Both sides have protested contract awards. These appeals delay program implementation, increase the administrative costs associated with implementation, and, in some cases, overturn award decisions. Questions of conflicts of interest, unfair bidding processes, and poorly executed evaluations have been raised and, in some cases, supported by the courts. In addition, the political environment is often highly charged.
Advocates seek to protect the interests of the vulnerable seriously mentally ill population.
Furthermore, county mental health agencies and other providers largely dependent upon State and local funds seek to secure sufficient resources to carry out their responsibilities. The level of effort required to produce winning proposals diverts staff resources from other activities. Ambiguous procurement specifications can lead to misunderstood program requirements, ill-prepared proposals, and evaluations of questionable legal defensibility. In addition, vaguely conceived contracts can produce difficult contract negotiations as the winning offeror seeks clarification and modification to program requirements and reimbursement terms. These difficulties can delay the process and add to the MBHO s marketing and administrative costs.