Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Contract 26579
CITY, SECRETARY .;,NTPACT NO. o�� S STATE OF TEXAS § KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENTS: COUNTY OF TARRANT § CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES This contract is made by and between the City of Fort Worth, Texas, a municipal corporation situated in Tarrant and Denton Counties, Texas, hereinafter called "City", acting herein by and through Charles Boswell, its duly authorized Assistant City Manager and Transportation Consultants, Inc., acting herein by and through, 4 -f kw 6" LAJ , QUQ NE7j its duly authorized hereinafter called "Consultant". 1. Scope of Services 1.1 Consultant agrees to perform in accordance with the highest professional standards the following professional management consulting services: An evaluation and analysis of the Equipment Services Division of City Services, Phase I, as more specifically described in the City's Request for Proposal 00-0313 dated October 14, 2000 and Consultant's response thereto dated November 16, 2000, collectively attached hereto as Exhibit "A". This contract specifically excludes any work contained in Article 111, Paragraph B of Consultant's response to City's Request for Proposal. 1.2 The parties contemplate that Consultant may be authorized to proceed with Phase 11, Implementation. The parties shall negotiate a scope of work consistent with the requirements Consultant shall not proceed with any Phase Il work without the prior written consent of City, nor shall consultant be entitled to any compensation for Phase Il work without such prior written consent and approval by the City Council 2. Compensation; Payment Schedule 2.1 The maximum fee to be paid to Consultant for all Phase I services performed hereunder shall be Twenty-one Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($21,500.00), iWWNH. PECEOED EERY hereinafter "Consultant's Fee". In addition, City shall reimburse Consultant for the following expenses at invoice cost: air fare, lodging, auto rental, meals, office supplies directly related to the scope of services, parking and long distance telephone calls. Reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00). 2.2 Consultant shall submit its statement for services performed at the conclusion of Phase I services. Payment shall be made within 30 days after receipt and approval of the statement. 2.3 It is understood that this Contract contemplates the provision of full and complete consulting services for this Phase I, including any and all necessary changes or contingencies to complete the work as outlined in Exhibit"A". 3. Term Unless terminated pursuant to paragraph 4 below, this Contract shall be completed on or before 45 calendar days from the date of execution. The time to complete may be extended by agreement of the parties in writing. 4. Termination 4.1 The City may terminate this Contract for its convenience by notice in writing to Consultant. Upon receipt of such notice, Consultant shall immediately discontinue all services and work and the placing of all orders or the entering into contracts for all supplies, assistance, facilities and materials in connection with the performance of this Contract and shall proceed to cancel promptly all existing contracts insofar as they are chargeable to this Contract. If the City terminates this Contract under this Section 4.1, the City shall pay Consultant for services actually performed in accordance herewith prior to such termination, less such payments as have been previously made, in accordance with a final statement submitted by Consultant documenting the performance of such work. 4.2 The City may terminate this agreement for cause in the event Consultant fails to perform in accord with the requirements contained herein. In such event City shall give Consultant written notice of Consultant's failure to perform, giving Consultant seven (7) calendar days to come into compliance with the contract requirements. If Consultant fails to come into compliance with this contract, City slia Offleg Al[CORD in writing and this contract shall be terminated as of the date of such notification. In such event, Consultant shall not be entitled to any additional compensation 4.3 Upon termination of this Contract for any reason, Consultant shall provide the City with copies of all completed or partially completed documents prepared under this contract. 5. Indemnification and Release 5.1 Consultant shall indemnify and hold the City and its officers, agents and employees harmless for any loss, damage, liability or expense for damage to property and injuries, including death, to any person, including but not limited to officers, agents or employees of Consultant or subcontractors, which may arise out of any negligent act, error or omission in the performance of Consultant's professional services. Consultant shall defend at its own expense any suits or other proceedings brought against the City, its officers, agents and employees, or any of them, resulting from such negligent act, error or omission; and shall pay all expenses and satisfy all judgments which may be incurred by or rendered against them or any of them in connection therewith resulting from such negligent act, error or omission. 5.2 In addition to the indemnification requirement above, Consultant releases Fort Worth from any liability for injury or property damage incurred during this contract, unless such injury or property damage was the result of intentional conduct committed by an employee of the City. Consultant shall not permit any employee, officer, and agents of the Consultant or any employees, officers or agents of any subcontractor to perform any activity under this contract without first executing a release containing such provisions. 6. Insurance Consultant shall carry insurance in the following types and amounts for the duration of this agreement, and furnish certificates of insurance along with copies of policy declaration pages and policy endorsements as evidence thereof. 6.1 Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability coverage with limits consistent with statutory benefits outlined in the Texas Workers' Compensation Act (Chapter 401, NNl/�f��0 GOG�� ���uD 011 MVV Rio WrININ, M. Texas Labor Code) and minimum policy limits for Employers Liability of $100,000 bodily injury per accident, $500,000 bodily injury disease policy limit and $100,000 per disease per employee. 6.2 Commercial General Liability with a combined single limit of $250,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage and a minimum annual aggregate of $500,000 for coverage A & B including products/completed operations, where appropriate. 6.3 Business Automobile Liability Insurance for all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles as follows: $500,000 Bodily Injury per person, each accident $1,000,000 Bodily Injury each accident $100,000 Property Damage or $1,000,000 Combined Single Limit 6.4 General Requirements for Insurance 6.4.1 Consultant shall be responsible for deductibles and self-insured retentions, if any, stated in policies. All deductibles or self-insured retentions shall be disclosed on the certificates of insurance required above. 6.4.2 All insurance, other than workers compensation, shall be written on an occurrence basis. 6.4.3 If insurance policies are not written for amounts specified above, Consultant shall carry Umbrella or Excess Liability Insurance for any differences in amounts specified. If Excess Liability Insurance is provided, it shall follow the form of the primary coverage. 6.4.4 Consultant shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has obtained the required insurance and until the Contract Manager has reviewed such insurance. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work until required insurance has been obtained and approved. Approval of insurance by the City shall not relieve or decrease the liability of the Consultant. 6.4.5 Insurance shall be written by companies licensed to do business in the State of Texas at the time the policy is issued and shall be written by companies with a SGB U MUPS PIN rating of A- or better in the current A.M. Best Key Rating Guide or have reasonable equivalent financial strength and solvency. 6.4.6 The City of Fort Worth shall be an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability and Business Automobile Liability policies with a mailing address of Attn.: Purchasing Manager, Purchasing Division, 1000 Throckmorton, Fort Worth, Texas 76102. 6.4.7 Consultant shall produce endorsements to each affected policy to effectuate the following: 6.4.7.1 The City of Fort Worth is named as an additional insured on all policies (except Workers' Compensation) with a mailing address of Attn.: Purchasing Manager, Purchasing Division, 1000 Throckmorton, Fort Worth, Texas 76102. 6.7.4.2 The insurance company is obligated to notify Purchasing Manager, Purchasing Division, 1000 Throckmorton, Fort Worth, Texas 76102, of any non- renewal, cancellations or material changes an any policy at least forty-five (45) days prior to change or cancellation. 6.7.4.3 That the "other" insurance clause shall not apply to the City where the City of Fort Worth is an additional insured shown on the policy. It is intended that policies required in this Agreement, covering both the City and Consultant shall be considered primary coverage as applicable. 6.7.4.4 The City shall be entitled, upon request and without expense, to receive copies of policies and endorsements thereto and may make any reasonable requests for deletion or revision or modification of particular policy terms, conditions, limitations, or exclusions except where policy provisions are established by law or regulations binding upon either of the parties hereto or the underwriter on any such policies. 6.7.4.5 Consultant shall not cause any insurance to be canceled nor permit any insurance to lapse during the term of this Agreement or as required in this Agreement. 6.7.4.6 The City reserves the right to review the insurance requirements of this section during the effective period of the Agreement and to make reasonable ' � u'N'Gj�r, " � adjustments to insurance coverage and their limits when deemed necessary and prudent by the City based upon changes in statutory law, court decision or the claims history of the industry as well as of the Consultant. 6.7.4.7A11 certificates shall include a clause to the effect that the policy shall not be reduced, restricted or limited until thirty (30) days after the City has received written notice. 6.7.4.8 Consultant shall provide owner thirty (30) days written notice of erosion of the aggregate limit below the per occurrence limits outlined above. 6.4.8 Actual losses not covered by insurance as required by this Agreement shall be paid by Consultant 7. Independent Contractor Consultant shall perform all work and services hereunder as an independent contractor and not as an officer, agent or employee of the City. Consultant shall have exclusive control of, and the exclusive right to control, the details of the work performed hereunder and all persons performing same and shall be solely responsible for the acts and omissions of its officers, agents, employees and subcontractors. Nothing herein shall be construed as creating a partnership or joint venture between the City and the Consultant, its officers, agents, employees and subcontractors; and the doctrine of respondeat superior shall have no application as between the City and the Consultant. 8. Disclosure of Conflicts Consultant warrants to the City that it has made full disclosure in writing of any existing or potential conflicts of interest related to the services to be performed hereunder. Consultant further warrants that it will make prompt disclosure in writing of any conflicts of interest that develop subsequent to the signing of this Contract. 9. Right to Audit 9.1 Consultant agrees that the City shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after final payment under this Contract, have access to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers and records of the Consultant involving transactions relating to this Contract. Consultant agrees that the City shall have access during normal working hours to all necessary Consultant facilities and shall be provided adequate and appropriate workspace in order to conduct audits in compliance with the provisions of this section. The City shall give Consultant reasonable advance notice of intended audits. 9.2 Consultant further agrees to include in all its subcontractor agreements hereunder a provision to the effect that the subcontractor agrees that the City shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after final payment under the subcontract, have access to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers and records of such subcontractor involving transactions to the subcontract, and further that City shall have access during normal working hours to all subcontractor facilities and shall be provided adequate and appropriate work space in order to conduct audits in compliance with the provisions of this paragraph. City shall give subcontractor reasonable advance notice of intended audits. 10. Prohibition of Assignment Neither party hereto shall assign, sublet or transfer its interest herein without the prior written consent of the other party, and any attempted assignment, sublease or transfer of all or any part hereof without such prior written consent shall be void. 11. Phase II Services and M/WBE Goals; Nondiscrimination 11.1 This contract is for Phase I services only as more particularly described in Exhibit "A". The parties hereto contemplate that Consultant may be authorized to proceed with Phase II, Implementation. Upon specific city council authorization to proceed with Phase II, Consultant shall comply with the requirements of section 11.2 below. 11.2 In accord with City of Fort Worth Ordinance No. 11923, as amended by City of Fort Worth Ordinance No. 13471, the City has goals for the participation of minority and woman business enterprises in City contracts. Consultant acknowledges the M/WBE goal established for this contract and its commitment to meet that goal. Any misrepresentation of facts (other than a negligent misrepresentation) and/or the commission of fraud by ilio � a 0 JAI f''EC r QD C 0 8Ec o' QIP Consultant may result in the termination of this agreement and debarment from participating in City contracts for a period of time of not less than three (3)years. 11.2 As a condition of this Contract, Consultant covenants that it will take all necessary actions to insure that, in connection with any work under this Contract, Consultant, its associates and subcontractors, will not discriminate in the treatment or employment of any individual or groups of individuals on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex or physical handicap unrelated to job performance, either directly, indirectly or through contractual or other arrangements. 12. Choice of Law; Venue 12.1 This contract shall be construed in accordance with the internal law of the State of Texas. 12.2 Should any action, whether real or asserted, at law or in equity, arise out of the terms of this Contract, venue for said action shall be exclusively in the District Court in Tarrant County, Texas. EXECUTED on this, the Z�tday of February, 2001. ATTEST: CITY OF FORT WORTH By. a- &1UCQ1 K ity Secretq/y Charles Boswell Assistant City Manager MEIS AS 1 O FORM AND LEGALITY: Assistant ity Attorney Transportation Consultants, Inc. - � g By:,ryl w. Z"* contract //Authorization Printed Name: J:iFelt.., 4J. 1F✓"eW Title: fr_. VlZc, M Date uff0rW WORD �, wo"Alfix, EXHIBIT A Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 The City of Fort Worth ("City") is soliciting responses to a Request for Proposal ("RFP") for an evaluation of the Fort Worth Equipment Services Division ("ESD"). Contained herein are the guidelines and instructions for responding to this solicitation. Section I General Provisions 1.0 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL 1.1 One original and fifteen (15) copies of all proposal documents shall be submitted in sealed packages. Proposer's name and address should be marked on the outside of the envelope. To ensure consideration of the proposal, the RFP number and the published opening time and date should also be clearly shown on the lower left corner of the return envelope. Facsimile transmittals or offers communicated by telephone will not be accepted or considered. Proposals that are not submitted in sealed packages will not be considered. 1.2 Mailed proposals shall be sent to: CITY OF FORT WORTH PURCHASING OFFICE ATTN: ROBERT COMBS, PURCHASING MANAGER P.O. BOX 17027 FORT WORTH, TX 76102 1.3 Proposals may also be delivered in person to: CITY OF FORT WORTH PURCHASING OFFICE (Southwest corner of the Lower Level) ATTN: ROBERT COMBS, PURCHASING MANAGER 1000 THROCKMORTON FORT WORTH, TX 76102 2.0 DELIVERY OF PROPOSALS Proposals must be received in the Purchasing Office no later than the time indicated on the coversheet of this solicitation or subsequent addendum. The Proposer is responsible for the means of delivering the proposal documents to the locations listed in 1.2 or 1.3 on time. Delays due to any instrumentality used to transmit the proposal including delay occasioned by the Proposer or the City's internal mailing system will be the responsibility of the Proposer. The proposal must be completed and delivered in sufficient time to avoid disqualification for lateness due to difficulties in delivery. The clock in City of Fort Worth Purchasing Office is the official clock for determining whether proposals are submitted timely. Late proposals will not be accepted under any circumstances. ROOM C� l.; ���-�V 0 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 3.0 PUBLIC OPENING Proposals will be publicly acknowledged at 2:OOPM on the published opening date on November 2, 2000 at: City Council Chambers, 2"`'Floor, 1000 Throckmorton Fort Worth, TX 76102. Proposers, their representatives and interested persons may be present. The proposals shall be received and acknowledged only so as to avoid disclosure of the contents to competing offers and to be kept confidential. After the contract is awarded, all proposals will be open for public inspection, to the extent permitted by law. 4.0 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION 4.1 If a Proposer does not desire proprietary information in the proposal to be disclosed, it is required to identify all proprietary information in the proposal. This identification will be done by individually marking each page with the words "Proprietary Information" on which such proprietary information is found. If the Proposer fails to identify proprietary information, it agrees that by submission of its proposal that those sections shall be deemed non-proprietary and made available upon public request. 4.2 Proposers are advised that the City, to the extent permitted by law, will protect the confidentiality of their proposals. Proposers are advised to consider the implications of the Texas Public Information Act, particularly after the proposal process has ceased and the Contract has been awarded. While there are provisions in the Texas Public Information Act to protect proprietary information, where the Proposer can meet certain evidentiary standards, please be advised that a determination on whether those standards have been met will not be decided by the City of Fort Worth Purchasing Office, but by the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Texas. In the event a request for public information is made, the City will notify the Proposer, who may then request an opinion from the Attorney General pursuant to 552.305, Texas Government Code. The City will not make a request of the Attorney General. 5.0 COMPLETION OF PROPOSAL Proposals shall be completed in accordance with the requirements of this RFP and paragraph 5 of Section III. Statements made by a Proposer shall also be without ambiguity, and with adequate elaboration, where necessary, for clear understanding. I-2 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 6.0 CLARIFICATIONS AND ISSUANCE OF ADDENDA Any explanation, clarification, or interpretation desired by a Proposer regarding any part of this RFP must be requested in writing to the City of Fort Worth Purchasing Office at least seven (7) days prior to the published submission deadline, as referenced on the cover of the RFP or addenda. If the City, in its sole discretion, determines that a clarification is required, such clarification shall be issued in writing. Interpretations, corrections or changes to the RFP made in any other manner other than writing are not binding upon the City, and Proposers shall not rely upon such interpretations, corrections or changes. Oral explanations or instructions given before the award of the Contract are not binding. Requests for explanations or clarifications may be faxed to the City of Fort Worth Purchasing Office at (817) 871-8440. The fax must clearly identify the Request for Proposal Title, Number and the name of the City's Purchasing Manager, Robert Combs. After faxing, Proposers may phone Robert Combs at (817) 871-8357 to ensure receipt. Any interpretations, corrections or changes to this RFP will be made by addendum. Sole issuing authority of addendum shall be vested in the City of Fort Worth Purchasing Office. Addenda will be mailed or faxed only to Proposers who have been approved through the Request for Qualification procedures. Proposers shall acknowledge receipt of all addenda within the response. 7.0 WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSAL A representative of the Proposer may withdraw a Proposer's proposal at any timerip or to the proposal submission deadline, upon presentation of acceptable identification as a representative of such Proposer. 8.0 AWARD OF CONTRACT It is understood that the City reserves the right to accept or reject any and all proposals and to re-solicit for proposals as it shall deem to be in the best interests of the City of Fort Worth. Receipt and consideration of any proposal shall under no circumstances obligate the City of Fort Worth to accept any proposal. If an award of contract is made, it shall be made to the responsible Proposer whose proposal is determined to be the best evaluated offer taking into consideration the relative importance of price and the other evaluation factors set forth in the RFP. Any reference to the word "bid" contained in this RFP shall mean "proposal". I-3 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 9.0 PERIOD OF ACCEPTANCE Proposer acknowledges that by submitting the proposal contained herein, Proposer makes an offer that, if accepted in whole or part by the City, constitutes a valid and binding contract as to any and all items accepted in writing by the City. The period of acceptance of this proposal is ninety (90) calendar days from the date of opening, unless the Proposer notes a different period. 10.0 TAX EXEMPTION The City of Fort Worth is exempt from Federal Excise and State Sale Tax; therefore, tax must not be included in this proposal. 11.0 COST INCURRED IN RESPONDING All costs directly or indirectly related to preparation of a response to the RFP or any oral presentation required to supplement and/or clarify a proposal which may be required by the City shall be the sole responsibility of and shall be borne by Proposer(s). 12.0 NEGOTIATIONS The City reserves the right to negotiate all elements that comprise the successful Proposer's proposal to ensure that the best possible consideration be afforded to all concerned. 13.0 CONTRACT INCORPORATION The contract documents shall include the RFP, the Response to the RFP and such other terms and conditions as the parties may agree. Attachment A of this RFP is an example of the type of contract and subsequent language that will be used for this study. 14.0 NON- ENDORSEMENT If a proposal is accepted, the successful Proposer shall not issue any news releases or other statements pertaining to the award or servicing of the agreement that state or imply the City of Fort Worth's endorsement of the successful Proposer's services. 15.0 PROPOSAL PRESENTATION In addition to their written submission, all Proposers will be required to make a formal presentation to an evaluation committee at the Proposer's expense prior to a selection being made. The City will contact each Proposer to arrange a presentation date, time and location after the RFP submittal deadline has been reached. I-4 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 Section 11 Standard Terms and Conditions These standard terms and conditions and any special terms and conditions become part of any contract entered into if any or all parts of the Proposal are accepted by the City of Fort Worth. 1.0 ASSIGNMENT The successful Proposer may not assign its rights or duties under an award without the prior written consent of the City of Fort Worth. Such consent shall not relieve the assignor of liability in the event of default by its assignee. 2.0 ERRORS OR OMISSIONS The Proposer will not be allowed to take advantage of any errors or omissions in this RFP. Where errors or omissions appear in this RFP, the Proposer shall promptly notify the City of Fort Worth Purchasing Office in writing of such error or omission it discovers. Any significant errors, omissions or inconsistencies in this RFP are to be re- ported no later than seven (7) days before time for the Proposal response is to be submit- ted. 3.0 INDEMNITY AND RELEASE 3.1 Successful Proposer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Fort Worth and all its officers, agents and employees from all suits, actions, or other claims of any character, name and description brought for or on account of any injuries or damages received or sustained by any person, persons or property due to any negligent act or fault of the successful Proposer, or of any agency, employee, subcontractor or supplier under the successful Proposer in the execu- tion of, or performance under, any contract awarded. Successful Proposer indemnifies and will indemnify and hold harmless the City of Fort Worth from liability, claim or demand on their part, agents, servants, customers and/or employees whether such liability, claim or demand arise from event or casualty happening or within the occupied premises themselves or happening upon or in the halls, elevators, entrances, stairways or approaches of or the facilities within which the occupied premises are located. Successful Proposer shall pay any judgment with costs that may be obtained against the City of Fort Worth growing out of such injury or damages. 3.2 In addition to the indemnification requirement above, successful Proposer shall execute a statement releasing Fort Worth from any liability for injury or property damage incurred during this contract, unless such injury or property damage was the result of intentional conduct committed by an employee of the City. Further, all employees, officers, and agents of the successful Proposer or any subcontractor shall be required to execute the release prior to entering into performance of any work associated with the contract to be awarded hereunder. 1I-1 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 4.0 TERMINATION If this award results in a contract, it shall remain in effect until contract expires, delivery and acceptance of products and/or performance of services ordered or terminated by the City with a thirty (30) day written notice prior to cancellation. In the event of termination, the City of Fort Worth reserves the right to award a contract to next lowest and best Proposer as it deems to be in the best interest of the City of Fort. Further, the City of Fort Worth may cancel this contract without expense to the City in the event that funds have not been appropriated for expenditures under this contract. The City of Fort Worth will return any delivered but unpaid goods in normal condition to the Proposer. 5.0 TERMINATION, REMEDIES,AND CANCELLATION Right to Assurance. Whenever the City has reason to question the successful Proposer's intent to perform, the City may demand that the successful Proposer give written assurance of successful Proposer's intent to perform. In the event a demand is made, and no assurance is given within ten calendar days, the City may treat this failure as an anticipatory repudiation of the contract. The City may terminate this agreement if the successful Proposer fails to cure a material breach which substantially impairs the value of the contract as a whole within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of written notice being given by the other party. If more than thirty (30) calendar days are required to cure such default or breach, a reasonable time in excess of said days may be established, provided both parties agree in writing as to the time period to be substituted. In the event such default or breach is not cured within a specified time, the City may terminate this agreement upon thirty (30) calendar days written notification. The City may also cancel this agreement for convenience upon thirty (30) calendar days written notice to the successful Proposer. Effective date of such notice shall begin three (3) days after date of posting with the United States Postal Service with said notice being sent to last known address of successful Proposer. 6.0 CHANGE ORDERS No oral statement of any person shall modify or otherwise change or affect the terms, conditions or specifications stated in the resulting contract. All change orders to the con- tract will be made in writing by the City of Fort Worth Purchasing Office and approved by City Council. 7.0 VENUE This agreement will be governed and construed according to the laws of the State of Texas. This agreement is performable in Tarrant County, Texas. Venue shall lie exclusively in Tarrant County, Texas. II-2 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 8.0 CONFLICT OF INTEREST No public official shall have interest in this contract, in accordance with Vernon's Texas Codes Annotated, Local Government Code Title 5, Subtitled C., Chapter 171. 9.0 INSURANCE Successful Proposer must carry insurance in the following types and amounts for the duration of this agreement, and furnish certificates of insurance along with copies of policy declaration pages and policy endorsements as evidence thereof. 9.1 Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability coverage with limits consistent with statutory benefits outlined in the Texas Workers' Compensation Act (Art. 8308-1.01 et seq. Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat.) and minimum policy limits for Employers Liability of$100,000 bodily injury per accident, $500,000 bodily injury disease policy limit and $100,000 per disease per employee. 9.2 Commercial General Liability with a combined single limit of $250,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage and a minimum annual aggregate of $500,000 for coverage A & B including products/completed operations, where appropriate. 9.3 Business Automobile Liability Insurance for all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles as follows: $500,000 Bodily Injury per person, each accident $1,000,000 Bodily Injury each accident $100,000 Property Damage or $1,000,000 Combined Single Limit 9.4 General Requirements • Successful Proposer shall be responsible for deductibles and self-insured retentions, if any, stated in policies. All deductibles or self- insured retentions shall be disclosed on the certificates of insurance required above. • If coverage is underwritten on a claims made basis, the retroactive date shall be coincident with or prior to the date of this Agreement and the certificate of insurance shall state that the coverage is claims made and the retroactive date. The successful Proposer shall maintain coverage for the duration of this Agreement and for five (5) years following completion of the services under this Agreement or for the warranty period whichever is longer. The successful Proposer shall provide the City annually with a certificate of insurance as evidence of such insurance. 11-3 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 • If insurance policies are not written for amounts specified above, the successful Proposer shall carry Umbrella or Excess Liability Insurance for any differences in amounts specified. If Excess Liability Insurance is provided, it shall follow the form of the primary coverage. • Successful Proposer shall not commence work under this Agreement until he/she has obtained the required insurance and until such insurance has been reviewed by the Contract Manager. Successful Proposer shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work until required insurance has been obtained and approved. Approval of insurance by the City shall not relieve or decrease the liability of the successful Proposer hereunder. • Insurance shall be written by companies licensed to do business in the State of Texas at the time the policy is issued and shall be written by companies with a rating of A- or better in the current A.M. Best Key Rating Guide or have reasonable equivalent financial strength and solvency. • The City of Fort Worth shall be named as an additional insured as their interests may appear on the Commercial General Liability, and Business Automobile Liability. • Successful Proposer shall produce endorsements to each affected policy; L Naming the City of Fort Worth, Attn.: Purchasing Manager, Purchasing Division, 1000 Throckmorton, Fort Worth, Texas 76102 as additional insured (except Workers' Compensation). A That obligates the insurance company to notify Purchasing Manager, Purchasing Division, 1000 Throckmorton, Fort Worth, Texas 76102, of any non-renewal, cancellations or material changes at least forty- five (45) days prior to change or cancellation. i That the "other" insurance clause shall not apply to the City where the City of Fort Worth is an additional insured shown on the policy. It is intended that policies required in this Agreement, covering both the City and the successful Proposer shall be considered primary coverage as applicable. • The City shall be entitled, upon request and without expense, to receive copies of policies and endorsements thereto and may make any reasonable requests for deletion or revision or modification of particular policy terms, conditions, limitations, or exclusions except where policy provisions are established by lav or regulations binding upon either of the parties hereto or the underwriter on any such policies. • The successful Proposer shall not cause any insurance to be canceled nor permit any insurance to lapse during the term of this Agreement or as required in this Agreement. II-4 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 • The City reserves the right to review the insurance requirements of this section during the effective period of the Agreement and to make reasonable adjustments to insurance coverage and their limits when deemed necessary and prudent by the City based upon changes in statutory law, court decision or the claims history of the industry as well as the successful Proposer. • All certificates shall include a clause to the effect that the policy shall not be reduced, restricted or limited until thirty (30) days after the City has received written notice. • Successful Proposer shall provide owner thirty (30) days written notice of erosion of the aggregate limit below the per occurrence limits outlined above. • Actual losses not covered by insurance as required by this Agreement shall be paid by the successful Proposer. 10.0 WAIVER OF SUBROGATION The contract to be executed will require that successful Proposer and City waive all rights against each other and any of their contractors, subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, agents and employees, each of the other, for damages arising out of this contract to the extent covered by insurance obtained pursuant to this paragraph. The policies shall provide such waivers of subrogation by endorsement or otherwise. A waiver of subrogation shall be effective as to a person or entity even though that person or entity would otherwise have a duty of indemnification, contractual or otherwise, did not pay the insurance premium directly or indirectly, and whether or not the person or entity had an insurable interest in the property damaged. II-5 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 Section III Analysis of the Equipment Services Division Scope of Work and Special Contract Provisions 1. 0 BACKGROUND In past years, several attempts have been made to improve the quality of service provided by The City of Forth Worth's Equipment Services Division. In 1992 The City of Fort Worth explored the opportunities of outsourcing the activities rendered by the Equipment Services Division. A request for information was issued to solicit information about how companies would approach contracting to provide services. The RFI was sent to ten national and 23 local companies. Three national companies responded to the request for information. The information was studied in detail and compared to actual operating expenses. It was determined that the total costs of contracting would actually increase fleet maintenance and management expenses. Therefore, all further actions geared toward outsourcing were halted. In 1994 an independent consulting firm initiated a study focused primarily on the utilization and maintenance of the Police Department's fleet of patrol vehicles. This was a two-phase project with the objective of enhancing vehicle maintenance schedules, procedures and policies to reduce downtime and costs, establishing appropriate levels of service, staffing, and capacity. It also addressed issues surrounding the interface between the Police Department and Equipment Services Division to eliminate redundancies and properly align functional responsibilities. Almost five years ago, a project similar to the current proposal was initiated. Proposals were sent out soliciting study recommendations and implementation plans to improve maintenance and management of the City's fleet. It was determined that the timing was not right, and the project was abandoned. The time is now right. However, the proposed 2000 Equipment Services Division project requires a much more comprehensive approach than previous attempts. It is expected that this comprehensive, objective look at operations will provide information needed by the City to ensure the most effective means of service delivery. On June 20, 2000 a presentation of a proposed project outline and timeline for the Equipment Services Division was given to the City Council. Council gave direction to proceed with the process of securing an external consultant to carry out the study. The Request for Qualifications was issued on July 26, 2000. This RFQ, in conjunction with this RFP, will enable the City of Fort Worth to determine the most appropriate consultant match for this endeavor. III-1 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 2.0 INTRODUCTION The City requests proposals for an analysis of the Equipment Services Division of the City Services Department. The Division operates on an adopted 1999-2000 total budget of$11.3 million dollars. In part, these monies employ 148 authorized positions. The division is organized into administration, technical services, and equipment materials sections. Equipment Services is responsible for the repair and maintenance of a mixed fleet of approximately 3,300 vehicles. The division operates five service centers, a tire shop, and a satellite facility. Equipment Services receives funding by charging user departments for parts, fuels, and services. The City of Fort Worth requires the consultant, in collaboration with two designated, full-time City Staff to undertake a comprehensive review of all aspects of the Equipment Services Division to include, but not be limited to: • Workflow and procedures • Quality control and preventive maintenance programs • Staffing levels • Information systems (paper and automated) • Vehicle replacement methodologies • Benchmarking current efforts against similar sized municipal fleet management practices • Identification of activities for out-tasking and/or out-sourcing • Evaluation of existing out-tasking activities • Parts inventory and/or consolidation of service centers • Evaluation & identification of a mechanism to track vehicle utilization (miles, hours, etc.) • Relocation and/or consolidation of service centers 3.0 OBJECTIVE & OTHER CONSIDERATIONS The overall objective of this project is to conduct a comprehensive study of the present operations within the Equipment Services Division and to develop recommendations and implementation plans to improve the overall quality of services provided. Each recommendation shall include an analysis of projected costs, savings, and benefits. Prior to the development of an implementation plan, the City reserves the right to prioritize and select recommendations at their discretion. Implementation plans shall include projected timelines with additional detail in regard to the projected costs, savings, and benefits. The City will assign two hilly qualified City employees, who have participated in similar studies within the City, for the full extent of the project. Proposals should consider this factor when determining the project's staffing requirements and the ultimate proposal bid. III-2 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 4.0 SCOPE OF WORK The proposals submitted to the City of Fort Worth shall address two basic components of the comprehensive study of Equipment Services: • The Analysis: A two week analysis of the entire Equipment Services Division that will determine the primary focus areas to be addressed during the implementation • The Implementation: A description of the consultant's technique and approach to generating results from information obtained during the detailed, two week analysis period Proposals addressing the initial component, the Analysis, shall include a detailed description of how the two-week study will be approached and how it will be staffed & organized. The analysis will include all sections of the Equipment Services Division. The proposal shall include a flat fee for this service. The implementation component, for the purpose of this proposal, shall focus on the consultant's technique and approach to generating results from analytical findings. The selected firm will be afforded the opportunity to present specifics upon conclusion of the two-week analysis. Additional proposal requirements for these components are included in paragraph 5.0 of this section. 4.1 Title of the Program Analysis of the Equipment Services Division of the City Services Department 4.2 Materials and Services to be provided by the City: The City will: 4.2.1 Provide staff to assist in the study. This includes assignment of two fully qualified City employees that have participated in similar studies within the City for the full extent of the project. 4.2.2 Provide any available supporting data or reports that may aid in the development of work performance measurements/standards, flow charts, and other desired outcomes of the study. 4.2.3 Provide guidance in the development of all desired outcomes outlined in the Scope of Work. 4.2.4 Prioritize the recommendations of the consultant prior to development of implementation plans. III-3 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 4.3 Services to be provided by the Proposer: During the Analysis Phase the Proposer will be required to: 4.3.1 Develop and compile all necessary information required to meet desired outcomes shown in the Scope of Work. 4.3.2 Provide a written statistical analysis of all data including tables and graphics to support analyses where appropriate. 4.3.3 Collect, review and evaluate all data pertaining to the project. 4.3.4 Meet with a designated City oversight committee at the conclusion of the two-week analysis to present findings and prioritize focus areas for the implementation phase of the project. 4.3.5 Upon completion of the Analysis phase, the selected firm shall prepare a formal proposal detailing the specifics of how the Implementation phase will be approached, including staffing requirements and a detailed timeline indicating key activities and projected milestones. Additionally, estimations of costs vs. savings and benefits to the City shall be included. During the Implementation Phase the Proposer will be required to: 4.3.6 Prepare a detailed timeline to determine the approximate number of working days required for completion of the project. 4.3.7 Meet with a designated City oversight committee on a bi-weekly basis to report accomplishments and forecast upcoming project events. On a monthly basis, these presentations will require a typewritten report and a saving/benefits schedule based on a measurement that will be mutually agreed to by the selected firm and the oversight committee. 4.3.8 Prepare a final written report, including graphics, which will include, but not be limited to • A listing of all information gathered • Improvement opportunities identified • Accomplishments achieved • An outline of the proposed actions still needing to be addressed • An executive summary of this report, and • Twenty-five (25) copies of this report and the executive summary. This report shall also be provided on disk using Microsoft Office 97 software. III-4 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 5.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT Prefacing the Proposal, the Proposer shall provide an Executive Summary of three (3) pages or less, which gives in brief, concise terms, a summation of the Proposal. The Executive Summary shall include a brief statement of intent to perform the services, qualifications for selection, and signature of an authorized officer of the firm who has legal authority in such transactions. Unsigned proposals will be rejected. In addition, the Proposer's Executive Summary shall expressly state that, should the enclosed proposal be accepted, the Proposer agrees to enter into a contract under the terms and conditions as prescribed by this Request for Proposal. Any and all exceptions to the RFP must be listed on an item-by-item basis and cross-referenced within the Executive Summary. If there are no exceptions, the Proposer must expressly state that no exceptions are taken. The proposal itself shall be organized in the following format and informational sequence: 5.1 Part 1- Organization State the full name and address of your organization and identify the parent company if you are a subsidiary. Specify the branch office or other subordinate element that will perform, or assist in performing, work herein. Indicate whether you operate as a partnership, corporation or individual. Include the state in which you are incorporated or licensed to operate. 5.2 Part II- System Concept and Solution Define in detail your understanding of the problem presented in Paragraph 4.0, Scope of Work, and your system solution. Provide all details as required in Paragraph 4.0, Scope of Work, in addition to those facts you deem necessary to evaluate your proposal. III-5 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 5.3 Part III- Program Describe your technical plan for accomplishing the required work. Include such time-related displays, graphs, and charts as necessary to show tasks, sub-tasks, milestones, and decision points related to the Scope of Work and your plan for accomplishment. For the Analysis component, specifically indicate: 5.3.1 The description of the analysis process including tasks & projected staffing requirements and assignments. 5.3.2 The technical factors that will be considered and the depth to which each will be treated. 5.3.3 The degree of definition provided in each technical element of your plan. 5.3.4 The flat fee to be charged for the two-week analysis. For the Implementation component, specifically indicate: 5.3.5 The methodology you would employ to link the analysis discovery to the implementation phase. 5.3.6 The techniques and approach you would take to generate results during the implementation phase 5.3.7 The manner in which you would charge for services rendered during this phase, and an estimation of those costs (Detail on this subject will be discussed and considered separately from this proposal upon completion of the analysis phase by the selected firm) 5.4 Part IV-Project Management Structure Provide a general explanation and chart which specifies project leadership and reporting responsibilities; and interface the team with City project management and team personnel. If use of subcontractors is proposed, identify their placement in the primary management structure and provide an internal management description for each subcontractor. 5.5 Part V-Prior Experience Describe only relevant corporate experience and individual experience for personnel who will be actively engaged in the project. Do not include corporate experience unless personnel assigned to this project actively participated. III-6 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 5.6 Part VI- Personnel Include the names and qualifications of all professional personnel who will be assigned to this project. Identify any change in personnel from the original Request for Qualification (RFQ) submittal. State the primary work assigned to each person and the percentage of time each person will devote to this work. Identify key persons by name and title. Only submit resumes of staff not shown in the original RFQ. 5.7 Part VII-Authorized Negotiator Include the name, address, and telephone number of the person in your organization authorized to negotiate contract terms and render binding decisions on contractual matters. 5.8 MinorityAVomen Business Enterprise (M/WBE) Participation It is the policy of the City of Fort Worth, via Ordinance#13471 to ensure full and equitable participation by Minority and Women Business Enterprise(M/WBE) firms, in the procurement of professional services. All proposers will be required to submit information concerning the M/WBE(s) that will participate in the contract to meet the 20% goal. The information shall include: (1) the name, address and telephone number of each M/WBE; (2) the description of the work to be performed by each M/WBE; and(3) the approximate dollar amount/percentage of the participation. Professional service contracts in excess of S25,000 will not be executed by the City unless M/WBE participation has been achieved or a "Good Faith Effort"has been documented. The M/WBE(s) must be located or doing business in the City's geographic market area and must be currentl certified or in the process of being certified by the North Central Texas Regional Certification Agency (NCTRCA) or the Texas Department of Transportation, Highway Division (TxDOT). For information and/or clarification of M/WBE requirements only, proposers may contact Sandra Davis, the City's M/WBE Coordinator, at(817) 871-6104. M/WBE participation or "Good Faith Effort" documentation will be part of the evaluation criteria for this proposal. Failure to comply with Ordinance #13471 will result in a loss of points or a lower evaluation as applicable. III-7 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 6.0 COMPETITIVE SELECTION This procurement will comply with applicable City of Fort Worth Policy. The City, on a rational basis, will select the successful Proposer. Evaluation factors outlined in Paragraph 7.0 below shall be applied to all eligible, responsive Proposers in comparing proposals and selecting the successful Proposer. Award of the Contract may be made without discussion with Proposers after proposals are received. Proposals should, therefore,be submitted on the most favorable terms. 7.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION FACTORS The evaluation criteria will have the following assigned point values. The criteria shall have a maximum total value of 130 points in accordance with the following ranking: 7.1 System Concept and Solutions Proposed - Maximum of 40 points Grasp of problem and its solution(s), creativity and appropriateness of solutions, responsiveness to the Scope of Work requirements. 7.2 Demonstrated Applicable Experience - Maximum of 30 points 7.3 Personnel Qualifications - Maximum of 23 points 7.4 Total Evaluated Cost— Maximum of 20 points 7.5 M/WBE Participation - Maximum of 10 points 7.6 Schedule - Maximum of 7 points 8.0 CONTRACT PAYMENT RETAINAGE-COMPLIANCE STATEMENT 8.1 The Contract shall be prepared under the direction of the City and shall incorporate all applicable provisions. A firm fixed-price or not-to-exceed contract is contemplated with progress payments as mutually determined to be appropriate. These payments shall be based upon milestones completed as proposed by the successful Proposer. 8.2 Ten percent (10%) of the total contractual price will be retained until submission and acceptance by the City of the final work products for the contract period. The City will retain ten percent (10%) from the amount payable from each invoice to accomplish this. 8.3 Successful Proposer shall state his compliance with all-applicable rules and regulations of Federal, State and Local governing entities. Successful Proposer must state his compliance with terms of this RFP. 8.4 The City shall be the sole and final determinant of points awarded in the evaluation Process. III-8 Equipment Services Division Analysis RFP 00-0313 9.0 CONTRACT ALP.:INISTRATOR Paul Sweitzer is designated as Contract Administrator for this RFP. Proposers having questions pertaining specifically to Section III of this RFP may contact Mr. Sweitzer at: Paul Sweitzer City Manager's Office City of Fort Worth, Texas 1000 Throckmorton Fort Worth,TX 76102 Office: (817) 871-8507 Fax: (817) 871-6134 Proposers having any other questions concerning this RFP should contact Tom Davis at: Tom Davis City Services City of Fort Worth, Texas 1000 Throckmorton Fort Worth, TX 76102 E-mail: DavisT@ci.fort-worth.tx.us Fax: (817) 871-6304 III-9 City of FORTWORTH Response For Fleet Competitive Assessment November 16, 2000 presented by: Stephen W. Burnett Senior Vice President Transportation Consultants, Inc. 7000 Peachtree Dunwoody Road Building 10, Suite 200 Atlanta, Georgia 30328 (404) 250-0100 City of Fort Worth TABLE OF CONTENTS Part Page I. Organization ..................................................................................................... 5 II. System Concept and Solution .......................................................................... 6 IIIProgram ............................................................................................................ 7 IV Project Management Structure ....................................................................... 15 VPrior Experience ............................................................................................. 17 VIPersonnel ........................................................................................................ 20 VII Authorized Negotiator ................................................................................... 40 Attachment: Required Submittals Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 4 City of Fort Worth I. ORGANIZATION Transportation Consultants, Inc. is a consulting firm specializing in the areas of transportation, distribution, information systems, and logistics management. We assist our clients both domestically and internationally, in saving substantial sums on their fleet operations, distribution networks, warehousing, and routing delivery systems. TCI provides both long and short term solutions to our client's toughest logistical challenges and then manages these changes. Furthermore, we integrate the areas of finance, human resources, and management information systems with the distribution process. We advise our clients on cost saving strategies and then assist in the implementation of the programs that we recommend. Results follow immediately. Since our inception in Atlanta, Georgia in 1981 (we are incorporated in Georgia), we have realized that even the largest entities seldom have a full time staff with expertise in all aspects of distribution and transportation. Our mission is to fill this void for our clients by examining each and every aspect of the transportation process. From purchasing to maintenance to distribution to finance, every element of the process is scrutinized, then polished while we remain diligently cognizant of our client's existing operational and servicing requirements. The firm has rapidly grown to a position of national prominence in the field of logistics management consulting. Presently, we maintain field offices in New York, Philadelphia, Columbus, OH, Los Angeles and Portland. Each is staffed with seasoned professionals ready to serve organizations such as Fort Worth. Our Atlanta office located at 8302 Dunwoody Place, Suite 352, Atlanta, GA 30350 will be the performing office. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 5 City of Fort Worth II. SYSTEM CONCEPT AND SOLUTION The City of Fort Worth has a significant stake in fleet operations as evidenced by a large budget and a large complement of vehicles (3,300 currently). Vehicles are maintained at five service centers with a staff of 148 currently. Costs are recovered through an internal service fund concept of chargebacks. With such an investment, the City is procuring an outside assessment to not only focus on improving operations, but on specific issues such as best practices, service improvement, cost reduction and vehicle replacement issues. A competitive assessment of the operation is the overriding objective of this engagement. Accordingly, the City has requested this proposal from TCI. Several questions need to be answered in this competitive assessment: • Are we (Fort Worth) getting good value for our maintenance dollar? • How do we stack up against similarly sized cities in terms of cost per unit? Performance measures? Staffing ratios?Best practices? • How, precisely, can the quality of services be improved? • How do our costs and performance measures compare to those entities with completely privatized fleet services? • Are we assigning the correct mix of work to outside vendors on a rational basis? Should more or less of the functions be outsourced? • What measures can we institute to be more competitive? More value-driven? • Is our replacement program on solid ground? • What are the merits and use of centralized fleet management practices versus our current five service centers concept? • How can our processes be improved? Customer Service? Information? • In summary, what can we do to convince taxpayers and elected officials that fleet support is the "best that it can be"? Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 6 City of Fort Worth We will fully address the major tasks outlined in the City's RFP. These include: 1. Completing a comprehensive two-week analysis of ESD and presenting to the Oversight Committee prioritized improvement opportunities. 2. Working through an implementation phase refining certain improvement opportunities and implementing others. A final report will document results achieved and those yet to be addressed. The twelve (12) detailed work steps outlined below in Part III will document the tasks in the Analysis Phase. III. PROGRAM A. ANALYSIS PHASE Detailed Work Steps Follow: RESEARCH/DATA COLLECTION The two-week analysis phase of work is directed toward starting the project efficiently and effectively, finalizing and detailing the plan of work, and defining the current operations and accompanying strengths and weaknesses in the vehicle maintenance area. The various tasks will include data review, initial interviews with managers and users, observation and other activities designed to document existing programs and highlight possible immediate enhancements. STEP I —Project Start-Up We will plan a meeting early in the project to enable the consultants to: • Refine and review project objectives, scope, task schedules and the like. • Allow all stakeholders to offer insights and guidance to the consultants at project initiation. • Re-review other project "ground rules" and logistics. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 7 City of Fort Worth STEP 2— Operations Review/Observations During the first two days of the engagement, the fleet management team will initiate reviews of operations to familiarize themselves with current operations. Areas to be included will be: • Shop and departmental organization. • Shop procedures and work order control. • Repair and maintenance operations. • Staffing/Resource allocation. • Historical performance. STEP 3—Documentation of Users Viewpoint We will spend part of our time in Step 3 surveying principal users of the fleet operation in order to gauge the level and adequacy of"customer service". Typically, we are able to identify symptoms or problematic situations during this process. We will gauge the level Of user responsibility at this point as well. This step will be particularly important as we establish a base level of comparison for future organizational and maintenance alternatives. STEP 4—Data Collection After the initial reviews of actual operations, and following initial user feedback, our consultants will begin to assess the level and responsiveness of equipment operations. In large part, we will depend on the existing work order system and vehicle records and interviews to provide any data needs at this stage. When we review the operations of the fleet, we will consider: • Turnaround time. • Backlog ✓ By class of repair (per APWA standards). ✓ By major vehicle class. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 8 City of Fort Worth • Re-work or comeback level. • Compliance with the PM schedule and relationships of scheduled to unscheduled repairs. • Downtime of fleet. • Equipment utilization/fleet sizing/take home issues. • Productivity rates/employee utilization. • Cost per unit comparisons • Equipment trends as to fleet size and class composition. • Parts level and usage. • Internal Control issues. • Asset profiles (age, use, mileage). We will be able to determine the "appropriateness" of the quality and quantity of vehicle repair services. We will also review the following finance-related issues: • Vehicle rental rates (and structure) • Fund Management • Fund flow schematics • Dollar trends in budget • Unit costs in various categories for comparison against comparable in house and outsourced operations. (area of emphasis) • Use of blanket P.O.'s and the purchasing parameters. STEP S—Assessment of Management Processes During this step, TCI fleet management consultants will briefly review the variozrs fleet management processes and practices in use. Included here, will be a review of • Accident Management • Current policies in place to prolong vehicle life, to include a review of the current Preventive Maintenance Program, including the program definition, the level of operator abuse of vehicles, and how this is prevented and/or curtailed. • Personnel and training practices. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 9 City of Fort Worth • The "make or buy" decision process on the contracting out of services; we will look at the current and historical ratio of the type of services contracted out as opposed to those performed in-house. • The purchasing process (assets, parts, vendor services) • Opportunities to "streamline" administration and to facilitate the decision making required of management. • Replacement policy and practice will be reviewed to ascertain its timeliness, methodology completeness, and conformance with industry guidelines. STEP 6—Resource Assessment (staffing) tiVe will compile the authorised,filled and vacant position as of the payroll date closest to our start. We will pay specific attention to the mechanic positions to test: • Assignment patterns (which mechanics are assigned to which repair activities). • Current vehicle to mechanic ratios. (both traditional and contemporary methods) • The number of mechanics required to staff on-going operations. • Degree of training accorded to incumbents. • Supervisory levels. • Any outsourcing arrangements. TCI consultants will use this and other data to assess the adequacy of current staffing and training programs, any incentives and the resource allocation process. We will pay particular attention to mechanic staffing patterns,job assignments, minimum qualifications and tie-ins to ASE certifications. STEP 7—Facility and Equipment As a part of our assignment, TCI consultants will briefly review fixed and moveable assets—building and equipment—employed in the repair process. The existing facilities (5 service centers) will be reviewed to idents: • Work-space layout to improve efficiency and safety. • Adequacy of size and design, given historical and projected fleet size trends. • The degree to which layout, equipment and tools aid or hinder the repair process. • Possible relocation/consolidation opportunities. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 10 City of Fort Worth STEP 8—Fleet Financing/Fleet Information The TCI team will briefly review the current financial and information frameworks within ESD to assess: • Efficacy of chargeback methodology and rental rates in an Internal Service Fund. • Adequacy of the replacement funding process and the ways to finance fleet purchases. • Flow of payment processes and funds management. • The rationale behind the organizational structure and application of indirect cost allocation methods, including opportunities for improvement. • Overall utilization and assessment of the fleet information system. • Recommended methodology for a revised chargeback calculation to include a program that recognizes City objectives, customer desires and generally accepted cost accounting practices. STEP 9—Parts Operation At this point, the TCI fleet management team will briefly assess the store's situation. Depending on data availability during this step, we brill review: • The adequacy of the stockage mix and level (items, dollars and line items). • Physical layout alternatives. • The overall balance between parts retrieved from stock as opposed to those purchased through blanket purchase orders "on the street". • The frequency of stock-out situations. • Fueling procedures and the related option to upgrade fuel control, dispensing and billing. • The range of obsolete parts existing in the parts inventory. • Observations on other related warehouse stockage, staffing, and procurement procedures. • Vendor procedures and inventory turns. • Alternative policies and practices that could better support the repair operation, including centralization versus decentralization of parts at the five service centers �. 1 This matches an assignment Mr. Burnett completed for the City of Dallas. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 11 City of Fort Worth STEP 10—Alaintenance Management TVe will conduct areview of shop operations in this task. Issues to be addressed here include: Costing—Using available data, we will review the cost of operations for various fleet service functions to arrive at an estimated unit cost for each. Service Delivery—Tied into user feedback in Step 3 as well as an analysis of the work flow and procedures. Work Order/Shop Control—In this area, we will address the degree of tightness with which work is assigned and controlled within the shop. This includes a review of current quality assurance procedures and the adequacy of record keeping methods in place, including automation. Quality control will be addressed here as well. Repair Order Procedures —By examining the methods of data capture, we will be able to determine the effectiveness of the current system. First, we will review how the repair order enters the information system. Next, we will evaluate how the mechanic receives his or her instructions, whether verbally or in writing. This will include the type of vehicle repair history provided to the mechanic at the time of repair. We will be able to gauge the "smoothness" of this process. Customers will be surveyed as well. Consolidation —Feasibility of consolidatinu any decentralized operations. Centralization issues outlined in the RFP will be reviewed in this step. Preventive Maintenance— We will examine current procedures and checklists and document opportunities for improvement, to include completeness, timeliness, conformity, and compliance measurements with schedules. Shop Scheduling—A fair and equitable priority system is necessary in order to keep user departments satisfied. If a priority system has been established, we will examine its structure and use, and determine how the backlog is managed and controlled. Fleet Utilization— We will sample, data permitting, the usage and absolute size of the fleet to include any usage of motor pools. We will apply industry standards for minimum usage for miles and/or hours. Privatization —An enumeration of turnkey opportunities and projected impact on operations. Current outsourcing activities will be evaluated here. Again, TCI consultants will evaluate operations against other best practice situations. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 12 Citta of Fort {Vorth STEP 11 —Benchmarking/Competitive Assessment (area of emphasis) 6Ve will review current and possible fitture benchmarking possibilities by compiling/sampling internal measures such as: • Downtime • Turnaround Time • Reworks • Key Ratios • Staffing Norms • Other, including thoughput, unit costs, billing rates, etc. It is here that we will begin the process of comparing Fort Worth's production and unit cost achievement against other, comparable operations. (Note: some tasks here must be deferred until the implementation phase.) TCI has worked with a number of clients on competitive assessments and benchmarking in many assignments. We have taken the most meaningful and measurable productivity indicators and compared them against suitable benchmark partners elsewhere. We will also investigate the possibility in STEP 11 of tying the City into a database for ongoing comparability (in Phase II—Implementation). RECOMMENDATIONS STEP 12—Formalization of Findings and Recommendations The Fleet Management Team will conclude our two-week work effort and formalize the findings, recommendations and study steps in a presentation report in order to detail the steps necessary to transform the operation into a competitive quality-oriented entity. These will be prioritized for the Oversight Committee. Typically, we outline the following in the body of the presentation and handout: • Current support program and identified enhancement. • Data analysis support schedules. • Nature of recommendations. • Whether the recommendation is short or long term in nature. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 13 s City of Fort Worth • The steps or action required to implement the change. • The expected benefits that could result from further study or implementation of the recommended change. • Innovative steps to propel the organization to the next level. Note: At the conclusion of our on site work,we will plan to present an oral briefing to City officials on our findings and recommendations. A formal proposal for Phase II tasks will follow shortly. PROFESSIONAL FEES (Phase I) Our fees are based on time actually spent on the assignment, billed at standard TCI professional rates. Approximately 200 hours are budgeted for Phase I. Expenses are billed at cost. Therefore,fees would be as follows: x Category t x fTota156� } � 3t" c . Fees (Analysis Phase) $21,500 Expenses 1 (approximately 15%) 3,000 Total (Not to Exceed) $24,500 We will plan to bill at engagement conclusion (two weeks). Hourly rates of selected consultants are as follows: Mr. Burnett $125/hour Mr. Psalmond SI101hour Other Staff S901hour 1 Air, lodging, auto rental, meals, office supplies,parking, telephone Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 14 City of Fort Worth B. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE Transportation Consultants, Inc. will build on the work in Phase I by working through a prioritized list of improvement opportunities that we would have reviewed with the Oversight Committee. In some tasks (customer service or staffing, for example) we may have to complete more analysis, but other tasks may have been sufficiently researched to enable us to: • Meet with affected officials. • Develop a detailed task listing and timeline. • Develop success criteria to measure implementation results. • Document new or revised procedures. Our charges (and expenses) are based on hours applied to the assignment at standard rates. These were delineated on the previous page. IV. PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE STAFFING The Director and Principal Investigator for this study will be Stephen W. Burnett, Senior Vice President of TCI and our Director of Public Sector Fleet Management Services. He may be assisted by additional TCI staff, such as: Mike Joyner, David Myer, Barry Hall and Marvin Psalmond. He has directed a number (100) ofpublic sector feet management revietivs including: • Dallas, TX • Shreveport, LA • Sedgwick County, KS • Decatur, AL • Gadsen, AL • State of Texas • Asheville,NC • Kansas City, MO • Decatur, GA • Atlanta, GA • Macon, GA • Garland, TX • Shelby County, TN . Milwaukee, WI • Albuquerque, NM • Clearwater, FL • Martin County, FL • Ventura, CA • Dade County, FL • Nashville, TN • Jackson County, OR • Greensboro,NC • Wilmington, DE • Grand Forks, ND • Greenville, SC • Charlottesville, VA • Concord, NH • Houston, TX • Richmond, VA . Tampa, FL • Jacksonville, FL • Hoover, AL . Jackson, MS Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 15 City of Fort Worth We will most likely commit three people to the assignment in Fort Worth during the analysis phase. Mr. Burnett will be full-time working in the areas of finance, costing and operations. Another individual will be working in maintenance management and a third in support areas such as parts, information services, management processes and the like. In the last 12 months Mr. Burnett has been working for Little Rock, Arkansas; Palm Beach County Sheriff, Florida; Decatur, Georgia; Sedgwick County, KS; Delray Beach, Florida; Shreveport, Louisiana, Martin County,Florida; State of Texas; West Valley City; Utah and the Coca-Cola Company on fleet matters. TIMING tii'e estimate that Phase 1 of the revietiv will take approximately 14 calendar days to complete. Timing for initiating on-site revietiv is expected for late 2000. Timing for the implementation phase is highly dependent on the results of Phase 1. O THER YVe did initiate a good faith effort to locate an operations analysis consultancy through the City's MBE/IVBE Office. Unfortunately, our search did not yield a positive match. Please see a copy of a facsimile on the follotiving page. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 16 "TQV-Go'-QO WED L1 :53 PM M_KBE FAX:8178716185 PAGE 1 �. r:, . ; nd' �T��� t: a 11 _ t'. :o r i ,. . : w > J ::: u��aaess E e .p. s (off' :; f j�. �m0' Thr� �ron Str�et .` m. , 3 .:- 1:1f+ : o t worth : xaS.`761 A 1, ,�' .'i _ .t y • jn• . ♦<. ,!. :, ♦;, Datel 11/�IZQO - . .. AX" '.. ' � . I .. ••i...':s Nutnber�of pages rnclucling covet' etre et: :t Y: ' y. • iy,• , .- .. ':: 41 ,r -'�' :'t 1 e To. St ve Burnetf rotii�: :::F .R c I.Ort . . ,. .. t.. a he .: :: • .; .t. ti� .. `'. -... .-.- . :. .. , .t.••. . S :y .. . i:. Ph _ .404-250�a100 l Fait phone.4b4 250=0253: ', Phone: $17 .$7:1-G1.a�:, CC: ; I . fi'^ :J Fax'phone; $17871-61$5 '.< .�)i{ y S. '•4 . ' � : t. t•^ •l..S: " i s s j V."w ]} SAP' P]' en REMARKS: Uc ent :.,.: :Fcir sevie 'Q"R A Baso comm :: :. Mr. Burnett: , I'am so rybut at3hI time l arraijhAble•to provi�te:A listing.inahe-::° . - . comm6dity of Operational.Analysis Sktils or an eng�rieer m the.fields we discussed . .. : . ; . .. .: - i. via aur telephone conver ation.:.if i:may be.of furthec:assista, . ;'pleas . .� A: .I. ; }..*,:.-:_!:,-,-.T-,---.... .. , • •," -'% '.4:. .. ' 1 '�.. y' `i . . . . O. . .. 1.. ^ r•,i 1 t i'^• 1 - - , /. -, . : ., :. . ,... .1..' ...'.: •.. .. .. . Ii :.i '.. '.:' { :.i .. .. •i. " ..• , ;,. �S.i; '.i „ s :~ - . -• l ..........w......... . ,:• ` ' ` -•;-. • ' 'i^ 1� •}. r«. 5 y- i, ..,,. ,; City of Fort Worth V. PRIOR EXPERIENCE ' Transportation Consultants, Inc. Fleet Management Consulting Services Statement of Qualifications t Much of this material was submitted in condensed form on August 17,2000, during the pre-qualification period. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 17 City of Fort Worth PUBLIC SECTOR FLEET MANAGEMENT PRACTICE The national public sector fleet management practice of TCI is headquartered in Atlanta, GA, and led by a staff of trained professionals who specialize in fleet and vehicle maintenance operations in the public sector. Combined, this staff has many years of consulting experience. The practice specializes in assisting clients in the following areas: • Operations and productivity improvement. • Vehicle utilization studies, to include take home analysis. • Inventory control reviews. • Consolidation and location analysis of maintenance services. • Programming of maintenance facilities (i.e., shop layout, equipment requirements, site plan, sizing). • Definition of information system requirements and selection of vehicle maintenance information systems. • Privatization and out-sourcing analyses. • Setting staffing and operational performance measures, including benchmarks. • Cost reduction initiatives. • Development of internal service fund and internal rental rate architecture. • Benchmarking and Performance Measurement Guidance. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 18 City of Fort Worth TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC FIRM-WIDE ORGANIZATION Paul Gold PrPvidPnt PRIVATE SECTOR GOVERNNIENT PRACTICEPRACTICE ..:�i�:�ta"'%ti'ayivev-•- r, . .i, Bruce Sa7fer y Steve Burnett Marvin Psalmond , . Senior ice Pres# -Senior:Vice Preside ' Vice President _hAtlan'tu'. '` Maintenance Practice t. .Michael Joyner_ -JohnNeumaDavid Myer >--::.a:.,......._,,.. ''Associate .Senior, ice Presiden Director >: . New.York City' Maintenance Practice -Lou Waldhour '�Associate'`� f " '>='Lee Urbani '' Don Porthan Senior ice Pres de Director ;�'hiladelpiia? - Maintenance Practice xBarry Hah .. Ss .fes BobJohneon Bob Creasman Logistics' Director "Consultant "s: Raymond Robinson' Maintenance Practice .h• 'Asspciate `>f °John Clarke= - Associate SUPPORTADNIMISTRATIVE Jo Huddleston Controller Marcia Sandler Administrative Assistant Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 19 City of Fort Worth VI. PERSONNEL The TCI Fleet Management Team has distinguished itself by conducting do=en.s of large fleet operations improvement projects. Without exception, our work has resulted in: • Reduced fleet expense • Improved turnaround time • Sharper management information and performance measures We would like to describe key members of the TCI Fleet Management Team. Mr. Paul Gold is President of Transportation Consultants, Inc. (TCI). Prior to founding TCI in 1931, Mr. Gold held several management positions with the truck division of The Hertz Corporation including Vice President of Operations for their United States and Canadian branches. A major focus, of which, was the responsibility for all of Hertz's maintenance functions. In his capacity as President of TCI, Mr. Gold has provided his logistics consulting services to such Fortune 500 companies as Anheuser-Busch, Georgia-Pacific, Home Depot, Wal-Mart, The New York Times and such municipalities and utilities as Monroe County, Florida, Lownes County, Georgia and the New York State Gas & Electric. Mr. Gold lists among his organizational memberships the Council of Logistics Management, the Maintenance Council of the American Trucking Association, and the Private Carrier Conference. Stephen IV Burnett is a Senior Vice President of TCI and is Director of our Public Sector Fleet Management Team. Prior to joining TCI, Mr. Burnett served as Executive Director- Government Services for Deloitte and Touche, an international CPA and consulting firm. He was a consulting partner for five years with Deloitte and Touche and headed their National Fleet Management efforts. He also directed the Atlanta office and the fleet management practice for David M. Griffith & Associates, now DMG/Maximus. Mr. Burnett provides final quality control within the fleet division, and general strategic direction for the group. His wealth of experience in fleet management consulting made the David M. Griffith Fleet Management Division the largest firm providing fleet management consulting services to the public and private sector. Mr. Burnett has been a management consultant for thirty years and has conducted 100 fleet related projects. In addition, he is a frequent speaker on fleet management issues for groups such as APWA, NAFA and CCG. Other key members of the consultant team include Mike Joyner, Harvey Harbour, John Neumann, Marvin Psalmond, Sherman Sawhney, and John Clarke. Our team will meet (and has met) MBE/WBE goals that the City might set forth, either through the diversity of our own staff or through prime/sub relationships. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 20 City of Fort Worth FLEET MANAGEMENT SERVICES PARTIAL CLIENT LIST Asheville—Metro. Sewerage District Lee County, Florida Asheville,North Carolina Little Rock, Arkansas Atlanta, Georgia Los Angeles, California Aurora, Colorado Los Angeles County, California Bibb County, Georgia Macon, Georgia Buncombe County, North Carolina MARTA Canton, Ohio Marquette, Michigan Chapel Hill, North Carolina Martin County, FL Charlottesville, Virginia Milwaukee, Wisconsin Chatham County, Georgia Mobile, Alabama Clayton County, Georgia Nashville, Tennessee Clearwater, Florida Onondaga County, New York Concord, New Hampshire Palm Beach County, FL Cumberland County, North Carolina Ponce, Puerto Rico Dade County, Florida Richmond, Virginia Dallas, Texas Rock Hill, South Carolina Decatur, Alabama St. Louis, Missouri Decatur, Georgia Sedgwick County, KS Delray Beach, Florida Shelby County, Tennessee Denver, Colorado Shreveport, Louisiana Dougherty County, Georgia Shreveport Police Douglas County, Oregon S. Florida Water Mgmt. Dist. Fayetteville, North Carolina Springfield, Tennessee Gadsden, Alabama Superior, Wisconsin Gainesville, Florida Tampa, Florida Gainesville, Georgia Texas, State of Garland, Texas Thornton, Colorado Georgia Department of Administrative Services Toccoa, Georgia Grand Forks,North Dakota U.S. General Services Admin. Greensboro, North Carolina Ventura County, California Greenville County, South Carolina Wake County, North Carolina Hinds County, Mississippi Warner Robins, Georgia Hoover, Alabama Washtenaw County, Michigan Houston, Texas West Valley, Utah Jackson, Mississippi Wilmington, Delaware Jacksonville, Florida Winston-Salem,NC Kansas City, Missouri Transportation Consultants, Inc. page 21 \ \ \ ƒ x x xk k g� � \ ( \ � k { {� k « ® a 4zi x x C) w � u z x # 2 ƒ \ k % ; k�kk x k k x x k k \ @a w - � u « \ \ k k 2 � 2 } / uk z � / �� \ / k k k x k k x k k x k x x k k k k k k x k x x x x x k k k x k 2 / � � � k \ w � \ Q 7 \ x x k k x x x k . 2 / § w ~ z � t 2 � w \ 2 § � \ ZU \ \ \ < O < \ ® � � 6 ® \ ¥ xz \ \ * a a o u § ƒ § \ u Uo \ ƒ ] / © � = f \3 ) / ® 2 ; { \ .5 3 ® u § e D 3 k § 3 & ƒ / E & 2 J \ m w & 3 u & \ { I m I I / ) 2 @\ t $ § / § $ O ) C> 7 7 %\ .k .$ $ ¢ 2 / � / f \ ffOG / / / � / AJR / w \ dd $ d \ d \ / / � - & 0 X X X XX X X X X XXX w fi fi fi tr Oi tr ofi, a `Z X X A tr Q Q w Q e v v Q e e tr X X X X X X X X X H U z � H H z Q � N•� ,O U N X X X X X X X zm � � oa z � fi y ofi O � •� o H04 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X GV � � z � W zW o � a N X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O cc a H z N e a uE d w Al c zz o Fa � Uvv z U U U r3 c o o ¢ U O �¢ ¢ L2 aNi INi U � � � a � O 0 o C Cd u �' S U 0 r°'n on¢ � U on ° e ^ = o o Ca � k, C7 c U o f4 e �0 o o r r c a °' o ''S x o > a°i C .C �d c c U � ¢ ¢ o c 3 :o `c -� ° s -� .a >L) ani - U U `� ^ N -- o o c° o " o .: s s` s` w a G o -non 5 ° � � � ; zoa. � av) � v� v� viv� v� F• F• � > 33333 REFERENCES Client Contact Services Provided State of Texas Mr. Mike Hay February—August 2000 Comptroller of Public Accounts 111 E. 17th Street Room G-24, LBJ State Office Bldg Austin, TX 78744 Phone: (512) 305-9954 City of Del Ray Beach Mr. Bob Barcinski 1998 / 1999 Assistant City Manager 100 N.W. 1 S`Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Phone: (561) 243-7011 City of Shreveport Mr. Jim Holt 1997 - 1999 Director Fleet Services 1731 Kings Highway Shreveport, Louisiana 71133 Phone: (318) 673-7450 Fax: (318) 673-7457 Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 24 City of Fort Worth TCI FLEET MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE THAT MATCH UP WITH CITY OF FORT WORTH PROJECT ELEMENTS Element # Element Representative Clients 1 Workflow Thornton, Colorado Delray Ray Beach, Florida 2 Quality Control/Preventive Little Rock, Arkansas Maintenance Martin County, Florida 3 Staffing Levels Lee County, Florida Shreveport, Louisiana 4 Information Systems State of Texas, Austin West Valley City, Utah 5 Vehicle Replacement Shreveport, Louisiana Little Rock, Arkansas 6 Benchmarking State of Texas Palm Beach County Sheriff Dept., Florida 7 Management Little Rock, Arkansas Dallas, Texas 8 Outsourcing Thornton, Colorado Wilmington, Delaware 9 Evaluation of Outsourcing Sedgwick County, Kansas Nashville, Tennessee 10 Parts Inventory MARTA—Atlanta, Georgia Lee County, Florida 11 Consolidation Dade County, Florida Kansas City, Missouri 12 Fleet Utilization St. Louis, Missouri Shreveport, Louisiana Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 25 City of Fort Worth Stephen W. Burnett, CMC Senior Vice-President, Transportation Consultants, Inc. Mr. Burnett, Senior Vice President of TCI, is the Director for public sector fleet management services. He is responsible for general marketing, strategic development, and final quality control for the public sector fleet division. CONSULTING EXPERIENCE In addition to his work with fleet management,Mr. Burnett also has considerable experience in the areas of financial and management consulting. Prior to joining TCI, Mr. Burnett was the Partner and Executive National Director for Government Services with Touche Ross & Co., now Deloitte & Touche, and regional Vice President of David M. Griffith & Associates, Inc. SELECTED FLEET MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE • Directed a review of three bottler operations for the Coca-Cola Company. The objective was to identify cost and fleet benchmark data for aggregation to the entire bottler network. • Conducted a comprehensive review of the City of Garland Fleet Services Division. This study focused on a competitive assessment of this 2 Million dollar (budget), 1,415 unit operation. • Conducted a comprehensive loaned executive Review of the City of Atlanta police fleet. This review was an integral part of an overall operations review of the Atlanta Police Department, carried out at the request of Mayor Andrew Young. The study generated sweeping recommendations for the police fleet. • Led two significant, sequential reviews for the City ofAurora, Colorado. The first study, a privatization feasibility review, resulted in substantial in-house improvements at a sharply competitive cost. The second review resulted in a comprehensive set of policies and procedures on subjects ranging from fleet replacement to preventive maintenance. • Directed a comprehensive study of the light and heavy fleet in Bibb County (Macon), Georgia. The engagement concluded that the light fleet should continue to be handled on a contractual basis but heavy fleet management required a number of significant changes to make to cost effective and responsive. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 26 City of Fort Worth • Led a DMG team in a pragmatic review and program design of a new vehicular maintenance facility in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. The program effects resulted in a design concept that was handed off to town selected architects. • Directed and conducted a comprehensive review of the City of Dallas central automotive parts warehouse. Dallas leaders believed it might be more cost effective to disband the central warehouse and have vendors supply directly to the five line garages. The study concluded otherwise and the central warehouse remained intact. • Directed a comprehensive, two phased fleet management study for the City of St. Louis. The City directed the study team to: 1) determine the required number of vehicles to support the City's mission and 2) to recommend the most cost effective means of maintenance support. DMG concluded the study by recommending a 180 unit reduction in the City's 1770 unit vehicular fleet and $1,500,000 in reduced operating expenditures. • Directed and conducted a number of studies over a 15 month period for the General Services fleet of Metro Nashville, Tennessee. The major focus was an operations improvement and enhanced responsiveness, but with major secondary efforts in 1) rental rate design, 2) PM training for the mechanic work force, 3) replacement programming and 4) consolidation studies for other segments of Metro's fleet. • Led a team of DMG specialists in a comprehensive review of the fleet of Concord, New Hampshire. Our work resulted in vastly improved operations, and eventual new facility and more sharply defined business practices. • Conducted a comprehensive review of the wide-spread operations of Douglas County, Oregon, one of the largest land area counties in the country. Phase I of the DMG study focused on operations improvement while Phase II centered on fleet software selection. • Developed an entire new fleet operating mode for the South Florida Water Management Agency. Headquartered in West Palm Beach, this agency required a fleet of 800+ vehicles across a wide area of South Florida. Our engagement resulted in a major re-focus of the fleet support programs with major changes in organization, information and staffing configurations. • Performed a comprehensive review of facility and operational options for the Regional Utility in Gainesville, Florida. This review encompassed a detailed review of centralized versus decentralized operations alternatives, privatized vs. in-house options and an exhaustive review of site choices. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 27 City of Fort Worth • Directed a landmark operations review for the 2,200 vehicular fleet of Ventura County, California. This review, encompassing detailed looks at virtually every facet of their operation, concluded in extolling a well-run, cost effective operation with several recommendations designed to enhance their operation even further. • Conducted two significant reviews for the 2,100 unit fleet of Tampa, Florida. The first review entailed a detailed look at privatization options of the City and resulted in a recommendation of improving in-house operations. The second study, 18 months later, updated the progress of Report #1. • Reviewed the operations of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC), a unit of the Metropolitan Regional Council of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota. This agency, which has Water and Waste water responsibilities for the Twin Cities, desired significant improvements in vehicular related accountability and information. • Directed a review of privatization contracting and RFP options for the U.S. General Services Administration. This study resulted in a standard solicitation document that Federal Agencies would use to procure support vehicles. • Served as Project Director for a major study of the 1,400 vehicular fleet of Jacksonville, Florida. This study, conducted over a 4 month period, resulted in sweeping recommendations and presented numerous opportunities for the consolidated government to be significantly more cost effective and efficient in their fleet operations. • Reviewed the feasibility of combining operations of the school bus fleet and the General Fund fleet in Virginia Beach, Virginia. The DMG report concluded that any cost savings or operational savings that could result from combining the fleet would be minimal and not worth the financial and operational risk. • Directed a comprehensive review of the 1,500 vehicular fleet in Richmond, Virginia. Our work resulted in significant operational improvements and a reversal of a deteriorating trend in the fund balance of the City's vehicular replacement fund. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 28 City of Fort Worth OTHER FLEET MANAGEMENT CLIENTS * Albany, GA * Long View, TX * Asheville,NC * Mobile, AL * Atlanta, GA * Niles, IL * Aurora, IL * Orlando, FL * Charleston County, SC * Putnam County, FL * Charlottesville, VA * Richmond, VA * Clearwater, FL * Rochester, MN Utilities * Cumberland County,NC * Rock Hill, SC * Dade County, FL * Shreveport, LA * Decatur, AL * St. Louis County, MN * East Troy, MI * Sarpy County,NE * Florence County, SC * Superior, Wl * Fulton County, GA * Temple Terrace, FL * Gainesville, FL * Toccoa, GA * Gainesville, GA * Warner Robins, GA * Glynn County, GA * Waukesha County, Wl * Greensboro, NC * Wausau, WI * Greenville County, SC * West Allis, Wl * Hinds County, MS * Wilmington, DE * Hoover, AL * Jackson, MS Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 29 Citi of Fort Worth PRESENTATIONS "Recent Trends in Fleet Management," before the CCG User Group, October, 1990 and October 1998. "Vehicle Acquisition and Federal Procurement regulations,"National Conference of State Fleet Administrators, 1992. "Fleet Management, the Long View," before the Portland, Oregon Fleet Management Association, July, 1983. "Vehicle Maintenance Trends and Issues," American Water Works Association National Conference, July, 1987. "Fleet Management Benchmarks," Coca-Cola Bottlers Association, April, 1998. "Innovative Compensation in Public Sector Fleets,"NAFA Conference, Seattle, Washington, May, 1998 and APWA, Las Vegas, 1998. "Issues and Trends in Fleet Management,"North Carolina chapter, American Public Works Associations, Asheville,NC, May, 1990. "Privatization". University of Washington Public Sector Fleet Management Conference in Seattle. March, 1996. "Benchmarking". Diagonal Data Users Conference - Vision 2000, Minneapolis, MN, June 1994. "Fleet Management for the Financial Executive". Alabama GFOA. Hunstville, AL, January, 1995. "Cost Containment in Fleet Management", GFOAA (Alabama), March 1997. EDUCATION ALS. in Finance, University of Tennessee BA. in Economics, Wake Forest University Certified Management Consultant Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 30 City of Fort Worth Michael T. Joyner Associate Consultant, Transportation Consultants, Inc. PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE • 1996 - Atlanta Committee For the Olympic Games - Venue Transportation Manager- Yachting. • 1994-1996 - Savannah Maintenance and Construction Business Manager for family business. • 1980-1984 - Armstrong State College - Taught American Government (Part Time) • 1977-1994 - City of Savannah, Georgia- Vehicle Maintenance Director - Managed procurement, assignment, maintenance, and replacement for a multi-purpose fleet which increased from 475 to 950. During the same time period staffing reduced from 68 to 50 employees. • 1975-1977 - City of Savannah - Assistant Garage Director. • 1974-1975 - City of Savannah - Budget Analyst • 1971-1974 - Emory University - Graduate Research Assistant, Atlanta Regional Council • 1970-1971 - Benedictine Military School - Taught History and Government PROFESSIONAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS • Established one of the first local government pay plans in the country, based on national certification testing. • Converted over 100 City vehicles to alternative fuel beginning in 1981. This conversion to propane saved over one million dollars in fuel and maintenance during the next five year. • Constructed the City of Savannah's first designed vehicle maintenance facility, funding the construction from budget savings from the approved operating budget over a ten-year period. • Established a joint City-County Driver Training Program for all equipment including Police and Fire. This was one of the first in the country and the first in the State of Georgia to have been approved for Commercial Drivers License training and testing. • Established the first City-wide Accident Review Board, which set standards and policies for the review of all vehicular accidents. By the spring of 1994, "at fault" accidents had been reduced by 50%. • Beginning in 1991, a partnership was formed with Atlanta Gas Light Co., which led to the conversion of over 100 police patrol vehicles to compressed natural gas. Over the next three years, Mr. Joyner applied for and received over $95,000 in state and federal grants. N.G.V. News, a national publication, said that the Savannah program established a"national standard". In 1994, the City's budget for fuel was $86,000 less than it would have been without the conversions. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 31 City of Fort Worth HONORS AND ASSOCIATIONS American Public Works Association: • President, Georgia Chapter- 1985 • Member, Product User and Suppliers Council - 1990-1992 • Member, Institute for Equipment Services Executive Council - 1992-Present • Delegate, APWA House of Delegates representing Georgia - 1988 - 1996 • Secretary/Treasurer, Georgia Chapter- 1996-Present Armstrong State Alumni Associates: • Member, Board of Directors - 1981-1988 • Vice President- 1985-1986, 1988 • President - 1987 Savannah Police Department, Certificate of Merit - 1982 U.S. Department of Energy, Technology Achievement Award - 1993 EDUCATION ABD Political Science, Emory University M.A. Political Science, Emory University B.A. Political Science, Armstrong State College Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 32 City of Fort Worth Louis G. Waldhour Consultant, Transportation Consultants, Inc. Mr. Waldhour has worked in transportation management for over thirty-two years. His areas of experience include: • Operations • Organization planning and systems analysis • Personnel management • Budgeting • Training • Administration PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE ATLANTA COMMITTEE FOR THE OLYMPIC GAMES Consultant on Olympic Yachting Transportation, October 1995— October 1996 Developed all Transportation Operational Plans to conduct the 1996 Centennial Yachting_ competitions in Savannah, Georgia. Scope of work included planning and managing all transportation operations including developing the operational concept, staffing plan and budget. Published a Master Transportation plan with 15 annexes for staff to use as an operational guide and negotiated 18 contracts to support the operation. Interviewed and selected the 225 person staff. Managed the operation during the games to a successful conclusion. SAVANNAH/CHATHAM BOARD OF EDUCATION Director of Transportation, February 1991 —A ugust 1995 Reduced fleet size and operation, increased efficiency, and brought innovation to school bus operation. To complete these tasks required management of a fleet of school buses and support vehicles numbering 550 with an annual budget of$7,000,000. The end result of these efforts was a 10% reduction in the bus fleet and a$750,000 reduction in the budget. As part of this process a system of management reporting was implemented that measured a number of items that included: - Daily on time bus arrivals - Complaints - Customer surveys - Accident trends - Bus seating capacity and utilization - Overtime trends Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 33 City of Fort Worth CHATHAM AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY April—February 1991 Reorganized local transit company's transportation department to achieve greater efficiency. Managed operation of local bus fleet utilizing 100 drivers and staff. Prepared innovative operator's and supervisor's manuals for greater system efficiency and coverage. These efforts were key in Chatham Area Transit Authority being awarded the "Best Transit System in the United States in 1989". UNITED STATES ARMY Transportation Management Made major improvements in large traffic management organization while serving as Executive Director of senior transportation staff. Planned, coordinated, and actively managed on a daily basis the movement of al Department of Defense cargo and personnel within Central Europe using all modes of transportation. Reorganized the system to achieve a 50% more timely delivery of cargo with zero budget growth and personnel cuts. during a three-year period. Employee Development Rejuvenated the efficiency of demoralized organization. While serving as senior executive, initiated and streamlined the training of program for transportation line organization of 800 personnel. Program resulted in an increase of personnel meeting Army skill standards in the organization from 2% to 99.6% in one year. Organizational productivity was increased by 50% yielding an efficient, contented workforce. Executive Management Reorganized and managed senior logistics staff in support of worldwide Army support requirements. Serviced as director of highly successful multi-faceted staff responsible for arranging logistics and transportation support to a military force of one million personnel. Directed staff planning, logistics systems analysis, administration, budgeting, operations, and organizational development. Reported directly to corporate head, but worked independently and dealt with other top level managers. Reorganizing efforts resulted in achieving a 30% greater productivity despite personnel cuts the first year. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 34 City of Fort Worth Budgeting and Financial Management Devised a monthly budget review to track operational programs. As Executive Director of transportation staff, conceived more realistic budget procedures by establishing a monthly review and analysis to track estimated and actual fund expenditures. Procedures resulted in cost avoidance of over $2,000,000 that was redirected to more critically needed Army programs. EDUCATION Master of Science in Economics, Louisiana State University Bachelor of Business Administration, University of Georgia (Phi Beta Kappa) Management Training, United States Army and Indiana State University Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 35 City of Fort «'orth Marvin Psalmond Vice-President of Maintenance Practices, Transportation Consultants, Inc. Marvin Psalmond, Vice President of Maintenance Practices,joined TCI in 1988 as Director of Maintenance. Prior to joining TCI Marvin was Director of Maintenance for United Parcel Service. Marvin's twenty-year career with United Parcel Service began as a mechanic and progress to a position as Director of Fleet Operations for the truck lease division of UPS. Among the many positions that Marvin held at UPS was as a troubleshooter to correct maintenance deficiencies at their garage facilities. His expertise includes maintenance management, software evaluations, supervisor and mechanic training programs and alternative fuel systems. As an integral part and responsible for TCI's maintenance consulting practice, Marvin has worked with such clients as: Anheuser-Busch, Inc., St. Louis, MO Branch operations: Boston, MA Newark,NJ Honolulu, HI Sylmar, CA Riverside, CA New Orleans, LA Chicago, IL Canton, OH Denver, CO From the beginning of TCI's primary interface with Anheuser-Busch, Marvin has conducted Fleet Maintenance seminars for the Anheuser-Busch distributors throughout the United States. For the past 8 years, Marvin has been a consultant to Anheuser- Busch's corporate locations. The assignment includes annual reviews of the costs, maintenance practices of each location. Marvin works with the maintenance group at each location to implement corrective solutions to and deficiencies. City & Suburban Delivery Systems, Inc., Long Island City, NY This subsidiary of The New York Times Co., retained TCI to completely review the maintenance effectiveness of this acquisition. TCI examined all components from purchasing practices to software to staffing to training. TCI implemented the suggested improvements to all these functions. Little Rock, Arkansas The City of Little Rock, Arkansas selected TCI to perform a complete fleet management review. As Director of Maintenance Practice, Marvin Psalmond, conducted the maintenance management, preventative maintenance and safety portions of this engagement. The result of these efforts included TCI observations and measurement of existing conditions and immediate, short-term and long-term recommendations for the shop facilities, inventory, information management, staffing and compensation, safety issues and regulation compliance. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 36 Citi•of Fort Worth Garland, Texas As part of the City of Garland fleet management review, TCI uncovered a number of areas of opportunity where substantial improvements could be made. Analysis and evaluation of current policies, procedures, and reports made it possible to provide the City with detailed recommendations on what needed to be done. Philadelphia Newspapers, Philadelphia, PA This project included the reduction of maintenance manpower in this 400 unit fleet. The services also included the preparation of a Fleet Operations Manual that provided this newspaper publisher with definitive procedures for maintenance management. Our program also included an evaluation of outsourcing the maintenance function. State of Texas TCI was selected by the State of Texas to complete an in depth analysis of its fleet operation and produce a statewide fleet management plan. Marvin Psalmond, Director of Maintenance Practice directed the analysis of maintenance management including vehicle use and efficiency, maintenance cost reduction, repair procedures and criteria, and information management. The Stop & Shop Supermarket Companies, Inc., Boston, MA TCI, Under the direction of Marvin Psalmond, provides this Northeastern supermarket chain with maintenance management for the past two years. Services have included the selection and implementation of maintenance software, staffing evaluation, the training of supervisory personnel and the outsourcing of two of their fleet operations. Supermarkets General (Pathmark Supermarkets), Woodbridge, NJ Conducted a complete evaluation of company's fleet maintenance programs. Implemented management systems to improve productivity and reduce costs. Ritter Sysco, Elizabeth, NJ Provided a six-month on-site program for this NJ food service company, services included the selection and training of a fleet supervisor. The introduction of National Account purchasing programs for truck components. The introduction of a comprehensive Preventive Maintenance program. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 37 City of For! fVorlh John NI. Neumann Executive Vice President Transportation Consultants, Inc. EXPERIENCE 0 30 years of experience in Trucking, Truck Leasing, Maintenance, Cars, Car Leasing and Material Handling Equipment. 0 Vice President of The New York Metropolitan Region - Penske Truck Rental. Total bottom-line operating responsibility. a Champion Truck Rental - Champion Material Handling Equipment Co./Genser Trucking Corp. -Partner in these businesses. Gained exposure to private enterprise, and the specific need to manage cash flow. a AMI Leasing Corp. -Senior Vice President, started new operation for AMI in New York and New Jersey. Company has subsequently doubled its size in these areas. Cars and Trucks. EDUCATION B.S. New York UniversitylAllajor - Industrial Labor Relations and Minor - Economics New York University School of Law School Ford Motor Executive Leasing program and vehicle specifications. PRESENTATIONS • Syracuse University - School of Transportation - guest lecturer on full service truck leasing and vehicle maintenance. • Amtralease - conducted annual lease sales seminars for group members. SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE • Quality King Distributors - Ronkonkoma,NY - Evaluated all delivery mode options for a 150 tractor fleet, operating 20 million miles annually. Set up a revised in-house fleet maintenance program. Hired an entirely new staff. Annualized cost savings resulting from the above project in the first year was 1.5 million dollars. • New York Daily News - Re-negotiated lease agreement including vehicle valuations, lease terms and conditions and various rate concessions. Annualized savings 1.8 million dollars. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 38 City of Fort Worth • Papetti's Hygrade Egg Corp. - Returned fleet maintenance to ownership from major full service leasing company. Savings first year: $350,000. Set up a new in-house trucking operation in Lenox, Iowa; built a new trucking and maintenance facility. Net savings first year: 1 million dollars as opposed to using outside carrier. • New York Times (wholesale distribution operation City &: Suburban Delivery Systems, Inc.) -Evaluated all distribution modes of delivery . Selected private ownership. Set up a complete in-house maintenance program for 200 vehicles. Purchased a new delivery fleet (7 million dollar investment). Savings in each of the first two years in excess of$750,000 per year. CLIENT LIST • Newark Star Ledger (Newhouse Newspapers) • New York Post • Philadelphia Ne�,vspapers (Knight Ritter Newspapers) • Ritter Sysco • Albany Sysco • Merit Thypen Steel Warehouse • Jaydor Liquors • John J. Brennan Construction Co., Inc. Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 39 • City of Fort Worth VII. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATOR Stephen W. Burnett, Senior Vice President Transportation Consultants, Inc. 8302 Dunwoody Place, Suite Atlanta, GA 30350 (404) 250-0100 Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 40 City of Fort Worth, Texas "agar and council Communication _ _ DATE REFERENCE NUMBER LOG NAME PAGE 2/6/01 **C-18448 1 21 PHASEI 1 of 2 SUBJECT AWARD OF CONTRACT TO TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR ANALYSIS OF EQUIPMENT SERVICES DIVISION PHASE I RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Transportation Consultants, Inc. for services necessary to conduct a two-week analysis of the Equipment Services Division at a cost not to exceed $24,500. DISCUSSION: The City Services Department, Equipment Services Division (ESD) is responsible for the repair and maintenance of a mixed fleet of 3,800 vehicles. ESD operates five service centers, a tire shop, and a satellite facility. It is organized into four sections that include Administration, Maintenance, Technical Services, and Equipment Materials. Staffing is comprised of 148 positions. The current year's operating budget is $12.4 million, and funding is derived from charging user departments for parts, fuel, and services. Following a staff presentation on June 20, 2000, the City Council expressed interest in engaging a consultant to perform a comprehensive study of the ESD. The study is part of the City Council's commitment to ensure the quality and cost effectiveness of City services by conducting systematic performance reviews of City operations over a multi-year period. A Request for Qualifications was subsequently issued on July 26, 2000, mailed to twenty-three firms, and advertised publicly. Seven responses were received. A Request for Proposal was developed, issued to all respondents on October 19, 2000, and advertised publicly. On November 19, 2000, six proposals were received. Of the six firms that responded, four firms were requested to make oral presentations to an evaluation committee comprised of representatives from the Budget Office, Organizational Analysis Unit, Transportation and Public Works, Parks and Community Services, Internal Audit, Fire, Police, and City Services Departments. It is the recommendation of the evaluation committee that Transportation Consultants, Inc. (TCI) be engaged to perform the ESD study. It is planned that the study be conducted in two phases. Phase I will consist of an intensive two-week period during which TCI will observe ESD operations, conduct interviews, and gather data. Areas to be examined include: • Workflow and procedures • Quality control and preventive maintenance programs • Staffing levels • Information systems • Vehicle replacement methodologies • Benchmarking current efforts against comparably sized and configured fleets • Evaluation of current out-tasked activities • Identification of additional activities that can be out-tasked and/or out-sourced • Parts inventories 0 Relocation and/or consolidation of service centers City of Fort Worth, Texas "ayor and Council Communication DATE REFERENCE NUMBER LOG NAME PAGE 2/6/01 **C-18448 1 21 PHASEI 2 of 2 SUBJECT AWARD OF CONTRACT TO TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR ANALYSIS OF EQUIPMENT SERVICES DIVISION PHASE I Two management analysts from the City's Organizational Analysis Unit who have participated in similar studies will be assigned to work with TCI for the full term of the study. It is also planned that an oversight committee comprised of representatives from user departments and ESD personnel from all levels in the organization will meet regularly to review and react to work that has been accomplished and work that is scheduled. At the conclusion of Phase I, TCI will provide the City with a report detailing its findings and prioritized recommendations as to where to focus efforts in Phase II. Based on the City's feedback, TCI will then provide the City with a formal proposal for Phase II that will identify the tasks to be done, include a schedule for completion, and indicate the costs to the City. The City Council will be briefed on Phase I findings and recommendations and will be requested to approve the scope of work and funding necessary prior to proceeding with Phase II. FISCAL INFORMATION/CERTIFICATION: The Finance Director certifies that funds are available in the current operating budget, as appropriated, of the General Fund. CB:k Submitted for City Manager's FUND ACCOUNT CENTER I AMOUNT CITY SECRETARY Office by: (to) APPROVED Charles Boswell 8511 CITY COUNCIL Originating Department Head: FEB 6 2001 Tom Davis 6300 (from) GG01 539120 0905500 $24,500.00 Additional Information Contact: City S rl the City of Fort Worth,'}nzn8 Tom Davis 6300