25-27738 SS Contract Justification.pdf

Department of Enterprise Services – C&P Page 1 of 5 June 2024

Sole Source CONTRACT Filing Justification Template

Use the following justification template for preparing to file sole source contracts in the Sole Source Contracts Database (SSCD). Once completed, copy and paste the answers into the corresponding SSCD question and answer fields. You will also need to include a copy of this completed form in the documents you post to your agency website and in WEBS.

What is a sole source contract?

"Sole source" means a contractor providing goods or services of such a unique nature or sole availability that the contractor is clearly and justifiably the only practicable source to provide the goods or services. (RCW 39.26.010)

Unique qualifications or services are those which are highly specialized or one-of-a-kind.

Other factors which may be considered include past performance, cost-effectiveness (learning curve), and/or follow-up nature of the required goods and/or services. Past performance alone does not provide adequate justification for a sole source contract. Time constraints may be considered as a contributing factor in a sole source justification, however will not be on its own a sufficient justification.

Why is a sole source justification required?

The State of Washington, by policy and law, believes competition is the best strategy to obtain the best value for the goods and services it purchases, and to ensure that all interested vendors have a fair and transparent opportunity to sell goods and services to the state.

A sole source contract does not benefit from competition. Thus the state, through RCW 39.26.010, has determined it is important to evaluate whether the conditions, costs and risks related to the proposal of a sole source contract truly outweigh forgoing the benefits of a competitive contract.

Providing compelling answers to the following questions will facilitate DES’ evaluation.

Specific Problem or Need

• What is the business need or problem that requires this contract?

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) request to enter into a Sole Source contract with Wildlife Genetics International, Inc. (WGI). WDFW is working on a multi-year black bear monitoring project that is used to manage the black bear population In Washington and set harvest regulations for the species. Black bear populations are managed by WDFW (RCW 77.04.012) as “big game” species (RCW 77.08.030). We must monitor the black bear population to estimate annual densities across Washington State.

This data is used for setting harvest seasons through the Commission (RCW 77.12.150).

Hair snaring is a non-invasive, affordable method for monitoring black bear density in an area. The collected hair samples are sent to the Contractor for genotyping.

https://sscd.des.wa.gov/Logon/Logon.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2f https://sscd.des.wa.gov/Logon/Logon.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2f https://pr-webs-customer.des.wa.gov/

Department of Enterprise Services – C&P Page 2 of 5

Newly collected hair samples are to be compared to the previous data contained in the library at Wildlife Genetics International, Inc., where they contain the previous 6 years of data and analyses records for this project with WDFW. WGI will use their library to continue to process samples and reports to WDFW.

Sole Source Criteria

• Describe the unique features, qualifications, abilities or expertise of the contractor proposed for this sole source contract.

WGI’s experience and publication record about data quality are unique, by commercial or academic standards. They work on many species from around the world, but their work on black bears alone includes over 200 completed studies of individual identification or population genetics, with a client list that includes, among others, the wildlife management agencies from 24 US states. Their laboratory has been subjected to blind testing and external inspection at an intensity that we believe to be unique (Kendall et al. 2009 Journal of Wildlife Management), which further provides a unique legal and scientific value to the data WGI generates.

Wildlife Genetics International (WGI) is a Canadian genotyping lab that specializes in studies of distribution and abundance in the context of wildlife management and research. To the best of our knowledge, WGI is the only company providing these services on a commercial basis. WGI has conducted all previous bear DNA analyses for WDFW monitoring projects and currently maintains the catalog and library of DNA samples from Washington bear work. We are in the middle of a monitoring project, and changing vendors would compromise the integrity of our work. It would take time and additional funds that we don’t have to transfer this work to another lab, where we would likely lose our past research and would be starting fresh, were any other genetics lab as cost effective as WGI. The only other labs that we are familiar with are for federal agency work only or are through a university, such as the University of Idaho, which I compare prices to below.

• What kind of market research did the agency conduct to conclude that alternative sources were inappropriate or unavailable? Provide a narrative description of the agency’s due diligence in determining the basis for the sole source contract, including methods used by the agency to conduct a review of available sources. Use DES’ Market Research Template if assistance is needed.

To our knowledge, Wildlife Genetics International (WGI) is the only company that provides these genetic services on a commercial basis. Nearly every state in the US and province in Canada uses this lab for that reason. When searching for other labs by internet search, contacted universities search through email, search for contractors on DES site, these all produced nothing available commercially. This information was further verified by contact with university representatives that engage in some work through academic labs on an ad hoc basis, specifically the University of Idaho.

Department of Enterprise Services – C&P Page 3 of 5

• As part of the market research requirements, include a list of statewide contracts reviewed and/or businesses contacted, date of contact, method of contact (telephone, mail, e-mail, other), and documentation demonstrating an explanation of why those businesses could not or would not, under any circumstances, perform the contract; or an explanation of why the agency has determined that no businesses other than the prospective contractor can perform the contract.

There are no other commercial companies that we are aware of for comparison.

There are DES contracts for “Analytical Laboratory Services” which include water, soil, and hazmat testing, but not genetic analyses. There are no DES contracts for genetic analyses

For the closest price comparison, we emailed a genetics lab at the University of Idaho (Lisette Waits) on July 2, 2025. This was their response:

“If WGI is using 10-12 loci per sample and only determining the number of individuals each year and across years then our price would be $101 per sample. The cost would increase for additional loci and analyses.” That is $57 more expensive per sample than WGI.

We are not aware of any other labs to compare to at this time that are not for federal or university work alone.

• Per the Supplier Diversity Policy, DES-090-06: was this purchase included in the agency’s forecasted needs report?

N/A

• Describe what targeted industry outreach was completed to locate small and/or veteran-owned businesses to meet the agency’s need?

There are no targeted small or veteran owned business outreach because a laboratory that can do his work generally resides in a university or is a large enough business that is financially positioned to obtain and maintain specialized equipment.

• What considerations were given to unbundling the goods and/or services in this contract, which would provide opportunities for Washington small, diverse, and/or veteran-owned businesses. Provide a summary of your agency’s unbundling analysis for this contract.

The type and cost of equipment and cost of staffing needing for a laboratory like this would be prohibitive for a small business to put in place. Additionally, the analysis of these DNA samples cannot be unbundled or subcontracted.

• Provide a detailed and compelling description that includes quantification of the costs and risks mitigated by contracting with this contractor (i.e. learning curve, follow-up nature).

There is no learning curve for this company because they have been the proprietors of WDFW’s black bear DNA for the last 6 years. They own and maintain the catalog and library of DNA samples from WDFW’s past bear and cougar work.

While they send us the data, they maintain the raw data according to our past contracts. While we could start fresh with another vendor, were one available and comparable, we would lose all of our past DNA samples that the vendor stores for

Department of Enterprise Services – C&P Page 4 of 5

us. These samples cannot be moved to another lab without complete re-examination, which WDFW cannot afford.

• Is the agency proposing this sole source contract because of special circumstances such as confidential investigations, copyright restrictions, etc.? If so, please describe.

The WGI catalog and library for WDFW is proprietary.

• Is the agency proposing this sole source contract because of unavoidable, critical time delays or issues that prevented the agency from completing this acquisition using a competitive process? If so, please describe. For example, if time constraints are applicable, identify when the agency was on notice of the need for the goods and/or service, the entity that imposed the constraints, explain the authority of that entity to impose them, and provide the timelines within which work must be accomplished.

N/A

• What are the consequences of not having this sole source filing approved? Describe in detail the impact to the agency and to services it provides if this sole source filing is not approved.

Failure to approve the sole source filing will result in a delay of analysis, which is used for management and setting harvest regulations for black bear. Additionally, it would result in higher expense to the agency because of historical data access and possibly negating a multi-year research project. This project is funded through federal dollars and is already accounted for in the budget using estimates from WGI. WDFW cannot afford another lab this biennium, were one available, as there would be many initial start-up costs (and generally more expensive analyses costs) in an attempt to recreate a library like the one that WGI has. Failure to approve this sole source filing could also compromise the ability to cross reference results to previous studies, create inconsistencies and erroneous errors in data results, and ultimately result in inaccurate findings which may impact management of black bears in Washington.

Sole Source Posting

• Sole Source Posting on Agency Website - Provide the date in which the sole source posting, the draft contract, and a copy of the Sole Source Contract Justification Template were published on your agency’s website.

- If failed to post, please explain why.

• Provide the date in which the sole source posting, the draft contract, and a copy of the Sole Source Contract Justification Template were published in WEBS.

- If failed to post, please explain why.

• Were responses received to the sole source posting in WEBS?

- If one or more responses are received, list name of entities responding and explain how the agency concluded the contract is appropriate for sole source award.

Department of Enterprise Services – C&P Page 5 of 5

Reasonableness of Cost

• Since competition was not used as the means for procurement, how did the agency conclude that the costs, fees, or rates negotiated are fair and reasonable? Please make a comparison with comparable contracts, use the results of a market survey, or employ some other appropriate means calculated to make such a determination.

There are no other commercial companies that we are aware of that we can compare to for this work. For the closest price comparison, we emailed a genetics lab at the University of Idaho (Lisette Waits) on July 2, 2025. This was their response:

“If WGI is using 10-12 loci per sample and only determining the number of individuals each year and across years then our price would be $101 per sample.

The cost would increase for additional loci and analyses.” That is $57 more expensive per sample than WGI.

We are not aware of any other labs to compare to at this time that are not for federal or university work alone.