HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-01 City Council (2)City of Palo Alto
City.Manager’s Report
TO:
FROM:
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: POLICE
DATE:
SUBJECT:
April 1, 2002 CMR: 191:02
APPROVAL OF AMENDED JOINT FUNDING
AGREEMENT RELATED TO COUNTYWIDE RADIO
INTEROPERABILITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY DATA
COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council authorize the City Manager to execute an
amended Joint Funding Agreement with other Santa Clara County cities for the
purpose of establishing a Radio Interoperability and Public Safety Data
Communications Network.
BACKGROUND
On June 4, 2001, the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a Joint
Funding Agreement (JFA) with other Santa Clara County cities for consulting
services to solve radio and data interoperability issues between public safety
agencies (CMR 245:1, Attachment B). Like many jurisdictions across the nation,
Santg Clara County public safety agencies are experiencing a number of
performance issues associated with the inefficient and tintimely exchange of
information, a lack of inter-agency field communication, and unnecessarily long
call processing times. These limitations severely impact the delivery of timely and
quality law enforcement, fire and emergency medical services.
As part of developing of an implementation strategy for the project, the network
participants hired William L. Doolittle and Associates. Upon receipt of the first
maj or project deliverable in late July 2001, it became evident the consultant would
not be able to meet the objectives set forth in the professional services agreement
and that it lacked the level of expertise necessary to complete the scope of work
for the project. After repeated attempts to improve the quality of the work
CMR: 191:02 Page I of 4
¯product, the Communications Steering Committee, on behalf of the network
participants, terminated the agreement with Doolittle & Associates.
In the meantime, the Steering Committee became aware of new emergent
technology: a "black box" hardware solution that was being used by the U.S.
military and federal law enforcement agencies (Secret Service, NSA and FBI) to
assist with radio interoperability. The hardware is just now being marketed as an
interoperability solution to local public safety agencies. Project Staff are currently
evaluating the feasibility of using this technology to solve local interoperability
issues and identify any technical issues this type of technology might have.
In November 2001, the Communication Steering Committee (the oversight
committee for the project) received authorization to proceed with the project using
in-house staff from the participating agencies. It seemed clear that, given the
expertise within local jurisdictions to analyze and design the system, and the
apparent availability of this new hardware, the use of available funds was better
spent on. solving the problem as opposed to hiring another consultant to design the
system.
DISCUSSION
The amended JFA provides the flexibility needed to research new technology,
analyze the various alternatives for both the radio and data interoperability
network and, as appropriate, implement the solutions.
For the radio portion of the project, the amended agreement provides the
Communications Steering Committee with the authority to purchase equipment
and utilize the services of an outside contractor to install the equipment.
Individual agency radio technicians can complete some of the radio infrastructure
work on the hardware purchased as part of the project; modifications or
enhancements needed to op.timize system coverage and installation services can be
obtained from an outside contractor.
The other portion of the project includes the development of a data network that
would allow interoperability between public safety dispatch centers and field
personnel throughout the county. Data sharing has become an even more
important priority for public safety and justice agencies since the events of
September 11. Although current technical staff has the expertise to work through
issues for the data network, the amended JFA provides the Steering Committee
with the authority to hire outside professionals to assist in finalizing the network
design should it become necessary.
CMR: 191:02 Page 2 of 4
Along with periodic project updates to County Police and Fire and the
County/Cities Managers’ Association, the network participants will be provided
with an implementation strategy that clearly delineates the equipment which will
be purchased, deployment and installation strategies and a final project timetable.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Each participating jurisdiction made an equal contribution of $19,500. Of the
$371,000 accumulated for the project, approximately $70,000 was paid to
Doolittle & Associates for its work on the project (in accordance with the
contract), leaving a balance of $300,000. Remaining funds will be used to
purchase equipment. In addition, the Communications Steering Committee is
working with the Department of Justice and other state and federal agencies to
seek alternative funding should it be required for the full implementation of this
project.
No additional appropriation of monies by the City Council is required at this time.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This agreement is Consistent with existing City policy.
TIMELINE
The timeline to complete the first phase of this project remains on schedule and
should be completed by January 2003.
ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIRED
Any environmental impact under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) will be determined in subsequent phases of the project.
CMR: 191:02 Page 3 of 4
Attachment A: Amended Santa Clara County Data and Radio Communications
Joint Funding Agreement
Attachment B: CMR 245:01 -June 4, 2001
PREPARED BY: ""-~~~~’~~
SHERYL A. C~TOIS
Technical Services Coordinator
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
Chief of Police
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
EMILY"~IARRIS ON
Assistant City Manager
~MR: 191:02 Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENT A
AMENDED SANTA CLARA COUNTY DATA COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
JOINT FUNDING AGREEMENT
This Amended Joint Funding Agreement ("Agreement") is made by and between the Cities of Campbell,
Gilroy, Los Altos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa
Clara, Saratoga, Sunnyvale, the Towns of Los Gatos, Los Altos Hills, the South Santa Clara County Fire
District, County of Santa Clara, San Jose State University and the Santa Clara Valley Water District and
is dated for identification purposes this 5t~ of March, 2002.
Recitals
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara County/Cities Managers Association has established a Santa Clara
County Data and Radio Communications Task Force for the purpose of creating county wide radio
interoperability and a public safety radio and data communications network to enable the real time
exchange of event and resource data between automated and non-aut0mated Public Safety
Communications Centers within Santa Clara County to improve public safety and emergency services by
enhancing field communications during emergencies and reducing response time of emergency resources
; and
WHEREAS, the cities of Campbell, Gilroy, Los Altos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill,
Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Saratoga, Sunnyvale, the Towns of Los Gatos, Los
Altos Hills, the South Santa Clara County Fire District, County of Santa Clara, San Jose State University
and the Santa Clara County Valley Water District (individually referred to as "Network Participant" and
collectively "Network Participants") all desire to design county wide radio interoperability and a public
safety radio and data communications network system that can be implemented in each of their respective
agencies at a significant cost savings to each Network Participant; and
WHEREAS, Network Participants previously approved a Joint Funding Agreement to retain the
services of William J. Doolittle and Associates, Incorporated to conceptually design and develop an
implementation strategy for county wide radio interoperability and the public safety radio and data
communications network; and
WHEREAS, Network Participants have determined that hardware solutions exist that offers an
economical and reliable radio interoperability solution; and
WHEREAS, Network Participants desire to acquire a radio communications system providing
interoperability between all Network Participants utilizing ~the available radio interoperability solution in
Santa Clara County; and
WHEREAS, Network Participants have determined that the Communications Steering Committee
and existing agency staff of the Network Participants possess the knowledge and capability of designing a
countywide data communications network system; and
WHEREAS, the Communications Steering Committee terminated the agreement with William J.
Doolittle and Associates prior to completion 0f the design and implementation of the a county wide radio
interoperability and the public safety radio and data communications network; and
WHEREAS, Network Participants now desire to amend the Joint Funding Agreement to allow the
Communications Steering Committee to expend monies allocated for the consultant to manage the design
of the county wide radio interoperability and the public safety radio and data communications network,
purchase of the radio interoperability system, radio infrastructure equipment for existing radio systems to
enhance the functionality of the interoperability system, and, if required, to retain consulting services to
assist in the design of the data communications network;
(
Each of the Network Participants now desire to amend the Joint Funding Agreement to read as
follows:
A. Purpose
In accordance with California Government Code Section 6502, the purpose of this Agreement is not
to create an independent authority but to jointly exercise the contracting power of all the public
agencies that are Network Participants to this Agreement to retain the professional services of
consultants for the conceptual design and development of an implementation strategy for countywide
radio interoperability .system and a public safety radio and data communications network and-realize a
significant cost savings, to purchase a radio communications system providing interoperability
between all Network.Participants utilizing the radio interoperability system and jointly apply for state,
federal and/or private alternate funding grants for the purchase of the radio interoperability and/or the
data communications network system.
B. Authorization.
Each Network Participant is authorized by its respective governing body or Board of Directors to
amend the Joint Funding Agreement to jointly exercise each Network Participant’s individual power
to retain the services of consultants for the conceptual design and development of an implementation
strategy for countywide radio interoperability and a public safety radio and data communications
network as set forth herein, to purchase a radio communications system providing interoperability
between all Network Participants and to apply for state, federal and/or private alternate funding grants
on behalf of the Network Participants for the funds to purchase the radio interoperability system
and/or the data communications network equipment.
C. Communications Steering Committee
1.Composition: The Communications Steering Committee shall consist of thefollowing five (5)
representatives appointed from their respective associations:
a.A City Manager from the Santa Clara County/Cities Managers’ Association;
b.A Fire Chief from the Santa Clara County Fire Chiefs Association;
c.A Police Chief from the Santa Clara County Police Chiefs Association; and
d.Two representatives from the Public Safety Communications Managers Association
2. Authority
ao Delegation of Authority: Each Network Participant hereby authorizes to the Communications
Steering Committee to (1) execute the professional services agreements with consultants in
the name of the Network Participants as provided herein; (2) to administer these agreements,.
including, but not limited to authorize payment for services rendered under these agreements
and the power to terminate the agreement on behalf of all Network Participants; (3) purchase
a radio communications system providing interoperability between all Network Participants?
and (4) apply for state, federal and/or private alternative fdnding grants on behalf of the
Network Participants to purchase the radio interoperability system and/or data
communications network equipment.
.,
b.Limitation. The Communications Steering Committee is only authorized to spend those monies
committed under this Agreement by the respective legislative bodies of the Network Participants.
Proiect Manager: For purposes of this Agreement, the Technical services Coordinator for the
Palo Alto Police Department and the Manager of Technical Services Bureau for the Sunnyvale
Department of Public Safety shall be designated the Project Directors. The Communications
Steering Committee is authorized to appoint a differentmember as Project Director provided that
written notice is given to the Network Participants.
Funding
Proportionate share of Funding. Each Network Participant shall share the expense for any
hardware, software and professional services equally under this Agreement. The amount of each
Network Participant’ s share shall be Nineteen Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety-nine Dollars
and forty-seven cents ($19,499.47)
Payment due date: Each Network Participant shall make no more than two payments to the City
of Mountain View: Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) is due no later than July 30, 2001 and
thebalance of Four Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety-Nine Dollars and forty-seven cents
($4,499.47) must be received by the City of Mountain View no later than March 30, 2002.
Payments shall be made payable to the City of Mountain View and sent to the attention of the
Finance and Administrative Services Department, 500 Castro Street, P.O. Box7540, Mountain
View, CA 94039
Agency/Internal Trustee Account: The City of Mountain View shall deposit all the payments it
receives from the Network Participants and any grant funding into an Agency/Internal Trustee
Account. In lieu of an administrative fee for administering the account, no interest shall accrue to
the account. Upon receipt of written authorization from the Communications Steering Committee
or its designee, the City of Mountain View shall make payments on behalf of the Network
Participants to purchase radio communications hardware and/or data communication network
equipment and, if required, to pay for consultant services rendered to conceptually design and
develop an implementation strategy for a county wide public data communications network.
Use of Funding: The City of Mountain View shall only spend the monies received under this
agreement upon receipt of an authorized invoice from the Communications Steering Committee
and only for the purpose of paying for hardware, Software and/or professional services rendered
pursuant to the agreement to conceptually design and implement a county wide public safety
radio and data communications network, providing interoperability between all Network
Participants in Santa Clara County.
Accounting: No more than twice per fiscal year and only upon receipt of written request from the
Communications Steering Committee, the City of Mountain View will provide an accounting to
the Communications Steering Committee of the monies paid from the Agency/Internal Trustee
Account pursuant to this Joint Funding Agreement.
Disposition of Any Remaining Funds: Upon completion of the project, if funds totaling One
Hundred Dollars ($100,00) or more remain in the agency account then the City of Mountain View
shall disburse to each Network Participant its proportionate share of the amount remaining (no
interest shall accrue).
This Agreement shall terminate upon written notice from the Communications Steering Committee
. that the design of a countywide radio interoperability and public safety radio and data
communications network system is complete. Upon receipt of that notice, the Network Participants
shall have thirty (30) days to register any objections in writing with the Communications Steering
Committee relating to this Agreement.
F. Indemnification.
Go
In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro rata risk allocation which might otherwise be imposed between
the Network Participants pursuant to Government Code Section 895.6, the Network Participants agree
that all losses or liabilities incurred by any Network Participant shall not be shared pro rata but
instead each of the Network Participants agree that pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, each
of the Network Participants hereto shall fully indemnify and hold each of the other Network
Participants, their officers, board members, employees and agents, harmless from any claim, expense
or cost, damage or any liability arising out of the performance of this Agreement, payments made by
the City of Mountain View to consultants for professional services or for the purchase of software or
hardware or the acts of the Communications Steering Committee on behalf of the Network
Participants.
Notices.
All notices required by this Agreement will be deemed given when in writing and delivered
personally or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed
to the other Network Participants at the addresses set forth on the signature pages of this Agreement
or at such other address as the Network Participants may designate in writing in accordance with this
section.
H. Governing Law
This Agreement has been executed and delivered in, and will be construed and enforced in
accordance with, the laws of the State of California. Proper venue for legal action regarding this
Agreement will be in the County of Santa Clara.
Severability
ff any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be void, invalid or
unenforceable, the same will either be reformed to comply with the applicable law or stricken, if not
so conformable, so as not to affect the validity or enforceability of this Agreement.
The Network Participants have ’caused this Amended Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized
representatives.
CITY OF CAMPBELL TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Bernard Strojny, CityManager
City of Campbell
70 North First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Debra Figone Town Manager
Town of Los Gatos
110 E Main Street
Post Office Box 949
Los Gatos CA 95031
CITY OF MILPITAS
David Knapp, City Manager
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
CITY OF GILROY
Thomas Wilson, City Manager
City of Milpitas
455 E. Cala’~eras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035
CITY OF MONTE SERENO
Jay Baksa, City Administrator
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
CITY OF LOS ALTOS
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
City of Monte Sereno
18041 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road
Monte Sereno, CA 95030
CITY OF MORGAN HILL
Phil Rose, City Manager
City of Los Altos
1 North San.Antonio Road
Los Altos, CA 94022
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
Ed Tewes, City Manager
City of Morgan Hill
17555 Peak Avenue
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
Maureen Cassingham, Town Manager
Town of Los Altos Hills
25379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
Kevin Duggan, City Manager
City of Mountain View
500 Castro Street
Post Office Box 7540
Mountain View, CA 94039
CITY OF PALO ALTO COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
Frank Benest, City Manager
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Post Office Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
CITY OF SAN JOSE
Richard.Wittenberg, County Executive
Santa Clara County
70 West Hedding Street
Eleventh Floor, East Wing
San Jose, CA 95110
SAI~ JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY
De! Borgsdorf, City Manager
City of San Jose
801 North First Street, Room 436
San Jose, CA 95110
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
.Ric Abeyta, Chief of Police
San Jose State University Police
One Washington Square
San Jose, CA 95192
SOUTH SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE
DISTRICT
Jennifer Sparacino, City Manager
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
CITY OF SARATOGA
Dave Anderson, City Manager
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
CITY OF SUNNYVALE
Robert LaSala, City Manager
City of Sunnyvale
456 West Olive Avenue
Post Office Box 3707-94088
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Steven Woodill, Fire Chief
South Santa Clara County Fire District
Protection
15670 Monterey Street
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT
Stanley M. Williams, Chief Executive Officer
/General "Manager
Santa Clara Valley Water District
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118-3614
ATTACHMENT B
TO:
City of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL 7
FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: POLICE
DATE:
SUBJECT:
JUNE 4, 2001 CMR:245:01
APPROVAL OF JOINT FUNDING AGREEMENT IN
THE AMOUNT OF $19,500 FOR PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES RELATED TO COUNTYWIDE RADIO
INTEROPERABILITY AND. PUBLIC SAFETY DATA
COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK PROJECT
REPORT IN BRIEF
Public safety agencies in Santa Clara County have been confronted.with a number
of performance issues that impact the delivery of timely and quality law
enforcement, fire and emergency medical services throughout the County. In
1998, at the direction of the City Managers Association, leaders throughout the
County began efforts to solve these problems. This report provides the Council
with information on the countywide effort and details the scope of work being
rendered under a professional services contract. Staff is recommending that
Council approve the Joint Funding Agreement developed to establish the funding
criterion for this project.
CMR:245:01 Page 1 of 5
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council authorize the City Manager to execute a Joint
Funding Agreement with other Santa Clara County cities to fund a professional
services contract with William L. Doolittle & Associates for the purpose of
establishing a Radio Interoperability and Public Safety Data Communications
network at a cost to the City of $19,500.
BACKGROUND
Public safety agencies in Santa Clara County have been confronted with a number.
of performance issues over the past few years associated with the inefficient and
untimely exchange of information, a lack of inter-agency field communication,
and unnecessarily long-call processing times. These limitatio.ns severely impact
the delivery of timely and quality law enforcement, fire and emergency medical
services throughout the County.
In 1998, at the direction of the Santa Clara C0unty/Cities Managers’ Association,
the Santa Clara County PoliceChiefs, Fire Chiefs and Communications Managers
formed two working groups to study interoperability issues for two projects: voice
radio and data communications. The working groups include representatives from
law enforcement and fire agencies from Palo Alto, Mountain View, Sunnyvale,
Santa Clara, County of Santa Clara, Campbell, Morgan Hill, Milpitas, Gilroy, Los
Gatos, Monte Sereno, Los. Altos, Los Altos Hills, San Jose, Saratoga, San Jose
State University, South Santa Clara County Fire District and the Santa Clara
Valley Water District. The City of Palo Alto is taking a leadership role, by
serving as Director for the project.
The working groups identified a number of potential solutions that could assist a
single agency, or agencies that bordered each ottier, but none of the solutions
provided for a comprehensive approach that could meet the collective need to
share information and communicate with each other, regardless of jurisdictional
boundary.
In June 2000, the City of Mountain View issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) on
behalf of the participating agencies soliciting professional services for the Public
Safety Data Communications Network portion of the project. This network would
"virtually" link all the public safety agencies in the County and provide the
capability for information exchange and dispatch monitoring capability. Nine (9)
proposals were received and range, d in cost from $250,000 to $1.3 million. After
careful screening and very detailed presentations by the three finalists, William L.
Doolittle & Associates, Inc., was selected for the project.
CMR:245:01 Page 2 of 5
In October 2000, the Radio Inter0perability Work Group completed its conceptual
design for a system that would patch radio equipment between agency dispatch
centers and enhance radio communication. The final design connected audio from
any radio channel or frequency to other agencies via high-speed phone lines and
data connectors and allowed field Users to communicate without requiring them to
change radio channels in the field during an emergency incident. It was at this
time the discovery was made that the conceptual design for the proposed voice
network could also serve as a data network. Discussions ..,,,ere held.with William
Doolittle & Associates and the Managers Association regarding the efficiencies
and economies of integrating both projects.
The decision to merge these two projects and form a single Radio Interoperability/
Public Safety Data. communications project was approved by the Managers
Association. A Communications Steering Committee was established to serve as
an oversight committee for the project. A copy of the organizational structure for
the project is provided in Attachment A.
DISCUSSION
Participation on the Radio Interoperability/Public Safety Data Communications
Network Project serves a great benefit to the City of Palo Alto. By partnering with
other local municipalities, Palo Alto’s Police and Fire Departments will reap the
benefit of information gained through this project and minimize the financial
impact on the City budget.
Ensuring that Palo Alto Police and Fire personnel can seamlessly communicate in
the field during an emergency, without interruption and regardless of jurisdiction,
has a profound public safety benefit. Any delay or interruption of critical field
communication can have serious consequences. Communications problems
associated with such high profile disasters as the Oklahoma bombing and the
Columbine School incident has brought this issue to the forefront of public safety
on the national level. These examples illustrated the problems associated with
numerous agencies being unable to easily communicate with each other during
response and aftermath.
To facilitate the funding of this project, a Joint Funding Agreement (JFA) was
drafted to outline the terms and conditions for the partnership of the Nineteen (19)
Participating Agencies (Attachment B). Each participant, regardless of
jurisdiction size, is funding an equal portion of the cost for this project. In
addition, a negotiation with William L. Doolittle & Associates was conducted and
CMR:245:01 Page 3 of 5
a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) was completed. A copy of the PSA and
Scope of Work for the Project is provided in Attachment C.
These agreements (professional services and JFA). cover the first two phases of
this project. During Phase I of the project, Doolittle & Associates will collect
information on existing public safety systems (hardware and software), mutual or
automatic aid agreements between jurisdictions, current, and future .technology
projects and other relevant data from each of the participating agencies. Using
information gathered in Phase I, Phase II will provide recommended solutions for
solving the Radio Interoperability and Data Communications Network issues. At
the end of Phase II, Doolittle & Associates will provide each of the participating
agencies with a final report detailing the recommended alternatives. A "cafeteria
sty!e" approach has been requested which will provide options that best meet the
needs of individual, jurisdictions and the collective group of public safety
organizations as a whole. After review of the Phase II final report, decisions .can
be made regarding the funding and implementation of Phase III of this project.
Phase III will cover the purchase and installation of the network by individual
agencies and/or collectively as part of participating agencies.-If a decision were
made to move forward collectively, additional professional services agreements
and a more formalized Joint Powers Authority (JPA) would be required.
RESOURCE IMPACT
The total cost of Phase I and Phase II of the Radio Interoperability and Public
Safety Data Communications Network project is $370,490. As an equal partner in
the JFA, Palo Alto’s share of the $370,490 project cost is $19,500. Funding for.
this project is provided in the Police Department’s Fiscal Year 2000-01 operating
budget. No additional appropriation of monies by the City Council is required at
this time.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This agreement is consistent with existing City policy.
TIMELINE
The timeline to complete Phase I and Phase II of this project is approximately 57
weeks.
CM-R:245:01 Pa’ge 4 of 5
ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIRED
Any environmental impact under the California Environmental
(CEQA) will be determined in subsequent phases of the project.
Quality Act
ATTACHMENTS ¯
A~achrnent A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Project Team Organization Structure
Santa Clara County Data Radio and Communications
Network Joint Funding Agreement
Professional Services Agreement, William L. Doolittle &
Associates
PREPARED BY:
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
Technical Services Coordinator
PA~fJCK DWYER k.
Chief of Police
CITY MANAGER APPROVALi.
EMII~Y-HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
CMR:245:01.Page 5 of 5
ITI
0 =
Attachment B
¯ . SANTA CLARA COUNTY DATA AND I~DIO COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
JOI~IT FUNDING AGREEMENT
This Joint Funding Agreement ("Agreement") is made by and between the Cities of Campbell, Cupertino,
Gilroy, Los Altos, Lo~ Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View,
Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Sar.atoga, Sunnyvale, South Santa Clara County Fire District, County of
Santa Clara, San Jose State University and the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
Recitals
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara County/Cities Managers’ Association has e§~ab~ied a Santa Clara
County Data and 1L~dio Communications Task l~oree for the purpose of creating county wide radio
interoperability and a public safety radio and data eommurtieations network to enable the real time
exchange of event and resource data between automated and nonautomated Public Safety.
Communications Centers within. Santa Clara County to improve publiesafety and emergency services by
enhancing field communications durham" g emergenciesand reducing response time of emergency resources
; and
WHEREAS, the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos,
Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Saratoga,
Sunnyvale, South Santa Clara County Fire District, County of Santa Clara, San Jose State University and
the Santa Clara Valley Water District (individually referred to as ’q~letwork Paxtieipant" and collectively
’q~letwork Participants") all desire to contract with a single consultan.t to design county wide radio
interoperability and a public safety radio and data communications network system that can be
implemented in each of their respective agencies at a significant cost savings to each Network Participant;
and
WHEREAS, tl~ough a competitive bid process, the Santa Clara County/Cities Managers
Association has selected consultant William J. Doolittle and Associates, Inc. to conceptually design and
develop an implementation strategy for county wide radio interoperability and the public safety radio and
data communications network;
NOW THEREFOKE, each Network Participant agrees as follows:
Purpose
In accordance with California Government Code Section 6502, the purpose of this Agreement is to
jointly exercise the.contracting powerof all the public agencies that are Network Participants to this
Agreement to retain the professional services of William L. Doolittle an.d Associates, Inc. (’hereinafter
referred to as DOOLITTLE) to conceptually design and develop an implementation strategy for
countywide radio interoperability and a public safety radio and data communications network and
realize a significant.cost savings.
Authorization
Each Network Participant is authorized by its respective governing body or Board of Directors to
enter into this Agreement to jointly exercise each Network Participant’s individual power.to retain the
services of DOOLITTLE for the sole purpose of conceptually designing and developing an
implementation strategy for countywide radio interoperability and a public safety radio and data
communications network. ’ ’
Cm Agreement for Professional Services
Through a formal.bid process, the Santa Clara County/Cities Managers’ Association selected
DOOL1TI’LE’s bid for the conceptual design and development of an implementationstrategy for
county wide radio interoperability and a public safety radio and data eommuuieations network for
Three Hundred and Seventy Thousand and Four hundred and Ninety Dollars ($370,490). A copy of
the professional services agreement, including DOOL1TTLE’S scope of work is attached hereto as
Attachment "A";
D. Communications Steering Committee
Delegation of Power: Each Network Participant hereby delegates to the Communications
Network Steering Committee its individualpower to(1) execute the professional services
agreement with DOOLIT-I~E attached as Exliibit "A" in the name of the Network Participants
and (2) the ability to administer the agreement, including, but not limited to the power to
authorize pa)a-nent for services rendered under the agreement and the power to terminate the
agreement on behalf of all Network Participants.
2.Composition: The Communications Network Steering Committee shallconsist of the following
five (5) representatives appointed from their respective associations:
a. A City Manager from the Santa Clara County/Cities Managers’ Association;¯b. ¯ A Fire Ckief from the Santa Clara County Fire Chiefs Association;
e. A Police Chief from the Santa Clara County Police Chiefs Association; and
d. Two representatives from the Public Safety Communications Managers Association
Project Director: For purposes of this Agreement, the Technical Services Coordinator for the Palo
Alto Police Department and the Manager of Teclmical Services Bureau for the Sunnyvale
Department of Public Safety shall be designated the Project Directors’. The Communications
Network Steering Committee is authorized to appoint a different.member as Project Director
provided that written notice is given to the Network Participants and DOOL1TTLE.
Funding
1. Proportionate Share of Funding. Each Network P.arficipant shall share the expense for
DOOL1TTLE’ S professional services equally. The amount of each Network Participant’ s share
shall be Nineteen Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety-Nine Dollars and Forty-seven cents
($19,499.47). This amount was derived by dividing the total amount due for DOOL1TTLE’S
services under the. attached professional services agreement by nineteen (19), which is the total
" number of the Network Participants.
Payment Due Date: Each Network Participant shall make no more than two payments to the City
of Mountain View. Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) is due’ no later than June 30, 2001 and
the balance of Four Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety-nine Dollars and forty-seven cents
($4,499.47) must be received by the City of Mountain View no later than December 31,2001.
Payments shall be made payable to the City of Mountain View and sent to the attention of the
’Finance Department, 500 Castro Street, P.O. Box 7540, Mountain View, CA 94039.
Agency/Internal Trustee Account: ,The City of Mountain View shall deposit all the payments it
receives from the Network Participants into an Agency/Internal Trustee Account. In lieu of an
administrative fee for administering the account, no interest shall accrue to the account. Upon
receipt of written authorization from the Communications Network Steering Committee or its
designee, the City of Mountain View shall make progress payments to DOOLITTLE on behalf of
the Network Participants for services rendered to conceptually design and develop an
implementation strategy for a county wide public safety radio and data communications network.
Use of Funding: The City of Mountain View shall use any monies received under this agre~maent
for the sole purpose of paying DOOL1TTLE for professional services’rendered pursuant to the
agreement attached as Attachment "A" and only upon writtenauthorization of the
Communicatiom .Network Steering Committee or its designee
Accounting: No more than twice per fiscal year .and only upon receipt of written request from the
Communications Network Steering Committee, ~he City of Mountain View will provide an
accounting of the monies paid from the Agency/Internal Trustee Account to DOOLITI’LE for
professional services rendered, theaccount balance and supporting documentation to the
Communications Network Steering Committee.
Disposition of Any Remaining Funds: If funds totaling One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) or more
remain in the agency account when the professional services agreement is terminated, then the
City of Mountain View shall pay each Network Participant its proportionate share of the amount
.remaining.
Indemnification
In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro rata risk allocation which might otherwise be imposed, between
the Network Participants pursuant to Government Code Section 895.6, the Network Participants agree
that all losses or liabilities incurred by any Network Participant shall not be shared pro rata but
instead each of the Network Participants agree that pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, ea.ch
of the Network Participants hereto shall fully indemnify and hold each of the other Network
Participants, their officers, board members, employees and agents, hamaless from any claim, expense
¯ or cost, damage or any liability arising out of the performance of this Agreement, payments made by
the City of Mountain View to DOOL1TTLE or the acts of the Communications Network Steering
Committee,
Notices
All notices required by this Agreement will be deemed given when in writing and delivered
personally or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed
to the other Network Participants at the addresses set forth on the signature pages of this Agreement
or at such other address as the Network Participants may designate in writing in accordance with this
section.
Governing Law
This Agreement has been executed and delivered in, and will be construed and enforced in
accordance with, the laws of the State of California. Proper venue for legal action regarding this
Agreement will be in the County of Santa Clara.
Severability
If any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be void, invalid or
unenforceable, the same will either be reformed to comply with the applicable law or stricken~ if not
so conformable, so as not to affect the validity or enforceability of this Agreement.
The Network Participants have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized
representatives.
CITY OF CAMPBELL TOWN OF. LOS GATOS ¯
Bernard Strojny, City Manager
City of Campbel!
70 North First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
CITY OF CUPERTINO
David Knapp, City Manager
City of Cupertino
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
C1TY OF GILROY
Jay Baksa, City Administrator
City of Gilroy
735.1 Rosarma Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
CITY OF LOS ALTOS
Debra Figone, Town Manager
Town of Los Gatos
110 East Main Street
Post Office B0~_949 ............. ~..., .,..
Los Gatos CA 95031
CITY OF MILPITAS ’
Tom Wilson, City Manager
City of Milpitas
455 East Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035
CITY OF MONTE SERENO
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
City of Monte Sereno
18041 Sarat0ga-Los Gatos Road
Monte Sereno, CA 95030
CITY OF MORGAN HILL
Pkil Rose, City Manager
City of Los Altos
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, CA 94022
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
Ed Tewes, City Manager
City of Morgan Hill
17555 Peak Avenue
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
Maureen Cassingham, Town Manager
Town of Los Altos Hills
25379 Fremont Road
Los Altos Hills, CA 94022
Kevin Duggan, City Manager
City of Mountain View
500 Castro Street
Post Office Box 7540 .
Mountain View, CA .94039
CITY OF PALO ALTO
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
Frank Benest, City Manager
City. of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Post Office Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303 -
CITY OF SAN lOSE
Richard Wittenberg, County Executive
Santa Clara County "
70 West Hedding Street
Eleventh Floor, East Wing
San Jose, CA 95110
SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY
Del Borgsdorf, City Manager
City of San Jose
801 North First Street, Room 436
San Jose, CA 95110
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
Jennifer.Sparacino, City Manager
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
CITY OF SARATOGA
Dave Anderson, City Manager.
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruit’vale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
CITY OF SUNNYVALE
Bob LaSala, City Manager
City of Sunnyvale
456 West Olive Avenue
Post Office Box 3707-94088
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
RicAbeyta, Chief of Police
San Jose State University Police
One Washington Square
San Jose, CA 95192 ¯
SOUTH SANTA CLARA COUNTY
FIRE DISTRICT
Steven Woodill, Fire Chief
South Santa Clara County Fire District
15670 Monterey Street
Morgan Hill, .CA 95037
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT
Signature
Name & Title.
Santa Clara Valley Water District
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118-3614
Attachment C
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
NETWORK PARTICIPANTS
AND WILLIAM L. DOOLITTLE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RELATED TO RADIO INTEROPERABILITY AND
PUBLIC SAFETY DATA COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK PROJECT
This-Agreement is dated for identification this 26 day of April 2001 and is made by and between
the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno,
Morgan Hil.1, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Saratoga, Sunnyvale~ South Santa Clara
County Fire District, County of Santa Clara, and San Jose State University (hereinafter "’NETWORK
PARTICIPANTS") and WILLIAM L. DOOL1TTLE & ASSOCIATES, Inc. whose address is 233
Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 400, Santa Moniea, California 90401-1214 (hereinafter "CONSULTANT").
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara County/Cities Managers’ Association has established a Santk Clara
County Data and Radio Communications Task Force for the purpose of creating a county wide radio
interoperability and public safety radio and data communications network to enable the real time
exchange of event and resource data between automated and nonautomated Public Safety
Communications Centers within Santa Clara County to improve public safety and emergency services by
enhancing field communications during emergencies and reduci~, g response time of emer.geney resources;
and
WHEREAS, the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Gikoy, Los Altos, Los Altos HillS, Los Gatos,
MilpitaS, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Saratoga,
Surmyvale, South Santa Clara County Fire District, County of Santa Clara, and San Jose State University
(individually referred to as "NETWORK PARTICIPANT" and collectively ’¢NETWORK
PARTICIPANTS") all desire to contract with a single, consultant to design a countywide radio
interoperability and public safety radio and data communications network system that can be
implemented in each of their respective agencies at a significant cost savings to each Network Participant;
and
WHEREAS, through a competitive bid process, the Santa Clara County/Cities Managers’
Association has selected CONSULTANT to conceptually design and develop an implementation strategy
for the county wide radio interoperabiiity and public safety radio and data communications network; and
WHEKEAS, NETWORK PARTICIPANTS desire to retain the services of CONSULTANT .to
provide professional services; and .
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is a qualified professional capable of providing the certain
professional services, which NETWORK PAKTICIPANTS seek; and .
WHEREAS, NETWORK PARTICIPANTS have executed a joint funding agreement authorizing
a Communications Network Steering Committee consisting of a City Manager from the Santa Clara
County/Cities Managers’ Association; a Fire Chief from the Santa Clara County Fire Chiefs Association;
a Police Chief from the Santa Clara County Police Chiefs Association; and two representatives from the
Public Safety Communications Manager’s Association to act on its behalf to execute and administer a
professional services agreement with CONSULTANT.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals and mutual promises contained herein,
NE~FwoRK PAKTICIPANTS do hereby engage CONSULTANT, and CONSULTANT agrees, to
perform the services set forth herein in accordance with the following terms and conditions.
1.Description of Services. CONSULTANT shall provide the services outlined in attached Scope of
Work, Kadio Interoperability and Data Communications Network, Attachment A.
Schedule and Term. The schedule for performing said services .shall be comPleted no later than June
30, 2002.
Compensation. Total compensation for providing services under this Agreement, including expenses
shall not exceed Three Hundred Seventy Thousand Four Hundred Ninety ~.~r~.,(,~3~7~,490).
Funding. Pursuant to a Joint Funding Agreement, each of the NETWORK PARTICIPANTS has
appropriated its proportionate share of the total compensation due under this Agreement for ¯
CONSULTANT’s services.. These funds will be paid to the City of Mountain View (hereinafter.
"CITY"). who will deposit these funds into an agency account.
D~liverables. Agreement Deliverables are identified in Attachment A and enumerated in Attachment
B. All Deliverables shall be deemed submitted by CONSULTANT as of the ~late of receipt by the
NETWORK PAKTICIPANTS.
6.Communications Steering Committee.
a.Powers:
Under a Ioint Funding Agreement (Attachment C), each of the NETWORK PARTICIPANTS has
delegated its power to execute this professional services agreement to the Communications
Network Steering Committee, (hereinafter "STEE1LING COMMITTEE"). The authority of the
STEEKING COMMITTEE includes, but is not limited to, the power to authorize payment for
services rendered under this Agreement and the power to terminate this Agreement on behalf of
all NETWORK PARTICIPANTS.
b.Members:
The Communications Network Steering Committee consists of a City Manager from the Santa
Clara Coupty/Cities Managers’ Association; a Fire Chief from the Santa Clara County Fire.Chiefs
Association; a Police Chief from the Santa Clara County Police Chiefs Association; and two
representatives from the Public Safety Communications Manager’s Association who shall serve
as Project Directors’ (under this Agreement).
7.Authorization of Payment.
ao STEERING COMMITTEE shall review the invoice and verify the submittal of each of the
Deliverables due for the progress payment within five (5) business days of receipt of
CONSULTANT’S invoice. Upon recSipt of written authorization from STEERING
COMMITTEE, CITY will make progress payments from the agency account to CONSULTANT
in accordance with Attachment B within 21 days of receipt of authorization.
bo Final Phase Reports. Upon receipt of Deliverables 44 (f’mal Phase I report) and 53 (final Phase
report), the STEERING COMMITTEE shall review each of the proposed reports and within five
(5) calendar days, notify CONSULTANT in writing that of either its acceptance of the report as
submitted or request ask for additional amendments and/or items of clarification from
8.
CONSULTANT. NETWORK PAKTICIPANTS may withhold the progress payments for each of
these two Deliverables until it accepts the final phase report.
Ownership of Work Product. All Deliverables of CONSULTANT that result from thisAgreement
are the exclusive property of NETWORK PAR.TIC]PANTS. NETWORK PARTICIPANTS and
CONSULTANT intend that such Work Product be deemed "work made for hire" of which
NETWORK PAKTICIPANTS will be deemed the author. CONSULTANT. hereby irrevocably "
¯ assigns to NETWORK PAKTIC.IPANTS all of its right, title, and interest in and to any and all of the "
Work Product, whether arising from copyright, patent, trademark, trade secretl or any other state or
¯ federal intellec.tual property law or doctrine. CONSULTANT will execute such further documents
and instruments as NETWORK PAI~TICIPANTS may reasonably request in order to fully v~st such
rights in NETWORK PARTICIPANTS. CONSULTANT forever waives any and all., rights relating
to the Work Product, including without limitation, any and all rights under 17 USC 106A or any other
fights of identification of authorship or rights of approval, restriction or limitation on use or
subsequent modification.
Work Papers. ’q~/ork Papers" are de~’med as those hand-written or electronic notes, tables, draft
documents, electronic files, images, sketches, drawings, presentations or other original tnaterial.
developed or created by CONSULTANT or its subcontractors during the course of performing work
under this Agreement. Work Papers include those materials provided by NETWORK
PARTICIPANTS. to support the analysis and conclusions of CONSULTANT. ...
All Work Papers developed under this agreement are the property of CONSULTANT and their
respective subcontractors who will have the right to maintain copies of all documents provided by.
NETWORK PARTICIPANTS and its participating agencies. CONSULTANT will maintain Work.
Papers for a period of three years after final acceptance of the work described in this agreement.
CONSULTANT will provide access to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS upon request during normal
business hours at CONSULTANT primary place of business. CONSULTANT retains the .right to
determine the format and storage media for Work Papers and ~11 other materials developed during this
Agreement.
10.Independent Contractor. It is agreed that CONSULTANT is an independent Contractor, and all
persons working for or under the direction of CONSULTANT or CONSULTANT’s agents, servants
and employees, and said persons shall not be deemed agents, servants or employee’s of NETWORK
PARTICIPANTS.
11.NETWORK PARTICIPANTS hereby acknowledge and approve the following subcontractors to
CONSULTANT.
GARY E. BOYD& ASSOCIATES, INC.
15540 Woodcrest Drive
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
EN2~ERPP,_ISE MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, INC.
18663 Ventura Blvd., Suite 232
Tarzana, CA 91356
12.Successors and Assigns. Neither this Agreement nor any duties or obligations under this Agreement
may be assigned without prior written consent by NETWOK.K PARTICIPANTS:
13.. Applicable La~s and Attorney’s Fees. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced pursuant to¯- the laws oft.he Stateof California. Should any legal action.be brought by a party for breach of this.
"Agreement or to enforce any provision herein, the prevailing party of such aetionshall be entitled to
reasonable attorneys’, fees, court costs, and such other costs as may be fixed by.the court.
14.Cooperation of NETWORK PARTICIPANTS. NETWORK PARTIC~ANTS agree t~bomply with
all reasonable requests of CONSULTANT and to provide access to all documents reasonably
necessary to the’performance of CONSULTANT’s duties under this Agreement.
15. Insurance.
Commercial General Liability/Automobile Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT shall obtain
Commercial General Liability insurance and Automobile Liability insurance in the amount of
One Million Dol!ars ($1,000,000) per occurrence. If a ¯general aggregate limit is used, either the
general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement or the general aggregate limit
shall be twice the required occurrence limit. CONSULTANT’s insurance coverage shall be
written on an occurrence basis.
b.Professional Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT shall obtain Professional Liability insurance in
the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per claim.
Co Workers, Compensation Insurance. CONSULTANT shall obtain statutory Workers’
Compensation insurance and Employer’s Liability insurance in the amount of One Million
Dollars ($1,000,000) per accident.
Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Current Best Rating of A.
VII unless otherwise acceptable to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS.
eo Verification of Coverage. Insurance, deductibles or self insurance shall be subject to the approval
of the NETWORK PARTICIPANTS. Ofi.’ginal Certificates ofInsurance with endorsements shall
be received and approved by NETWORK PARTI. CIPANTS before work commences, and
insurance must be in effect for the duration of the Agreement. The absence of insurance or a
reduction of stated limits shall cause all work on the project to cease. Any delays shall not
increase costs to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS or increase the duration of the project.
16. Other Insurance Provisions.
ao
bo
co
NETWORK PARTICIPANTS, their respective officers, officials, employees and volunteers are
covered as additional insured by Endorsement CG 20 10 11 85 for Commercial General and
Automobile Liability coverage.
For any claims related to thisproject, CONSULTANTI insurance coverage shall be pnmary and
any insurance or self-insurance maintained by NETWORK PARTICIPANTS, their respective
officers, officials, employees and volunteers shall not contribute to it.
Each insurance policy required shall be endorsed that a thirty (30) day. notice be given to.
NETWORK PARTICIPANTS in the event of cancellation or modification to the stipulated
insurance coverage..
4
17.
18.
In the event CONSULTANT employs subcontractors as part of the work covered by this
Agreement, it shall be the r.esponsibility of CONSULTANT to ensure that all subcontractors
comply with the same insurance requirements that are stated in this Agreement.
Hold Harmless. CONSULANT shall defend, indemnify and hold NETWORK PARTICIPANTS, its
officers., employees and agents harmless fi:om any liability for damage or claims of same, including
but not limited to personal injury, property damage and death, which may arise firom CONSULTANT
or CONSULTANT’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees’ operations under this
Agreement.. NETWORK PARTICIPANTS shall cooperate reasonably in the itefense of any action,
and CONSULTANT shall employ competent counsel, reasonably acceptable to NETWORK
PARTICIPANTS.
Reliance Upon Professional Skill. It is .mutually agreed by the parties that NETWORK
PARTICIPANTS are relying upon the professional sldll of CONSULTANT, and CONSULTANT
represents to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS that its work shall conform to generally recognized
professional standards in the indtistry. -Acceptance of CONSULTANT’s work by the. NETWORK
PARTICIPANTS does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT’s said representation.
19. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended by written instrument signed by both parties.
20.
21.
23.
Inconsistent Terms. If the attachments or exhibits to this Agreement, if any, are inconsistent with this
Agreement, this Agreement shall control.
Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties with
respect to the subject matter hwein. There are no representations, agreements or understandings
(whether oral or written) between, or among the parties relating to the subject matter of this
Agreement which are not fully expressed herein. If the attachments or extfibits to this Agreement, if
¯ any, are inconsistent with this Agreement, this Agreement shall control.
Termination. NETWORK PARTICIPANTS may t&minate this Agreement at any time by providing
tliirty (30) days advance writ%en notice to CONSULTANT. .
In the event that NETWORK PARTICIPANTS terminate this Agreement and a progress payment is
pending, CONSULTANT shall complete all Deliverables shown in Attachment B due.for that
progress payment. For purposes of this section, a progress payment is pending if CONSULTANT
has commenced work on the deliverables due for that progress payment. Upon satisfactory
completion of all of the deliverab!es required for the pending progress payment, NETWORK
PARTICIPANTS agree to pay CONSULTANT the entire amount of the progress payment. However,
CONSULTANT shall not commence work on any of the deliverables shown on Attachment B for a
future progress payment following receipt of notice of termination.
24.Force Majeure. Neither NETWORK PARTICIPANTS nor CONSULTANT will be held responsible
for delay or default caused by fire, riot, earthquake, acts of God, or war where such cause was beyond
the reasonable control of NETWORK PARTICIPANTS or CONSULTANT, respectively.
CONSULTANT, will, however, make all reasonable efforts to remove or eliminate such a cause of
delay, or default and will, t~pon the cessation of such cause, diligently pursue performance o’f its
obligations under this Agreement.
25.Nondiscrimination. CONSULTANT shall afford equal employment opportunities for all persons
without discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, political affiliiation,
national origin, ancestry, age, marital status, or physical or mental disability.
26:.’Notices. Any.notice required to be given to CONSULTA1vr shall be deemed to be duly and properly
given if mailed to CONSULTANT;postage prepaid, addressed to:
Mr. William L. Doolittle, President
William L. Doolittle & Associates, Inc.
233 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 400
Santa Moniea, CA 90401-1214
or personally delivered to contact at such address or at such other addresses as CONSULTA-N~ may
designate in Writing to NETWORK PAKTICIPANTS.
Any notice required to be given to NETWORK PAKTIC~ANTS shall be. deemed to beduly and
properly given to NETWORK PAKTICIPANTS, postage prepaid, addressed to: "
Ms. Sheryl A. Contois
Technical Services Coordinator ¯
Palo Alto Police Department
275 Forest Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
or
Ms. Laura A. Phillips
Manager, Teehrtical Services Bureau
Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety
700 All American Way-
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
or personally delivered to NETWORK PAKTICIPA_NTS at such address or at such other addresses as
NETWORK PAKTICIPANTS may designate in writing to CONSULTANT.
27.Alternative Dispute Resolution. Prior to initiating any formal legal action arising out of this
.Agreement, the Parties agree to consider alternative forms of dispute resolution, such as mediation.
¯ IN W1TNESSS WHEKEOF, this Agreement is executed by NETWOKK PAKTIC~ANTS and
¯ by CONSULTANT.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:. ’qffETWORK PARTICIPANTS"
j-~rme Qua, Cigot ~~ V~ew
~lAsst. City Attorney
Robe~’~’o~-~, City of Mountain View
Finance and Administrative
Sen, ices Director
SANTA CLARA COUNTY/ClqIES
MANAGER’ S ASSOCIATION
BY: Bernard Strojny
SANTA CLARA COUNTY F]~LE
CI-I~F’ S ASSOCIATION
BY: Ernest Kraule
Fire t~-’~’f; ~-arato~’a F-~re ~’r’o~ection District
PuBLIc SAFETY COMB4-UNICATIONS
MANAGER’S ASSOCIATION
BY: Laura A. Phillips
"CONSULTANT"
WILLIAM L. DOOLITTLE AND
ASSOCIATES, INC.
BY: William L. Doolittle
Sunn~ale Depaflment of Public Safety ¯
SANTA CLARA COUNTY POLICE
CHIEF’ S ASSOCIATION
BY: Michael Maehler
President.
-EIN 95-4770253
Chief of Police, Moufitain View
PUBLIC SAFE .Ty COMMUNICATIONS
MANAGER’S ASSOCIATION
BY: Sheryl A. Contois "
T~ator, "
Palo Alto Police Department
-7-
ATTACHMENT A- SCOPE OF WORK
Radio Interoperability
Task 1. Conduct Kick Off Meeting - During this task, we would conduct an initial "
project meeting with the Radio Interoperability Task Force. We would look to this Task
Force to provide direction to our activities, review Deliverables, and provide feedback on
our conclusions and recommendations. During this meeting, we would discuss and
confirm the project organization, goals, scope of the consulting work, our approach and
Deliverables, and Status Reporting methodology.
Deliverables:
1.Draft Project Status Reporting Package
2.Task Force Meeting Calendar "
3.Interview (Agency Contact) List
Task 2. Complete Review of Background Material - In this task, we would review
minutes of prior Task Force meetings, additional reports and any available Studies
reflecting prior work on interoperability within Santa Clara County. We would solicit
this material from the following entities:
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
City of Campbell
City of Cupertino
City of Gilroy
City of Los Altos
City of Los Altos Hills
City of Los Gatos
’ City of Milpitas
City of Monte Sereno
City of Morgan Hill
City of Mountain .View
City of Palo Alto
City of San ~Iose -
City of Santa Clara
City of Saratoga Fire
San lose State University
Santa Clara County
California Emergency Medical Services Authority
A-1
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreemem
26 April 2001
¯California Office of Emergency Services
¯Sunnyvale Department of PublicSafety
¯South Santa Clara County Fire District
We would also request information from these agencies .on existing radio communication
systems within Santa Clara County, including any plans for near-term enhancements to
these systems. Our review would also include any existing operational or mutual aid
communications plans and agreements within the County.
Deliverables:
4.Interview and Meeting Agendas
5.Documents Requested and Reviewed
6.Interviews Conducted
7.Meeting Minutes
8.Current System Profiles
Task 3. DeFine Needs and Requirements - For Task 3, we would define the needs for
inter-agency .voice radio interoperability. Working primarily with the Task Force, we
would identify the broad areas of interoperability requirements. We would supplement
the Task Force information with interviews or focus group meetings with staff and
management of the participating agencies, as appropriate. These requirements would
include the identification of operational needs (at a miniraum) for:
¯System Coverage
¯TaLk Chalmels
¯Channel Capacity
¯Security/Encryption
¯Fixed (Dispatch) and Mobile Access
We would also consider th.e needs for integration with external agency systems (i.e.,
adjacent counties). Our Deliverables would provide a profile of the types of inter-agency
communications, including the identification of entities involved in the communications.
These profiles would include an estimate of the anticipated utilization for each type of
communication. We would utilize the following (tentative) classifications:
¯Emergency
¯Dispatch
¯ . Logistical
¯ Informational
Deliverables:
A-2
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
9. Interoperability Requirements
10. Communications Profile
Task 4. Develop Alternatives Analysis - In this task, we would.review and consider
any prior studies and presentations of approaches to voice radio inteioperability,
including federal initiatives. Independently, we would also develop a list Of potential
alternatives to. meeting the County’s needs for radio interoperability, with sufficient
technical background to consider the degree of fit with local requ~, ements. Each profile
would identify any additional parameters or assumptions, such as frequency licensing,
inter-agency agreements, infrastructure,, etc. With each of the profiled alternatives, we
would also identify an expected range of cost to implement each approach. To the extent
possible, we would utilize the work in progress from the Public Safety Data
Communications Network to evaluate the feasibility of common technological solutions..
We would lead focused meetings of the Radio Interoperability Task Force to consider the
advantages and disadvantages of each approach, and to assess the effectiveness of each
approach to meeting agency needs.
Deliverables:
11.Meeting Agendas
12.Meeting Minutes ¯
13.Analysis of Altematives
14.Alternatives Matrix
Task 5. Compile Recommendations - In Task 5, we would provide our independent
recommendations as to the best alternative to meeting the County’s needs for voice radio
interoperability. We would also provide our assessment as to the overall risk and critical
success factors necessary to achieve the recommended approach. We would work with
the Task Force to develop a consensus as to a final approach and specific P~adio
Interoperability recommendations before drafting a final, report.
Deliverables:
15. Draft Recommendations
Task 6. Prepare Strategic Plan For Voice Radio Interoperability - During Task 6,
we would document the background of the radio iriteroperability’initiatives, agency goals
and objectives, consulting scope and methodology, assessment of alternatives, and
interoperability recommendations in a strategic plan for radio interoperability. The plan
would profile the existing systems, identify interoperability needs and requirements,
describe the recommended approach, and provide a budget and schedule for
implementation. This draft would be provided to the Radio Interoperability Task Force
A-3
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
for review and comment. Based on the Task Force input, we would develop a final of the
Strategic Plan in electronic and hard copy formats.
Deliverables:
16. Draft Radio Interoperability Strategic Plan
17. Final Radio Iuteroperability Strategic Plan
A24
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
Public Safety Data Communications Network
PHASE I - ANALYSIS OF’REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES
This Phase includes the needs analysis of participating agency requirements, the
development of technical alternatives, the evaluation of those alternatives, and recommendations
as to the architecture of the data communications network. Deliverables from this phase include
timelines for implementation, identification of agency priorities for integration, anda cost
analysis of alternatives. A comprehensive Phase I report is also provided encapsulating the work
accomplished in this Phase.
Task 7. Conduct Kick-Off Meeting - During this task, we-would convene an
inlxoductory meeting with the Countywide Public Safety Data Communications Network
Task Force. The Task Force would provide direction to the Consultant’s activities,
review Deliverables, and assist with project logistics. We would work with the Task
Force to identify those key agency individuals to be involved with the project from both
an operational and a technical perspective. The Kick-Off meeting would ensure that the
Task Force and individuals involved with additional tasks have a common foundation of
the project objectives and the proposed p~anning approach. We would also present our
project status reporting methodology for Task Force approval. In addition, we would set
the schedule for the project’s continuing status meetings, project Deliverables.and the
Phase I and Phase 17 Final Report Delivery Dates.
Deliverables:
18.Draft Project Status Reporting Package
19.Task Force Meeting Calendar
20.Project Timeline with DeliverableMilestones
Task 8. Review Background Material - In Tasl~ 8, we would begin our review of ~ae
existing systems and operations. Our activities would include a review of documentation
as well as interviews with technical staff from each of the participating agencies. At this
time, we understand the participating agencies will include the communications centers
for the following jurisdictions:
¯City.of Campbell
¯City of Cupertino
¯City of Gilroy
¯City of Los Altos
A-5
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
¯City of Los Gatos
¯City of Milpitas
¯City of Monte Sereno
¯City of Morgan Hill
¯City of Mountain View
¯City of Palo Alto "
¯City of San Jose
¯City of Santa Clara
¯City of Saratoga
¯City of Sunnyvale
¯San Jose State University
¯Santa Clara County
¯South Santa Clara County Fire District
Every interview would be preceded by an agenda and a list of questions to be addressed
during the meeting, as well as a request for documentation. The documents to be
reviewed would include descriptions of existing systems, system administration guides,
mutual aid agreements, operational plans and dispatching procedures. As necessary, we
would request further clarifying information from system vendors.
We would then develop a comprehensive agency profile identifying existing processing
platforms, data communications infrastructure, public safety application sets, existing
protocols, and available vendor interfaces. We would also become familiar with
concurrent countywide projects, including the radio interoperability project and the
County’s emergency medical services Agreement~
Deliverables:
21.Interview Agenda " ’
22.Documents Requested
23.Interviews Conducted
24.Documents Reviewed
25.Agency Technical Profile
26.Concurrent Initiative Profile
27.Existing Systems Overview
Task 9. Define Operational Needs and Requirements - During this task, we would
define the data communications network needs from an operational perspective. This
would provide the foundation for definition of system requirements for system-to-system
interfaces, including incident dispatching, station alerting, mobile computing, automatic
vehicle location, system status management,, inter-agency messaging, global status
keeping, and others. Our project team would leverage our initial agency interviews to
A-6
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
capture the required information, but would convene addition~tl interviews as necessary.
This task would be accomplished primarily using one-on-one interviews, but focus
groups and round table discussions would also be used. We would also consider the
applieabihty and integration of other pubhc safety agency application requirements, such
as local criminal justice information systems, records management systems, office
automation, and others.
Deliverables:
28. Operational Interface Requirements
29. Conceptual Application Model
Task 10. DeVelop Operational Model - In Task 10, we would develop a high level
overview of how.the agencies would interact through the data communications network.
This description would include the interaction between telephone and radio
communications at dispatch centers, .mobile. anti:vehicular, data,. P,.ecords Management
Sys.tems data transfers, AVL position reporting, geographic information systems,
mapping displays, system status management, patient information to hospitals, and other
application requirements. We would consider the impacts to non-automated entities, and
contemplate alternatives to meeting those agency requirements. We would also consider
and discuss the alternatives for the accumulation and reporting of management
information, such as call for service .statistics, response time performance, technical
system perfo .rmance, and others. This model would clarify the necessary timing and
synchronization of inter-agency CAD data. This task would also explore the expansion
of the Data Communications Network to incorporate other counties and private entities,
such as emergency medical providers and hospitals.
Deliverables:
30. Public Safety Data Communications Operational Model
31. Data Flow and Entity Relationship Models
Task 1 I. Identify Transaction Sets -During this task, we would define the transaction
sets and data objects necessary to support implementation of an integrated CAD-to-CAD
interface meeting the operational model defiued in Task 10. We would define the
specific transactions, provide descriptions of the data objects, define, ne.cessary-
standardization and synchronization for the objects, and the minimum data fields. In
particular, we would identify that databases that will require reconciliation and
synchronization between the various agencies. These databases could include geographic
data, incident~descriptions, and data definition files.
DeIiverables:
32. System Interface Requirements
A-7
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
33.. Integration Transaction Data Sets
34. Required Database Reconciliation
Task 12. Identify Applicable Industry Standards.- In task 12, we would identify and
summarize any apphcable industry technical standards. We would review the work of
standards-setting bodies such as:
¯American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
¯Intemet Engineering Task Force (~TF)
¯Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (’IEEE)
¯Association of Public-Safety Commdnications Officials (APCO)
¯National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
¯National Institute of Standards and Technology. (NIST)
¯National Emergency Number Association (NENA)
¯Soitware Engineering Institute (SEI)
¯Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA)
We would also identify any federal government agency recommendations for technology,
integration and systems management, such as those published by the Department of
Transportation, Federal Communications Commission, and the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration. ~We would assess the existing
standards and identify their applicability to the current initiatives. We would also provide
au overview and assessment of Ludustry initiatives to develop public safety system
¯ interfaces, such as APCO Project 36, the Critical Incident Management Forum, and the
CAD Consortium.
Deliverables:
35. Profile of Existing Industry Standards and Initiatives
36. Industry Standards Assessment
Task 13. Develop Conceptual Alternatives Analysis - In this task, we would profile
the various alternative to meeting the needs defined in previous tasks.. These would be
provided in functional groupings to facilitate their discussion and considerationl These
groupings could include Technical Approaches~ System Administration, Implementation
Priorities, Procurement, and others. We would initially identify the advantages and
disadvantages of each approach for discussion. The li~.ely .timing~ availability, and
duration of each alternative would also be considered. Facilitating the Task Force
discussions, we would work to achieve consensus on the preliminary evaluation, of the
various approaches. We would also provide an independent ri~k analysis for each of the
alternatives, identifying key implementation factors that are required for each approach to
succeed. This analysis will include an initial order of magaitude estimate of the costs to
implement each approach. The analysis of alternatives will likewise identify any discrete
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
agency differences to each approach considered. Initially; we would evaluate alternatives
in the following general groupings:
¯System Architecture
¯Wide Area Network Technologies
¯Application Interface Protocols
¯System Administration
Deliverables:
37. Preliminary Analysis of Altematives
Task 14. Develop Administrative Model - In Task 14, we would analyze and present a
discussion of the alternatives to an integrated systems administration and management
approach. We would utilize our ¯fact finding in Task 8 and 9 to evaluate the options for
centralized and distributed systems administration. We would consider (at a minimum)
the following system administrative responsibilities:
¯" Security administration
¯Database administration
¯Network administration and performance monitoi’ing
¯Hardware management
¯User account maintenance
¯Documentation development and maintenance
¯Training development and presentation
¯System testing and update migration
We would also discuss and consider the opportunities for vendor-provided services, such
as network administration and help desk functions.
Deliverables:
38~ Analysis of System Administration Alternatives
39. Proposed System Administration Model
Task 15. Identify Desired Alternatives - During this. task, we would utilize the
¯ alternatives defined in .Tasks 13 and 14 to provide a refined decision-making model. We
would provide estimates for each of the alternatives in the areas of one-time mud recurring
costs for hardware, software, integration services, database cl.ean up, contingency, aud
other cost factors. These budgetary costs would be presented in ranges, leveraging our
experience in similar projects, our fact-finding with each agency’s current vendors, input
from the participating agencies, and the results of our Cost estimating models. We would
provide our own. assessment of the defined alternatives, but would facilitate the Task
A-9
Attac ,hment A -.Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
Force’s discussion and identification of the desired approaches for system integration aud
implementation.
Deliverabies:
40. Identification of Desired Alternatives
Task 16. Develop Implementation Timeline - During Task 16, we would present a
timeline of the anticipated tasks necessary to implement the desired countywide
integration. We would utihze the selected alternatives from Task 15, and incorporateour
assessment of tkte likely duration of each task. Where possible, we would group tasks by
the functional capabilitythey would provid.e. The timeline would include separate tasks
for each participating agency, as well as an identification of any tasks required of a lead
agency or an independent, vendor. We would work. with the Task Force and
representatives of the participating agencies to incorporate the ~then-curcent" priorities for
implementation.
Deliverables:
41. Implementation Timeline
Task 17. Develop Recommendations - We would. independently develop our
recommendations, identifying the best approaches to-meeting the overall needs of the
County’s public safety agencies. Where appropriate, we would also provide agency-
specific recommendations that would facilitate the strategy for connectivity and
integration. These recommendations would initially be presented to the Task Force for
discussion and consideration. We would look to the Task Force to provide consensus on
the desired direction and recommendations.
Deliverables:
42. Data Communications Network Kecommendations
Task 18. Prepare and Present Phase I Report - In this task, we would prepare a
comprehensive report of our findings and Task Force recommendations. This report
would utilize the sections developed in previous tasks to provide a single document that
incorporates the definition of. needs, analysis of alternatives, architectural
recommendations, cost impacts, implementation planning, and benefits of proposed
systems and integration. We would include an Executive Summary, written in laYman’s
terms, encapsulating the planning process, recommendations and cost estimates. This
document would serve as a guide for the subsequent phases of the data communications
network initiatives. We would initially provide this report to the Task Force for review
and comment,, then as a final report incorporating the Task Force’s input. A final
Deliverablemeeting the Task Force’s requirements for electronic and hard copy originals
A-10
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
will be provided. We would also be prepared to make an oral presentation of the Phase I
R~port and to provide a PowerPoint file of the presentation materials.
Deliverable.s:
43. Draft Phase I Report
44. Final Phase I Report
45. Phase I Presentation Slides
A- 11.
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
PHASE H - DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
During this Phase, we would complete the specifications necessary to initiate a vendor
selection process for the, selected integration approach. In addition to developing a t~equest For
Proposal with detailed network specifications, this Phase would also provide an implementation
strategy for the participating public safety agencies. We would also assist in the identification
and assessment of. alternative funding sources for the project. Deliverables .fi:om this phase
include proposals for continued consulting assistance to the project.
Task 19. Develop Detailed Network Specifications- During. this task, we would
prepare detailed network specifications for incorporation in the Public Safety Data
Communications Network t~equest For Proposal. These specifications would be in
sufficient detail to allow vendors to propose the necessary tasks and scope of v~ork to
complete the desired level of integration. Where possible, we would leverage existing
technical standards as selected by the Task Force. The specifications would be provided
in functional groupings, identifying common infi:astructure and application platforms, as
well as individual agency ’point of interface’ details. We would also leverage the fact-
finding and system descriptions obtained in Phase I.
Deliverables:
46. Detailed Network Design Specifications
Task 20. Develop Implementation Strategy - During this task, we iwouldidentify the
high=level action items required to support the desired system integration and countywide
data communications network Capabilities. We would include the timing for
implementation of technical support infrastructure, staffing requirements, anticipated
expenditures, and level of effort required to execute the implementation timeline
identified in Phase.I. We would provide a draft Project Management Plan to support the
effective management and accountability of the project as it proceeds. This Plan would
outline the roles and responsibilities of the project team members and identify a
recommended project reporting methodology for the project. It would incorporate
generally accepted practices for project management reviews supporting the effective
monitoring and follow-up of project tasks and vendor Agreement management. We
would also develop guidelines for the Agreement negotiations with potential vendors and
service providers, These negotiation guidelines would include a description of the forum
for negotiations, identification of key Agreement terms and conditions, .and the probable
context of information sharing between vendors, such as non-disclosure requirements for
proprietary information.
Deliverables:
47. Implementation Strategy
48. Project Management Plan
A-12
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
¯49. Agreement Guidelines
Task 21. Develop Consulting Cost Estimates - In Task 21, we would develop
estimates of the level of effort and scope of our cont’.muing assistance to the project. We
would deliver our proposal with detailed work plans .and tasks to provide support to the
Task Force as the project continues through vendor selection and implementation. This
Deliverable. would include our quotation of professional fees and expenses. We would
also identify our proposed staffing, provide project team resumes, and describe the roles
and responsibilities of our project team members.
Deliverables:
50. Proposal for. Continued Assistance
Task 22. Identify Alternative Funding Sources - During this task, we would work
with the Task Force to identify likely sources of external funding for the Public Safety
Data Communications Network and CAD integration project. These alternatives could
include grants, state and federal capital funding, or public-private investments. Ata
minimum, we would consider the National Institute of Justice and federal Department of
Justice grant programs. We would provide an .overview of the various program
requirements and ma assessment of potential ’degree of fit’ with each program’s goals and
objectives. We would become familiar with the proposal requirements for the funding
sources, and identify the information required to submit a grant proposal. We would also
¯ provide our recommendations regarding the scope of may potential grant proposal, such
as a pilot project or prototype.
Deliverables:
51. Profile of Alternative Funding Sources
Task 23. Prepare and Present Phase H Report - During this task, we would develop a
comprehensive report of our findings and recommendations for Phase II. We would
include an Executive Summary, written in layman’s terms encapsulating the work
accomplished .in Phase II. We would initially provide this report to the Task Force for
review and comment, then as a final report incorporating the Task Force’s input. A final
Deliverable meeting the Task Force’s requirements for electronic and hard copy originals
will be provided. We would also be prepared to make an oral presentation of the Phase 17
Report and to provide an electronic copy of the presentation materials.
Deliverables:
52. Draft Phase II Report
53. Final Phase II Report
54. Phase 17 Presentation Slides
A-13
Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement
26 April 2001
Attachment B- April 23, 2001
Deliverables Provided
1 Deliverables: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 18,
19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24.
2 Delivembles: 8, 24, 25, 26 and 27.
3.Deliverables: 9, 10, 28 and29.
4 Deliverables: 11, 12, ~3 and 14.
5 Deliverables: 30, 31, 32, 33, 34,
35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 and 41.
6 Deliverables: 15.
7 Deliverables: 16, 17 and 42 (draft).
8 Deliverables: 42 (final).
9 Deliverables: 43.
10 Deliverables: 44 and 45.
11 .Deliverables: 46.
12 Deliverables: 47, 48, 49 and 50.
13 I Deliverables: 51 and52.
14 Deliverables: 53 and 54..
¯ Payment Milestone
Thelast day of the first calendar month
of proje.ct execution.
All deliverables received by Network
Participants.,
The last day of the second calendar
month of project execution or all
deliverables received by Network
Participants.
The last day of the third calendar month
of project execution or all dellverables
received by Network Participants.
The last day of the fourth calendar month
ofprojedt execution, or all deliverables
received by Network Participants.
The last day of the fifth calendar month
or all deliverables, received by Network
Participants.
The last day o~the sixth calendar month
of project execution or all deliverables
received by NetworEParficipant~.
The last day of the seventh calendar"
month of project execution or. all
deliverables, received by Network
Participants.
The last day of the eighth calendar month
of project execution or all deliverables
received by Network Participants.
The last day of the ninth calendar, month
of project execution or all deliverables
received by Network Participants.
The last day of the tenth calendar month
of project execution or all ddiverables
received b), Network Participants.
The last day of the eleventh calendar
month of project execution.or all
deliverables received by Network
Participants.
The last day of the twelffia calendar
month of project execution or all
deliverables received by Network
Participants.
The last day of th.e thirteenth calendar
month of project execution or all
deliverables received by Network
Participants.
Total of Payments
progress
Payment
$30,300
$39,400
$40,700
$52,500
¯$42,200
$14,200
$36,300
$14,600
$19,600
$8,300
$27,00b
$16,000
$22,800
$6,590
$370,490