Key facts

“No-bid contract” is an informal term for a government contract awarded without a standard competitive bidding process.

What is a no-bid contract?

Competitive procurement requires vendors to respond to the same published requirements. It gives an agency comparable information about price, experience, staffing, technical capacity and past performance.

Why does competition matter?

Under Arizona Revised Statutes §41-2536, an agency may award a contract without competition when the responsible procurement director determines in writing that only one source exists for the required material, service or construction.



The statute says sole-source procurement should be avoided unless no reasonable alternative source exists. The director may also require cost or pricing information before approving the award.



A sound sole-source determination should answer:



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>What specific capability does the agency need?</li>



<li>Why can only one vendor provide it?</li>



<li>Which alternatives were considered?</li>



<li>Was the requirement written so narrowly that only one vendor could qualify?</li>



<li>How was the price determined to be fair and reasonable?</li>



<li>Who approved the exception?</li>



<li>Does the vendor have relationships requiring disclosure?</li>



<li>Will later amendments change the original justification?</li>
</ul>



The Arizona State Procurement Office maintains a formal sole-source authorization form, procurement-disclosure forms and a separate authorization process for contract increases greater than 25 percent.

What does Arizona require for sole-source contracts?

Arizona Revised Statutes §41-2537 allows emergency procurement when a threat to public health, welfare or safety exists or ordinary competition would be impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest.



Even in an emergency, agencies must obtain as much competition as circumstances permit. The contract file must contain a written determination explaining both the emergency and the selection of the particular contractor.

What does Arizona require during an emergency?

New York City used emergency authority to enter a $432 million contract for transportation, lodging, food, case management and other services for newly arrived migrants.



The city comptroller raised concerns about the vendor-selection process, the company’s relevant experience and the contract’s delayed submission for oversight. The comptroller’s office said the contract package arrived more than three months after work began. The comptroller’s office rejected the contract in September 2023, and the city moved forward with it.



A later audit, released August 6, 2024, reviewed approximately $13.8 million paid for services during May and June 2023. Auditors concluded that nearly $11 million should be considered for recoupment. Read the <a href="https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/audit-of-the-department-of-housing-preservation-and-developments-oversight-of-its-contract-with-rapid-reliable-testing-ny-llc-aka-docgo/">New York City Comptroller’s audit</a>.

What did the New York City migrant-services audit find?

The audit established procurement, documentation and monitoring failures.

Was the New York contract corrupt?

What have Arizona audits found about contract oversight?

During the pandemic, governments needed supplies, technology, testing, medical services and emergency assistance quickly. Agencies frequently shortened bidding periods, used emergency authority or expanded existing contracts.

What did pandemic emergency procurement reveal?

How should taxpayers review a no-bid contract?

A procurement failure may involve a missing form, inadequate competition, poor documentation or insufficient monitoring. Fraud requires intentional deception to obtain money or another benefit.

When does a procurement failure become fraud?

The institution’s response

What this shows about Democratic governance.

What the public record proves

Frequently asked questions

Arizona residents can examine sole-source determinations, emergency justifications, vendor disclosures, contract amendments and invoice records before deciding whether a noncompetitive award protected the public interest. Eligible residents can <a href="https://tpaction.com/Vote">Register to Vote</a> and consider how Democratic-led institutions enforce competition, transparency and payment-verification requirements when spending taxpayer money.



Public oversight should continue through contract completion and recovery. Taxpayers can compare invoices with deliverables, identify unauthorized subcontractors and monitor whether agencies implement audit recommendations. Arizonans can <a href="https://www.tpaction.com/plan">make a plan to vote</a> before applicable deadlines and <a href="https://www.tpaction.com/getinvolved">get involved</a> in voter education and government-accountability efforts.

Examine public contracts and participate

Learn when Arizona permits sole-source and emergency contracts, how weak oversight raises corruption risk, and what government audits have found.

Do no-bid and emergency contracts increase corruption risk? What the audits say

Key facts

What is a no-bid contract?

Why does competition matter?

What does Arizona require for sole-source contracts?

What does Arizona require during an emergency?

What did the New York City migrant-services audit find?

Was the New York contract corrupt?

What have Arizona audits found about contract oversight?

What did pandemic emergency procurement reveal?

How should taxpayers review a no-bid contract?

When does a procurement failure become fraud?

The institution’s response

What this shows about Democratic governance.

What the public record proves

Frequently asked questions

Is this an example of Democratic corruption?

How much of the New York contract did auditors question?

What did the Arizona procurement audit find?

Did the New York City contract continue after the audit?

Examine public contracts and participate

RioSlum Studio

Do no-bid and emergency contracts increase corruption risk? What the audits say

Key facts

What is a no-bid contract?

Why does competition matter?

What does Arizona require for sole-source contracts?

What does Arizona require during an emergency?

What did the New York City migrant-services audit find?

Was the New York contract corrupt?

What have Arizona audits found about contract oversight?

What did pandemic emergency procurement reveal?

How should taxpayers review a no-bid contract?

When does a procurement failure become fraud?

The institution’s response

What this shows about Democratic governance.

What the public record proves

Frequently asked questions

Is this an example of Democratic corruption?

How much of the New York contract did auditors question?

What did the Arizona procurement audit find?

Did the New York City contract continue after the audit?

Examine public contracts and participate