Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-06-04 City Council (6)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 Agreemenl developed to establish the funding criterion for this project. CMR:245:01 Page I 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 limitations 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 County/Cities Managers’ Association, the Santa Clara County Police Chiefs, 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 other, 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 ranged 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 Interoperability 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 were 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 complete~L 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 wil! provide each of the participating agencies with a final report detailifig the recommended alternatives. A "cafeteria style" 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 Crmmu~nications 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. CMR:245:01 Page 4 of 5 ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIRED Any environmental impact under the California Environmental (CEQA) will be determined in subsequent phases o.f the project. Quality Act ATTACHMENTS Attachment 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~I’I~ICK DWYER \ Chief of Police CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: EMIIkY--HARRISON Assistant City Manager CMR:245:01 Page 5 of 5 m Attachment B SANTA CLARA COUNTY DATA AND RADIO COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK JOINT I~tYNDING AGREEMENT This Joint Funding Agreement ("Agreement") is made by and between the Cities ofCampbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los 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 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 nonautomated 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 citiesof 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 "Network Participant" and collectively "Network Participants") all desire to contract with a single consultant 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 costsavings to each Network Participant; and WHEREAS, through a competitive bid process, the Santa Clara County/CitiesManagers ¯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 THEREFORE, 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 power of all the public agencies that are Network Participants to this Agreement to retain the professional services of William L. Doolittle and 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. Agreement for Professional Services Through a formal bid process, the Santa Clara County/Cities Managers’ Association selected DOOL1T-FLE’s bid for the conceptual design and development of an implementation strategy for county wide radio interoperability and a public safety radio and data communications network for Three Hundred and Seventy Thousand and Four hundred and Ninety Dollars ($370,490). A copy of the professional services agreement, including DOOLITTLE’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 individual power to (1) execute the professional services agreement with DOOL1TTLE attached as Exhibit "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 payment for services rendered under the agreement and the power to terminate the agreement on behalf of all Network Participants. Composition: The Communications Network Steering Committee shall consist 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 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 o Project Director: 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 Network Steering Committee is authorized to appoint a different¯ member as Project Director provided that written notice is given to the Network Participants and DOOLITTLE. Funding 1. Proportionate Share of Funding. Each Network Participant 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. o 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 o 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 agreement for the sole purpose of paying DOOLITI~LE for professional services’rendered pursuant to the agreement attached as Attachment "A" and only upon written authorization of the Communications Network Steering Committee or its designee Accounting: No more than twice per fiscal year and only upon receipt of written request fromthe Communications Network Steering Committee, ~e City of Mountain View will provide an accounting of the monies paid from the Agency/I~ternal Trustee Account to DOOLITTLE for professional services rendered, the account balance and supporting documentation to the Cornmunieations 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, 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 DOOLITTLE or the acts of the Communications Network Steering Committee. G~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 Campbell 70 North First Street Campbell, CA 95008. CITY OF CUPERTINO David Knapp, City Manager City of Cupertino 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 CITY OF GILROY Jay Baksa, City Administrator City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna Street Gilroy, CA 95020 CITY OF LOS ALTOS Debra Figone, Town Manager Town of Los Gatos " 110 East Main Street Post Office Box 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 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 Cassingharn, 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 4 C1TY 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 Del Borgsdorf, City Manager City of San Jose 801. North First Street, Room 436 San Jose, CA 95110 CITY OF.SANTA CLARA Richard Wittenberg, County Executive Santa Clara County ’ 70 West Hedding Street Eleventh Floor, East Wing San Jose, CA 95110 SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY RicAbeyta, 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 Steven Woodill, Fire Chief South Santa Clara County Fire District 15670 Monterey Street Morgan Hill, CA 95037 SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Signature Bob LaSala, City Manager City of Sunnyvale 456 West Olive Avenue Post Office Box 3707-94088 Sunnyvale, CA 94086 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 26day 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 Hi!l, 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 Monica, California 90401-1214 (hereinafter "CONSULTANT"). 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 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 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, and San Jose State University (individually referred to as ’2qETWORK PARTICIPANT" and collectively ’2qETWORK 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 Particip’ant; 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 interoperability and public safety radio and data communications network; and WHEREAS, 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 PARTICIPANTS 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, NETwoRK PARTICIPANTS 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, Radio 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 Dollars ($370,490). 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. Defiverables. Agreement Deliverables are identified in Attachment A and enumerated in Attachment B. All Deliverables shall be deemed submitted by CONSULTANT as of the date of receipt by the NETWORK PARTICIPANTS. 6.Commuriications Steering Committee, Powers: Under a Joint 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 "STEERING COMMITTEE"). The authority of the STEERING 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. bo Members: The Communications Network Steering Committee consists 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 who shall serve¯as Project Directors’ (under this Agreement). 7.Authorization of Pa,cment. 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 receipt 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. Final Phase Reports. Upon receipt of Deliverables 44 (final Phase I report) and 53 (final Phase II 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 CONSULTANT. NETWORK PARTICIPANTS may withhold the progress payments for each of these two Deliverables until it accepts the final phase report. I0. Ownership of Work Product. All Deliverables of CONSULTANT that result from this Agreement are the exclusive property of NETWORK PARTICIPANTS. NETWORK PARTICIPANTS and CONSULTANT intend that such Work Product be deemed "work made for hire" of which NETWORK PARTICIPANTS will be deemed the author. CONSULTANT. hereby irrevocably ¯ assigns to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS all of its right, rifle, and interest in and to. any and all of the ’ Work Product, whether arising from copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, or any other state or . federal intellectual property law or doctrine. CONSULTANT will execute such further documents and instruments as NETWORK PARTICIPANTS may reasonably request in order to fully vest 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 rights of identification of authorship or rights of approval, restriction or limitation on use or subsequent modification. Work Papers. "Work Papers" are defmed 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. Independent Contractor. It i~ 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 Wo0dcrest Drive Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 ENTER.PRISE 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 NETWORK PARTICIPANTS. 13.~ Applicable Laws and Attorney’s Fees. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced pursuant to ¯ the laws of the Stareof 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 PARTICIPANTS agree toeomply with all reasonable requests of CONSULTANT and to provide access to all documents reasonably necessary to the perforrnanee of CONSULTANT’s duties under this Agreement. 15. Insurance. ao Commercial General Liability/Automobile Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT shall obtain Commercial G6neral Liability insurance and Automobile Liability insurance in the amount of One Million Dollars ($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. c.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. d.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. Original Certificates ofInsurance with endorsements shall be received and approved by NETWORK PARTICIPANTS 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. a.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. b.For any claims related to this project, CONSULTANTinsuranee coverage shall be primary and any insurance or self-ins.urance maintained by NETWORK PARTICIPANTS, their respective officers, officials, employees and volunteers shall not contribute to it. c.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. 21. 22. 23. 24. do In the event CONSULTANT employs subcontractors as part of the work covered by this Agreement, it shall be the responsibility of CONSULTANT to ensure that all subcontractors comply with the same insurance requirements that ar~ stated in this Agreement. Hold Harmless. CONSULANT shall defend, indemnify and hold NETWORK PARTICIPANTS, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any liability for damage .or elairns of same, including but not limited to personal injury, property damage and death, which may arise from CONSULTANT or CONSULTANT’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees’ operations under this Agreement. NETWORK PARTICIPANTS shall cooperate reasonably in the defense 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 skill of CONSULTANT, and CONSULTANT represents to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS that its work shall conform to generally recognized professional standards in the industry. Acceptance of CONSULTANT’s work by the.NETWORK PARTICIPANTS does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT’s said representation. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended by written instrument signed by both parties. 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 herein. 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 exhibits to this Agreement, if . any, are inconsistent with this Agreement, this Agreement shall control. Termination. NETWORK PARTICIPANTS may terminate this Agreement at any time by providing thirty (30) days advance wriften 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 deliverables 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. 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, upon the cessation of such cause, diligently pursue performance Of 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 affilihtion, national origin, ancestry, age, marital status, or physical or mental disability. 5 26.Notices. Any notice required to be given to CONSULTANT 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 CONSULTANT may designate in writing to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS. Any notice required to be given to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS shall be deemed to be duly and properly given to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS, 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, Technical Services Bureau Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety 700 All American Way Sunnyvale, CA 94086 or personally delivered to NETWORK PARTICIPANTS at such address or at such other addresses as NETWORK PARTICIPANTS 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 WlTN-ESSS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by NETWORK PAKTICIPANTS and by CONSULTANT. APPROVED AS TO FORM:’~IETWORK PARTICIPANTS" e Quinn, Ci~ of lV~uc~ain View sst. City Attorney " Robe~.oc~e, City of Mountain View Finance and Administrative Services Director SANTA CLARA COUNTY/CITIES -MANAGER’ S ASSOCIATION BY: Bernard Strojny SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE CHIEF’S ASSOCIATION BY: Ernest Kraule Fire Lsl~’f,~ ~-arato~a F-~re ~r’o~ection District PuBLIc SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER’ S AS SOCIATION BY: Laura A. Phillips "CONSULTANT" WILLIAM L. DOOLITTLE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. BY: William L. Doolittle r, Technical Service] ¯ ale Depm’tment of Public Safety - SANTA CLARA COUNTY POLICE CHIEF’S ASSOCIATION BY: Michael Maehler President EIN 95-4770253 Chief of Police, Moutitain View PUBLIC SAFE .TY COMMUNICATIONS ¯ MANAGER’S ASSOCIATION BY: Sheryl A. Contois " 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 ¯CityofSan Jose ¯City of Santa Clara ¯City of Saratoga Fire ¯San Jose State University ¯Santa Clara County ¯California Emergency Medical Services Authority A-1 Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement 26 April 2001 ¯California Office of Emergency Services ¯Sunnyvale Department of PublicSafety ¯South Santa Clara County Fire District We would a!so 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 Needsand 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 minimum) for: ¯System Coverage ¯Talk Charmels ¯Channel Capacity ¯Security/Encryption ¯Fixed (Dispatch) and Mobile Access We would also consider the needs for integration with external agency systems (i.e., adjacent counties). Our Deliverables would provide a profile of the types of inter-agency commuaxications, 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 interoperability, 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 requi~’, 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 Alternatives 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 Radio Interoperability recommendations before drafting a final report. Deliverables: 15. Draft Recommendations Task 6. Prepare Strategic Plan For Voice Radio lnteroperability - During Task 6, we would document the background of the radio interoperability initiatives, agency goals and objectives, consulting scope and methodology, assessment of alternatives, and interoperability recommendations in a strategic plan for radio i~nteroperability. 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 Interoperability Strategic Plan A-4 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 titig phase include timelines for implementation, identification of agency priorities for integration, and a 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 introductory 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 planning 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 II 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 Task 8, we would begin our review of the 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 L0s 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 Sunnyva!e ¯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 tiom 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. Def’me 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 additional 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 applicability and integration of other public 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 and vehicular, data, Records 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 performance, 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 defined in Task 10. We would define the specific transactions, provide descriptions of the data objects, define necessary 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. Deliverables: 32. System Interface Requirements A-7 Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement 26 April 2001 33. Integration Transaction Data Sets 34. Required Database Reconciliation ~ask 12. Identify Applicable Industry Standards - In task 12, we would identify and summarize any applicable industry technical standards. We would review the work of standards-setting bodies such as: ¯American National Stan~dards Institute (ANSI) ¯Infernet Engineering Task Force (IETF) ¯Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) ¯Association of Public-Safety Commtmications Officials (APCO) ¯National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) ¯National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) ¯National Emergency Number Association (NENA) ¯Software 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 an overview and assessment of industry initiatives to develop p.ublic 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 def’med in previous tasks. These would be provided in functional groupings to facilitate their discussion and considerationl These groupings could include Technical Approaches~ System Admi.’nistration, Implementation Priorities, Procurement, and others. We would initially identify the advantages and disadvantages of each approach for discussion. The likely timing, availability, and duration of each alternative would also be considered. Facilitating the Task Force discussions, we would woik to achieve consensus on the preliminary evaluation, of the various approaches. We would also provide an independent risk 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 magnitude estimate of the costs to implement each approach. The analysis of alternatives will likewise identify any discrete A-8 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 Alternatives 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 f’mding 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 monitoring ¯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 and recurring costs for hardware, software, integration services, database clean up, contingency, and 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 Attachment A - Professional Services Agreement 26 April 2001 Force’s discussion and identification of the desired approaches for system integration and implementation. Deliverables: 40. Identification of Desired Altematives 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 utilize the selected alternatives fi:om Task 15, and incorporate our assessment of the likely durationof each task. Where possible, we would group tasks by the functional capabilitythey would provide. 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-current’ 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 Recommendations 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 Deliverable meeting 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 Report 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 II - 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 Request 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 from 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 Request For Proposal. These specifications would be in sufficient detail to allow vendors to propose the necessary tasks and scope of work 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 infrastructure 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 wouldidentify 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 continuing 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. At a 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 an 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 any potential grant proposal, such as a pilot project or prototype. Deliverables: 51. Profile of Altemative 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 fmal 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 II Report and to provide an electronic copy of the presentation materials. Deliverables: 52. Draft Phase II Report 53. Final Phase II Report 54. Phase II 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 Deliverables: 8, 24, 25, 26 and 27. 3.Deliverables: 9, 10, 28 and 29. 4 Deliverables: 11., 12, ~3 and 14. Deliverables: 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 and 41. " 6 Deliverables: 15. 7 8 Deliverables: 16, 17 and 42.(draft). Deliverables: 42 (final). 9 Deliverables: 43. 10 Deliverables: 44 and 45. 11 Deliverables: 46. 12 Deliyerables: 47, 48, 49 and 50. 13 Deliverables: 51 and 52. 14 Deliverables: 53 and 54. Payment Milestone The last 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 dehverables received by Network Participants. The last day of the third calendar month of project execution or all dehverables received by Network Participants. The last day of the fourth calendar month of project execution or all dehverables received by Network Participants. The last day of the fifth calendar month or all dehverables, received by Network Participants. The last day o£ the sixth calendar month of project execution or all dehverables received by Network Participants.. " 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 dehverables received by Network Participants. The last day of the ninth calendar month of project execution or all dehverables received by Network Participants. The last day of the tenth calendar month of project execution or all deliverables received by Network Participants. The last day of the eleventh calendar month of project execution, or. all dellverables received by Network Participants. The last day of the twelPda calendar month of project execution or all deliverables received by Network Participants. The last day of the thirteenth calendar month of project execution or all dehverables received by Network Participants. Total of Payments Progress Payment $30,300 $39,400 $40,700 $52,500 $42,200 $14,200 $36,300 $141600 $19,600 $8,300 $27,000 $16,000 $22,800 $6,590 $370,490