Purchasing Department buyers make decisions on behalf of the University with respect to the purchase of goods and services needed by the University Community.  Frequently, these purchases involve the expenditure of externally awarded funds. In all cases, though, Loyola needs to ensure that the price to be paid for goods and services is fair and reasonable so that both University and external funds are utilized in a cost-effective manner.  Price/Cost analyses MUST be documented in writing.

 

With respect to the utilization of Federal funds and in accordance with 2 CFR 200.324; “(a) The non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. (b) The non-Federal entity must negotiate profit as a separate element of the price for each contract in which there is no price competition and in all cases where cost analysis is performed. To establish a fair and reasonable profit, consideration must be given to the complexity of the work to be performed, the risk borne by the contractor, the contractor's investment, the amount of subcontracting, the quality of its record of past performance, and industry profit rates in the surrounding geographical area for similar work. (c) Costs or prices based on estimated costs for contracts under the Federal award are allowable only to the extent that costs incurred or cost estimates included in negotiated prices would be allowable for the non-Federal entity under Subpart E—Cost Principles of this part. The non-Federal entity may reference its own cost principles that comply with the Federal cost principles. (d) The cost plus a percentage of cost and percentage of construction cost methods of contracting must not be used.”

In simple terms, a price analysis is a review, analysis or examination of the price proposed by a supplier and an assessment or evaluation as to whether or not it is fair and reasonable. A determination that a price is fair and reasonable is really a conclusion that the proposed price is fair to both parties, considering the quality, delivery and other factors. The basis for reaching the conclusion is found in the facts and information considered and analyzed by the buyer. 

A cost analysis is different from a price analysis. The major difference is that a price analysis looks at the whole price, and does not involve an examination of the individual cost elements or components that collectively comprise the seller's total price. Depending on the purchase, these elements vary, but generally include such categories like labor rates, material costs, overhead or indirect rates, a cost of money factor, general and administrative expenses (G&A), and a profit or fee.  Overhead or indirect rates may be verified and found reasonable by verifying such rates with the awarding agency. The number of hours proposed, not the price, should be evaluated by the technical or scientific staff. The reasonableness of the percent of fee or profit is the responsibility of the buyer, and is negotiable in most cases. 

In performing a price analysis (determining whether a price is fair and reasonable without examining the individual components of the price), a buyer has several options. The suitability of the method to be used will depend on the circumstances related to the individual purchase. Some common methods or criteria used to determine price reasonableness include:

When three (two if approved by Purchasing) or more acceptable offers are received and the lowest priced one is selected, the price of the lowest offered can be concluded to be fair and reasonable.  In general, if the difference in price between the two best offers is less than 15%, then price competition is presumed to exist. A price that is very low should be evaluated for accuracy.  For example: Seller A proposes a price of $2,592; Seller B, $2,550 and Seller C, $1,400. Seller C is the lowest, but the difference may be too great. Care should be taken to ensure Seller C is proposing the same item(s) and has made no errors in the proposed pricing. If the selection of a higher-priced vendor is made, the price must be analyzed and determined to reasonable by other means.

The Federal Government often enters into contracts with various companies to establish the prices of items that will be sold to the Government General Services Administration (GSA). These are presumed to be fair and reasonable. If a Seller cites a GSA contract price, it must also provide the GSA contract number. If the GSA price is available from a website, the buyer must provide a copy of the webpage. This then is adequate rationale to determine the price fair and reasonable. The actual price may be lower than the GSA due to discounts (if this is the case, it should be noted in the written analysis), or higher based upon volume sales discounts (supplier should provide their price break structure for volume sales).

Where only one offer is received and the seller has a published or established price list or catalog, available to the general public, which sets forth the price of a commercial item, this fact can be used to find the price fair and reasonable. The catalog should be current. Documentation can include a dated (web) page from the catalog along with the page where pricing is identified.  Often, discounts off of the price list are offered. If this is the case, it should be noted in the written analysis. The item to be purchased should generally be a commercially produced one sold to the general public in substantial quantities.

Where an item has an established market price, verification of an equal or lower price also establishes the price to be fair and reasonable. Example: the purchase of metals such as lead, gold, silver, or commodities such as grains.

If the buyer has a history of the purchase of the item over several years, this information, taking into account inflation factors, can be used to determine a price fair and reasonable. The historical pricing summary must be supported by appropriate documentation (e.g. copies of past purchase orders).

It may be that only one Seller will make an offer. If this is the case and the item was previously purchased based on competition, this may be acceptable. In such cases, cite the price of prior purchase and note if it was competitive or based on catalog price or other. An increase in price, with no current catalog or competition, should be about the current rate of inflation between the time of the last competition and the commitment of the current order.

If an independent estimate of the item has been prepared prior to contacting suppliers, and no other method or information is available, a price can be compared to the estimate and if it compares favorably, this can be a basis to find a price fair and reasonable. The estimate, however, must be independent. Use of a Seller's pricing to make an independent estimate is NOT independent.

Often an item is very similar to a commercial one, but has added features that are required. If the Seller can provide the price of the base item, by a catalog, and then state the costs of the additional features, the buyer can then find the price reasonable based on these two factors. Differences should be detailed and priced. The reasonableness of the extra cost can be a) checked against other purchases that had the extras, or some of them, or, b) based on an evaluation of the extra cost by technical personnel.

If the Seller has no catalog but has sold the same item to others in the recent past, the price can be determined to be fair and reasonable by verifying with those other purchasers what price they paid. This must be noted in the written documentation with name, telephone number, date of confirmation and price paid. A copy of another customer’s invoice will suffice.

Under federally funded grant or cooperative agreement awards, if the award references a proposal that a) specifically identified the manufacturer, model and the price (only if a supplier quotation accompanied the proposal), or b) identified a specific person with an hourly rate for fixed price for that person, then the contracting officer has accepted that price as being deemed reasonable by the proposer and nothing else needs be done as long as the final price does not exceed the budgeted line item.

If, however, the award is a federally funded contract or purchase order, then the proposer must formally provide rationale with the proposal (using one of the above methodologies in a) through i)) to determine price reasonableness at the time of the proposal before this method of price reasonableness is acceptable. Under FAR regulations, it is the responsibility of the proposer to determine price reasonableness, either at the time of proposal or at the time an acquisition is made. It is not the responsibility of the contracting officer.

Documentation (copy of the award page related to the acquisition and any supporting documents, i.e. copies of quotations, in-house estimates, other customer invoices, GSA pricing, etc.) supporting either of the above situations must be provided to the Purchasing Department.