279.835
Definitions for ORS 279.835 to 279.855. As used in ORS 279.835 to 279.855:
(1) “Department”
means the Oregon Department of Administrative Services.
(2) “Direct labor”
includes all hours directly related to the performance of a service or
manufacture of a product, but not supervision, administration, inspection and
shipping.
(3) “Disability”
means a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more
major life activities.
(4) “Individual
with a disability” means an individual who, because of the nature of
disabilities, relies upon specialized employment services to find, secure and
maintain employment.
(5) “Public
agency” or “public contracting agency” means any agency of the State of Oregon
or any political subdivision thereof authorized by law to enter into public
contracts and any public body created by intergovernmental agreement.
(6) “Qualified
nonprofit agency for individuals with disabilities” means a nonprofit
organization:
(a) Organized
under the laws of the United States or of this state and operated to provide
training or employment for individuals with disabilities in this state, and the
net income of which does not inure in whole or in part to the benefit of any
shareholder or other individual;
(b) That complies
with any applicable occupational health and safety standard required by the
laws of the United States and of this state; and
(c) That in the
manufacture of products and in the provision of services, whether or not the
products or services are procured under ORS 279.835 to 279.855, employs
individuals with disabilities for not less than:
(A) 75 percent of
the work hours of direct labor required for the manufacture or provision of the
products or services during a fiscal year that begins on or before June 30,
2019.
(B) 65 percent of
the work hours of direct labor required for the manufacture or provision of the
products or services during a fiscal year that begins on or after July 1, 2019,
and before June 30, 2021.
(C) 60 percent of
the work hours of direct labor required for the manufacture or provision of the
products or services, or the federal ratio, whichever is lower, during a fiscal
year that begins on or after July 1, 2021. [1977 c.304 §3; 1983 c.690 §17; 1989
c.224 §42; 1991 c.93 §1; 1993 c.500 §34; 2001 c.104 §96; 2003 c.794 §229b; 2007
c.70 §62; 2019 c.371 §4]
Notes of Decisions
Indep. Contractors Rsch. Inst. v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 139 P.3d 995 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 13× “Petitioners challenge the validity of rules promulgated by the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to implement the Products of Disabled Individuals Act (PDIA), ORS 279.835 to 279.855. In their eight assignments of error, petitioners argue that the fiscal impact…”
BWK, Inc. v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 218 P.3d 156 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 16× “(Garten) was a qualified rehabilitation facility (QRF) under the Products of Disabled Individuals Act (PDIA), ORS 279.835 to 279.855. 1 Petitioner contends that DAS had no authority to conduct a contested case hearing to determine Garten’s qualifications as a QRF and that its…”
Hinkley v. Eugene Water & Elec. Bd., 74 P.3d 1146 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 4× “015 certain public contracts are exempted from competitive bidding if the public contracting agency has entered into the contract or contracts with qualified nonprofit agencies providing employment opportunities for disabled individuals within the meaning of and subject to the…”
Servs. Employees Int'l v. Portland Habilitation Ctr., Inc., 173 P.3d 1268 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“ORS 279.835(5). Under the Oregon Products of Disabled Individuals Law (PDIL), contracts between public agencies and QRFs need not be based on competitive bids or proposals but, rather, can be entered at prices established by the Oregon Department of Administrative Services.”
DePaul Indus. v. City of Eugene (D. Or. 2020).
· cites it 4× “See ORS §§ 279.835–279.855. Plaintiff is the only QRF providing security services in Lane County.”
Depaul Indus. v. City of Portland (D. Or. 2022).
· cites it 2× “850(2) discusses what a public agency may require in an agreement with a qualified nonprofit agency: [a] public agency may require in any agreement with a qualified nonprofit agency for individuals with disabilities under ORS 279.835 . . . to 279.855 . . . that the qualified…”
Nw. Success, Inc. v. City of Portland (D. Or. 2025).
“§ 279.835(5) (“‘Public agency’ or ‘public contracting agency’ means any agency of the State of Oregon or any political subdivision thereof authorized by law to enter into public contracts and any public body created by intergovernmental agreement.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 279.835(2) — 1 case
Indep. Contractors Rsch. Inst. v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 139 P.3d 995 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“Petitioners challenge the validity of rules promulgated by the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to implement the Products of Disabled Individuals Act (PDIA), ORS 279.835 to 279.855. In their eight assignments of error, petitioners argue that the fiscal impact…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 279.835(3) — 1 case
Indep. Contractors Rsch. Inst. v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 139 P.3d 995 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“Petitioners challenge the validity of rules promulgated by the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to implement the Products of Disabled Individuals Act (PDIA), ORS 279.835 to 279.855. In their eight assignments of error, petitioners argue that the fiscal impact…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 279.835(4) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 279.835(4)(c) — 1 case
BWK, Inc. v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 218 P.3d 156 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“(Garten) was a qualified rehabilitation facility (QRF) under the Products of Disabled Individuals Act (PDIA), ORS 279.835 to 279.855. 1 Petitioner contends that DAS had no authority to conduct a contested case hearing to determine Garten’s qualifications as a QRF and that its…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 279.835(5) — 3 cases
Servs. Employees Int'l v. Portland Habilitation Ctr., Inc., 173 P.3d 1268 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“ORS 279.835(5). Under the Oregon Products of Disabled Individuals Law (PDIL), contracts between public agencies and QRFs need not be based on competitive bids or proposals but, rather, can be entered at prices established by the Oregon Department of Administrative Services.”
Nw. Success, Inc. v. City of Portland (D. Or. 2025).
“§ 279.835(5) (“‘Public agency’ or ‘public contracting agency’ means any agency of the State of Oregon or any political subdivision thereof authorized by law to enter into public contracts and any public body created by intergovernmental agreement.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 279.835(5)(a) — 2 cases
Indep. Contractors Rsch. Inst. v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 139 P.3d 995 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“Petitioners challenge the validity of rules promulgated by the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to implement the Products of Disabled Individuals Act (PDIA), ORS 279.835 to 279.855. In their eight assignments of error, petitioners argue that the fiscal impact…”
BWK, Inc. v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 218 P.3d 156 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“(Garten) was a qualified rehabilitation facility (QRF) under the Products of Disabled Individuals Act (PDIA), ORS 279.835 to 279.855. 1 Petitioner contends that DAS had no authority to conduct a contested case hearing to determine Garten’s qualifications as a QRF and that its…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 279.835(5)(c) — 2 cases
BWK, Inc. v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 218 P.3d 156 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“(Garten) was a qualified rehabilitation facility (QRF) under the Products of Disabled Individuals Act (PDIA), ORS 279.835 to 279.855. 1 Petitioner contends that DAS had no authority to conduct a contested case hearing to determine Garten’s qualifications as a QRF and that its…”
Indep. Contractors Rsch. Inst. v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 139 P.3d 995 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“Petitioners challenge the validity of rules promulgated by the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to implement the Products of Disabled Individuals Act (PDIA), ORS 279.835 to 279.855. In their eight assignments of error, petitioners argue that the fiscal impact…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 279.835(6) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.