CI23015-1_UnaccompaniedMinorsService-Refugees.pdf

Page 1 of 4 SPO Form 101 - Competition Impracticable Procurement Authorization (Rev 03.21.22)

Procurement Determination:

Competition Impracticable Authorization A.A.C. R2-7-E303

SECTIONS I THROUGH III MUST BE COMPLETED BY THE REQUESTOR

USE ADDITIONAL PAGE AS NECESSARY

SECTION I - State Governmental Unit Request

1. State Governmental Unit

2. Requestor 3. Email

4. Title 5. Telephone

SECTION II - Background

6. Service(s)/Material(s)

7. Supplier

8. Contract ID

9. CI Type

10. Requesting Term 11. Estimated Cost

Department of Economic Security

Nate Hudson nhudson@azdes.gov

Contracts Supervisor 602-815-0055

- Modification pursuant to R2-7-E303(E) for a CI modification

1/1/2024-9/30/2025 $4,300,000

Page 2 of 4 SPO Form 101 - Competition Impracticable Procurement Authorization (Rev 03.21.22)

SECTION III - Justification

12. Rationale

13. Provide details of the procurement need, reason for the competition impracticable, and how the proposed procurement is advantageous to the State

- Compliance with A.R.S. §§ 41-2533, 41-2534, 41-2538, or 41-2578 is impracticable

Page 3 of 4 SPO Form 101 - Competition Impracticable Procurement Authorization (Rev 03.21.22)

14. Describe the procurement process, strategy to promote competition, and determination that the price is fair and reasonable

15. I have conducted research and determined that no mandatory state contract is available for the service(s)/material(s)

16. Signature 17. Date of Request

In accordance with the Procurement Rules, the Arizona Uniform Terms and Conditions must be made a part of all Contracts. If you will be required to sign a software licensing agreement or sign any other agreement containing terms and conditions, these will need additional review to ensure that the terms and conditions do not invalidate the Arizona Uniform Terms and Conditions. Approval of this request does not allow for agencies to exceed their dollar acquisition amount of delegated authority.

Nathanael Hudson (Sep 29, 2023 12:39 PDT) Nathanael Hudson

9/29/2023 https://na1.documents.adobe.com/verifier?tx=CBJCHBCAABAAIOE55KuMCm8ry957PnfXhxJ765TZqJjU

Page 4 of 4 SPO Form 101 - Competition Impracticable Procurement Authorization (Rev 03.21.22)

TO BE COMPLETED BY PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY

SECTION IV - Approval

18. Determination

19. Approved Expiration Date

20. Comments, conditions, or restrictions (as applicable)

21. Print Name 22. Title

23. Signature 24. Date of Approval

25. Use section as necessary

STATE GOVERNMENTAL UNIT NOTICE: This is an official written determination in response to a procurement authorization request.

A copy of the form shall be maintained by the State Governmental Unit and the State Procurement Office.

Upon completion, Requestor shall forward the signed form to the Contract Owner.

Contract Owner shall upload the signed approval version of this form in the eProcurement system.

If anticipated expenditure is above State Governmental Unit's delegation, forward document to SPOCompliance@azdoa.gov.

- Request Authorized Pursuant to R2-7-E303

9/30/2025

David Steuber Chief Procurement Officer

10/11/2023 mailto:nhudson@azdes.gov mailto:gpinkerton@azdes.gov https://azdesgov.na1.adobesign.com/verifier?tx=CBJCHBCAABAAIOE55KuMCm8ry957PnfXhxJ765TZqJjU

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY

Procurement Compliance Checklist

Control Self-Assessment

Date:

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

$2,300,000.00 $2,000,000.00

Section Action

OP 6.3.1 Yes

OP 6.3.2 Yes

Action

DIV 6.3.3.1 Yes

DIV 6.3.3.2 Yes

DIV 6.3.3.3 Yes

DIV 6.3.3.4 Yes

OP 6.3.4 Yes

DIV/OP 6.3.5 Yes

OP 6.3.6 Yes

Action

OP 6.3.7.1

OP 6.3.7.2

DIV/OP 6.3.7.3

OP 6.3.7.4

Competition Impracticable (CI) Procurement Compliance Checklist

Explanation of why the proposed procurement process is advantageous to the state? (A.A.C. R2- 7-E303 (C) (3)) Scope, duration and estimated total dollar value of the procurement need? (A.A.C. R2-7-E303

(C) (4))

Did the contract include the State's Uniform Terms and Conditions? (A.R.S. § 41-2585, A.A.C. R2- 7-606)

Comments

Estimated Amount:

Was there a written approval by the delegated ACPO or by the SPA or Deputy SPA for this procurement? (A.A.C. R2-7-E303 (B)-(D)) Was this procurement performed by an authorized Procurement Officer within their delegated authority? (A.A.C. R2-7-206)

Explanation of the situation that makes competitive bidding impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to public interest? (A.A.C. R2-7-E303 (C) (1))

Definition of the proposed procurement process to be utilized and an explanation of how this process will foster as much competition as practicable? (A.A.C. R2-7-E303 (C) (2))

Procurement Officer:

Contact Person:

Division:

Title/ Description:

Section 6.0 - Limited Competition Section 6.3: Competition Impracticable (CI)

Procurement Officer Signature:

Were documents named and upload to the e-Procurement system following the naming conventions outlined in SP 006?

Comments

PA DAAS-24-011

Vendor specified by Federal government - ORR

Within the CI

See Contract Files in APP

Was there a record of the Competition Impracticable Authorization in the procurement file?

(A.R.S. § 41-2551, A.A.C. R2-7-E303 (F))

Did the procurement file contain the following records: list of notified vendors, written request and approval determination, and additional information requested by ACPO and approved by SPA or Deputy SPA, if any? (A.A.C. R2-7-101 (38))

Were Procurement Disclosure Statements (PDS) reviewed for everyone who participated in the development of the procurement, evaluation tool, served as technical advisors or evaluators, recommended or selected a vendor, or who approved Sole Source or Competition Impracticable? (SP 003)

Was there a valid and current Certificate of Insurance in the procurement file, with amounts consistent with contract requirements? (Insurance Modules)

Contact Person Number:

Procurement Officer Number:

Does the Procurement request include the following Compliance Criteria?

Solicitation No.

N/A

PA No.

DAAS-24-011

Nate Hudson

Gloria Pinkerton 480.798.7086

602-815-0055

September 29, 2023

Did the agency director, or designee, inform employees when the first PDS was signed, and notify the SPA or Deputy SPA? (A.R.S. § 41-753, SP 003)

See Contract Files in APP

Notification submitted 2/14/2023

Unaccompanied Minors Service-Refugees

Total

$4,300,000.00 gpinkerton@azdes.gov

Section 6.3.3: Did the procurement request include the following (A.A.C. R2-7-E303 (C))

CommentsSection 6.3.7: Contract Administration nhudson@azdes.gov

DAAS

Contact Person Email Address:

Procurement Officer Email Address:

Page 1 Updated: June 2022 mailto:nhudson@azdes.gov mailto:gpinkerton@azdes.gov mailto:gpinkerton@azdes.gov mailto:nhudson@azdes.gov mailto:gpinkerton@azdes.gov mailto:nhudson@azdes.gov

Lutheran Social Services of the Southwest (LSS-SW)

TBD

In addition to previous proposed contractors CCCS & LSS-SW, ADES is proposing to modify the current URM CI to add TBD to allow RRP to explore options to add qualified foster care providers, providing both therapeutic & general group home services to approved individuals. In accordance with 45 CFR § 400.116, “a State must provide unaccompanied minors with the same range of child welfare benefits & services available in foster care cases to other children in the State.” In order to comply with providing the same range of services to URM, and considering the current providers are unable to provide Group Homes, ADES is seeking to add one (1) therapeutic group home & one (1) regular group home to this contract set.

According to ORR, 10% of all URM need a higher level of care (e.g.,therapeutic foster home, therapeutic group home, residential treatment). Most of the youth referred to the URM program have experienced some level of trauma such as abuse, neglect, sexual exploitation, human trafficking, and/or community violence. To comply with 45 CFR § 400.116 and align with ORR guidance to add therapeutic foster care capacity in FY24 plans, ADES is seeking to incorporate therapeutic group homes to meet the needs of this population and to phase them into a less restrictive option based on their needs to a group home or foster home.

Group home providers would need to be ADCS licensed but would need to set up an individual group home or therapeutic group home specifically for URM foster children as the home needs to be dedicated for URMs. Considering the set up costs for an additional facility, the infrastructure that would need to be established, and the unknown demand for these services; starting with one or two providers may meet the need, as these children will not be staying long term. Group home providers would also need to partner with CCCS and LSS-SW, to provide Case Management Services to all URM staying in the Group Homes Care.

With the current caseload URM has & the anticipated growth within the URM population proceeding with a CI modification to add group home providers is in the best interest of the youth that need placement and the state.

Text14: ADES believes it is in the best interest of the State to continue to contract with Catholic Charities Community Services and enter into a direct contract with Lutheran Social Services of the Southwest, as well as pilot a program with one (1) Foster Group Home and one (1) Therapeutic Group Home due to the unknown demand, complexity in establishing relationships with foster care providers, limited funding, and case management services that will continue to be provided by CCCS and LSS-SW.

The pricing is fair and reasonable, as the URM program must have a parity with the State child welfare program, therefore foster parents, group homes, therapeutic group homes will align with rates set by ADCS. Other services being provided will be reimbursed through an approved Itemized Service Budget which is reviewed, negotiated, and approved by the division to ensure pricing is fair and reasonable and in line with approved expenses by ORR.