Comptroller's Oversight of State Contracts

A closeup image of the New York State capitol building.

Contracts by the Numbers 2025 Chart Update

Google Charts - API

Comptroller DiNapoli Ensures State Procurements Provide the Highest Value to New Yorkers

For more than a century, the Comptroller’s Office has conducted independent, pre-review of State and limited Public Authority contacts, adding transparency to the process and resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars in savings for taxpayers each year. As government contracting expands in size, scope and complexity this oversight is more important than ever.

The Comptroller's contract oversight extends to most State agency contracts, generally those where the contract value exceeds $50,000. The Comptroller may also review State public authority contracts valued at more than $1 million if they are either awarded noncompetitively or paid in whole or in part from State appropriations. In addition, any State agency seeking to waive competitive bidding and receive an exemption from its statutory requirement to advertise a procurement opportunity in the New York State Contract Reporter must first receive approval from the Comptroller's Office.

Benefits of the Comptroller’s Review

 Promotes fair competition to ensure the best price and overall value for the State

 Detects fraud and waste before tax dollars are spent

 Confirms funding availability so that agencies do not overspend

 Verifies vendor responsibility

 Adds transparency to the process

Review Has Little Impact on the Overall Time Frame of Procurements

Comptroller DiNapoli's procurement experts and legal team are sensitive to agency deadlines and the State’s business needs and understand that delays can cost New York’s taxpayers and businesses money, keep workers idle, and harm not-for-profits.

2024 Results Demonstrate Cost-Effective Oversight


25,263

Total Agency Contracts Received



7.47 Days

Average Time for Contract Review



89%

Reviewed Within 15 Days


Average Days to Review Contracts

Value of Contracts Reviewed by Calendar Year

Less Than 1 Percent of Contracts Take Longer Than 45 Days to Review

 

The very small percentage of contracts completed after the 31 day timeframe are generally due to complex procurements and/or protest procurements.

Tools and Dashboards

Contract Review Highlights

Finding Opportunities to Renegotiate and Save Costs

The State University of New York at Stony Brook submitted a purchase order for scientific and laboratory equipment. The cost of the equipment was higher than another known vendor and included tariff fees. The Comptroller’s office requested SUNY Stony Brook negotiate the costs further and questioned the applicability of tariff fees. The result was a price reduction and an approved tariff waiver, resulting in savings of $183,750.
 

The Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) submitted a five-year contract for ambulance services. The rates in the proposed contract were significantly higher than Medicaid rates and rates from prior agreements. Therefore, the Comptroller’s office requested DOCCS engage the vendor to negotiate lower rates. The agency requested the transaction be returned and later resubmitted the contract with lower rates, resulting in an estimated savings of $695,545. 

Identifying Costly Errors and Contract Duplication

The Division of State Police submitted a purchase order for uniforms for the police academy. The Comptroller’s review identified that the State Police did not apply the appropriate volume pricing discount. The purchase order was resubmitted with the volume discount pricing, saving the State $25,298.

The Office of General Services (OGS) submitted an amendment for custodial services incorrectly applying escalation. BOC identified the discrepancy and non-approved the transaction. OGS resubmitted the transaction with the correct escalation, saving the State $89,714. 
 

Ensuring a Level Playing Field for Vendors

The Department of Labor submitted a transaction for security guard services that included rates increases over the original bid. Allowing an increase after bidding would be inappropriate and unfair to other bidders. The transaction was returned and subsequently resubmitted with the lower rates from the original bid, saving the State $26,479. 
 

Multiple State Agencies submitted transactions against the Office of General Services’ Manufacturer Based Information Technology Umbrella Contract that included software and services that were excluded under the contract terms. Allowing non-contract items to be purchased would be unfair to the other centralized contract vendors offering similar products. These transactions were non-approved.