Procurement innovation in Escambia County, Florida.

• Author: Pillitary, Joe F., Jr.

The Escambia County, Florida, Office of Purchasing recently completed the largest county building project in its history. The Office of Purchasing used innovative planning and procurement methods and formed productive working relationships with private contractors that enabled it to "stretch" the county tax dollar. Other counties may be able to learn from Escambia County's techniques to enhance their own procurement processes.

Background. The Office of Purchasing has provided strategic leadership and planning in the county's largest building project to date: the addition to and renovation of the M.C. Blanchard Judicial Center, Pensacola, Florida. Key players - the purchasing manager, the Court Administrator, the design architects, and representatives from the contracting community - began discussions on the contract methodology in approaching a construction job of this magnitude. After considerable deliberations and consultation with the state of Florida's Department of Management Services, the county made a decision to employ a contract method known as guaranteed maximum price.

Initial Planning. The government contracting team began the serious work of solicitation development, which culminated in a Request for Letters of Interest to qualified construction managers. Once the responses were received, presentations completed, and recommendations approved by the Board of County Commissioners, the last member of the team was on board - the construction manager.

The county kicked off the next phase of the project with "value engineering" meetings. The purchasing manager and the purchasing agents responsible for certain commodities and services used in construction advised the team of substantial savings from utilizing county contracts and federal, state, local, and cooperative purchasing agreements - rather than using goods and services purchased by the construction manager or by trade contractors.

The county subsequently adopted this method. For example, it was employed in a large-scale procurement of carpeting. The construction manager estimated the total price for carpet at $761,404. In contrast, through county sources the Office of Purchasing secured a price of $493,825. Naturally, this sizeable price difference (more than $250,000) generated skepticism, but ultimately the county convinced the construction manager that the difference was valid. The Office of Procurement emphasized to the County Value Engineering Team that the Office of...