A – Texas State University
For collection purchases, the University Librarian has signatory authority up to $1M. Texas procurement law includes exemptions from bid & sole source requirements for library collection purchases, plus we
implemented a VPAT review process before the university-wide process was adopted. We also have an MOU that outlines specific processes we are required to follow when making collection purchases and operating letters that specify that software purchased for
the collection must go through the full IT procurement process. We buy very little software for the collection.
From: serialst@simplelists.com <serialst@simplelists.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 1:48 PM
To: serialst@simplelists.com
Subject: [SERIALST] RE: Query about contract review and the role of procurement at academic libraries
B-Pennsylvania College of Technology
From:
serialst@simplelists.com <serialst@simplelists.com>
On Behalf Of Laura Gewissler
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 1:48 PM
To: serialst@simplelists.com
Subject: [SERIALST] Query about contract review and the role of procurement at academic libraries
Greetings NASIG and other serials colleagues,
Hope you all are safe and well!
Your assistance is needed to determine the role of procurement in contract review at academic libraries.
Please let me know if your library has the authority to review, approve, and sign its own vendor contracts (within approved financial thresholds) or if campus procurement has taken on this role
including signatory authority. Our library can no longer sign vendor price quotes or contract agreements which causes major delays in negotiating and renewing resources.
Backstory: about a year ago campus procurement implemented two new campus-wide requirements for contract review and technology review. To receive approval and obtain an authorized signature from
a procurement official, all vendor contracts/quotes must have Terms updated within the past 5 years AND undergo technology review to assess vendor compliance with accessibility requirements (VPAT, etc). The latter is a worthy goal but together these requirements
remove our ability to act in a timely manner or negotiate favorable terms that often need an expeditious turn around.
To make a case for library autonomy and regain our signatory authority, I seek evidence that academic libraries retain the authority to approve and sign their own contracts (within approved
financial thresholds) and to complete their own technology review process. Please respond to this query (and include the name of your school, if possible):
Thanks so much for your help!
Take good care and stay safe,
Laura
Laura Gewissler
Director of Collection Management Services
David W. Howe Memorial Library Rm 117
University of Vermont
Burlington, VT 05405
Prefer cell: 908-839-2810
Office line: 802-656-2204
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://archives.simplelists.com
This email may contain confidential information about a Pennsylvania College of Technology student. It is intended solely for the use of the recipient. This email may contain information that is considered
an “educational record” subject to the protections of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act Regulations. The regulations may be found at 34 C.F.R. Part 99 for your reference. The recipient may only use or disclose the information in accordance with
the requirements of the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act Regulations. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the email.
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=gPZTif98SUc3xdW9BgkL6X1nTpfhPb8v