Relates to the cost effectiveness of consultant contracts by state agencies; defines "consultant services".

---

S3093-2011 Actions

• Jun 21, 2012: COMMITTED TO RULES
• May 14, 2012: AMENDED ON THIRD READING 3093A
• May 7, 2012: ADVANCED TO THIRD READING
• May 2, 2012: 2ND REPORT CAL.
• May 1, 2012: 1ST REPORT CAL.665
• Jan 4, 2012: REFERRED TO FINANCE
• Feb 8, 2011: REFERRED TO FINANCE

S3093-2011 Meetings

Finance: May 1, 2012

S3093-2011 Calendars

Floor Calendar: May 2, 2012 , Floor Calendar: May 7, 2012 , Floor Calendar: May 8, 2012 , Floor Calendar: May 9, 2012 , Floor Calendar: May 14, 2012

S3093-2011 Votes

S3093-2011 Memo

BILL NUMBER:S3093

TITLE OF BILL:
An act
to amend the state finance law, in relation to the cost effectiveness of
consultant contracts by the state agencies

PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:
Sets forth conditions when an agency
shall enter into a contract for consultant services.
Requires agencies to conduct a cost comparison prior to entering into
a contract for consultant services to determine if there is a less
expensive alternative.

SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
Amends the state finance law by
amending section 163 to add a new subdivision 15, setting forth
conditions that must be met when an agency shall enter into a
contract for consulting services of more than $500,000. The agency
shall compare costs to determine whether the work can be performed at
lower cost by utilizing state employees rather than consultants.
Certain exceptions are specified when this cost comparison is not
required. The agency must retain documentation of the cost comparison
as a public record.

JUSTIFICATION:
The purpose of this bill is to require
state agencies
to do cost comparisons before entering into contracts for consultant
services.
Any time the taxpayers' money is used to fund a contract for services
there is a need to insure that this expenditure is necessary and
prudent. The State of New York spends over $2 Billion per year on
consultants. In many cases these consultants perform work that could
be done by professional state employees and the cost of using
consultants is substantially higher.

In 1998 the use of engineering consultants by the State Department of
Transportation was studied by the State Comptroller and OSC concluded
that the State could save millions of dollars by reducing the use of
consultants. The Comptroller recommended cost/benefit analysis prior
to contracting with consultants. other studies have confirmed this
finding, including an analysis by the State Assembly in 2009 that
estimated the state could save $250 million over three years by
reducing the use of information technology consultants. In 2010 The
state Senate Task Force on Government Efficiency estimated
that the Department of Transportation could save about $46 million per
year by implementing this policy.

In 2009 the Federal Office of Management and Budget issued a directive
to Federal government agencies that calls for them to perform a cost
benefit analysis before entering into contracts and to initiate pilot
projects for in-sourcing work in cases where the cost analysis
supports the conclusion that the work can be performed by government
employers at lower cost that by using contractors. OMB estimates that


this and other contracting reforms can save the Federal government
$40 Billion.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
New Bill.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.

EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect on the ninetieth day after
it shall have become a law, with provisions.

S3093-2011 Text

                      S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
  ________________________________________________________________________

                                    3093

                         2011-2012 Regular Sessions

                              I N  SENATE

                              February 8, 2011
                                 ___________

  Introduced  by  Sen.  ROBACH -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
    printed to be committed to the Committee on Finance

  AN ACT to amend the state finance law, in relation to  the  cost  effec-
    tiveness of consultant contracts by the state agencies

    THE  PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
  BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:


    Section 1. Section 163 of the state finance law is amended by adding a
  new subdivision 15 to read as follows:

    15. CONSULTANT SERVICES. A.  BEFORE  A  STATE  AGENCY  ENTERS  INTO  A
  CONTRACT  FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES WHICH IS ANTICIPATED TO COST MORE THAN
  FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN A TWELVE MONTH PERIOD THE STATE  AGENCY
  SHALL CONDUCT A COST COMPARISON REVIEW TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE SERVICES
  TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CONSULTANT CAN BE PERFORMED AT EQUAL OR LOWER COST
  BY  UTILIZING  STATE  EMPLOYEES,  UNLESS  THE  CONTRACT MEETS ONE OF THE
  EXCEPTIONS SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH B OF THIS SUBDIVISION.  AS    USED  IN
  THIS  SECTION,  THE  TERM  "CONSULTANT SERVICES" SHALL MEAN ANY CONTRACT
  ENTERED INTO BY A  STATE  AGENCY  FOR  ANALYSIS,  EVALUATION,  RESEARCH,
  TRAINING,  DATA PROCESSING, COMPUTER PROGRAMMING, ENGINEERING, ARCHITEC-
  TURE, ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH SERVICES, MENTAL HEALTH  SERVICES,  ACCOUNT-
  ING, AUDITING, OR SIMILAR SERVICES, BUT SHALL NOT INCLUDE LEGAL SERVICES
  OR SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH LITIGATION INCLUDING EXPERT WITNESSES AND
  SHALL  NOT  INCLUDE CONTRACTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC WORKS. THE COST
  COMPARISON SHALL COMPARE THE ANTICIPATED  COST  OF  CONSULTANT  SERVICES
  WITH THE ANTICIPATED COST OF PROVIDING SIMILAR SERVICES BY STATE EMPLOY-
  EES  INCLUDING THE COST OF SALARIES AND BENEFITS OF ANY ADDITIONAL STATE
  EMPLOYEES THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PERFORM  THE  SERVICES.  THE  ANTIC-
  IPATED  COST  OF  CONSULTANT SERVICES SHALL INCLUDE ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED
  WITH THE CONTRACT INCLUDING THE COST TO THE STATE AGENCY OF  ADMINISTER-
  ING THE CONTRACT.
    B. A COST COMPARISON SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED IF:


   EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                        [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                             LBD08715-01-1

 S. 3093                             2

    (I)  THE  SERVICES  ARE INCIDENTAL TO THE PURCHASE OF REAL OR PERSONAL
  PROPERTY; OR
    (II)  THE CONTRACT IS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO AVOID A CONFLICT OF INTER-
  EST ON THE PART OF THE AGENCY OR ITS EMPLOYEES; OR
    (III) THE SERVICES ARE OF SUCH A HIGHLY SPECIALIZED NATURE THAT IT  IS
  NOT  FEASIBLE  TO  UTILIZE  STATE  EMPLOYEES  TO PERFORM THEM OR REQUIRE
  SPECIAL EQUIPMENT THAT IS NOT FEASIBLE FOR  THE  STATE  TO  PURCHASE  OR
  LEASE; OR
    (IV) THE SERVICES ARE OF SUCH AN URGENT NATURE THAT IT IS NOT FEASIBLE
  TO UTILIZE STATE EMPLOYEES; OR
    (V)  THE  SERVICES ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE SHORT TERM AND ARE NOT LIKELY
  TO BE EXTENDED OR REPEATED AFTER THE CONTRACT IS COMPLETED.
    C. NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE DEEMED TO AUTHORIZE A STATE AGENCY
  TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WHICH IS OTHERWISE PROHIBITED BY LAW.
    D. ALL DOCUMENTS RELATED TO  THE  COST  COMPARISON  REQUIRED  BY  THIS
  SUBDIVISION  SHALL  BE  PUBLIC RECORDS SUBJECT TO DISCLOSURE PURSUANT TO
  ARTICLE SIX OF THE PUBLIC OFFICERS LAW.
    S 2. This act shall take effect on the ninetieth day  after  it  shall
  have become a law; provided, however, that the amendments to section 163
  of  the  state  finance  law  made  by section one of this act shall not
  affect the repeal of such section and shall be deemed to  repeal  there-
  with.