Privatization Subcommittee 

Policies and Procedures Regarding Review of Privatization Requests

1. Each state contracting agency shall complete a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in accordance with C.G.S. 4e-16 (b-c) that shall be submitted to the SCSB as part of the SCA’s business case. The CBA shall be completed in accordance with the template found here (insert hyperlink on the word “here”).
2. Upon receipt of the business case from the SCA, the CPO shall conduct a pre-submittal review and determine if it meets the elements required at C.G.S. 4e-16 (d), below. If the business case is insufficient, a letter noting the deficiencies shall be drafted by the CPO and sent to the SCA via email only. SCAs may request a hard copy of the letter which will be provided at no cost to the SCA. If the business case meets the requirements, the Executive Director shall set meetings for both the Privatization Contract Committee (PCC) and the full board. The business case then shall be forwarded by the CPO to the PCC.
3. At the commencement of the PCC’s meeting to review the SCA’s submission, the business case shall be deemed received by the board. The CPO shall calendar the due date of the board’s decision 60 days from the date of the PCC’s meeting. 
(d) Any business case developed by a state contracting agency for the purpose of complying with subsection (c) of this section shall include: (1) The cost benefit analysis as described in subsection (b) of this section, (2) a detailed description of the service or activity that is the subject of such business case, (3) a description and analysis of the state contracting agency’s current performance of such service or activity, (4) the goals to be achieved through the proposed privatization contract and the rationale for such goals, (5) a description of available options for achieving such goals, (6) an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each option, including, at a minimum, potential performance improvements and risks attendant to termination of the contract or rescission of such contract, (7) a description of the current market for the services or activities that are the subject of such business case, (8) an analysis of the quality of services as gauged by standardized measures and key performance requirements including compensation, turnover, and staffing ratios, (9) a description of the specific results-based performance standards that shall, at a minimum be met, to ensure adequate performance by any party performing such service or activity, (10) the projected time frame for key events from the beginning of the procurement process through the expiration of a contract, if applicable, (11) a specific and feasible contingency plan that addresses contractor nonperformance and a description of the tasks involved in and costs required for implementation of such plan, and (12) a transition plan, if appropriate, for addressing changes in the number of agency personnel, affected business processes, employee transition issues, and communications with affected stakeholders, such as agency clients and members of the public, if applicable. Such transition plan shall contain a reemployment and retraining assistance plan for employees who are not retained by the state or employed by the contractor. If the primary purpose of the proposed privatization contract is to provide a core governmental function, such business case shall also include information sufficient to rebut the presumption that such core governmental function should not be privatized. Such presumption shall not be construed to prohibit a state contracting agency from contracting for specialized technical expertise not available within such agency, provided such agency shall retain responsibility for such core governmental function. For the purposes of this section, “core governmental function” means a function for which the primary purpose is (A) the inspection for adherence to health and safety standards because public health or safety may be jeopardized if such inspection is not done or is not done in a timely or proper manner, (B) the establishment of statutory, regulatory or contractual standards to which a regulated person, entity or state contractor shall be held, (C) the enforcement of statutory, regulatory or contractual requirements governing public health or safety, or (D) criminal or civil law enforcement. If any part of such business case is based upon evidence that the state contracting agency is not sufficiently staffed to provide the core governmental function required by the privatization contract, the state contracting agency shall also include within such business case a plan for remediation of the understaffing to allow such services to be provided directly by the state contracting agency in the future.
4. Each member of the PCC shall receive and review the business case in its entirety. If the PCC desires more information about the matter, it shall request that information from the CPO who shall communicate the requirement to the SCA, along with a clear time frame for submission of the requested document. A meeting of the PCC shall occur thereafter and all members of the PCC in attendance shall discuss the business case, including whether the services sought meet the definition of a “core governmental function” as defined at C.G.S. 4e-1. The SCA requesting the privatization shall attend the PCC meeting if the PCC so requests, to answer any questions or concerns. The PCC or the CPO shall draft the evaluation and recommendation of the PCC, which shall be shared with the board via email, along with the business case. The evaluation and recommendation shall be discussed and voted on by the board. As a matter of procedure, if the question of whether the service(s) is a core governmental function is at issue, the board must first vote on that aspect, as it dictates the number of votes required to approve the privatization.  Similarly, if the CBA shows that less than 10% savings will be achieved with the privatization of the services in question, a vote of 2/3 of the board shall be required. The board may request the SCA’s attendance at the board meeting, though the SCA may attend the meeting regardless of whether its attendance is requested. During the review or consideration of any such business case, no member of the board shall engage in any ex-parte communication with any lobbyist, contractor or union representative with regard to a pending matter. Unless otherwise provided in this section, a majority vote of the board shall be required to approve any such business case.
5. A report from the board detailing its decision shall include the elements detailed at C.G.S. 4e-16 (h)(2), and said report must be delivered to the SCA on or before the 60th day from the board’s receipt of the complete request unless an extension has been granted by the board. The board may, as it finds necessary and by a majority vote of the board or the PCC, issue a 30 day extension of time to render its decision.
6. An SCA may request an expedited review of a privatization request if there is a “compelling public interest” in doing so, by submitting the form found here (create form and hyperlink “here”) to the CPO.  In the event that the PCC agrees to expedite the review, the same processes articulated above shall apply, but the report must be issued on or before the 30th day from receipt of the complete request. If the expedited review is denied, the SCA’s request will be reviewed by the process described above.
7. In the event of a proposed amendment to a board-approved business case, the board shall approve and review such amendment. The disposition of the amendment shall be rendered on or before the 30th day from receipt of the proposed amendment, with the same vote that was required for approval of the original business case, a 2/3 vote or a simple majority, dependent on whether the service is a core governmental function. The date of receipt is the date on which the board receives the document to review.  If the board fails to complete its review within 30 days of receipt, the proposed amendment to the business case shall be deemed approved.