HomeMy WebLinkAboutContract 37099STATE OF TEXAS §
COUNTY OF TARRANT §
CITY SECRETARI�rY`a0�
CONTRACT NO.
KNOWN ALL BY THESE PRESENTS:
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into the 13th day of May, 2008 by and between
the City of Fort Worth, a home -rule municipal corporation of Tarrant, Denton, Parker,
and Wise Counties, Texas ("City") acting herein by and through Karen L. Montgomery,
its duly authorized Assistant City Manager/CFO and MGT of America, Inc., an
independent contractor, acting by and through Mark Epstein, its duly authorized Senior
Partner, hereinafter called "Consultant". City and Consultant may be referred to herein
individually as a Party, or collectively as the Parties.
WITNESSETH
That for and in consideration of mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the
Parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
SERVICES
Section 1.
Consultant hereby agrees to perform as an independent contractor the services set forth in
the Scope of Services attached hereto as Attachment "A". These services shall be
performed in connection with a Citywide Review and Assessment of the Municipal
Organizational Structure ("Project").
Section 2.
Additional services, if any, will be requested in writing by the City. City shall not pay for
any work performed by Consultant or its subconsultants, subcontractors and/or suppliers
that has not been ordered in writing. It is specifically agreed that Consultant shall not be
compensated for any alleged additional work resulting from oral orders of any person.
ARTICLE 2
COMPENSATION
Consultant shall be compensated a lump sum fee not to exceed $119,262.00 in
accordance with Attachment "A". Payment shall be considered full compensation for all
labor, materials, supplies, and equipment necessary to complete the services described in
Attachment "A".
The Consultant shall provide monthly invoices to the City. Payment for services
rendered shall be due within thirty (30) days of the uncontested performance of the
05-19-Q8 A11�34
�9�v' 'j��(II?I�IC��II!���
particular services so ordered and receipt by City of Consultant's invoice for payment of
same.
Acceptance by Consultant of said payment shall operate as and shall release the City
from all claims or liabilities under this Agreement for anything related to, done, or
b nished in connection with the services for which payment is made, including any act
or omission of the City in connection with such services.
ARTICLE 3
TERM
Unless terminated pursuant to the terms herein, this Agreement shall be for a term of one
year beginning upon the date of its execution, or until the completion of the subject
matter contemplated herein, whichever occurs first.
ARTICLE 4
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
Consultant shall operate hereunder as an independent contractor, and not as an officer,
agent, servant, or employee of the City. Consultant shall have exclusive control of and
the exclusive right to control the details of its work to be performed hereunder and all
persons performing same, and shall be solely responsible for the acts and omissions of its
officers, agents, employees, contractors and subcontractors. The doctrine of respondent
superior shall not apply as between City and Consultant, its officers, agents, employees,
contractors, and subcontractors, and nothing herein shall be construed as creating a
partnership or joint venture between City and Consultant.
ARTICLE 5
PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE AND INDEMNIFICATION
Section 1.
Work performed by Consultant shall comply in all aspects with all applicable local, state
and federal laws and with all applicable rules and regulations promulgated by the local,
state and national boards, bureaus and agencies. Approval by the City shall not constitute
or be deemed to be a release of the responsibility and liability of Consultant or its
officers, agents, employees, contractors and subcontractors for the accuracy and
competency of its services performed hereunder.
Section 2.
In this connection, Consultant shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City and its
officers, agents, servants and employees from and against any and all claims or suits for
property damage or loss and/or personal injury, including death, to any and all persons of
whatsoever kind or character, including but not limited to employees of Consultant,
employees of subcontractors, and all other persons performing work incident to this
Agreement which may rise out of or be connected with directly or indirectly with
performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall likewise indemnify, and hold harmless,
U ����e
I,,
City for any and all injury or damage to City property arising out of, or in connection
with, any and all acts or omissions of Consultant, its officers, agents, employees or
subcontractors.
ARTICLE 6
INSURANCE
Section 1.
Consultant shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has obtained all
insurance required under this Article and the City has approved such insurance, nor shall
Consultant allow any subcontractor to commence work on its subcontract until all similar
insurance of the subcontractor has been so obtained and approval given by the City;
provided, however, Consultant may elect to add any subconsultant as an additional
insured under its liability policies.
Commercial General Liability
$1,000,000 each occurrence
$1,000,000 aggregate
Automobile Liability
$1,000,000 each accident (or reasonably equivalent limits of
coverage if written on a split limits basis). Coverage shall
be on any vehicle used in the course of the Project.
Worker's Compensation
Coverage A: statutory limits
Coverage B: $100,000 each accident
$500,000 disease - policy limit
$100,000 disease - each employee
Section 2.
Additional Insurance Requirements
a. Except for employer's liability insurance coverage under Consultant's
worker's compensation insurance policy, the City, its officers, employees and
servants shall be endorsed as an additional insured on Consultant's insurance
policies.
b. Certificates of insurance shall be delivered to the City of Fort Worth, Attention:
Bridgette Garrett, Sunset Review Director, 1000 Throcicmorton Street, Fort
Worth, TX 76102, prior to commencement of work.
c. Any failure on part of the City to request required insurance documentation
shall not constitute a waiver of the insurance requirements specified herein.
d. Each insurance policy shall be endorsed to provide the City a minimum thirty
days notice of cancellation, non -renewal, and/or material change in policy terms
or coverage. A ten days notice shall be acceptable in the event of non-payment
of premium.
e. Insurers must be authorized to do business in the State of Texas and have a
current A.M. Best rating of A: VII or equivalent measure of financial strength
and solvency.
f. Other than worker's compensation insurance, in lieu of traditional insurance,
City may consider alternative coverage or risk treatment measures through
insurance pools or risk retention groups. The City must approve in writing any
alternative coverage.
g. Workers' compensation insurance policy(s) covering employees employed on
the Project shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation providing rights of
recovery in favor of the City.
h. City shall not be responsible for the direct payment of insurance premium
costs for Consultant's insurance.
i. Consultant's insurance policies shall each be endorsed to provide that such
insurance is primary protection and any self4unded or commercial coverage
maintained by City shall not be called upon to contribute to loss recovery.
j. In the course of the Agreement, Consultant shall report, in a timely manner, to
City's officially designated contract administrator any known loss occurrence
which could give rise to a liability claim or lawsuit or which could result in a
property loss.
k. Consultant's liability shall not be limited to the specified amounts of insurance
required herein.
1. Upon the request of City, Consultant shall provide complete copies of all
insurance policies required by these Agreement documents.
ARTICLE 7
TRANSFER OR ASSIGNMENT
City and Consultant each bind themselves, and their lawful successors and assigns, to this
Agreement. Consultant, its lawful successors and assigns, shall not assign, sublet or
transfer any interest in this Agreement without prior written consent of the City.
TERMINATION OF CONTRACT
JI�t� t.. kA
��, i, U,
Section L
City may terminate this Agreement for its convenience on 30 days' written notice. Either
the City or the Consultant for cause may terminate this Agreement if either Party fails
substantially to perform through no fault of the other and does not commence correction
of such nonperformance with 5 days of written notice and diligently complete the
correction thereafter
Section 2.
If City chooses to terminate this Agreement under Article 8, upon receipt of notice of
termination, Consultant shall discontinue services rendered up to the date of such
termination and City shall compensate Consultant based upon calculations in Article 2 of
this Agreement and Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein.
Section 3.
All reports, whether partial or complete, prepared under this Agreement, including any
original drawings or documents, whether furnished by the City, its officers, agents,
employees, consultants, or contractors, or prepared by Consultant, shall be or become the
property of the City, and shall be furnished to the City prior to or at the time such
services are completed, or upon termination or expiration of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 9
RIGHT TO AUDIT
(a) Consultant agrees that the City shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after final
payment under this Agreement, have access to and the right to examine any directly
pertinent books, documents, papers and records of Consultant involving transactions
relating to this Agreement. Consultant agrees that the City shall have access during
normal working hours to all necessary facilities and shall be provided adequate and
appropriate workspace in order to conduct audits in compliance with the provisions of
this section. City shall give Consultant reasonable advance notice of intended audits.
(b) Consultant further agrees to include in all its subcontracts hereunder, a provision to
the effect that the subcontracting consultant 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 subconsultant, involving transactions to the subcontract, and further, that City
shall have access during normal working hours to all subconsultant facilities, and
shall be provided adequate and appropriate work space in order to conduct audits in
compliance with the provisions of this article. City shall give Consultant and any
subconsultant reasonable advance notice of intended audit.
(c) Consultant and subconsultants agree to photocopy such documents as may be requested
by the City. The City agrees to reimburse Consultant for the cost of copies at the rate
published in the Texas Administrative Code in effect as of the time copying is
performed.
ARTICLE 10
MINORITY AND WOMAN BISUNESS ENTERPRISE
(M/WBE) PARTICIPATION
In accordance with City Ordinance No. 15530, the City has goals for the participation of
minority business enterprises and woman business enterprises ("MIWBE") in City
contracts. Consultant acknowledges the M/WBE goal established for this Agreement and
its commitment to meet that goal. Any misrepresentation of facts (other than a negligent
misrepresentation) and/or the commission of fraud by the 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.
ARTICLE 11
OBSERVE AND COMPLY
Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all federal, state, and local laws and
regulations and with all City ordinances and regulations which in any way affect this
Agreement and the work hereunder, and shall observe and comply with all orders, laws
ordinances and regulations which may exist or may be enacted later by governing bodies
having jurisdiction or authority for such enactment. No plea of misunderstanding or
ignorance thereof shall be considered. Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold
harmless City and all of its officers, agents and employees from and against all claims or
liability arising out of the violation of any such order, law, ordinance, or regulation, whether
it be by itself or its employees.
ARTICLE 12
VENUE AND JURISDICTION
If any action, whether real or asserted, at law or in equity, arises on the basis of any
provision of this Agreement, venue for such action shall lie in state courts located in
Tarrant County, Texas or the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Texas — Fort Worth Division, This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of Texas.
ARTICLE 13
CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION
The Parties acknowledge that each party and, if it so chooses, its counsel have reviewed
and revised this Agreement and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any
ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party must not be employed in the
interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits hereto.
ARTICLE 14
SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this Agreement are severable, and if any word, phrase, clause,
sentence, paragraph, section or other part of this Agreement or the application thereof to
any person or circumstance shall ever be held by any court of compet r 'Q., o
REV F
14
.J 1. a 12 e
be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason, the remainder of this Agreement and the
application of such word, phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or other part of
this Agreement to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and this
Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid or unconstitutional portion had never
been contained therein.
ARTICLE 15
NOTICES
Notices to be provided hereunder shall be sufficient if forwarded to the other Party by
hand -delivery or via U.S. Postal Service certified mail return receipt requested, postage
prepaid, to the address of the other Party shown below:
City of Fort Worth
Attn: Bridgette Garrett, Sunset Review Director
1000 Throckmorton Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
Consultant:
MGT of America, Inc.
Attn: Mark Epstein
502 E. 11t' St., Ste. 300
Austin, TX 78701
ARTICLE 16
HEADINGS
The headings contained herein are for the convenience in reference and are not intended
to define or limit the scope of any provision of this Agreement
ARTICLE 17
COUNTERPARTS
This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts and each counterpart shall,
for all purposes, be deemed an original, but all such counterparts shall together constitute
but one and the same instrument.
(Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank)
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement in
multiple originals the day and year first above written, in Fort Worth, Tarrant County,
Texas.
CITY OF FORT WORTH:
Assistant City Manager/CFO
RECOMMENDED:
Bridgett3 Garre
Sunset Review Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
T F('TOT TTV•
ATTEST:
City Secretary
b sk \a zo(D\
Date
Authorization: C-22803, May 13, 2008
CONSULTANT:
MGT of America, Inc.
Mark Epstein
Senior Partner
1�• .,V,'•r�..ir
Ul7�la
MGT
OF AMERICA, INC.
MGT contact for Apri116, 2008'
City of Fort Worth
Mr. Mark Epstein, Senior Partner
MGT of America, Inc.
502 East 11Street, Suite 300
Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 476-4697, ext. 4405
mepstein@mgtamer.com
Response to
City of Fort Worth, Texas
Request for Proposal for a
City -Wide Review and Assessment
of Municipal Organization Structure
as submitted to
Bridgette Garret
Sunset Review Director
City of Fort Worth
1000 Throckmorton Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
MGT Office Austin
502 East 1116 Street
Suite 300
Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 476-4697
(512) 476-4699 FAX
www.mgtofamerica.com
Apri125, 2008
Ms. Bridgette Garrett
Sunset Review Director
City of Fort Worth
1000 Throckmorton Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
Dear Ms. Garrett, Mr. Fisseler, and Members of the Selection Committee;
MGT of America, Inc. is pleased to respond to the city of Fort Worth's search for firms qualified
to conduct a city wide organizational review and assessment. Fort Worm s actions offer evidence
of the city's commitment to provide the highest level of service, efficiency, and effectiveness to
and on behalf of its citizens. To achieve this, the city must utilize a professional organization that
is equally committed to the same goals. With our proven commitment to taxpayers across
America, MGT of America, Inc. is such a partner.
We understand the city's need to streamline and simplify operations and to ensure that service
demands are being met efficiently without duplication or unnecessary overlap. Creating
innovative and effective public policy solutions to help governments do their job better is all that
we do. From our humble beginnings in 1974 with one office in Tallahassee, Florida, MGT has
grown to four offices across the country, including the city of Austin, Texas, with a staff topping
140 professionals with an array of talent and skills. We have provided services to over 2,800
national and international clients, affirming our reputation of being one of the nation's leading
public sector management auditing and consulting firms.
From our work with this extensive client base, MGT has acquired an extensive understanding of
local government operations and the environment within which they operate most effectively. We
have conducted large-scale local government management audits and analyses in a number of the
nation's largest urban areas, such as New York City, Dallas, San Diego, Baltimore, Houston,
Albuquerque, Miami, San Antonio, Kansas City, Denver, and Richmond. In addition to our work
throughout the United States, we have also successfully delivered projects to many other Texas
clients, including the cities of Austin, Irving, and College Station, as well as Jefferson, Bexar,
Reeves, and Webb counties.
Perhaps most importantly to the city of Fort Worth, MGT has had the opportunity to work with a
variety of government organizations in creating, developing, nurturing and conducting new and
innovative management and organizational reviews.
Ms. Bridgette Garrett
April25, 2008
Page 2
Some of the start-up programs MGT has worked on include:
• Hillsborough County, Florida (Tampa), retained MGT of America to
administer, manage and monitor performance audits by outside, independent
firms. This included the development of methodological approaches, drafting
RFPs and audit requirements, assessing individual audits, and monitoring the
progress of specific audits, which were conducted in accordance with
Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the
United States.
• The Texas School Performance Review program, run by the Texas State
Comptroller, has been highlighted on ABC News Prime Time Live, U.S. Netivs
& World Report and the Wall Street Journal for its success at accomplishing
measurable reform in Texas state government and school districts across
Texas. MGT was selected by the Comptroller to help develop the pilot phase
of that program, and Comptroller John Sharp has called MGT's reports a
"model" of how to conduct management audits. MGT has conducted more of
those reviews for the Comptroller's office than any other firm in the nation.
• The Inter -American Development Bank asked MGT to help it develop a
management audit methodology and work plan for its first efforts at
conducting such audits in the Province of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
• The Texas Conference of Urban Counties has asked MGT to develop for its
members an innovative methodology for analyzing state funding patterns and
strategies to assess the state's equity and fairness in terms of spending on
urban, suburban, and rural counties across the state.
• The City Controller of Houston, Texas utilized MGT of America's expertise to
'
help create and define the approach and methodology for the citys first
management audits. In addition to the city's operations, MGT was asked to
conduct a management audit of the city's municipal court system.
As previous work samples indicate, MGT is well -regarded throughout the country. Our customers
often remark on our innovation, technical skills, and satisfactory job completion, despite the
many challenges that often arise when conducting comprehensive organizational reviews. We
understand our clients want to improve their way of doing business and we work hard to ensure
our recommendations produce real results.
In fact, when the Texas State Comptroller's office assessed the management audit work done on
behalf of the State Comptroller's Office in Texas school districts by both MGT and other
consulting firms, the progress report revealed that the school districts implemented 93 percent of
the recommendations put forward by MGT, compared to 83 percent for the "Big Four", and
77 percent for all other firms. The MGT recommendations also resulted in nearly $40 million in
savings.
MGT
OF AMERICA, INC.
Ms. Bridgette Garrett
April 25, 2008
Page 3
However, this success rate is not an accident; but rather, based on our relentless attention to detail
and the use of accurate and cutting -edge data analysis. In addition, MGT's reputation has been
built on a number of other value-added factors, including:
• This is what we do. We understand how government works because we have
hands-on experience. All of MGT's senior staff have served in upper -level
management roles within a government organization. Because our staff is
seasoned and experienced, we understand what is realistic and how to produce
results.
• We have specific expertise in city's highest dollar expenditures. MGT has
whole practice areas dedicated to public safety, cost allocation, and other
specific areas of city government. We bring an unparalleled depth and breadth
of professional expertise and project experience. We look at the "big picture"
but have a working knowledge of best practices for areas of city government
that are most critical and typically represent the biggest portion of your
budget.
• We are objective. Because we do not sell other services or products, such as
computer systems or annual financial audits, you can expect honest answers
from MGT that are not influenced by any attempts to acquire additional
business or "add-ons."
• We listen to citizens, front-line employees, as ive11 as managers and
policymakers, to learn about problems and solutions. We invest the time and
effort to determine what changes will work in reality and how best to
implement them.
• We learn about and strategically consider the expectations of the community
regarding the level of service they expect from their city government.
• Our final reports are concise with findings that are thoroughly backed up, and
we know how to communicate the information in d�erent formats so that a
variety of audiences - employees, management, officeholders, the media, and
the public - can read and understand the material. Most importantly, after
issuing our final recommendations, we want the citizens of Fort Worth to feel
confident that they have received their tax dollars' worth of value.
In our view, a good management audit must provide a detailed snapshot of current operations,
commendations of exemplary practices that deserve credit and can be built upon, and a mix of
recommendations that cut costs, increase productivity and improve customer service.
We are excited about the possibility of partnering with the city of Fort Worth and utilizing our
nationally acclaimed experts to realize real results for the city. All of our key staff, including
myself and the project director are located in Austin, Texas. The professionals whose credentials
are presented in our proposal will be the individuals who show up to do the work. To ensure the
city obtains the results it desires, MGT will work directly with the sunset review director, city
manager, and city council with the goal to exceed all expectations.
MGT
OF AMERICA, INC.
S. Bridgette Garrett
April25, 2008
Page 4
To comply with the city of Fort Worth's M/WBE requirements. We have invited SNAP
Management Group, Inc. to team with us on this important endeavor. SNAP is a minority -owned
business enterprise through the South Texas Regional Certification Agency (NCTRCA). SNAP
founder and president Darrell Pierce will be a valuable member of our team. He recently worked
with MGT as a subcontractor on our review of the public safety departments for the city of
Austin. The following page is confirmation of SNAP's acceptance of our invitation to team on
this project and a copy of their SCTRCA certification as well as a copy of their State of Texas
HUB certification. Mr. Pierce is working on his NCTRCA certification.
Should there be any additional questions, don't hesitate to contact me. Again, MGT appreciates
this opportunity and looks forward to the possibility of working with the city of Fort Worth to
realize the most efficient and effective city organizational structure.
Respectfully,
L
ark Epstein
Senior Partner
Director State and Local Government Practice
MGT
OF AMERICA. INC.
5 A LPManagement Group, Inc.
The Leader iIt provng change management solutions!
Apri1249 2008
Mr. Mark Epstein
Senior Partner
MGT of America, Inc.
502 East I Ith Street
Austin, Texas 78701
Dear Mr. Epstein;
SNAP Management Group, Inc. is pleased to accept your invitation to team on an
organizational study for the city of Fort Worth. I will serve on the team at for an hourly
rate of $160 plus related travel expenses and will receive approximately 10% of the total
contract hours and fees.
Thank you for this opportunity and we look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
Darrell Pierce
Principal, SNAP Management Group Inc.
901 East 12�` Street *Austin, TX 78702 * O. 512-477-8788 * F. 512-474-8788
www.snapmgt.com
I
i
I KLA
F�il�[rrity area ldrlom=r, Business EnMrprise
l: (MWBE) Program
R MCana1 ru nt a
t�a� filed ttae apprdfriate afFidaVit wikh the South imentral Texas Regional
C&tifleation Agency (SCfRCA) and Es hereby certified, in accordance with
SCTRCA Policies and Procedures, as a.
�1BE AABE Ml��
�__ Thisrt:ification Ccrtifict must f�c updated E�yufrni�siOn of
IL I '�t1. Compliance Affidavit. You are required tonotiry the SCTRC.A within 30
I1Wr r
�;I��t41,k' { days of any change in circumstances affecting your ability to meet size,
�:,tidisadvantage status, ownership, or controlrequirements and any material
changes in the information provided in the sul:iMission of the business
zl' application for certification.
CER�`I�1G�TE EXP�aE�. 1Of311aa� C'�r��Ftca-rr- r�c�. �o�ic►zaas�
Certified in the fallowing tiwQrk cat�oricz:
,L
T'i4rth Arrierican industry Cl lhsdication S'ysteam tP4fAICs) co toic:
541611 Administratiwc M,nagement and Gurteral Mariaq&M4snt Cansultirty
Services
5416I$ Other Management Consulting Services
$h��r�a � Taber
EX_�CLiiTlif>` i>YRE�T�t�
OUR UNDERSTANDING OF YOUR PROJECT
Key factors for success
MGT has designed an innovative and unique approach to conducting the city-wide assessment and
organizational review in partnership with the city of Fort Worth. This approach is based on our extensive
experience conducting just this type of management consulting work around the nation, including the
opportunity to assist a variety of government organizations during initial phases of such initiatives.
We begin our proposal planning with the understanding that every customer we have has different
expectations, motivations, and definitions regarding the program they wish to implement. In the case of the
city of Fort Worth, the city has shown a willingness to commit the necessary resources to the organizational
review process, and is flexible on the best way to proceed by looking for innovation, creativity and a
willingness to take a good hard look at city operations and organizational structures.
It is the role of the professionals you select to provide the methodology needed to accomplish greater
efficiency and effectiveness for the city of Fort Worth's operations. We must take a high-level look at the
structure of municipal operations, identifying any overlap or duplication, inefficiency, or agency and/or
department that may have strayed from its original mission or intended objective. This methodology must be
inherently flexible, to allow for a customization of the organizational process as the expectations and desired
outcomes of the city manager and city council become more clear and specific.
There are a number of key aspects to our methodology and work plan that we want to point out. All are
specifically designed to meet the unique challenges of the city of Fort Worth and to facilitate a "priority list"
for the city for future in�depth departmental reviews and assessments. While the work plan that follows is
tailored to Fort Worth, all of the following key factors have proven effective for us in previous work:
■ We will conduct an extensive diagnostic review, which will address the following criteria
and requirements for each department: legal obligations and intended objectives or
mission; self assessments; factors impacting growth and budget; and span of control. We
will examine city operations as a whole for organizational structure, alignment, overlap,
and duplication.
r The second part of the diagnostic review will be the benchmarking study. Comparing city
operations to cities of similar demographics, service levels, and costs. This is a standard
component of our study methodology. The cities selected for comparative analysis will be
chosen in conjunction with the city leadership and/or designated project manager, with
recommendations made by the MGT team. Based on our knowledge at this time, and
typical peer city criteria, we have made preliminary suggestions for this part of the project
in Task 3 of our work plan.
■ These two components of the diagnostic review will work in coordination with each other,
allowing for analysis of department specific functions, services, and costs. High -resource
or high -impact activities that cross functional boundaries will be analyzed in order to
identify duplications, redundancies, and unnecessary steps that exist within the network of
the departments' operations.
■ The holding of periodic "tollgates" among MGT team members to ensure clear lines of
communication among the audit teams and to ensure that all issues and areas of concern,
especially in terms of cross -cutting factors, are identified and addressed. The tollgates will
serve as forums for creative brainstorming, coordination of issue development, work effort
prioritization, and discussions of changes in direction, if needed.
■ The holding of a pre -draft report submission "tollgate" with MGT project leaders and the
city's sunset review director, city manager, and other appropriate individuals to allow for
creative brainstorming, and consideration of potential recommendations prior to final
presentation or final report (for any subsequent departmental reviews) delivery.
■ Identification of both strengths and weaknesses of current management practices,
organizational structures and operations. Commendations can be used to improve other
activities, build upon existing successes, improve morale and develop ".buy -in" among
internal stakeholders. They can also help the cityof Fort Worth develop greater credibility
with its citizens.
■ The findings and recommendations based on our diagnostic review will be presented in a
report and presentation by mid -June focusing on functional areas to be studied in�depth in
the future should the city decide to move forward with individual departmental reviews
with MGT or if the city should decide to move forward using city staff to conduct internal
sunset reviews.
OF AMERICA, INC.
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
Project approach and work plan
Our proposed approach and methodology for conducting the organizational review of city operations
illustrates our understanding of the needs of the city of Fort Worth. Our approach is based on our extensive
experience in conducting re -engineering and management audits for local and state governments, school
districts, and colleges and universities in Texas and in 47 other states.
Our methodology for conducting this project is based on approaches we have used to successfully conduct
similar studies for state and local government agencies/departments. These approaches will be tailored to
meet the specific needs of the city of Fort Worth. Our general methodology for conducting management
review studies is as follows:
■ Project Initiation MGT begins every engagement with an introductory meeting to ensure
that the goals, objectives, and details of project implementation are clearly defined and
understood. We recognize and fully support the need for a project manager or single point
of contact at the city for the general oversight of the project. We have found that this
assignment is critical to a project's success. We believe that relationships and
communication are vital components of successful projects, and are a foundation that
should be laid from day one. At the initial planning meeting, we will establish lines of
communication and the mechanism that best meets the needs of the city's project manager.
■ Project Scope. We will review and confirm the project scope and expectations during
project initiation. At the initial meeting, MGT will work with the project manager to
address issues, concerns, or priorities that may affect or influence the completion of the
project. A final detailed work plan will be developed based on these preliminary
discussions with the project manager.
■ Work Plan. We place great importance on thorough preparation for each project since it
lays the foundation for ultimate success —a satisfied client whose expectations are fully
realized. Though we have proposed a solid work plan here, once we are face-to-face with
the city, we will develop a project work plan to help:
- Establish a clear understanding with the city regarding what will be done and the
products that will be produced.
Provide a means for the city to anticipate project activities and monitor progress.
Provide a basis for making any revisions or additional specific consultant
assignments, and for managing project progress and results.
■ Communication. We place tremendous emphasis on gathering stakeholder input during
our projects. We see part of our job as helping an organization build a consensus for
necessary change, and helping an organization understand the needs and wants of its
customers and stakeholders, both internal and external, in order to provide better services.
It is also why it is important to meet with the project manager, city manager, or the city
council to discuss the MGT team's findings. This is done before a draft report is written,
in order to tentatively confirm our early research and analysis, and to conduct a creative
brainstorming session together as a partnership of client and consultant, and agree on a
direction for the final report.
■ Flexibility. We recognize that an effective work plan for any study must be flexible
enough to accommodate unforeseen circumstances, tight deadlines, problems, and issues.
An effective work plan must also probe deeper into certain organizational and
management areas when necessary. Accordingly, we are prepared to make appropriate
adjustments in our work plan and schedule at any time to produce the most effective
results possible and to maintain our time schedule.
■ Work Processes. We will develop and study criteria for city departments to be use in the
benchmarking exercise. Full-time employee (FTE) ratios to services provided, budgets,
growth, to span of control. Once criteria is developed, each department, as well as the
city's organizational structure as a whole will be reviewed. We will recommend strategies
to improve operations through sound, accountable, and efficient operations.
■ Strengths and Weaknesses. In all of our studies, we identify and document both the
strengths and weaknesses of current organizational structures, management practices and
processes, and operations. Too often, studies do a disservice by concentrating on
weaknesses and failing to identify strengths. We will look at both.
■ Recommendations. Because MGT understands that lasting and meaningful changes require
innovative and intrepid thinking, we do not shy away from questioning everything from
organizational structures and work process to the very statutes and ordinances that create
and guide the work of an organization or agency. However, ever mindful of the practical
and political realities such an organization may face, MGT is committed to offering only
practical recommendations that achieve real results.
■ Documentation. We will document all of our findings and recommendations for any
studies conducted. Facts and data will be presented to support every finding and
recommendation. Sufficient information will be presented in our report in a clear,
understandable way so that readers can follow our analyses.
MGT approaches each project as a unique challenge for which it develops a specific work plan and assigns
personnel that have the background and experience necessary to meet the needs of the client. While each
project is unique, MGT has the luxury of drawing on over 34 years of experience in completing more than
3,300 client engagements. This experience has exposed MGT consultants to virtually every issue and problem
that could confront government agencies.
In coordination with the city's requirements, MGT will conduct this study with an approach that has proved to
be successful in similar projects throughout the country. Our approach combines optimal practices in
planning, quality project management, and quality control with an exceptionally qualified team of
professionals.
Below we detail some of our management practices that we will use to ensure a successful evaluation of the
cityIs overall organization and structure.
Project Coordination and Management. A project such as this requires special efforts to ensure that all
functions receive adequate levels of review, that team members do not duplicate each other's work, and that
I
indings and recommendations are thoroughly coordinated. The keys to ensuring that all of these actions are
accomplished include:
■ Adherence to the finalized work plan and project time line.
■ Clearly ascribed project team assignments in terms of work activities and work products.
■ Frequent project team meetings to share project findings, ideas, and crosscutting issues.
Diagnostic Review. We think it is important that this project focus on the areas most likely to result in
significant cost savings or efficiencies. For this reason, we propose to conduct a diagnostic review of all
department(s) functions to ascertain those areas where the greatest efficiencies and improvements are needed.
Organizational Structure. Our approach will include a detailed examination of organizational relationships,
assignments, and staffmg levels. We will examine the current organizational structures in terms o£
■ Groupings of related functions.
■ Clear assignments of responsibilities and authority.
■ Spans of control.
■ Avoidance of internal conflict and interests.
■ Relationships of staffing levels to work loads.
■ Ability to control essential functions within division roles.
■ Ability to hold management and organizational units accountable for performance and
results.
Process Flow Analysis. Some processes can be very complicated and involved. When beneficial to the
understanding of an identified problem, the review team will map the process flow in order to conduct its
analysis. This analysis will assist the project team in determining if alternatives are available and appropriate
For improvement of operations.
Use of Prior Studies, Surveys, and Existing Data. When available, we will use the results of prior studies,
auditsI and analyses in order to avoid unnecessarily duplicating prior work. Where prior studies have made
recommendations for improvement, we will assess the level of implementation and the results of the
implementation.
Benchmarking and Best Practices. We also possess extensive experience regarding benchmarking and best
practices. This vast experience provides us with a working library of knowledge and the unique ability to
utilize such methodology to produce reliable analysis and avoid the oft -encountered challenges and
difficulties involved with comparative analysis; therefore, greatly improving our ability for accurate analysis
and planning going forward.
Assignment of Consultant Team. We know what it takes to make government work. The recommendations we
make are grounded in real -world experience. In making assignments to projects, MGT draws from its more
than 100 consultants to match the skill sets needed to ensure that the right personnel are assigned to complete
the work. Before joining MGT, our professionals served in state government agencies, city and county
offices, colleges and universities, school districts, and legislative bodies. We are committed to providing
customized models, objective research, creative recommendations, quality service, and exceptional products
that respond to the city's unique needs.
While a review of individual departments is possible, it is not recommended at this time. We support the
city's efforts to first get a clear view of operations as a whole. The best way to evaluate the effectiveness and
efficiency of Fort Worth municipal operations and government is to simultaneously examine the organization
and operation of all departments and/or functions. When departments are looked at in isolation, it restricts a
thorough cross4unctional analysis and ultimately flexibility in making structural and organizational changes.
Efficiencies most often come from optimal organization. To ensure that proper workflows and organizations
exist, at a minimum, it is recommended that studies be conducted along functional lines. For example, a
review of all "support departments" (human resources, finance, internal audit, and information services)
would enable a contractor to better assess the efficiency of operations and to maximize recommendations.
Based on our current knowledge of your project, we would propose the following tasks.
Activities:
1.1 Establish working relationships with the city council, sunset review director, city
manager, and/or the city's appointed project manager (city leadership) and MGT's
project management team.
1.2 Conduct "kick-off' meeting or meetings with city leadership and senior management
staff, department heads, and key supervisors to discuss project expectations, specific
concerns and issues, timeline, roles and responsibilities for city staff and consultants.
1.3 Determine the availability of data and obtain copies of existing reports and information
on Fort Worth city government such as:
■ department mission statements and budget objectives,
■ staffing plans,
■ departmental budgets,
■ policy/procedure manuals,
■ training manuals,
■ performance measurements and standards,
■ list of potential representative peer cities,
■ strategic planning documents,
■ prior community opinion surveys, and
■ other special reports and studies,
1.4 Confirm or identify the five comparison city governments to be used in performing peer
analysis and benchmarking.
1.5 Make appropriate revisions in the scope of services, methodology, work tasks and
activities, and time schedules, if necessary.
Deliverables:
■ Revised scope of services, work plan, and time schedule as required
■ List of comparison city governments
--
OF AMERI, .
C AINC
0
Activities:
2.1 Develop a document request to ensure that a complete and comparable set of information
and data are collected from each department or division covered by the management
audit. A tentative list of informational categories to be included in the request include:
■ revenues,
■ .operations budgets for each area being reviewed,
■ detailed organizational charts (span of control) for each department being reviewed,
■ reporting requirements/communication (internal and external),
■ levels of services (activities and volumes), and
■ facilities and equipment.
2.2 Review preliminary document request with city leadership and make appropriate revisions.
2.3 Collect requested information and data from each area.
2.4 Summarize and analyze collected information and data.
2.5 Review profiles with members and staff as necessary.
2.6 Revise profiles as appropriate for inclusion in final report of findings.
Deliverables:
■ Preliminary profile report on each city department showing functions and responsibilities
We have taken the liberty of making a tentative list of peer cities for use in this study. Communities were
selected by clustering American cities by the indicated demographic factors. Communities that showed
similar levels of distance from the mean for each factors as Forth Worth were deemed comparable. As a
result, our suggested benchmarks include cities that are large (but not the largest population centers) feature
significant diversity across ethnic groups, house poor residents, and have large homeowner communities with
average commute times. However, as we have mentioned in Task 1 of the work plan, we will be happy to
revise at project initiation.
EXHIBIT 1
Tentative Selection of Five Peer Cities for Fort Worth, Texas
Operating
Travel
Spending
Budget
Median
Time to
Per Capita
06-0
City
Pop.
06-07
thousands)
White
Black
Asian
Hispanic
Aqe
Income
Rate Rate rate (mins)
acramento city
alifornia
ucson city
rizona
516 084
$1 095
$565,320
63%
4 %
3%
39%
32.6
$36,095
20 % 55% 45% 10
Fort Worth city
exas
637,178
803
$511,820
61 %
18 %
3%
32 %
32.3
$45,276
16 % 61 % 39 % 11
EI Paso city
exas
596,189
$952
1 $567 380
75 %
1 3%
1 1 %
1 81 %
1 31.7
1 $33 103
1 26 % 1 61 % 1 39 % 1 8
ustin city
1 1 1
exas
717 100
$593 000
59 %
1 9 %
1 6 %
1 36 %
1 31.2
1 $47 212
17% 47 % 53 % 11
Dallas city
1
1
1
1
1 1
exas
11,192,538
835
995 945
53 %
24 %
2 %
43 %
31.9
36 276
22 % 47% 53 % 11
ources: Demographic data is from 2006 American Community Survey. Spending per capita data is based on latest publicly available approved
ud et reporting 06-07 expenditures. Operating budgets exclude education debt service transit and utility expenditures,
fiCllYItICS:
3.1 Perform peer analysis and benchmarking based on factors such as demographics, service
levels, and costs.
3.2 Conduct comparative analysis of similar jurisdictions to identify services, costs or
performance disparities, opportunities for productivity or service improvements, and
recognition of the City of Fort Worth's leadership on any individual factors.
Deliverables:
■ Summary of peer analysis and benchmarking
■ List of services that exceed or do not meet those of peer cities
Activities:
4.1 Conduct reviews of existing policies, procedures, organizational structures, budgets, and
workloads (from data and documents obtained in Task 2).
4.2 Administer follow-up interviews, if necessary, with appropriate staff to determine
management practices.
4.3 Execute a review and assessment of service standards, performance and outcome measures,
process bottlenecks, front-line to management communication, and management reporting
systems and operational norms.
4.4 Develop a "macro" analysis of workload flow and staffing capacity in each department and
between departments.
4.5 Prepare a summary of findings and recommendations for further in-depth study from above
steps consisting of:
OF AMERICA, INC.
■ a list of exemplary management practices,
■ functions or areas that are duplicative,
■ inefficient practices that could be eliminated,
■ staffing and management efforts to control peak demands, and
■ areas or functions that could be consolidated, eliminated, or restructured.
4.6 Produce a priority list of functions and areas to be audited during any subsequent reviews
or future sunset review activities.
Deliverables:
■ Recommendations for immediate efficiencies or improved service delivery
■ Priority list of areas and functions to be audited in more detail.
Activities:
5.1 Combine all information and findings from Tasks 1.0 through 5.0 above to be included in
report.
5.2 Prepare draft report including a coordinated presentation of the work of the functional
assessment teams and the benchmarking team. The draft report would include:
■ an executive summary of the final report project activities,
■ the design and purpose of the organizational assessment,
■ the methodology used to conduct organizational assessment,
■ profiles of all city departments covered during the project,
■ benchmark and peer analyses,
■ commendations regarding current practices, with suggestions for building upon
successful activities,
■ recommendations for immediate improvement in the effectiveness and efficiency of
key management systems, policies and operations, including general fiscal impact
estimates and implementation steps, and
■ identification of services or programs, either department focused or cross -cutting, that
should be given a more detailed, in-depth audit in subsequent reviews.
5.3 Prepare detailed plans for implementing proposed recommendations.
5.4 Conduct a "tollgate" of MGT team leaders, the city leadership and other appropriate
decision -makers to allow for creative brainstorming and consideration of potential
recommendations prior to final report delivery.
5.5 Make revisions and prepare final report based on discussions during the tollgate meeting.
Deliverables:
0
Final report and/or presentation
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND COST
Proposed timeline and proposed project cost
Exhibit 2 represents our estimated time schedule by major project tasks. We are prepared to begin the project
immediately upon notification to do so or on May 1, whichever date comes sooner, and to meet all project
deadlines issuing a final report and/or giving a presentation by the end of the week of June 23, 20084
EXHIBIT 2
Proiect Schedule
May-08
Jun-08
Week
Week Week
Week
Week
Week
Week
Week of
Task
of 51h-9th
of 12th-16th of 191h-23rd
of 26th-30th
of 2nd-61h
of 91h-131h
of 16th-20th
23rd-27th
----
----
MGT proposes to complete all of the information outlined in the previous work plan for the total sum of
$119,262. However, we are willing to discuss a revision to the scope of the project, should the city deem it
necessary.
EXHIBIT 3
OF AMERICA, INC.
c
PROJECT TEAM
Team structure and individuals assigned to your project
MGT is an employee owned company so partners are intimately involved in every project we undertake.
Project oversight begins at the top. For projects, MGT assigns a partner4n�charge who is overall responsible
to the city of Fort Worth's project manager for meeting project objectives and deadlines. Another senior staff
member is assigned as the MGT project director to handle the day-to-day management of the evaluation.
The team is additionally structured to address city departments most closely aligned and also most likely to
overlap or have duplicate efforts and/or services. MGT has the advantage of drawing subject matter experts
from its four offices to assign to studies. As previously stated, MGT's more than 140 consultants have
expertise in the areas to which they are assigned. Our team members possess critical skills and capabilities
directly relevant to this endeavor. Our team is organized along the chain of command structure, but will
integrate into a single evaluative group in order to address such overreaching issues as organization and
management, human resource issues, financial data, management, and how each department affects the others
ability to operate efficiently. In addition, upon developing recommendations based on our findings, our team
will convene to ensure all recommendations complement one another and are fiscally sound to the city as a
whole. In other words, we understand that while the city is organized into multiple departments and offices,
one of these operate in a vacuum, and that the primary objective of this project is to simplify and streamline
operations.
We recognize that the ultimate strength of any study depends on the qualifications and abilities of the project
team, as well as the structure and management of the project. Accordingly, we have carefully assembled a
project team that fully understands all aspects of local government and organizational reviews. Additionally,
several of our team members have worked together on numerous projects, creating a functional and successful
internal working relationship that will benefit the city.
Exhibit 4 illustrates the proposed management structure for the project.. This structure has been designed to
address all of the departments in the city of Fort Worth's municipal organizational structure. We have used
information available on the city's website and considered our staff expertise in order to develop the
organizational chart. However, we anticipate refinement at project initiation when we have the opportunity to
consult with city staff and leadership.
MC
OF Ah
MGT of America, Inc.
Response to the City of Fort Worth, Texas
Gity wide Review and Assessment of Municipal Organizational Structure
Fort Worth City Council andlor City
Manager
Mark Epstein
Partner -in -Charge
Team 1 -Management Services
Human Resources, IT Solutions)
Suzanne Bradford, Team Leader
Elise D'Auteil
MGT Analyst
Team 4 -Infrastructure Services
(Aviation, Engineering,
Transportation & Public Works,
Water)
Bob Lauder, Team Leader
Darrell Pierce (MBE)
MGT Analyst
Suzanne Bradford
Project Director
Team 2 -Public Safety
Bob Lauder, Team Leader
Alan Pollock
MGT Analyst
T_ eam_ 5 -Economic &Community
Development
(Economic & Community
Development, Housing, Planning &
Development)
Suzanne Bradford, Team Leader
Darrell Pierce (MBE)
MGT Analyst
Team 3 -Neighborhood Services
agement-Li6ra�y,-Parks &
Community Services)
Suzanne Bradford, Team Leader
Darrell Pierce (MBE)
MGT Analyst
Team 6 -Administration
(City Manager, City Secretary,
Internal Audit, Law (City Attorney))
Bob Lauder, Team Leader
Elise D'Auteil
MGT Analyst
Page '12
The information below is a brief summary of each team member's qualifications for this project. Detailed
resumes for each team member are available upon request.
Mr. Mark Epstein will serve the city of Fort Worth as partner -in -charge. Mr. Epstein has 30 years of
professional experience working with state and local governments, educational institutions, school districts,
non profits, and the private sector providing assistance in activity based cost identification, management and
operational reviews, grants accounting, and program management. He is a nationally recognized expert in
government cost of services, revenue maximization, and business process improvement. In addition, he has
authored a number of articles on costing and pricing services in government and conducted numerous
workshops and seminars in the user fee and cost allocation area.
Mr. Epstein's project work includes directing a project to review the management and operational studies for
the political jurisdictions within Lake County, Indiana. This privately funded multi -phased study included the
County departments, cities, school districts, and library districts. Strategies reviewed included regionalization
in specific areas, staffing reductions, consolidation of operations, technology enhancements, and management
and operational changes to enhance efficiencies and effectiveness. A review of all the operations included a
comparison with standard best practices. He also directed an organizational review of the child support
function within the Office of the Texas Attorney General. In this engagement the organizational structure,
staffing, management, reporting and delivery systems were reviewed and analyzed. As a result of the
recommendations made in the study, changes were made which increased productivity, customer satisfaction,
and the accountability of the Child Support Program.
Mr. Epstein has directed two operational reviews for the City of San Antonio, Texas. The functions reviewed
included contracting, legal, human resources, planning, building inspection, and park and recreation.
Implementation of the recommendations resulted in significant cost savings, improved efficiencies, and a
higher quality of service. He also directed financial and operational review of the functions within the City of
San Angelo, Texas. This citywide review included all general fund operations plus the enterprise operations
of the utility and airport. This study identified opportunities to consolidate operations within the City and with
the County, analyzed whether to privatize the City's utility operation, determined where efficiencies could be
realized, identified significant cost savings opportunities, and documented areas where the City could
significantly enhance its revenue.
Mr. Epstein also directed an information technology (IT) charge -back rate analysis for the City of Fort Worth,
Texas. Standard activity based costing principles and OMB Circular A47 principles were used in the
analysis. This project included designing the rate structure, identifying and collecting appropriate usage
statistics, analyzing both the direct and indirect costs of the department by activity, rate development, and
development of an implementation plan. Also included was a recommendation for a software program that
would automatically generate the usage statistics necessary to generate unit cost information. As a result of
this study, the city complied with the Section H provision of OMB Circular A-87 and could charge IT's direct
and indirect costs to federal grant programs and to its enterprise operations.
Ms. Suzanne Bradford will serve the city of Fort Worth as project director. Ms. Bradford has 20 years of
experience in financial and management accounting. She is a licensed CPA and has seven cumulative years of
work history at MGT. Ms. Bradford previous employment experience includes work in banking, health
services, and state government. She was the project director for a review of the Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report (CAFR) preparation processes for the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, which
included documenting the report consolidation process for over 200 state agencies.
Ms. Bradford has worked extensively with both state and local governments. Ms. Bradford's relevant
experience includes project work on numerous audits and business analysis for the North Carolina General
Assembly, Florida Department of Management Services, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Texas
Department of Transportation, City Clerks office in Austin, Texas, and the North Carolina Department of
Motor Vehicles. She was the assistant team leader on a process review for the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality. Ms. Bradford directed an assessment and evaluation of the City of Austin's (Texas)
police public safety operation; an evaluation of Bexar County's central magistration process for the City of
San Antonio (Texas); a comprehensive management and performance review of Jefferson County (Texas); a
comprehensive review of the City of Bonham (Texas); and a comprehensive performance review of the City
of Alice (Texas). Ms. Bradford also managed a seven -month review of the City of Austin's Fleet Services
Department. The project included a review of parts, tire, fuel, and fined assets inventory procedures, as well
as review of all maintenance operations, accounting and billing processes.
Mr. Alan Pollock is a Senior Partner and he specializes in management and organizational review studies,
including reengineering and process improvement analysis. Prior to joining MGT Mr. Pollock served as the
Director of the Texas Comptroller's Research Division where he was responsible for coordinating fiscal and
policy research on an array of pertinent issues, including taxation, technology, transportation, health and
human services, economic projections, government spending, and regulatory practices. Analyzing the impact
of proposed legislation and regulatory guidelines on economic performance, tax revenues, and need for
government services;
Under Mr. Pollock's direction, the Texas Performance Review division of the Comptroller's office conducted
three comprehensive performance audits of Texas state government, producing three comprehensive reports
outlining approximately 1,825 recommendations to improve state government operations for a total cost
savings of $10.4 billion. The Texas Legislature adopted $7.7 billion or 74 percent of those recommendations.
TPR was selected as a semi-finalist for the John F. Kennedy School of Government's Innovations in
American Government Award for 1996.
In addition to his career with the State of Texas, Mr. Pollock has served as Project Director on many projects
in which MGT conducted entity wide organizational reviews, analyzing a city or county's core organizational
structure and business processes and producing recommendations to improve the city or county's operations
and ultimately its service delivery. To provide an accurate and complete analysis, Mr. Pollock often
conducted benchmarking studies of entities' core functions and used the comparative analysis to achieve
maximum efficiency and effectiveness. His work is exemplified in projects such as a Comprehensive
Management Audit of the city of Irving (Texas), Richmond (Virginia), and most recently the public safety
departments of the city of Austin (Texas).
Mr. Robert Lauder, is one of two partners responsible for our public safety practice. He is a licensed CPA
and has been with MGT since 1999. Mr. Lauder's prior experience includes more than 13 years in state
government, where his experience includes conducting internal audits and performance reviews, including an
eight month long review of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
Mr. Lauder has conducted numerous performance reviews for various law enforcement departments and the
divisions by which a given department is organized. He has an extensive knowledge of law enforcement
organizations and operations, including property and evidence collection and management systems. Each of
his police operations review projects has included an analysis of these systems and this experience has
provided him with a working library of best practices. As a CPA, he possesses extensive knowledge and
experience with accounting, budgeting, financial analysis and performance auditing. His knowledge of
performance audits as they apply to law enforcement in small, medium, and large cities, and his
understanding and appreciation of the effects of a dynamic and growing city on its public safety will be a
great contribution to the success of the project.
Mr. Lauder's relevant experience includes, but is not limited to, currently directing a review of the public
safety departments for the City of Austin (Texas), a review of the Marion County (Oregon) Sheriff's
department; and a review of the police department for the city of Tulsa (Oklahoma). He served as project
director for a police resource allocation study for the City of Miami (Florida); team leader on a
comprehensive performance audit of the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (Tennessee); team leader
for a performance review of the Lee County Sheriff's Office (Florida); consultant on a performance review of
Bonney Lake Police Department (Washington). Bob also directed a project for an overall review of county
operations in Jefferson County (Texas).
Ms. Elise d'Auteuil has more than twenty years of experience working with state and local govemment. She
has an extensive knowledge of local government operations through her project experiences as a consultant
and her 5 years of work with the Dallas County budget office. Her experiences include the preparation of
indirect cost rate proposals (ICRP), cost allocation plans (CAP) in accordance with GAAP for the
identification of general fund costs provided to non general fund entities, charge -back rates for billed services,
activity based cost of services studies, costing of services for which a fee is charged or maybe charged, and
both and organizational and operational reviews. Her responsibilities have included the collection and
analysis of organizational, financial and performance data.
Ms. d'Auteuil has completed local government project work for the cities of Greenville, Texas and the City of
Santa Ana, California as wells as county work in Bexar, Galveston, Harris, Travis, and Tarrant in the state of
Texas.
Mr. Darrell Pierce is presently the Principal and founder of SNAP Management Group, Inc. He serves as a
senior lead consultant, and provides consulting services focused on determining best practices, streamlining
processes, reviewing programs, and implementing solutions. He recently worked as a subcontractor with
MGT on our project to review the public safety departments for the city of Austin.
He has over sixteen years of experience in management —reviewing programs, managing change management
initiatives, developing organizations, building and re -engineering processes, team building, managing teams,
building strategic management systems and developing supply chain management systems. His recent
experience includes conducting performance reviews and improving processes for private and public
organizations including Travis County Law Enforcement, Austin Energy, City of Austin, Capital
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Health Department, Health and Human Services Commission, and
Texas Education Agency.
Darrell served at the General Services Commission (CSC) as the Director of Executive Business
Administration, and worked in a lead role for two fortune 100 companies. Further, he also served as a
Commissioner on the City of Austin's Planning Commission and Chaired the Capital Improvement
Committee. He holds a business degree from St. Edwards University, pursuing an advanced degree in
leadership/ethics, graduated from United States Air Force Police Academy, and is a graduate from Leadership
Austin.
SNAP Management Group, Inc. is a registered 8A minority owned business through the federal government
program, a Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) with the state of Texas, and a certified MBE, AABE,
SBE through the South Central Texas Regional, as well as a MBE with the city of Austin, Texas.
Historically Underutilized Business
Certification and Compliance Program
r J�
== The Texas .Buading $.ProcuremenF Comnussiar(TBPG),.
--_- hereby certifies that
SNAP MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.
has successioly met the established requirements of the
State of Texas Historically Underutifiied Business (HUB)'
Certification and Compliance Program to be recognized as aHUB.
1M aY.Tax>=. pram lY EEe-a tle any f en
rams f"Ctrdkam, and cdmos..te rAvam xeaam a. s,r
ro.darsoar�maG". «w+u..aaas,es.p�++.a_ ems..
1Are m.-1 i+'tlrf u:+�] mn.a n:ti,' ram - ,ec*l+^n�ds-4 rfa
o � N' m wgFta m-sa te.:z.4� m brz omrs,a we eaatras �.
caY aim m+'v �C�a�a�smf,w^�9aa�.`•-+>.
CaY.r IWIDIYntee i'ieVtl+Os MerM. 8J1M
Appoipt �- oz.r�azoos -
EpiraSonWle: otE�-ao,o
a,aa� ma,.roce
a=e�.a�a.i ..•�.>xe n nwte xw orrFzn;, o.
�av rcyiaayspc>riYn®l arq wSscrTNTae ��vaa,aw,a,a�ssz
1Jt23lR1JtYA
)
ERICA, INC-
= mdri _ SCTRCA
nBuaf ss Easresaa
wE.aaar.a and Rso m
% j SNAP Management Group
ttn acgmo `_artd>+ tl Sa UNmi-T¢a"a S
tG+AM (5 o and h: aCc d,In. danon..il,
serRce ssv, a.m Eeama as
` see A E naE
J1r;; o7t ous cPebem max ea ataata: by a
CaroCaaC AMe�ru. va. m-t. 9e] m roily tae SCTRCA Y.;h-ar ]o
Crysd any doma in [Ca¢rtastanas athi-mg ra t 1v mess tt y
d r...� j a.rRsnq. or and am meaa
; = - uti= .n Me sai;mou. i.
re - aadsa(aa �asmrs.sa.an,ay.r,-
carb+aa wsix roeaa,a mat an�
�. akr,E .nwiv¢.Geu±ary sass+-�bdn Syr codo*
senOms
- -• - waq.m.,s o.��ass.,,as�.,,maua•..w
Gl1y ojAusiLr
Depnrbrrent ojSnrnll adrd bllnorlJplinsinesx Resptnres
Cer+i(ies Jlrn!
SNAP Management Group
mee)s all illc criteria established by the City of Austin Minority -Owned and Women -Owned
(iusirress Enterprise Procurement Program, and is registered as a
Affinorlty-Owned Business Enterprise
With the City of Austin.
Ex MTIDNDATE
7/17J2D0a
5kldi EDm Irminimft l flea u,ala)for i=War4 omdryxat. vim JF
'tkRn¢n:v(¢(Sn�ll add Atimn6 auteae Rc of M%4rin. aJ idr] or oWima t efiot0m csh
Ysrifintuv arani�eaikv�tat¢�eav b¢blsld<d L,
caNar50.XV140: -
cn\"S \'EnwR CY1nE: s�9n141.
E%EPITJVE 131 C DR
PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE
Recent and similar project experience
MGT is a leader in the field of performance and management reviews. Our approach to evaluating an
organization is to work cooperatively and in consultation with our clients. There are two primary reasons for
this philosophy.
First, we believe that cooperative and consultative working relationships yield not only smoother project
processes, but also higher quality project outcomes. Although we are widely recognized as being an
exceptionally qualified management consulting firm with a stellar reputation, we know that the more people
who are examining an issue or problem, the more creative and plentiful the possible resolutions are going to
be. In short, while we will be doing the work, we want our clients to be part of what we like to refer to as the
"thinking team."
Second, although we are technical experts in conducting performance and management reviews, we recognize
that we can never understand the subject matter of our projects as well as the organizations we serve. Here we
must ultimately rely on the experience and expertise of our clients, their understanding of their concerns and
needs, and their willingness and ability to communicate goals, objectives, and desired outcomes to us. The
invariable result —smoother processes and superior products.
Over the past 34 years, we have conducted numerous projects addressing management performance, cost-
effectiveness, and service quality at the city, county, and state levels. This record of success is based on the
following:
■ Sound Recommendations and Imptementation Strategies. We have found over the years
that most major improvements require bold thinking that breaks traditional molds. Our
team members are not afraid to question existing organizational structures, programs,
policies, rules, statutes, operations, work processes, and staffing patterns. We are
experienced in the design of both sound recommendations for improvements and effective
implementation plans. In some cases, the implementation of our comprehensive
management study recommendations has saved our clients millions of dollars.
■ Management Study Guidelines. To be effective, a management study must be disciplined.
While flexibility is required to prioritize important operational areas and to follow leads
suggested by accumulated findings, a management study cannot be conducted in a helter-
skelter manner. It must follow a set of guidelines to ensure that all operations are analyzed
effectively. Through the years, MGT has developed a detailed and extensive set of
guidelines for conducting management, operational, and performance studies. By starting
with a proven set of guidelines, we are able to save our clients both time and money that
can be devoted to conducting a more thorough study of operations with the focus on
improving efficiency and effectiveness.
■ Project Team Qualifications. Our firm qualifications translate into project team
qualifications. Most of our proposed project team members have worked on the numerous
projects listed in our firm qualifications. Our team membersqualifications, education, and
experience were described previously.
b
■ Objectivity and Flexibility. We have no vested interests in the outcomes of the
management study and can thus assure the city of Fort Worth of our objectivity. We will
not be assessing any programs that we have designed. In addition, we will be receptive to
any comments or concerns raised by the city and will accommodate any changes that are
necessary to ensure the completion of a valid and responsive final report.
Our relevant experience provides us with superior qualifications to conduct this city-wide organizational
review and assessment for the city of Fort Worth. To demonstrate the depth and breadth of our experience, we
have provided a representative sample of our review/audit experience.
Client: City of Irving, Texas
Contact: Mr. Steve MCcullough
(former City Manager)
214/60&7746
smecullough51@yahoo.com.
MGT performed a comprehensive management audit of the city of Irving including an extensive review of
department operations and staffing. The management audit included holding a public input process for
citizens, businesses, and city employees to provide the project team with issues and ideas concerning city
operations. MGT developed recommendations to make improvements in city operations, strengthen fiscal
accountability, improve communications and operations among city departments, and improve services to the
citizens of Irving. MGT developed detailed implementation steps and a timeline to help guide the city in
implementing the recommendations. Finally, MGT prepared a methodology to monitor the implementation of
the recommendations. The report was well accepted by the city, and out of the 117 recommendations
proposed, Irving implemented 96.
Performance Audit of Department of Corrections
Client: Legislative Service Bureau (LSB) of the Oklahoma Legislature
Contact: Mr. Tom Walls (Senate)
Chief of Staff
405/ 521-5670
MGT was retained by the Legislative Service Bureau of the Oklahoma Legislature to complete a
comprehensive performance review of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections and its related programs. In
the course of this review MGT completed a review of the Department of Correction's operations with a
primary focus on the identification of steps that can improve efficiency and reduce costs. In its final report
MGT outlined steps that could be initiated in order to plan for the growth of the system's inmate population in
a manner that is consistent with the need to maintain public safety.
Countywide Assessment and Management Review
Client: Jefferson County, Texas
Contact: Cary Erickson
Human Resource Director
(409) 839-2391
MGT conducted a comprehensive performance and management review of Jefferson County, Texas. Review
areas included the county's enterprise operations (Entertainment Complex and County Airport) and the
Following general government functions: road and bridge, health and welfare, human resources, budget risk
management, management information systems, library services, veterans' services, maintenance, service
center facilities, engineering, and emergency management.
Operational Performance Audit of County and School Svstem
Client: Anderson County, Tennessee
Contact: Jay Yeager
Assistant County Attorney
865482-3933
MGT conducted a comprehensive operational performance audit of Anderson County, Tennessee,
government. The purpose of the audit was to ensure that all aspects of Anderson County government were
operating efficiently, economically, effectively, and in compliance with all policies, procedures, and statutory
regulations. MGT evaluated county governmental operations, comparing them with established laws,
regulations, and policies, identified findings, and developed recommendations for system -wide
improvements. This audit encompassed 42 county departments, including the School Department and
governing Board of Education, other offices, boards, and commissions of Anderson County.
Client: City of Austin, Texas
Contact: Patrick Johnson
Office of the City Auditor
City of Austin
512/974-2805
patrick.johnson@ci.austin.tx.us
MGT is currently conducting an in{lepth study of the public safety operations for the city of Austin. The
study focuses primarily on the Austin Police Department (APD), but also includes the Office of Police
Monitor, and three related city of Austin public safety departments, the Austin Airport Police; the Austin
Parks Police; and the City Marshals. The study is focused on the economy and efficiency of public safety
operations with specific emphasis on the major cost drivers and service delivery improvements; management
structure and organization of public safety, and community indicators and trends with respect to public safety
outcomes. APD functions on a current budget of $183.4 million and employs 1,435 uniform and 595 civilian
personnel. APD utilizes a neighborhood -based policing model which aligns the city into nine area commands.
Organizational Study
Client: Scotland County, North Carolina
Contact: Shepard Jones
Scotland County Sheriff
910/277-2580
sherif[@scotlandsheriff.org
(former reference County Manager Scott Sauer now retired)
Scotland County hired MGT to conduct an organizational and management study. The specific objectives
established by Scotland County for this review project included developing findings and recommendations
related to efficiencies, structure, staffing, turnover, organization, and outsourcing. MGT made
recommendations to contain costs and improve management strategies, ultimately leading to better and more
efficient expenditures of County funds.
Manasement Studv of Dorchester County
Client: Dorchester County, South Carolina
Contact: Jakie Walters
Special Projects Director
843/563-0219
MGT completed a management and organization study for Dorchester County. The study focused on
organizational structure, staffing levels, and critical issues of concern for all county departments, including
the. Dorchester County has over 500 employees who provide a wide range of public services. The project
included_ considerable input from elected officials, appointed officials, and managers and supervisors. MGT
prepared an extensive number of recommendations for consideration by the County Council.
Client: City of Tulsa, Oklahoma
MGT was just awarded a contract to conduct an analysis of the police patrol staffing requirements and the
police department for the Tulsa Police Department. MGT will perform an analysis of patrol officer staffing
and deployment requirements, as well as an analysis of the department's non -sworn employee needs. MGT
All also determine adequate staffing in order to conduct criminal investigations of crimes that meet minimum
solvability factors. A plan will then designed to deploy the required number of police patrol officers cost-
effectively.
Evaluation and Analysis of the Police Oversight Ordinance and Police Oversight Svstem
Client: City of Albuquerque, New Mexico
Contact: Mike McCan
Policy Analyst
City of Albuquerque
505/768-3100
mmccan@cabq.gov
MGT was hired to evaluate and make a complete assessment and analysis of the city of Albuquerque's entire
police oversight process. MGT made recommendations based on the analysis and best practices that will
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the process. The evaluation included reviews of the roles of the
Independent Review Officer and the Police Oversight Commission.
Police Deployment Study
Client: City of Richmond, Virginia
Contact: Alicia Zatcoff
(former General Counsel, Richmond Police Department)
Program Manager
Community Assisted Public Safety Program
804/646-3055
alicia.zatcoff@richmondgov.com
MGT conducted a study of the Richmond Police Department's deployment practices and recommended
changes in patrol district configurations, staffing levels, shift schedules, and use of special police units to
provide greater police coverage. For the project, MGT conducted community focus groups and internal
stakeholder interviews to ascertain perceptions and priorities of internal and external stakeholders.
Client: City of Miami, Florida
MGT conducted a police resource allocation study for the city of Miami to review and analyze the existing
law enforcement environment, organizational structure, management practices, staffmg, and support resources
of the Miami Police Department. The study, a comprehensive performance and management audit of the
police department, focused on maximizing the use of existing resources, cutting operating costs, and
strengthening the organizational structure. The study included an analysis of the deployment of patrol officers
to meet calls for service, the use of sworn staff to handle the investigative workload of the department, and the
use of sworn and civilian staff. In addition, MGT assessed the use and condition of facilities, technology, and
vehicles.
Client: Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee
MGT conducted a comprehensive performance audit of the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department
(MNPD). MGT compared MNPD to selected peer police departments as a whole, and to selected benchmarks
and best practices; evaluated specific areas of administration, enforcement, staffing and other areas against
policies, procedures, and other standards promulgated by MNPD; identified major strengths, weaknesses, and
opportunities for improvement for all operational areas, including significant contributing factors behind
those strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities. The comprehensive audit was used to develop a long-range
planning model to help MNPD achieve goals, fulfill its mission, and to enhance its overall effectiveness in the
EXHIBIT 5
MGT PARTIAL CLIENT LISTING FOR PAST THREE YEARS
Bexar County, TX Charlottesville City Schools, VA
City of St. Paul, MN City of Tampa, FL
County of Orange CA City of Atlanta, GA
Kem County Superintendent of Schools CA Stanislaus County Office of Education, CA
Deschutes County Sheriffs Office, OR Town of Frisco Police Department, CO
Fresno County, CA Dillon County, SC
Los Angeles City Controller, CA Albemarle County, VA
L.A. County Office of Education, CA City of Tamarac, FL
City of Cape Coral, FL Dallas County, TX
City of North Miami, FL City of Bonham, TX
Citrus County, FL Pinellas County Charter Commission, FL
King County Department of Adult & Juvenile Detention, WA County of Kankakee, IL
Town of Jupiter, FL Miami Dade County, FL
Charleston County, SC Orange County, FL
Tallahassee Housing Authority, FL City of Easley, SC
City of Albuquerque, NM DeKalb County, GA
Indian River County, FL City of Columbia, SC
Maury County, TN Town of Hampton, SC
Town of Davie, FL City of Boynton Beach, FL
Anderson Housing Authority, SC NY City Economic Development Corporation
City of Richmond Hill, GA Miami -Dade Expressway Authority, FL
Charlotte County, FL City of Waynesville, NC
City of Casselberry, FL Jasper County, SC
City of Tallahassee, FL Citrus County, FL
Jefferson County, TX City of Longwood, FL
City of Titusville, FL Hillsborough County, FL
Oklahoma County, OK City of Anderson, SC
Anderson County, TN Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County, FL
Hillsborough County, FL Richland County, SC
City of Fort Walton Beach, FL City of Key West, FL
Travis County, TX District of Columbia Department of Corrections
City of Gulf Port, FL Fulton County, GA
City of Lakewood, Washington Charlotte County, FL
City of Toledo, OH Hidalgo County, TX
York County, SC Nassau County Office of Housing and Intergovernmental Affairs,
York County Library, SC NY
City of Gloucester, MA City of North Miami, FL
City of Lake Worth, FL City of Phoenix, AZ
City of Boulder, Colorado City of Hampton, VA
City of Santa Fe Springs, CA Jacksonville Transportation Authority, FL
Orange County, FL City of Key West, FL
Los Angeles County, CA City of St. Petersburg, FL
Miami Dade County, FL City of Marathon, FL
City of Florence, SC Montgomery County Criminal Justice Council, OH
City of Chula Vista, CA Sedgwick County, KS
Barnwell County, SC San Josh Department of Parks, Recreation & Neighborhood
City of Santa Fe Springs, CA Services, CA
Alachua County Board of Commissioners, FL Hampton County, SC
Pickens County, SC Metropolitan Nashville Head Start, TN
Brazos County, TX City of Anderson, SC
If you have any questions about the information presented in this submittal, or require any additional
information, please do not hesitate to contact Mark Epstein at 512/476-4697 ext. 4405 or by a -mail at
mepstein@mgtamer. corn
Page 1 of 2
City of Fort Worth, Texas
Mayor and Council Communication
COUNCIL ACTION: Approved on 5/13/2008
DATE: Tuesday, May 13, 2008
LOG NAME: 02SUNSET
REFERENCE NO.: **C-22803
SUBJECT:
Authorize Execution of a Professional Services Agreement with MGT of America, Inc., in the
Amount of $119,262, to Perform a Citywide Review and Assessment of the Municipal Organizational
Structure
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a professional services
agreement with MGT of America, Inc., in the amount of $119,262, to perform a Citywide review and
assessment of the municipal organizational structure.
DISCUSSION:
During the FY2007-08 budget process, and in subsequent discussions, Council Members have indicated a
desire to implement a formal Sunset Review process for the City of Fort Worth. Accordingly, the City
Manager established the Sunset Review Division.
The purpose of the Sunset Review Process is to:
1. Identify more effective methods of service delivery;
2. Identify efficiencies in the organization;
3. Identify overlap and/or duplication of programs, services and/or functions; and
4. Provide periodic validation of programs, services and functions.
For the current year, staff has been tasked to bring a consultant on board to perform a comprehensive
Citywide review and assessment of the municipal organization structure.lf warranted, based on
recommendations resulting from this review, the City Manager may implement changes in the organization's
mission, structure and operations. The results of this review will also be used to develop the Plan for future
annual departmental reviews.
MGT of America, Inc., is in
n compliance with the City's MWBE Ordinance by committing to 10 percent
MWBE participation on this contract.
FISCAL INFORMATION/CERTIFICATION:
The Finance Director certifies that funds are available in the current operating budget of the General
Fund. No funds were budgeted for purpose; however the department will attempt to find savings to offset
Page 2 of 2
these expenditures.
TO Fund/AccountlCenters
Submitted for City Manager's Office !�:
Originating Department Head:
Additional Information Contact:
FROM Fund/AccountlCenters
GG01 539120 0905500 $119,262.00
Karen Montgomery (6222)
Bridgette Garrett (8518)
Bridgette Garrett (8518)
1�4tr.•//or,r.c� n%:mni nrfr/rniinnil 119/�UPi/KPn/1riC/YY1!` r�rint