Mississippi Administrative Code
Title 12 - Finance and Administration
Part 6 - Office of Purchasing, Travel and Fleet Management
Chapter 3 - Source Selection and Contract Formation
Sec2 12-6-3.107 - Competitive Sealed Proposals
Section 12-6-3.107.02 - Conditions for Use

Universal Citation: MS Code of Rules 12-6-3.107.02

Current through September 24, 2024

(1) Competitive sealed bidding is the preferred method of procurement; however, if it is not practicable and advantageous, a request for proposals or request for qualifications may be used. The terms "practicable" and "advantageous" are to be given ordinary dictionary meanings. The term "practicable" denotes what may be accomplished or put into practical application. "Advantageous" denotes a judgmental assessment of what is in the state's best interest.

(2) The following factors shall be considered when determining advantageousness:

(a) The need for flexibility;

(b) The type of evaluations that will be needed after offers are received;

(c) Whether the evaluation factors involve the relative abilities of offerers to perform, including degrees of technical or professional experience or expertise;

(d) Whether the type of need to be satisfied involves weighing artistic and aesthetic values to the extent that price is a secondary consideration;

(e) Whether the types of supplies, services or construction may require the use of comparative judgmental evaluations to evaluate them adequately; and

(f) Whether prior procurements indicate that a request for proposals may result in more beneficial contracts for the state.

(3) The following factors shall be considered when determining practicability:

(a) Whether the contract needs to be a contract other than a fixed-price type contract;

(b) Whether oral or written discussions may need to be conducted with offerers concerning technical and price aspects of their proposals;

(c) Whether offerers may need to be afforded the opportunity to revise their proposals, including price;

(d) Whether the award may need to be based upon a comparative evaluation of differing price and contractual factors as well as quality factors that include technical and performance capability and the content of the technical proposal; and

(e) Whether the primary consideration in determining award may not be price.

(4) If the head purchasing agent at an agency or his or her designee determines, in writing, that the use of competitive sealed bidding is either not practicable or not advantageous to the state, he or she shall submit a detailed explanation of the reasons for that determination to the Public Procurement Review Board by submitting same in writing on agency letterhead to OPTFM. If the Public Procurement Review Board determines that competitive sealed bidding is either not practicable or not advantageous to the state, then a contract may be entered into for the procurement of commodities, supplies, equipment, construction, technology, personal and professional services, state agency purchased employee benefits or state agency supplemental insurance and cafeteria plans, by a request for proposals or request for qualifications. However, these procurements contracted for through a request for proposals or request for qualifications may not be combined or included in a contract with other procurements that are required to be procured through competitive sealed bidding so as to avoid the statutory obligation for procurement through competitive sealed bidding. The board may modify or revoke its determination at any time, and the determination should be reviewed for current applicability from time to time.

(5) In addition to determining whether a request for proposals or request for qualifications would be practicable and advantageous to the state, when making the decision to use a request for proposals or request for qualifications, the head purchasing agent shall consider the following factors:

(a) Whether quality, availability or capability is overriding in relation to price in procurements for research and development, technical supplies or services;

(b) Whether the initial installation needs to be evaluated together with later maintenance and service capabilities and what priority should be given to these requirements in the best interests of the state; and

(c) Whether the marketplace will respond better to a solicitation permitting not only a range of alternative proposals but evaluation and discussion of them before making the award.

Disclaimer: These regulations may not be the most recent version. Mississippi may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.