D430 SIGNED COMPETITION IMPRACTICABLE.PDF

BARIZOKA
Nea] aa] i) ]
|
“OuN’
Office of Procurement Services
GOODS AND SERVICES
COMPETITION IMPRACTICABLE FORM
This form is to be used when a department believes an acquisition is considered Competition Impracticable and the acquisition
dollar amount is above $10,000. The Chief Procurement Officer can approve purchases up to $100,000. Board of Supervisors
approval is required if the acquisition is over $100,000. This form must be submitted for approval to: Office of Procurement
Services | 160 S 4th Ave | Phoenix, AZ 85003. Fax number: 602.506.6766. The signed form must be retained in the purchasing
file. Unless approved by the Board of Supervisors in a formal agenda item or the Chief Procurement Officer in a formal Contract
a Cl form is valid from July 1 thru June 30th of each Fiscal Year.
DEPARTMENT NAME p DEPARTMENT RX#
Treasurer's Office
PROPOSED CONTRACT VENDOR #vso0000005889
NEED IDENTIFIED Date: 5/03/2021
Company: Solvency Advisors LLC
penveny
Rte 07/19/2021
Address: 1360 Peach St.
City, State: San Luis Obispo, California QUOTED PRICE:
$1 54,800
Zip/Postal Code: | 93401
Phone: 703-638-5939 Accounting String: 460 D470 4715 DYUP &)
Fax: TA éG re) | aed
Contact Name: | Petre Snegireff
DESCRIPTION OF GOODS OR SERVICES REQUIRED: ye
The estimated cost of this Procurement is: < $100k Y >$100k
Is this a Technology Procurement? | lYes Y No
The SOW is for Phase |, which is not technical in nature. It is performing activities with our
business partners in preparation for Phase II, which will be a technology procurement. This
request for a Cl to onboard a PM is critical in developing a SOW for the Phase II portion for the
County Treasurer's system.
COMPETITION IMPRACTICABLE CATEGORY (check applicable box, attach documentation or provide explanation below.)
Maricopa County Procurement Code MC1-351states: “CompetitionImpracticable” means an acquisition where, competition is
impractical because of standardization, warranty, or other factors as approved by the Board of Supervisors.
NOTE: The following are unlikely to be sufficient Competition Impracticable justifications:
¢ Personal or department preference for a product or vendor
* Department perception that the vendor is the best qualified (this should be determined through a competitive process)
* Lack of department planning resulting in limited time to conduct a competitive procurement
¢ Special incentive or deal offered (can be assessed in open and competitive solicitation)
*Department convenience
Software license renewals, additions, or upgrades available
[_ |Grant specified (supporting documents attached)
from only one source
Brand compatibility available from only one source (no other
[_ [Mailing lists, subscriptions or media advertising
distributors)
[Warranty voided if service provided by other contract vendor | |Other proprietary situation
[V other (Provide written explanation below)

THISISA COMPETITION IMPRACTICABLE PROCUREMENT BECAUSE (attach additional page if needed):
The project manager has extensive knowledege directly related to the Treasurer's Office for
ULTIS Phase | Dynamics and SymPro development and implementation. The PM has the
knowledge and historical perspective who can collaborate with our business partners and
perform the phase | activities listed in the attached document. He has been in a position to
increase his knowledge base of the Treasurer's accounting, financial, investment systems,
including day to day business operations. These experiences cannot be replaced in the short
term in order to meet County Objectives.
SEARCH
Asearch was conducted consisting of: (check all that apply) RESULTS
[| Market research [_] Public notice given, list [_]no alternatives were identified
Giher vendors contacted Other yne alternatives were deemed acceptable
LU VI ecause (explain below):
Describe the search from above in detail:
This request presents a unique situation and should be considered a reasonable request for Cl.
Other PM's do not have the knowledge or experience to begin providing services immediately.
These resources are unique to this individual which would result in an overall savings to the
County through their ability to hit the ground running including a cost avoidance by avoiding
additional training with another firm or PM. The learning curve would be difficult and long. The
PM's detailed, hands on experience with Maricopa County Treasurer's Office is unique and
specific and should be considered through this Cl request.
PRICE
MC1-352-B states: The Using Agency requesting a Competition Impracticable Procurement shall provide written evidence
to support a Competition Impracticable determination containing an explanation of why the proposed procurement
process is advantageous to the County; and the scope, duration, and estimated total dollar value of the procurement.
Price has been fairly and reasonably established by: [| Comparison to public sector contract pricing
to previous comparable purchases L] biscount off published catalog pricing
[7]Comparison
from a different vendor [| Market survey
LC] Independent estimate Cl Other explain:
Describe methodology and results (attach any written supporting data, e.g., survey or market analysis):
Although, the comparison for hourly rate is comparable to ACRO, and less than Grant
Thornton. The PM's requested hourly rate is reasonable, based on their current knowledge and
familiarity with the Treasurer systems including the critical details in meeting County timelines.

CERTIFICATIONS
| certify:
1) | recognize that the Maricopa County Procurement Code requires the use of competitive solicitations unless
exempted by law. | have reviewed the information and materials relevant to this procurement of goods and services,
and am requesting approval of an exception to the competitive process for the reasons described;
2) the price to be paid to the proposed vendor is fair, reasonable, and provides the best value to Maricopa County; and
3) this request for an exception to the competitive solicitation process is not the result of inadequate advance planning
or for purposes of securing the services of a preferred vendor.
Department Head or Department Head Delegate Signature (Required)
Jordan Dale TU
6/24 /202\
And
Printed Name Phature Date
Office of Procurement Services
The CPO can approve procurements up to $100,000. If this request is over $100,000 it must be submitted as
an agenda item to the Board of Supervisors for consideration.
K] Recommended to BOS for approval.
.
7,
Voted
Kevin Tyne, Director OPS June 24, 2021
Printed Name Signature Date
Office of Enterprise Technology (If this procurement is classified as a technology procurement it must be
forwarded to OET for coordination and/or approval. If this procurement request is not approved by OET, the form will
be returned to the requestor.)
Approved. Recommended purchase is in line with Maricopa County's strategic technology plan or currently installed
L_Jequipment or service, and is considered to be a competition impracticable procurement.
[| Not Approved. Reasoning:
Printed Name Signature Date
Email Save