Government Accountability

Solutions Overview

Create Transparency though an Online Database and Comprehensive Reports, HB 2037

Many states are further ahead than Oregon in providing public information regarding contracts. Oregon ranks 42nd in the nation. By requiring a comprehensive report, Oregon can learn more about who is doing contracting, how much it is costing, and who is receiving contracts and who is not. This information is invaluable in evaluating the cost-effectiveness, the quality, and the impact on our community.

In addition to information for the Legislature and agencies to be able to evaluate, it is important that taxpayers have information on how money is being spent and which contractors are providing the services. Indiana and the Federal Government both have databases that allow the public, the media, and public officials information about contracting. These websites are praised by the National Taxpayers Union and Good Jobs First in recent reports.(1)

Indiana Website: http://www.in.gov/idoa/2796.htm
Federal Governmant Website: http://www.usaspending.gov/

Require Cost/Benefit Analysis and Responsible Bidders

Learning from California and recommendations on responsible contracting, Oregon can ensure that it uses contractors appropriately and for cost-savings. Requiring a cost/benefit analysis before an agency or local district contracts ensures that all costs have been considered, that the contract is necessary, and that the agency is prepared to adequately oversee the contract. Cost/benefit analysis are recommended by National Association of Auditors(2) and are used in many states, including California.

Ensuring that contractors are responsible bidders is critical to maintain proper bidding rules and strong standards for wages and benefits. While contracting can often times save money, cost-savings should not come only because of lower wages and benefits. In addition, contractors should comply with all state and federal regulations, should not be in dispute on one contract while bidding on another, and should be public record.

Increasing Oversight will Ensure Quality Services

Contractors can and must provide some critical services. However, it is important that government ensures that contractors are providing the services laid out in the contract and that it is to the standard the public expects.

The recent Multnomah County Audit of Large Contracts found that often contractors were being paid before the contract was even signed.(3) In the report, “All Costs Considered” which reviewed school district contracts, it found that the standards and expectations for quality work was left for the contractor to write.(4) It is critical that all contracts have clear expectations on quality written into the contract. Without clear expectations in the contract it is impossible to evaluate the success of the contract and it makes it harder to cancel a contract if the goals are not being met.

References:

1. “The State of State Disclosure: An Evaluation of Online Public Information About Economic Development Subsidies, Procurement Contracts, and Lobbying Activities”, Phillip Matteria, Karla Walter, Julie Farb Blain, and Michelle Lee, November 2007, Corporate Research Project of Good Jobs First., “Show Us the Money: How Online Databases can help Taxpayers Sort Out State Spending”, NTU Issue Brief #161, Christopher Biggs and Kristina Rasmussen, March 23, 2007.
2. “Contracting for Services: A National State Auditors Association Best Practices Document”, The National State Auditors Association , 2003
3. Multnomah County Audit, Management of Large Contracts Audit Report, June 2008, LaVonne Grissin-Valade, Multnomah County Auditor.
4. “All Costs Considered: A New Analysis on the Contracting Out of School Support Services in Oregon”, Gordon Lafer, Bob Russel, Labor Education and Research Center, University of Oregon, February 2009