Official Summary Text
AB 880, as introduced, Bennett.
State government grants and contracts: payment of claims and grantees’ indirect costs.
The California Prompt Payment Act requires a state agency that awards a grant or that acquires property or services pursuant to a contract to make timely payments pursuant to the grant or contract. If a state agency or the Controller fails to take certain timely actions and payment is not issued within 45 calendar days from the state agency receipt of an undisputed invoice, the act requires the state agency or the Controller, as applicable, to pay certain penalties. The act provides an exception to certain penalty provisions applicable to services or equipment under the Medi-Cal program if the grant or contract was awarded to a nonprofit organization in an amount less than $500,000. The act defines the term “grant” to mean a signed final agreement between any state agency and a local government agency or organization authorized to accept grant funding for victim services or prevention
programs administered by any state agency or restoration activities performed by a resource conservation district. The act also defines “nonprofit service organization” to mean a nonprofit entity that is organized to provide services to the public, but the act does not use that term in its provisions.
This bill would revise the definition of “grant” to also mean a signed final agreement between a state agency and a nonprofit organization and would delete the $500,000 exception described above. The bill would remove the definition of “nonprofit service organization,” and instead would define “nonprofit organization” to mean an organization that qualifies as an exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
The act authorizes a state agency to dispute for reasonable cause an invoice, refund request, or claim for Medi-Cal reimbursement, as specified, and defines “reasonable cause” to mean a
determination by a state agency that any of certain conditions exist, including that there is a discrepancy between the invoice or claimed amount and either the claimant’s actual delivery of property or services to the state or the state’s acceptance of those deliveries.
This bill would revise the condition described above to require the discrepancy to be of an amount greater than $250 or 5% of the invoice or claimed amount, whichever is less, in order to qualify as a reasonable cause for the state agency to dispute it.
Existing law establishes the Department of General Services in the Government Operations Agency for purposes of providing centralized services of state government. Existing law establishes various state grant programs. Existing federal law provides uniform administrative requirements, cost principles, and audit requirements for federal grant awards to nonfederal entities and provides guidelines for
determining direct and indirect costs, as defined, charged to federal awards.
This bill would require a state agency administering a grant program to reimburse a grantee’s indirect costs, as defined, at one of specified rates as requested by the grantee in their grant program application, unless prohibited by any other state or federal law. The bill would authorize the establishment of indirect cost pools, as specified. The bill would make these provisions applicable to a grant program administered by a state agency, regardless of whether the funding source is state funds, federal funds, or a combination thereof.