Audit firm finds CMAR procurement for AAA high school compliant but urges clearer RFQ language and disclosure checks

An external special review of the Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) procurement for the AAA high school concluded there were no disqualifying breaches of district policy or state procurement requirements, but auditors recommended procedural improvements to strengthen transparency and reduce risk in future procurements.

The presentation, delivered by Speaker 6 from the external assessor, said: "we did not identify any instances of noncompliance that would negate or invalidate the procurement process." The report nonetheless flagged three areas for improvement: formalized selection-committee disclosures of potential conflicts of interest, clearer language in the request for qualifications (RFQ) about the purpose of preliminary cost estimates, and correcting small scoring calculation errors used in vendor evaluations.

On conflicts, the report noted procedures requiring proposers to disclose potential conflicts already exist but similar mandatory disclosures for selection-committee members were not consistently in place. Speaker 6 recommended the district "develop procedures requiring selection committee mandatory disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest prior to participating in the selection committee." Speaker 6 said the district is working to improve those procedures.

Regarding RFQ guidance, auditors found purchasing had requested preliminary cost estimates from all proposers and observed that state statutes prohibit using cost estimates during the shortlisting step; the report recommended revising RFQ language to eliminate ambiguity about why cost information is requested so it cannot be interpreted as evaluative criteria.

On scoring, Speaker 6 said errors in calculations were "less than 1%" and did not change the award outcome, but recommended improvements in verification and simplified scoring to lower human error risk. Board members asked whether an independent verification step would be added; auditors and staff said existing verification processes had caught some mistakes and that the district would add better checks going forward.

Several board members suggested adding a community representative with construction expertise to future selection committees to increase transparency. Speaker 5 noted the scoring issue was minor but the absence or inconsistency of evaluator conflict disclosures was more concerning; Speaker 6 said the review found no exceptions in this procurement but that the recommendation remains to formalize disclosures.

Next steps: the audit committee and district staff are already implementing recommended changes to RFQ language and scoring verification, and the board discussed committee-level oversights to ensure those changes are completed and followed in future procurements.