Report 2007-111 Recommendation 2 Responses
Report 2007-111: California Highway Patrol: It Followed State Contracting Requirements Inconsistently, Exhibited Weaknesses in Its Conflict-of-Interest Guidelines, and Used a State Resource Imprudently (Release Date: January 2008)
Recommendation #2 To: Highway Patrol, California
To ensure that it protects the State?s interest and receives the best products and services at the most competitive prices, the CHP should provide a complete analysis of how it determines that the offered price is fair and reasonable when it chooses to follow a noncompetitive bid process.
1-Year Agency Response
CHP reported that it has included in its procurement checklist steps for staff to follow in a noncompetitive procurement. These steps include staff documenting their efforts to identify similar goods and providing an evaluation for why the similar goods are unacceptable. Additionally, staff must examine the California State Contracts Register to identify suppliers and document the examination. CHP stated that when it can identify no other suppliers, it will use the information gathered from similar goods to justify the cost of a noncompetitive procurement is fair and reasonable. (See 2010-406 p. 73)
- Response Date: January 2009
California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Fully Implemented
Agency responses received after June 2013 are posted verbatim.