Requisition Review
|
TITLE: REQUISITION REVIEW POLICY
|
POLICY NO: P-300 |
|
SUBMITTED BY: R. BRADLEY & A. JACKSON |
|
|
APPROVED BY: D. SABEL |
|
|
Effective Date: 05/07 Supersedes No: 03/84 Page No 1 of 1 |
|
I. Purpose
To establish the authority to review requests and determine sources.
II. Scope
This policy applies to all procurements where Shopping Carts (Requisitions) come into Purchasing Services Sourcing Cockpit.
III. Policy
One of the responsibilities vested in the Director of Purchasing (see Policy P-020) is the responsibility to arrange for the purchase of materials, supplies and services with the objective that they will be available at the proper time, in the proper place, in quantity, quality and price consistent with the needs of the University. It is vital to the performance of this duty that the procurement staff, hereafter referred to as Purchasing Services, have authority to review purchase requests, specifications, and suggested sources.
It shall be the policy; therefore, that Purchasing Services shall have the responsibility and authority to review specifications and sources within the following guidelines:
A. The user and Purchasing Services shall be jointly responsible for developing a list of acceptable vendors or a specific product or service whenever necessary, with the user being responsible for the technical aspects of the evaluation and Purchasing Services being responsible for the financial and service aspects. Once a list of acceptable vendors has been established, Purchasing Services shall be solely responsible for selection of a vendor from that list who best can respond to the requirements of each particular order.
B. It shall be the responsibility of Purchasing Services to review the specifications of each purchase requisition, which SRM automatically sends into Purchasing Services Sourcing Cockpit. This review shall include but not be limited to:
1. Requests for “sole source” purchases.
2. Requests for goods of a quality that seem to be greater than required.
3. Requests for goods of a quality that seem to be less than required.
4. Requests whose material seems inconsistent with the requirement.
5. Requests that do not conform to University standards.
Procurement Professionals shall not materially alter specifications without discussion with the Requisitioner.