Cooperative purchasing: A faster path to government technology procurement

When a technology system needs an upgrade, your instinct is probably the same as many government offices: write an RFP. But traditional procurement can be slow and can take anywhere from three to 24 months to finalize, with complex technology purchases often landing at the high end of that range.

A Request for Proposal (RFP) can also leave you with a system that doesn’t quite fit. The process can feel like a game of Battleship: Your team gathers requirements internally and sends them out with limited context, and vendors do their best to guess what you need. If those requirements miss something, you may end up with a vendor that can’t keep up with your needs, and another RFP down the road.

For a wide range of use cases, cooperative purchasing offers a faster option that has already been competitively bid and vetted, so you can save time and money without the headache of running a process of your own.

Here’s what to know before your next purchase.

What is a cooperative contract?

A cooperative contract lets you and other agencies buy off one already-negotiated agreement with proven, trusted suppliers instead of each agency running an RFP for the same need. These pre-negotiated terms cut the cost, time, and risk that come with a traditional RFP. The scope of a cooperative contract is intentionally broad and offers a menu of pre-approved products, services, and vendors so you can choose what fits your needs.

What are the benefits of a cooperative contract?

A cooperative contract can reduce staff-time cost since the agency that ran the original solicitation already handled the drafting, evaluation, and negotiation. That same competitive sourcing process lowers risk, too — the terms have already been tested by other agencies before you. NASPO ValuePoint, one of the largest national cooperatives, for example, develops its contracts using its Lead State Model® and Multistate Sourcing Teams®, leveraging expertise from public procurement professionals nationwide.

With a cooperative purchasing model, the cooperative vets the legal terms, the suppliers, and the pricing on your behalf. On the legal side, NASPO ValuePoint notes that its master agreements come with high-level terms and conditions already negotiated by public procurement professionals and subject matter experts. Additionally, vendors undergo comprehensive competitive evaluation by nationwide sourcing teams using established standards, ensuring every available choice has already met rigorous quality benchmarks.

Your agency inherits pre-negotiated terms and proven suppliers, without spending months to get there on your own. The broad terms in cooperative contracts offer the additional benefit of expanding services under an existing contract without going through another RFP.

A cooperative contract’s wider scope leaves room to adjust as needs evolve, and a local purchase order or Statement of Work can still address your agency- or project-specific needs without changing the master agreement. You can also engage directly with awarded suppliers to ask questions and request quotes before you buy.

What are the limitations of a cooperative contract?

Although cooperative contracts are by their nature unrestrictive, they aren’t always the best fit for every purchase. They work best when your agency already has a clear picture of what it needs and what the market offers. A few considerations to keep in mind:

• Your agency has a truly unique need: If your agency has specialized requirements, it’s important to make sure the vendor can meet them. In these cases, it may be helpful to see what capabilities are available to you by soliciting numerous responses from vendors through an RFP.
• Your agency wants full control over the buying process: A cooperative contract’s master terms and vendor pool are already in place. If your agency prefers to set every requirement itself, a dedicated RFP may be the better fit.
• Vendor diversity can suffer: There’s limited data on whether cooperative contracts open opportunities for small, diverse, or local vendors, and the scaled, broad nature of these contracts tends to favor larger vendors.

That’s why it’s worth doing due diligence before assuming a cooperative contract is the right fit every time. Research what’s out there before choosing a vendor. A Request for Information (RFI) is one way to do this, and it’s much faster than an RFP. PayIt’s Digital Government Service Delivery: A Guide for Buyers can also help you define your purchase criteria and evaluate vendors.

What do cooperatives require?

There are many cooperative contract options, from state and federal programs to procurement organizations. Here’s a look at two of the largest programs and what each requires to get started:

• NASPO ValuePoint: Pools demand across states using a lead-state sourcing model.
• OMNIA Partners: Works with public and private-sector members alike.

Access rules depend on which cooperative you’re using. NASPO ValuePoint works through signed Participating Addendums, while OMNIA Partners only requires free online registration.

If your state hasn’t signed on to NASPO ValuePoint, you can pursue a Local Participating Addendum, or use OMNIA Partners, which doesn’t require state-level sign-off.

Getting started is free since NASPO ValuePoint and OMNIA Partners don’t charge a membership or registration fee to review or use their contracts. Once you’re in, NASPO’s eMarketPlace and OMNIA’s OPUS platform both let you search contracts and purchase directly online.

You can check your state’s status yourself: NASPO’s website has a state-by-state map of signed Participating Addendums, and NASPO will confirm by email whether your specific city or county already has one on file.

Faster procurement

The next time your state or local agency is getting ready to purchase, weigh all your procurement options first. Cooperative purchasing contracts are one of the fastest ways to get there, while still cutting cost and risk. Learn more about procurement in our latest PayIt GovLab episode, Level up procurement for better modernization outcomes.