Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Grants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wilson County court withdraws RFQ for grant-writing services after auditor flags procurement limits
Summary
Wilson County Commissioners Court approved withdrawing RFQ 205-1003 after the county auditor warned that a general RFQ could preclude vendors from serving as grant writers for specific state or federal awards; the court discussed alternatives including hourly consultants or a retainer model.
Wilson County Commissioners Court on April 7 voted to withdraw the county's request for qualifications (RFQ 205-1003) for grant-writing services after County Auditor Brenda Permino explained federal and state procurement rules could make respondents ineligible to serve as grant writers on specific future grants.
Permino told the court the RFQ was advertised in the Wilson County News on March 26 with responses due April 14, but said several experienced vendors had raised concerns that responding to a general RFQ now could bar them from being hired to write particular grant applications later. "Most, well, all federal and state grants require the county to go out for, request for proposals from grant writing firms if we're utilizing, federal and state funding to pay for those services, and that is grant specific," Permino said. She asked the court to withdraw the RFQ to allow more flexibility in future procurements.
The nut graf: County staff and commissioners debated how best to capture occasional state and federal opportunities without paying for a full-time position. Permino and other speakers said much of the larger federal funding is tied to declared disasters and that continuing with an all-purpose retainer may not yield a good return on investment.
In discussion, commissioners said the county needs someone to "watch" grant postings and suggested several alternatives: hire a firm on a monthly retainer (one county described paying $3,000 per month), contract hourly consulting for part-time research, or leave grant-seeking to department heads and issue an RFP only when a specific award appears. Permino said the Texas General Land Office (GLO) staff confirmed the procurement guidance she described and that the GLO and other state sources typically open large awards to targeted disaster areas rather than as standing maintenance funds.
The court then moved to withdraw RFQ 205-1003. The judge called for the vote; court members answered "aye," and the motion passed. The motion text and vote were recorded but no roll-call vote by name appeared in the transcript.
What this means going forward: Permino recommended the court consider one of three paths: 1) contract a firm on retainer, 2) hire an hourly consultant to monitor opportunities and coordinate with the auditor's office, or 3) continue the prior practice in which individual elected officials or departments pursue grants themselves and the county issues an RFP for grant-writing services only for specific eligible awards. Permino said she and staff do not have sufficient bandwidth to research large federal applications in addition to their current duties.
Ending: The court approved withdrawing the general RFQ; commissioners and staff left open what procurement structure they will place on a future agenda for consideration.
