBLIC SOURCING SOLUTIONS ....................... 14
SERVICEWEAR APPAREL ..................................... 19
STAPLES ADVANTAGE .......................................... 26
U.S. COMMUNITIES ..................................... 16-17, 18
U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION .. 9
32 | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2012
BACK PAGES [fred marks]
FREDERICK MARKS, CPPO, VCO, is a retired purchasing officer who has held positions as a supervising buyer for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey as well as director of material management for Northern Virginia Community College. Contact Marks at [email protected].
T&M: Not a license to stealention a T&M contract to most buyers and you’ll see their face frozen in dismay.
You can just hear the words “blank check” and “license to steal” going through their
minds. Time and material contracts are a complex method of contracting with potential
for abuse. You are paying for direct labor at a fixed hourly rate (which includes direct and
indirect labor, overhead and profit) and materials at cost or at a previously agreed-upon
material cost markup. The most common types of T&M contracts are repair or service
contracts. Each one has special needs and requirements, and the buyer, contract administrator
and vendor each have important roles to play if the contract is to be successful.
It’s up to the buyer to research the particular pricing structure and labor rates of the categories
that will be performing on their contract. I have previously written here about repair contracts
(Government Procurement, June 2008) and how one can structure estimated hours to effect a
repair. A journeyman mechanic is priced at a different rate than a trades helper. Labor rates differ in
each specialized trade depending on experience, time in grade, training, certification and abilities.
Check information on the contractor’s personnel; ask for copies of their certifications and the
standing of those certifications in a particular industry. Anyone can print a certificate. You should
be looking for certifications that can be verified by training and education and have transparency.
The contract administrator has a difficult job in that he or she is responsible to verify not
only that the work is done correctly, but also the time each category of labor spends on a
specific project task. In the case of a large number of employees, such as a painting contract,
verification of the vendor’s personnel should be done by sign-in sheets,
proof of identity using government-issued ID, and a random taking of
attendance. You may be better served by using a database to keep track
of the vendor’s personnel. Your buyer, client and contract administrator
should work as a team to set down the rules on how the contract will
be administered, and I would also include those rules in the contract
documents. Remember the “no surprises” rule. Neither party wants them!
One of the biggest complaints about a T&M contract from Bill Lindsey
of Gloucester County, Va., is that there is no incentive for the vendor to
control costs or to have an end in sight. I would like to think that most
vendors are responsible businesses and want to provide enough detailed
information to a buyer so their costs are covered in the schedule of unit
prices and other pricing information revealed by the buyer’s research.
To that end, it’s the responsibility of the buyer to ensure that a detailed
account of what needs to be accomplished is provided and approved prior to the
commencement of any work. Verification of the vendor’s claims for additional work is difficult unless
you have an expert on staff who can help you. Just remember, you can rent help. Look around and see
what an independent consultant will charge to verify claims. Contact a testing lab; ask a colleague
in another public body if they will “loan” you an expert (it’s how we work together as a profession).
Some buyers put in a “not to exceed” clause which may work for your particular needs.
Some use estimated hours, and others rely on a quote prior to the start of work. Whatever
you use, verify, verify and verify. There are instances of additional work to be performed
after agreed-upon work starts. Write a decent and liberal extra work clause and make
it dependent on the vendor’s complete explanation of what needs to be performed. The
agreement of the client and contract administrator will complete your audit trail.
M
/ŶƟƌŝŽŶŽƌƉŽƌĂƟŽŶϮŶŶĞƩĞZŽĂĚ^ƵŝƚĞϯ&ŽdžďŽƌŽDϬϮϬϯϱ;ဒϬϬϲϯϳϳϱϲϳǁǁǁŵŝĐƌŽĨƌŝĚŐĞĐŽŵ$ŐŽƉƌŽDŝĐƌŽ&ƌŝĚŐĞΠĂŶĚ^ĂĨĞWůƵŐΠĂƌĞƌĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚƚƌĂĚĞŵĂƌŬƐŽĨ/ŶƟƌŝŽŶŽƌƉŽƌĂƟŽŶΞ/ŶƟƌŝŽŶŽƌƉŽƌĂƟŽŶϮϬϭϮ
ŝŶŽŶĞĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶƚĂƉƉůŝĂŶĐĞDŝĐƌŽ&ƌŝĚŐĞΠǁŝƚŚ
^ĂĨĞWůƵŐΠ allows you to chill and heat your food
ĂŶĚĐŚĂƌŐĞLJŽƵƌĞǀĞƌLJĚĂLJĞůĞĐƚƌŽŶŝĐƐƐƵĐŚĂƐĐĞůů
ƉŚŽŶĞƐůĂƉƚŽƉƐDWϯƉůĂLJĞƌƐĂŶĚĚŝŐŝƚĂůĐĂŵĞƌĂƐ
dŚĞŵŽƐƚƉŽƉƵůĂƌĐŽŵďŝŶĂƟŽŶĂƉƉůŝĂŶĐĞŝŶ
ŵĞƌŝĐĂŽīĞƌƐƚŚĞƐĂĨĞƚLJĂŶĚĞŶĞƌŐLJĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶ
ďĞŶĞĮƚƐǁŝƚŚ^ĂĨĞWůƵŐΠƚĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJ
dŚŝƐŝƐŶŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƌLJƌĞĨƌŝŐĞƌĂƚŽƌDŝĐƌŽ&ƌŝĚŐĞΠǁŝƚŚ
^ĂĨĞWůƵŐΠƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐ,
(10-Year WarrantyKƵƌŽŶ)ƐŝƚĞƐĞƌǀŝĐĞŽŶůLJĂĚĚƐ
ƚŽǁŚĂƚŝƐďLJĨĂƌĂŶŝŶĚƵƐƚƌLJďĞƐƚǁĂƌƌĂŶƚLJ
(Safe Plug® Technology: ƉĂƚĞŶƚ)ƉĞŶĚŝŶŐƉŽǁĞƌ
ŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚƐLJƐƚĞŵƚŚĂƚĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĞƐĞŶĞƌŐLJĂŶĚ
ƉƌĞǀĞŶƚƐĐŝƌĐƵŝƚŽǀĞƌůŽĂĚƐ
( ƵĂůŚĂƌŐŝŶŐ^ƚĂƟŽŶMakes it easy and
ĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶƚƚŽĐŚĂƌŐĞƉĞƌƐŽŶĂůĞůĞĐƚƌŽŶŝĐĚĞǀŝĐĞƐ
( ŶĞƌŐLJĸĐŝĞŶƚŽŶƐĞƌǀĞĞŶĞƌŐLJƐĂǀĞƵƟůŝƟĞƐ
ĂŶĚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚƚŚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚ
The Comforts of Home
Call today for a demo: 800-477-4715
arifl eet.com
Think big.We’re talking about the ability to handle Big
Data—more data than ever before. Diverse
data, on a global scale. And not just handle
it. Master it. So you can get more done. In
fact, ARI analytics™ does everything in a big
way—including saving you time and money.
Get reports on the fl y across multiple categories and much more.
analytics
