Formal Purchase Methods for Community Nutrition Programs


Welcome to Formal Purchase Methods for Community
Nutrition Programs Webinar. This Webinar is for agencies participating
in the Child and Adult Care Food Program-or CACFP-and the Summer Food Service Program-or
SFSP. I am Laurie Pennings. And I’m Courtney Hardoin. We are both Nutritionists in the Education
and Nutrition Policy Unit at the Nutrition Services Division or NSD. The purpose of this Webinar is to review the
requirements for the formal purchase methods; discuss the differences between an Invitation
for Bid, which we will refer to as an IFB or bid; and a Request for Proposal, which
we will refer to as an RFP or proposal; and to review the components to include in a formal solicitation, including the scoring criteria for and RFP. We developed this Webinar for nonprofit and for profit agencies, tribal agencies and government agencies. Because the majority of agencies participating
in the CACFP are not required to adhere to state laws that pertain to school districts,
this Webinar will not cover those California State laws. For more information regarding procurement
requirements for school districts, visit the Procurement in Child Nutrition Programs Web
page at the Web address listed on this slide. Agencies must follow the formal procurement
process when the dollar amount of a purchase exceeds the small purchase threshold. So, what is the dollar amount for the small
purchase threshold? Courtney, the small purchase threshold depends
on the type of agency making the purchase. There are three main thresholds: the federal
threshold, the state threshold, and there may also be local thresholds. Agencies must identify which threshold pertains
to their agency. Let’s review each one separately. The current federal small purchase threshold
is $150,000. This means that agencies must follow the formal
purchase procedures if a single purchase transaction exceeds this amount. The federal small purchase threshold pertains
to private, nonprofit and for-profit agencies, and some public agencies. This dollar amount may change. Agencies should check the Federal Acquisition
Regulation, Part 2, under the definition of Simplified Acquisition Threshold at the Web
address listed on this slide if they want to be certain of the current dollar amount
for the small purchase threshold. School districts and county offices of education
must comply with the CDE small purchase threshold. This threshold changes each calendar year
based upon inflation. In January 2017, it was set at $88,300. After January 1, 2018, agencies that must
adhere to the CDE small purchase threshold should check the Web link on this slide for
the current threshold. Some agencies must comply with local small purchase thresholds that are set by either local governments or by their own agency. Agencies must always use the most restrictive applicable small purchase threshold. Before we review the different types of formal
solicitations, let’s review three critical procurement principles. One, free and open
competition; 2 fairness and integrity; and 3 responsive and responsible vendors. We will cover each of these principles separately. Free and open competition is important because
it secures the best price for the best quality products or services. It allows companies to differentiate prices,
services, and innovation. Free and open competition ensures a level
playing field. It gives the same opportunity for all vendors
to compete. It is important that procurement procedures do not unjustifiably restrict or eliminate competition. Courtney, can you give examples of procedures
that might restrict competition? Yes. Agencies must not:
– Place unreasonable requirements on vendors in order to qualify. For example, requiring vendors to use only
specific vehicles as part of their delivery fleet. That would be unreasonably restrictive. – Have organizational conflicts of interest. This is defined by awarding a contract to
an affiliate or subsidiary of the organization. – Or have unnecessary bonding requirements
or require that a vendor have an excessive number of years in business. These procedures could all restrict competition. The following practices promote fairness and
integrity: 1) Specifications are clearly written and
not too restrictive 2) Solicitations are publicized to the widest
possible audience 3) Evaluation criteria are clear and not too
restrictive 4) An adequate amount of time is given for
vendors to prepare their bids or proposals 5) The bid opening and evaluations are transparent
6) The entire process is documented, and 7) Goods identified in the solicitation are procured What’s meant by goods identified in the solicitation
are procured? Let’s say for example that an agency’s solicitation
estimated they planned to purchase 200 meals per day but only requested 50 meals per day
after the contract was awarded. This would not be fair to the vendor who gave
a quote based upon 200 meals per day. Agencies should demonstrate integrity by their
honest, ethical and sincere business transactions with vendors. Of course, the expectation is that vendors
also demonstrate fairness and integrity in their transactions with agencies. It is important to note that federal regulations
do not allow vendors to develop or draft specifications, requirements, statements of work, IFBs or
RFPs for the agency. Agencies may ask vendors for their specifications
on specific products, but the agency must determine the specifications to include in
their solicitation. The third principle falls under the category
of responsive and responsible vendors. This means awards should only be made to vendors
who are both responsive and responsible. Responsive means that the vendor conforms to all material terms and conditions of the solicitation. For example, if an agency requires that a
vendor deliver meals daily at noon and the vendor can only deliver meals at 11 a.m.,
the vendor would not be able to meet the minimum requirement and would therefore be considered unresponsive. An agency should reject their bid or proposal
if they cannot meet the terms and conditions of the solicitation. Courtney, what’s meant by responsible? Responsible vendors are capable of successfully
performing under the terms and conditions of the contract. Agencies should consider developing criteria which must be met in order to be considered responsible. Can you give some examples? Sure. An agency could ask whether the vendor has
had any contracts terminated in the past ten years and if so, to explain the circumstances. They could also request references from like
agencies, or they could request in the solicitation that the vendor submit documents to show they are financially viable or operating in the black. If an agency determines that a vendor is not
responsive or responsible, the reasons must be documented. It’s important in the event of an appeal that
agencies have sound criteria and were transparent in the solicitation. It is important that agencies keep in mind
that they may not disclose confidential information, such as scores or pricing in a Request for
Proposal before an award is made. Sealed bids should be opened publicly at the
time and date advertised. After the bid opening, or after a Request for Proposal is awarded, pricing is public information. Now that we’ve covered the basic principles
of good procurement, let’s review the two formal purchase methods. Agencies must select one of these two methods
when their purchase transactions or their contracts exceed the small purchase threshold. The first method is called the IFB and the
second is the RFP. Listed on this slide are the required steps
for both formal procurement methods, IFB and RFP. We will go into detail on each of these steps
later in the Webinar. Step 1: Develop the solicitation. We will cover the components to include in
the solicitation shortly. Step 2: Publicly advertise the solicitation
in a public, widespread publication such as the legal notice section of a generally circulated
newspaper or an appropriate trade journal. In addition, agencies may post the solicitation
on their Web page. Not all vendors would know to look on an agency’s
Web page for a solicitation so it must still be posted in a widespread publication. To save money, agencies can post reference
to the RFP or IFB in a newspaper and refer vendors to their Web page for more details. In addition to public posting, as a best practice,
many agencies maintain a list of vendors and notify them directly when solicitations are
advertised. Step 3: Evaluate bids using the criteria established
in the solicitation. Step 4: Award the contract to the responsive
and responsible bidder. Step 5: Manage the contract to ensure that
the vendor is complying with the terms and conditions of the contract. This is an important, but often overlooked step Laurie, what components should be included
in an RFP? The components of an IFB or RFP may have different
names and be ordered differently, but in general, the information in each of these components
should be included. It’s a good idea to have a cover page that states whether the solicitation is an RFP or an IFB. Next, agencies should include an introduction
which documents the name of the agency, a brief description of what is being procured,
and an explanation of why the agency is conducting the procurement. It’s best to use clear, simple and concise
language. The solicitation must include a timeline or
schedule of events which should clearly state when bids or proposals are due, when a contract
will be awarded and note any pre‐solicitation meetings. Presolicitation meetings are optional but
provide an opportunity for all interested vendors to come talk in person to the agency about the solicitation and obtain clarification if needed. The solicitation should include general instructions
for the respondents. These instructions outline the rules for bid
or proposal submissions. The solicitation should state where and how
to submit the bid or proposal. If an agency wants an option to negotiate
the final terms and conditions of submitted proposals with the top scoring vendors prior
to the award, this should be clearly stated in the RFP. The solicitation should describe the goods
and services you are requesting and should clearly outline all requirements which the
potential vendors must fulfill including completion of specific forms, signatures on documents,
and/or answers to specific questions. The specific terms and conditions of the contract
should be clear as well. If there are minimum requirements, these should
be stated too. The regulations require that agencies identify all factors to be used in evaluating IFB or RFP proposals. In the case of an RFP, the solicitation should
clearly show the relative importance of each evaluation criteria to be scored. For example, an RFP needs to show the number
of points allocated for each evaluation criteria so that a vendor will understand the relative
importance of each scored criteria. We will review examples of scoring criteria
for RFPs later in the Webinar. To make it easy to compare prices among vendors,
agencies should include a standard form for vendors to fill in the blanks. This way agencies are comparing apples to
apples. For a one-year vended meal bid or proposal,
agencies should request vendors to identify the individual price per meal and/or snack
which would then be multiplied by the number of meals and snacks estimated annually. The total cost for all meals and snacks delivered
for the year would be the contract amount. Delivery fees and taxes should be included
in the cost of meals. Courtney, when would an agency use an IFB
and when would they use an RFP? An IFB is used when there is no substantial
difference among the products or services that meet specifications so that the only
difference among responsive bids is price. An RFP is used when the product or service
varies from one vendor to another. In an RFP, price is only one of the criteria
that is needed for evaluating proposals. For example, when an IFB is used for vended
meals, the responsible vendor with the lowest price that meets the specifications wins the
award. If an agency wants to evaluate the quality
of menus submitted by vendors, they can issue an RFP and allocate points to each vendor
for their menus. However, the agency should be clear in the
solicitation as to what they desire in the menu. Only RFPs allow agencies to score other criteria
besides price. Price must be given the highest weight in
the scoring for evaluation, but price is only one of the criteria rated. Another difference between an IFB and an RFP
is that in the IFB process, the bids are opened publicly at a predetermined time and date. All vendors are invited to attend the bid
opening but they are not required to attend. In an IFB, there is no negotiation of price
or terms. The vendor with the lowest priced bid that
meets the specifications and is considered responsive and responsible will be awarded
the contract. In an RFP, negotiation of both price and other
criteria can take place prior to the award. The IFB process will always result in a fixed-price
contract. The RFP process will always result in either
a fixed-price contract or a cost-reimbursement type contract. Please note that cost reimbursement type contracts
are not allowable in the SFSP and cost plus percentage contracts are not allowable from either an RFP or an IFB for both the CACFP and the SFSP. SFSP regulations currently require vendors that submit a bid over $150,000 to submit a bid bond. A bid bond serves to protect the agency as
guarantee to the agency that the vendor will execute the contract as awarded. The bid bond is subject to full or partial
forfeiture if the awarded contractor fails to execute the contract or provide the required
performance bonds. A performance bond is required when a contract
over $150,000 is awarded. A performance bond is a surety bond issued
by an insurance company or a bank to guarantee satisfactory completion of a contract. CACFP regulations do not require vendors to
obtain bid or performance bonds. A bid opening is the stage in the bidding
process where sealed bids are publically opened and examined by the agency. Currently, SFSP regulations require the presence
of a State agency representative at SFSP bid openings when agencies are expected to receive
over $150,000 in Program payments. The state representative may attend either
in person or electronically, such as a WebEx Meeting SFSP agencies must notify the CDE a minimum
of 14 days in advance of the time and place of the bid opening as CDE staff are required to attend. Currently, SFSP regulations require agencies
to submit all bids totaling over $150,000 to the CDE for approval before the agency
can award a contract. The NSD requests agencies submit bid documents
ten business days in advance of the proposed award date to their program specialist. If an agency desires to award a bid to a vendor
that did not submit the lowest bid, they must include justification when submitting their
bid documents to the CDE for approval. Courtney mentioned earlier that RFPs will have scoring criteria. This is unique to the RFP. The regulations require that the solicitation
identify all evaluation criteria and their relative importance. Agencies can assign a point value, percentage,
or establish some sort of scoring system for each factor they want to evaluate. There is no prescribed maximum evaluation
points. While cost must be the highest weighted factor,
it does not need to total more than half the points. We will review an example of scoring criteria
soon. What about taste testing. How would that work in an RFP? Agencies can require vendors to provide sample
menu items for children or adults to taste to determine acceptability. The results of the taste test would lead to
a score. If taste testing is included as a scored criteria,
the RFP needs to include sufficient detail to ensure vendors know what to bring where
and the name and phone number of a contact person. The agency should also include in the solicitation
the process the agency will use to evaluate the menu items. For example, children may be asked to circle either a face with a smile or a frown after tasting an item. Can an agency conduct taste testing with an IFB? Yes, The agency could state in its minimum requirements, that vendors must meet a specific threshold to pass a taste test or their bid will not
be considered. For example, the solicitation could state
that the taste test will be held four weeks before the bid opening. Those vendors that do not pass the taste test
would be notified that they did not meet the minimum requirements to be considered for an award. For example, an agency could say that 85 percent
of children tasting the menu items must circle a face with a smile in order to pass. In this context, the vendor would either pass
or fail the taste test. Rather than choosing a vendor based on scoring
criteria, the vendors that do not pass the taste test would not move forward and be considered
for an award. The award would be made to the vendor who
passed the minimum requirements, who was responsive and responsible, and had the lowest price. Here is an example of scoring criteria that
might be used in an RFP. In this example, the menu is worth 25 points. In the solicitation, it should be clear what
the agency desires in a menu. In addition to meeting the meal pattern, does
the agency desire whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, hot menu items, culturally
appropriate for the population of children at the preschool? Keep in mind that if culturally appropriate
menu items are used for scoring criteria, the solicitation should include a description
of what the agency means by culturally appropriate. In this example, the results of the taste
test will yield a score of up to 20 points. Before the taste test is conducted, agencies
should determine how they will develop scores based on the response of the children and/or adults. This example shows that they will give up to 20 points for the experience of the agency and references. Again, agencies must determine prior to the
solicitation, how experience and references will be scored. The last item in this example to be scored
is cost. Agencies will need to compare the costs of
all proposals in order to determine points. One way to allocate points for cost is to
give the vendor with the lowest price the full amount of points. In this example, they would receive 35 points. The vendors should be scored in comparison
to the lowest price vendor. For example, let’s say that vendor A’s proposal totals $160,000 and vendor B’s proposal is $170,000. vendor B’s proposal is 6 percent higher than
vendor A’s proposal; therefore, it might make sense to give them 6 percent less points which
would be 32.9 or rounded up to 33 points. If vendor C’s proposal was $180,000 this is
11 percent higher; therefore, the vendor might be given 30.8 points or rounded up to 31 points. Agencies must clearly identify all evaluation
criteria and their relative importance. Cost must be the highest weighted factor. Other than that, there are no regulations
for determining which criteria to be scored or the scoring method. Laurie, I’m hearing a lot about purchasing
and serving local foods lately. What foods are considered local foods and how can local foods be considered in either an IFB or an RFP? Those are great questions. Agencies should develop their own definition
of what local means to them based upon the abundance or lack of abundance of farms and
producers in their area. In addition, different food items could have
their own definition of local as well. For example, avocados are typically grown
in southern California, therefore an agency in northern California may consider avocados
grown within the State to be local. Let’s say that same agency has several ranches
in their county. They may consider local beef to be within
their county. Some agencies consider the definition of local
to be within a certain radius of their center. It’s up to agencies to define what local means
to them. Can agencies require vendors to purchase local
foods in their menus? Agencies may not include a specification that
requires food to be locally grown or produced within a specific radius because it is seen
as limiting competition. Agencies may however, give a geographic preference
for unprocessed agricultural products, both locally grown and raised. What food handling methods are allowed for
an agricultural product to be considered unprocessed? After handling, the products must retain their
inherent character. All of the food handling and preservation
techniques listed on this slide are not considered to change a product’s inherent character and
thus are allowable. – Washing
– Refrigerating or freezing – Peeling, slicing, dicing, cutting
– Chopping, shucking, grinding – Forming ground products into patties without
additives or fillers – Drying or dehydration
– Packaging – Vacuum packing and bagging
– Adding ascorbic acid or other preservatives to prevent oxidation
– Butchering livestock and poultry – Cleaning fish
– Pasteurizing milk Heating and canning, however, are not allowed
under the geographic preference option. Now I understand which foods can be included
in the geographic preference option. How would an agency give a geographic preference
in either an IFB or an RFP? Here are the steps
1) Define local. 2) Determine what type of procurement method
to use, either an IFB or an RFP. 3) Decide how much preference local products
will receive. 4) Ensure the solicitation is clear how the
preference will be applied. Here are two examples for including geographic
preference on this slide. The criteria states “. . .each month a different
locally grown fruit or vegetable is highlighted and repeated in different forms on the menu.” If a vendor can comply with this criteria,
they would get five points. This is a great idea not only for serving local foods but for educating children about local foods. The second criteria is that at least 50 percent
of produce on the menu is locally grown. The term local is allowed to be included in
the scoring criteria because it is not a requirement. The agency is giving a preference for locally
grown produce. Here is another example of how an agency can
use the geographic preference option when scoring an RFP. A vendor could receive 20 points if 76 to
100 percent of the produce was locally grown, 15 points if 51 to 75 percent is local, 10 points for 26 to 50 percent, and 5 points for 0 to 25 percent. Remember, these additional points must be
clearly identified in the solicitation. The geographic preference option can also
be used when following the IFB process. Because the IFB awards are based upon price,
and not points, agencies may reduce the bid price if the geographic preference option
can be met by the vendor. The amount a bid is reduced for meeting the
geographic preference option would be determined by the agency. Here’s an example. In this solicitation, the agency clearly stated
that thirty cents will be subtracted from the bid price for vendors that meet the geographic
preference option. The agency provided a clear definition of
local and clearly stated the percentage of produce in the menu that would need to be
met to get this price reduction. In this scenario, three vendors submitted
bids. Only Vendor A stated they were able to meet
the criteria for the price reduction. Even though Vendor A submitted the highest
bid, $3.35, their bid was reduced by 30 cents making them the vendor with the lowest price. Vendor A would be awarded the contract. Keep in mind, the amount paid to Vendor A
for meals would be $3.35. The reduction in price was only to give them
an advantage for using local foods. Agencies should be aware that obtaining local
foods may cost more when using the geographic preference option. The price reduction should be carefully considered. Courtney, now that we’ve covered how to use
the geographic preference option, let’s discuss what agencies should do if they only receive
one response to their solicitation. Can they award a contract to that vendor? That’s a good question Laurie and sometimes
agencies do receive only one response. In this case, the regulations state a noncompetitive
procurement can be awarded if competition is deemed inadequate. Here are some questions agencies should ask
themselves if only one bid or proposal was received. – Was the advertisement placed in an appropriate
publication? – Are there an adequate number of available
vendors in the area? – Are several vendors able to meet the specifications? If not, are the specifications too restrictive? – And were vendors given enough time to submit a bid? If it is determined that the solicitation
was too narrow, or not enough time was given for the solicitation, the agency must publicly
advertise the solicitation again. Let’s say that an agency receives several
responses to a solicitation for RFPs. Let’s discuss scoring the proposals. While not required, it’s a good idea for the
scoring of the submitted proposals to be done by several people independently to avoid the
perception of bias towards one vendor. First, agencies should review any minimum
requirements to ensure the vendors are considered responsive and responsible. Total the points for the technical criteria,
then rank proposals. At this point, agencies should know which proposals score highest based on everything but cost. This is when negotiation can begin. After the deadline has passed, agencies may
negotiate prices and services or the technical criteria with the top scoring vendors. Agencies are not required to conduct negotiations
but it is in their best interest. Remember during the negotiation process, confidentiality must be maintained. You may not discuss either the technical aspects
or price with vendors competing for your business. Agencies must be careful to avoid biased or
preferential treatment during the negotiation period. The top scoring vendors must be treated equitably
throughout the negotiation process. When you say agencies may conduct negotiations
with the bidders that submitted the top ranked technical proposals, what do you mean? The reviewers should total the scores for
all criteria except for cost. Then they can choose to negotiate with the
vendors that scored the highest for everything but cost. The agency can ask the vendor whether they
can change their proposal to better meet the agency’s need. For example, let’s say a vendor put in their
proposal that they need 48 hours advance notice for a change in number of meals delivered
but it would better meet the agency’s need to give only 24 hours advance notice. An agency could ask the vendor whether they
would be willing to change their deadline for changes to the number of meals delivered from 48 hours advance notice to 24 hours advance notice. Keep in mind, the agency must give all the
top scoring bidders the same opportunity to negotiate. At the end of the negotiation, ensure the
technical proposals will fully meet the agency’s needs. Here is an example of how to determine which
vendors to select for negotiation. In this scenario, three vendor’s technical proposals were scored independently by three evaluators. Evaluator A gave Vendor A’s technical proposal
63 points. Evaluator B gave Vendor A 58 points, and Evaluator
C gave Vendor A’s technical proposal 55 points. When adding the points of all evaluators together,
Vendor A ended up with 176 points. Vendor B received 128 points and Vendor C
received 184 points. Given Vendor A and Vendor C’s scores were
within ten points of each other, and Vendor B’s points were dramatically lower, the agency
could choose to negotiate only with Vendor A and C. Vendor B would no longer be in the running. Can you give an example of something that
might be negotiated? Let’s say for example that the agency was
really pleased with vendor A’s references and experience but their menus were scored
a little low because they lacked a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables. The agency could contact Vendor A and ask
them whether they could include more variety of fresh fruits and vegetables in their menus. For Vendor C, they also were pleased with
their references and experience but their menu could have received a higher score if
they included some hot menu items. The agency could contact Vendor A and C and
negotiate menus that were more advantageous for the agency. After negotiation, each of the top scoring
vendors would submit their best and final offer. Keep in mind, as you negotiate a higher quality
menu, the cost per meal could increase. Whichever method you select, ensure that you
are clear in your RFP, how you will identify the top scoring vendors for negotiation and
that a best and final offer will be allowed. Once the agency is satisfied that the top
scoring proposals would fully meet its technical needs, the agency would open the bidders’
cost proposal, and permit the vendors to amend their cost proposals to reflect any changes
resulting from the technical proposal negotiation phase. You can request that the cost proposal be
submitted in a separate envelope from the technical proposal but it is not required. It is important to note that even though the
technical criteria can be modified through negotiations with the vendor, it cannot materially
change the nature of the RFP. For example, if a vendor tells you in their
technical proposal that they will bring farm animals and local produce for a special farm
to summer event, yet this was not requested in the solicitation, agencies cannot consider this service or score the proposal higher because of it. This would be considered a material change
because the vendor’s would have bid differently had they known this requirement. It is also not fair to the other vendors who
may have included this service had they known it was part of the solicitation. Remember, to ensure open and fair competition. When negotiating costs, some of the bidders
may wish to modify their technical proposals again. This is acceptable, if the RFP made clear
to all bidders that this is permitted. The agency would need to re-rank the technical proposals. After all negotiations and modifications have
been completed, each remaining bidder will submit a best and final offer. The agency needs to review the technical proposals
within each “best and final offer” first, to ensure that each of them still fully meets
the agency’s needs. Remember, it is critical that the specifications
and criteria contained in the RFP are well-thought-out and well-written. Agencies should award contracts on the basis
of the best overall value. As mentioned in the previous slide, decisions
cannot be based on additional services or products vendors are willing to provide but
were not part of the solicitation. We have covered a lot of information. Let’s recap: Laurie, who gets awarded the contract? In an IFB, the responsible and responsive
vendor with the lowest price wins the award. In an RFP, the responsible and responsive
vendor with the highest score wins the award. Remember, in an RFP, even though criteria
other than price is considered, price must be the highest weighted factor. Once a contract is signed and in place, it’s
easy to feel relieved that the workload involved in finding a vendor is over. However, agencies should remember the workload
of monitoring contracts has just begun and is vitally important. Courtney, what should an agency do if the
vendor is not complying with terms and conditions of the contract? Let’s say they are repeatedly late with deliveries,
and send meals that are not compliant with the meal pattern. First, language in the contract should stipulate
that they will not pay for meals that do not meet the meal pattern or if they arrive late
with their deliveries. Additional penalties or restrictions for failures
to adequately perform as contracted should be included at the agency’s discretion. The contract language should clearly state
that contracts with vendors who are unable to perform successfully may be terminated. Agencies must maintain written documentation
to show how the terms and conditions of the contract were not met and all communication
should be in writing. We have finished covering the formal purchase
methods which involve competitive procurement. The regulations do allow procurement by noncompetitive proposals under four circumstances. At least one of the following four scenarios
must be met: The first scenario is after solicitation,
competition is inadequate. As we mentioned earlier, it’s possible that
an agency has followed all the required procurement procedures and only one vendor is responsive
and responsible. The second scenario is when the item is only
available from one source. The third scenario is when a urgent public
need or public emergency, such as an earthquake, will not permit a delay to go through the
proper procurement process The fourth scenario is when an agency has submitted a request to the CDE and has received approval. Program operators are strongly encouraged
to contact their program specialist if they have a noncompetitive or sole source situation. Failure to adequately follow procurement guidelines
and requirements related to sole source or noncompetitive procurement may result in financial
findings against an agency. This concludes the Formal Purchase Methods
for Community Nutrition Programs Webinar. Please note that the NSD has posted two additional
procurement Webinars for Community Nutrition Programs on YouTube. The Informal Purchase Methods Webinar covers
the requirements for purchases under the small purchase threshold. The Code of Conduct and Procurement Standards
Webinar describes how agencies can develop a code of conduct and reviews the federal
procurement standards. For additional procurement information, visit the CDE Procurement in Child Nutrition Program’s Web page. If you have questions after reviewing the
NSD Procurement Web page, please contact your program specialist. To find your CACFP specialist, type in the
URL listed on this slide, or contact the NSD or SFSP at the listed phone numbers and e-mail address. Your specialist is here to assist you with ensuring you are meeting the federal procurement standards. You can print up a certificate of completion
for this Webinar by accessing the link on your slide. Keep this certificate on file as you may be
asked to show it during an administrative review. Thank you for listening in today! This institution is an equal opportunity provider.