Cooperative Purchasing Reciprocity

Below is a list of states that generally permit piggybacking on out-of-state cooperative contracts, based on the specific criteria of Idaho’s procurement process (formal, sealed RFPs with two public notices and committee approval, per Idaho Code § 67-2806 and § 67-2806A) as of May 30, 2025.

Key Considerations

• Idaho’s Procurement Process: Idaho’s formal, sealed RFP process requires two public notices (the first at least two weeks before bid opening, the second at least seven days before; Idaho Code § 67-2806(1)(b)), committee review for evaluation and award (Idaho Code § 67-2806A), and compliance with competitive bidding standards. 
• Reciprocal Piggybacking: States typically allow piggybacking if their laws permit participation in out-of-state cooperative contracts and if the originating state’s (Idaho’s) process meets their statutory standards.  Public agency buyers needing additional documentation about the LGC's procurement process, or vendor contracts, can email to: admin@lgcprocurement.org

States Allowing Reciprocal Piggybacking

The following states have procurement laws or policies that generally permit piggybacking on out-of-state cooperative contracts, such as those procured by the LGC. States are included if their laws allow piggybacking without explicit restrictions that would conflict with Idaho’s formal RFP process.

1. Alaska
   • Alaska Statute § 36.30.730 allows state agencies and political subdivisions to participate in cooperative purchasing agreements, including those with out-of-state public entities.
2. Arizona
   • Arizona Revised Statutes § 41-2632 permits public agencies to use contracts from other public entities, including out-of-state cooperatives.
3. California
   • California Public Contract Code § 10302 and § 12100 allow public agencies to use cooperative purchasing agreements, including out-of-state contracts, if they meet competitive bidding standards.
4. Colorado
   • Colorado Revised Statutes § 24-110-201 permits cooperative purchasing with other public entities, including out-of-state agencies, if the contract was competitively bid.
5. Florida
   • Florida Statutes § 287.042 allows state agencies and local governments to use cooperative purchasing contracts, including those from other states, if they comply with competitive procurement requirements.
6. Hawaii
   • Hawaii Revised Statutes § 103D-1008 permits cooperative purchasing with other public entities, including out-of-state cooperatives, if the procurement is competitive.
7. Indiana
   • Indiana Code § 5-22-10-16 allows public agencies to purchase from contracts established by other public entities, including out-of-state cooperatives, if the process is competitive and complies with state law.
8. Michigan
   • Michigan Compiled Laws § 18.1261 allows state agencies to participate in cooperative purchasing with other public entities, including out-of-state cooperatives, if the contract was competitively bid.
9. Minnesota
   • Minnesota Statutes § 16C.03 allows cooperative purchasing with other public entities, including out-of-state cooperatives.
10. Montana
    • Montana Code Annotated § 18-4-401 permits cooperative purchasing with other public entities, including out-of-state contracts, if they meet competitive bidding standards.
11. Nevada
    • Nevada Revised Statutes § 332.195 allows local governments to use contracts from other public entities, including out-of-state cooperatives, if the procurement process is competitive.
12. New Mexico
    • New Mexico Statutes § 13-1-129 permits cooperative procurement with other public entities, including out-of-state contracts, if competitively bid.
13. North Dakota
    • North Dakota Century Code § 54-44.4-13 allows state agencies and political subdivisions to use cooperative purchasing contracts, including those from other states, if they meet competitive bidding standards.
14. Oregon
    • Oregon Revised Statutes § 279A.205–§ 279A.220 explicitly allow cooperative procurement with other public entities, including interstate agreements, if the original solicitation meets competitive standards.
15. South Dakota
    • South Dakota Codified Laws § 5-18A-37 permits cooperative purchasing with other public entities, including out-of-state contracts, if competitively bid.
16. Texas
    • Texas Government Code § 2155.144 allows state agencies and local governments to use cooperative purchasing contracts, including out-of-state agreements, if they meet competitive bidding standards.
17. Utah
    • Utah Code § 63G-6a-2105 permits cooperative purchasing with other public entities, including out-of-state contracts, if the procurement is competitive.
18. Washington
    • Washington’s Revised Code § 39.34.030 allows public agencies to piggyback on contracts from other public entities, including out-of-state cooperatives, if the original solicitation meets competitive bidding standards (e.g., public notice and sealed bids). Washington’s MRSC guidance emphasizes verifying that the host agency’s process (Idaho’s RFP) complies with RCW 39.34.030(5)(b), which Idaho’s two-notice, committee-reviewed process satisfies.
19. Wyoming
    • Wyoming Statutes § 9-2-1016 allows state agencies and local governments to use cooperative purchasing contracts, including those from other states, if competitively bid.

States Not Listed Above May Have Conditional or Unclear Piggybacking Policies

Some states have restrictive or ambiguous laws that may limit piggybacking on Idaho’s cooperative contracts unless specific conditions are met. These states require further verification:

• New York: Public Contract Law § 103 allows cooperative purchasing, but strict competitive bidding requirements and local preferences may require Idaho’s RFP process to be explicitly validated by New York’s procurement office.
• Georgia, Illinois, Ohio, Virginia: These states allow cooperative purchasing but have specific requirements (e.g., local vendor preferences, additional public notices, or state-specific certifications) that may complicate piggybacking on Idaho contracts.
• States with Reciprocity Restrictions: Some states (e.g., Massachusetts, Pennsylvania) require explicit reciprocity agreements or limit piggybacking to states with reciprocal policies. Idaho’s laws (Idaho Code § 67-2803(1)) allow piggybacking on other states’ contracts, which may satisfy these requirements, but further confirmation is needed.

Disclaimer:

This list is not exhaustive due to variations in state regulations and the need for case-by-case compliance checks. States not listed may allow piggybacking, but require additional steps (e.g., legal review, administrative approval) by the purchaser. States may update or change their regulations at any time. This information should not be construed as legal advice.