Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2018/01/23 City Council Resolution 2018-010
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-010 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK TO EXECUTE A SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE CENTER FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT, LLC, TO CONDUCT AN ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC SAFETY RESOURCES, AND TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FY 2017-18 WITHIN THE GRATON MITIGATION PUBLIC SERVICES FUND AND RELATED ACTIONS WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park seeks to secure a consultant capable of a professional study that can be relied upon to enable the Department of Public Safety to develop effective master planning; and WHEREAS, the objective of the professional study of the Public Safety Department is to assist the City to make informed decisions for prioritization and allocation of resources; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the City's Purchasing Policy, staff has issued a Request for Proposals for Analysis of Public Safety Resources, evaluated responses and determined that Center for Public Safety Management LLC is most qualified to provide professional analysis services on this project; and WHEREAS, staff has negotiated a scope of work for the project and an anticipated overall fee of $106,620, with a not -to -exceed contract amount of $116,620; and WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority to amend the budget; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has reviewed and recommended the operational changes to be brought forward to the City Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, the cost of the project would be paid from the Graton Mitigation Public Services Fund, and the use of such funds would be in a manner consistent with applicable restrictions. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park as follows: 1. The above recitals are true and correct and material to this Resolution. 2. The City Council of the City of Rohnert Park does hereby authorize and approve an agreement with the Center for Public Safety Management LLC, a District of Columbia limited liability company, for public safety resource analysis services. 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all necessary actions to effectuate this agreement on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park, including the execution of an agreement substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A," subject to minor modifications by the City Manager or City Attorney. 4. The Director of Finance is authorized to make any administrative adjustments necessary to increase appropriations for FY 2017-18 within Graton Mitigation Public Services Fund. 1 2018-010 DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 23d day of January, 2018. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Pam Stafford, Mayor 4 ATTEST: o line M. Buergler, City `lerl: Attachments: Exhibits A and B AHANOTU: BEI.['C RTF.: A MACKFNZIE: � "� C.ALLINAN: Objf vtTAFTORU: AYES: ( u ) NOES: ( 0 ) ABSENT: ( / ) ABSTAIN: ( 0 ) 2 2018-010 Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES CENTER FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT, LLC PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT RESOURCE ANALYSIS This PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT is entered into as of the _____, day of _____, _____, by and between the CITY OF ROHNERT PARK (“City”), a California municipal corporation, and Center for Public Safety Management, LLC (“CPSM”), a District of Columbia limited liability company ("Consultant"). RECITALS WHEREAS, City desires to obtain consulting services to prepare a study and recommendations for the Public Safety Department Resources; and WHEREAS, Consultant hereby warrants to City that Consultant is skilled and able to provide such services described in Section 3 of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, City desires to retain Consultant pursuant to this Agreement to provide the services described in Section 3 of this Agreement. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth above, and all defined terms set forth in such recitals and in the introductory paragraph preceding the recitals, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if set forth herein in full. 2. Project Coordination. A. City. The City Manager or his/her designee shall represent City for all purposes under this Agreement. The Senior Analyst is hereby designated as the Project Manager. The Project Manager shall supervise the progress and execution of this Agreement. B. Consultant. Thomas J. Wieczorek, CPSM Director, shall have overall responsibility for the progress and execution of this Agreement for Consultant. 3. Scope and Performance of Services A. Scope of Services. Subject to such policy direction and approvals as City may determine from time to time, Consultant shall perform the services set out in the "Scope of Work" attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services B. Time of Performance. The services of Consultant are to commence upon receipt of a written notice to proceed from City, but in no event prior to receiving a fully executed agreement from City and obtaining and delivering the required insurance coverage, and satisfactory evidence thereof, to City. Consultant shall perform its services in accordance with the Fee Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B, and incorporated herein by reference. Any changes to these dates in either this Section 3 or Exhibit A must be approved in writing by the Project Manager. C. Standard of Quality. City relies upon the professional ability of Consultant as a material inducement to entering into this Agreement. All work performed by Consultant under this Agreement shall be in accordance with all applicable legal requirements and shall meet the standard of quality ordinarily to be expected of competent professionals in Consultant's field of expertise. 4. Compensation and Method of Payment. A. Compensation. The compensation to be paid to Consultant, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall be at the Fee Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B, and incorporated herein by reference. However, in no event shall the amount City pays to Consultant for services provided directly under this Agreement exceed $116,620. Payment by City under this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of unsatisfactory work, even if such defects were known to the City at the time of payment. B. Timing of Payment. Consultant shall submit itemized invoices for each deliverable performed. City shall make payment, in full, within thirty (30) days after approval of the invoice by the Project Manager. C. Payments to Consultant. Payments by direct deposit (preferred method) shall be sent to: Routing No.: 052000113 Account No. : 9856252680 Payments by check to the Consultant shall be sent to: Center for Public Safety Management c/o Bastian Accounting, LLC P.O. Box 199 Amherst, NY 14226 D. Changes in Compensation. Consultant will not undertake any work that will incur costs in excess of the amount set forth in Section 4(A) without prior written amendment to this Agreement. E. Taxes. Consultant shall pay all taxes, assessments and premiums under the federal Social Security Act, any applicable unemployment insurance contributions, Workers Compensation insurance premiums, sales taxes, use taxes, personal property taxes, or other taxes or assessments now or hereafter in effect and payable by reason of or in connection with the services to be performed by Consultant. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services F. No Overtime or Premium Pay. Consultant shall receive no premium or enhanced pay for work normally understood as overtime, i.e., hours that exceed forty (40) hours per work week, or work performed during non-standard business hours, such as in the evenings or on weekends. Consultant shall not receive a premium or enhanced pay for work performed on a recognized holiday. Consultant shall not receive paid time off for days not worked, whether it be in the form of sick leave, administrative leave, or for any other form of absence. G. Litigation Support. Consultant agrees to testify at City's request if litigation is brought against City in connection with Consultant's work product. Unless the action is brought by Consultant or is based upon Consultant's negligence, City will compensate Consultant for the preparation and the testimony at Consultant's standard hourly rates, if requested by City and not part of the litigation brought by City against Consultant. 5. Amendment to Scope of Work. City shall have the right to amend the Scope of Work within the Agreement by written notification to the Consultant. In such event, the compensation and time of performance shall be subject to renegotiation upon written demand of either party to the Agreement. Consultant shall not commence any work exceeding the Scope of Work without prior written authorization from the City. Failure of the Consultant to secure City's written authorization for extra or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in the contract price or time due, whether by way of compensation, restitution, quantum merit, etc. for work done without the appropriate City authorization. 6. Term. This Agreement shall commence upon its execution by both parties and shall continue in full force and effect until completed, amended pursuant to Section 18, or otherwise terminated as provided herein. 7. Inspection. Consultant shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to ascertain that the services of Consultant are being performed in accordance with the requirements and intentions of this Agreement. All work done and all materials furnished, if any, shall be subject to the Project Manager's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve Consultant of any of its obligations to fulfill the Agreement as prescribed. 8. Ownership of Documents. Title to all data, plans, specifications, maps, estimates, reports, manuscripts, drawings, descriptions and other final work products compiled by the Consultant under the Agreement shall be vested in City, none of which shall be used in any manner whatsoever, by any person, firm, corporation, or agency without the expressed written consent of the City. Basic survey notes and sketches, charts, computations, and other data prepared or obtained under the Agreement shall be made available, upon request, to City without restriction or limitations on their use. Consultant may retain copies of the above-described information but agrees not to disclose or discuss any information gathered, discussed or generated in any way through this Agreement without the written permission of City during the term of this Agreement, unless required by law. 9. Employment of Other Consultants, Specialists or Experts. Consultant will not employ or otherwise incur an obligation to pay other consultants, specialists or experts for services in connection with this Agreement without the prior written approval of the City. 10. Conflict of Interest. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services A. Consultant covenants and represents that neither it, nor any officer or principal of its firm, has, or shall acquire any investment, income, business entity, interest in real property, or other interest, directly or indirectly, which would conflict in any manner with the interests of City, hinder Consultant's performance of services under this Agreement, or be affected in any manner or degree by performance of Consultant's services hereunder. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of the Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it as an officer, employee, agent, or subcontractor without the express written consent of the City. Consultant agrees at all times to avoid conflicts of interest, or the appearance of any conflicts of interest, with the interests of the City in the performance of the Agreement. B. Consultant is not a designated employee within the meaning of the Political Reform Act because Consultant: (1). will conduct research and arrive at conclusions with respect to its rendition of information, advice, recommendation, or counsel independent of the control and direction of the City or of any City official, other than normal contract monitoring; and (2). possesses no authority with respect to any City decision beyond the rendition of information, advice, recommendation, or counsel. (2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18700(a)(2).) 11. Liability of Members and Employees of City. No member of the City and no other officer, elected official, employee or agent of the City shall be personally liable to Consultant or otherwise in the event of any default or breach of the City, or for any amount which may become due to Consultant or any successor in interest, or for any obligations directly or indirectly incurred under the terms of this Agreement. 12. Indemnity. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant hereby agrees to defend (by counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, damages, costs, liabilities, or obligations brought on account of or arising out of any acts, errors, or omissions of Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, and subcontractors undertaken pursuant to this Agreement excepting liabilities due to the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City. The City has no liability or responsibility for any accident, loss, or damage to any work performed under this Agreement whether prior to its completion and acceptance or otherwise. Consultant's duty to indemnify and hold harmless, as set forth herein, shall include the duty to defend as set forth in California Civil Code § 2778. This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages or compensation payable by or for Consultant under Worker's Compensation, disability or other employee benefit acts or the terms, applicability or limitations of any insurance held or provided by Consultant and shall continue to bind the parties after termination/completion of this agreement. This indemnification shall be regardless of and not in any way limited by the insurance requirements of this contract. This indemnification is for the full period of time allowed by law and shall survive the termination of this agreement. 13. Consultant Not an Agent of City. Consultant, its officers, employees and agents shall not have any power to bind or commit the City to any decision. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services 14. Independent Contractor. It is expressly agreed that Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed by Consultant, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of City; and as an independent contractor, Consultant shall obtain no rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to City's employees, and Consultant hereby expressly waives any claim it may have to any such rights. Consultant, its officers, employees and agents shall not have any power to bind or commit the City to any decision. 15. Compliance with Laws. A. General. Consultant shall use the standard of care in its profession to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has and shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, insurance and approvals which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City business license. City is not responsible or liable for Consultant's failure to comply with any or all of the requirements contained in this paragraph. B. Workers' Compensation. Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the California Labor Code which require every employee to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and Consultant certifies that it will comply with such provisions before commencing performance of the Agreement and at all times in the performance of the Agreement. C. Prevailing Wage. Consultant and Consultant's sub-consultants (if any) shall, to the extent required by the California Labor Code, pay not less than the latest prevailing wage rates to workers and professionals as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations of the State of California pursuant to California Labor Code, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 2. Copies of the applicable wage determination are on file at the City's office of the City Clerk. D. Injury and Illness Prevention Program. Consultant certifies that it is aware of and has complied with the provisions of California Labor Code § 6401.7, which requires every employer to adopt a written injury and illness prevention program. E. City Not Responsible. City is not responsible or liable for Consultant's failure to comply with any and all of its requirements under this section and Agreement. F. Business Licenses. Except as otherwise allowed by City in its sole discretion, Consultant and all sub-consultants shall have acquired, at their expense, a business license from the City in accordance with Chapter 5.04 of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code, prior to City's issuance of an authorization to proceed with the Services. Such license(s) must be kept valid throughout the term of this Agreement. G. Waiver of Subrogation. Consultant and Consultant's insurance company agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents and volunteers for losses paid under Consultant's workers' compensation insurance policy which arise from the work performed by Consultant for City. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services 16. Confidential Information. All data, documents, discussions or other information developed or received by or for Consultant in performance of this Agreement are confidential and not to be disclosed to any person except as authorized by City, or as required by law. 17. Assignment; Subcontractors; Employees A. Assignment. Consultant shall not assign, delegate, transfer, or convey its duties, responsibilities, or interests in this Agreement or any right, title, obligation, or interest in or to the same or any part thereof without the City's prior written consent. Any assignment without such approval shall be void and, at the City's option, shall immediately cause this Agreement to terminate. B. Sub-contractors; Employees. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services of Consultant hereunder. No subcontractor of Consultant shall be recognized by the City as such; rather, all subcontractors are deemed to be employees of the Consultant, and Consultant agrees to be responsible for their performance. Consultant shall give its personal attention to the fulfillment of the provisions of this Agreement by all of its employees and subcontractors, if any, and shall keep the work under its control. If any employee or subcontractor of Consultant fails or refuses to carry out the provisions of this Agreement or appears to be incompetent or to act in a disorderly or improper manner, it shall be discharged immediately from the work under this Agreement on demand of the Project Manager. 18. Insurance. Without limiting Consultant's obligations to indemnify provided herein, Consultant shall, at its own expense, procure and maintain insurance that complies with the requirements set forth in Exhibit C to this Agreement. Consultant shall upon thirty (30) days’ notice comply with any changes in the amounts and terms of insurance as may be required from time-to- time by City’s risk manager. 19. Termination of Agreement; Default. A. This Agreement and all obligations hereunder may be terminated at any time, with or without cause, by the City upon 5 days’ written notice to Consultant. B. If Consultant fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement within the time and in the manner herein provided or otherwise violates any of the terms of this Agreement, in addition to all other remedies provided by law, City may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice. In such event, Consultant shall be entitled to receive as full payment for all services satisfactorily rendered and expenses incurred hereunder, an amount which bears the same ratio to the total fees specified in the Agreement as the services satisfactorily rendered hereunder by Consultant bear to the total services otherwise required to be performed for such total fee; provided, however, that the City shall deduct from such amount the amount of damages, if any, sustained by City by virtue of the breach of the Agreement by consultant. C. In the event this Agreement is terminated by City without cause, Consultant shall be entitled to any compensation owing to it hereunder up to the time of such termination, it being understood that any payments are full compensation for services rendered prior to the time of payment. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services D. Upon termination of this Agreement with or without cause, Consultant shall turn over to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by Consultant or its subcontractors, if any, or given to Consultant or its subcontractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials shall become the permanent property of the City. Consultant, however, shall not be liable for the City’s use of incomplete materials nor for the City’s use of complete documents if used for other than the project contemplated by this Agreement. 20. Suspension. The City shall have the authority to suspend this Agreement and the services contemplated herein, wholly or in part, for such period as it deems necessary due to unfavorable conditions or to the failure on the part of the Consultant to perform any provision of this Agreement. Consultant will be paid for satisfactory services performed through the date of temporary suspension. 21. Merger; Amendment. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the agreement between City and Consultant and shall supersede all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by written instrument, signed by both the City and Consultant. All provisions of this Agreement are expressly made conditions. 22. Interpretation. This Agreement shall be interpreted as though it was a product of a joint drafting effort and no provisions shall be interpreted against a party on the ground that said party was solely or primarily responsible for drafting the language to be interpreted. 23. Litigation Costs. If either party becomes involved in litigation arising out of this Agreement or the performance thereof, the court in such litigation shall award reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, to the prevailing party. In awarding attorneys’ fees, the court will not be bound by any court fee schedule, but shall, if it is in the interest of justice to do so, award the full amount of costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees paid or incurred in good faith. 24. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. 25. Written Notification. Any notice, demand, request, consent, approval or communication that either party desires or is required to give to the other party shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by prepaid, first class mail. Any such notice, demand, etc. shall be addressed to the other party at the address set forth below. Either party may change its address by notifying the other party of the change of address. Notice shall be deemed communicated within 72 hours from the time of mailing if mailed as provided in this section. If to City: Leonardo A. Tacata, Jr. Senior Analyst City of Rohnert Park 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 If to Consultant: Director of Research & Project Development Center for Public Safety Management, LLC 475 K Street NW, Suite 702 Washington, DC 20001 Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services 26. Consultant’s Books and Records. A. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services, or expenditures and disbursements charged to City and all documents and records which demonstrate performance under this Agreement for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of termination or completion of this Agreement. B. Any records or documents required to be maintained pursuant to this Agreement shall be made available for inspection or audit, at any time during regular business hours, upon written request by the City Attorney, City Auditor, City Manager, or a designated representative of any of these officers. Copies of such documents shall be provided to City for inspection when it is practical to do so. Otherwise, unless an alternative is mutually agreed upon, the records shall be available at Consultant’s address indicated for receipt of notices in this Agreement. C. The City may, by written request by any of the above-named officers, require that custody of the records be given to the City and that the records and documents be maintained in the City Manager’s office. 27. Agreement Binding. The terms, covenants, and conditions of this Agreement shall apply to, and shall bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assigns, and subcontractors of both parties. 28. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant is an equal opportunity employer and agrees to comply with all applicable state and federal regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Consultant will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, age, sex, creed, color, sexual orientation, marital status or national origin. Consultant will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are treated during such employment without regard to race, religion, age, sex, creed, color, sexual orientation, marital status, or national origin. Such action shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; lay-offs or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. Consultant further agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 29. City Not Obligated to Third Parties. The City shall not be obligated or liable for payment hereunder to any party other than Consultant. 30. Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that such party may have hereunder. 31. Severability. If any one or more of the provisions contained herein shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, then such provision or provisions shall be deemed severable from the remaining provisions hereof, and such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had not been contained herein. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services 32. Exhibits. The following exhibits are attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by this reference: A. Exhibit A: Scope of Services B. Exhibit B: Fee Schedule C. Exhibit C: Insurance Requirements 33. Execution. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument and shall become binding upon the parties when at least one copy hereof shall have been signed by both parties hereto. In approving this Agreement, it shall not be necessary to produce or account for more than one such counterpart. 34. News Releases/Interviews. All Consultant and sub-consultant news releases, media interviews, testimony at hearings and public comment shall be prohibited unless expressly authorized by City. 35. Applicable Law; Venue. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted according to California law. In the event that suit shall be brought by either party hereunder, the parties agree that a trial of such action shall be held exclusively in a state court in the County of Sonoma, California. 36. Authority. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of one of the parties represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign and deliver the Agreement on behalf of such party and that this Agreement is binding on such party in accordance with its terms. 37. STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST. If City determines Consultant comes within the definition of Consultant under the Political Reform Act (Government Code §87100), Consultant shall complete and file and shall require any other person doing work under this Agreement to complete and file a “Statement of Economic Interest” with the Clerk of the City of Rohnert Park disclosing Consultant and/or such other person’s financial interests. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CENTER FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT, LLC By: __________________________________ Darrin Jenkins City Manager By: __________________________________ Thomas J. Wieczorek Director Date: ________________________________ Date: ________________________________ Per Resolution No. 2018-XX ATTEST: By: __________________________________ City Clerk Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF SERVICES The “Center for Public Safety Management Proposal for Comprehensive Analysis of Public Safety Resource Analysis: Rohnert Park, California” proposal shall be provided as Exhibit A: Scope of Services. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services EXHIBIT B: FEE SCHEDULE Deliverable and Payment Schedule Deliverable Milestone Expected Date of Milestone Deliverable Amount Contract signing Milestone 1 Full execution of the agreement February 1, 2018 None Launch meeting Milestone 2 Project Launch Consultant will conduct an interactive telephone conference with local government contacts. Project leads will launch the project by clarifying and confirming expectations, detailing study parameters, identifying agency point of contacts and commencing information gathering. Project Launch Day February 15, 2018 $37,848.00 Due 14 days after Project Launch Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services Deliverable Milestone Expected Date of Milestone Deliverable Amount Launch meeting Milestone 3a Information Gathering Operations leads (Police and Fire) will deliver an information request to the department. Consultant will provide instructions concerning uploading materials to consultant website. When necessary, the lead will hold a telephone conference to discuss items contained in the request. The team lead will review this material prior to an on-site visit. Completed 17 days from Launch Day: Est. March 5, 2018 $37,848.00 Data extraction for all divisions, analysis, draft reports submitted to city Milestone 3b Data Extraction Data Lead will submit a preliminary data request, followed by a comprehensive request for data from the CAD system. The data team will extract one year’s worth of Calls for Service (CFS) from the CAD system. Once the Data Team is confident the data are accurate, they will certify that they have all the data necessary to complete the analysis. Completed 60 – 87 days from Launch Day: Est. April 4, 2018 through May 1, 2018 None Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services Deliverable Milestone Expected Date of Milestone Deliverable Amount Data extraction for all divisions, analysis, draft reports submitted to city Milestone 3c Data Certification Completed 60 – 87 days from Launch Day: Est. April 4, 2018 through May 1, 2018 None Data extraction for all divisions, analysis, draft reports submitted to city Milestone 4a Data Analysis Within thirty days of data certification, the analysis will be completed and a draft, unedited data report will be delivered to the department for review and comment that outlines the Police and Fire Divisions. After the data draft report is delivered, an on-site visit by the operations team will be scheduled. Completed 60 – 87 days from Launch Day: Est. April 4, 2018 through May 1, 2018 None Data extraction for all divisions, analysis, draft reports submitted to city Milestone 4b Delivery of Draft Data Report The department will have 10 days to review and comment on the draft unedited data analysis. Rohnert Park must specify all concerns with the draft report at one time. Completed 60 – 87 days from Launch Day: Est. April 4, 2018 through May 1, 2018 None Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services Deliverable Milestone Expected Date of Milestone Deliverable Amount Data extraction for all divisions, analysis, draft reports submitted to city Milestone 4c – Final Data Report – 10 days After receipt of the department's comments, the data report will be finalized within 10 days. Completed 92 – 117 days from Launch Day: Est. May 7, 2018 through June 1, 2018 $37,848.00 Operations team visit and delivery of draft operations reports Milestone 5 – Conduct On-Site Visit – 30 days Subject matter experts will perform a site visit within 30 days of the delivery of the draft data report. Completed 92 – 117 days from Launch Day: Est. May 7, 2018 through June 1, 2018 None Operations team visit and delivery of draft Milestone 6 – Draft Operations Report – 30 days Within 30 days of the last on-site visit, the operations team will provide a draft operations report to the department point of contact. Again the department will have 10 days to review and comment. Completed 92 – 117 days from Launch Day: Est. May 7, 2018 through June 1, 2018 $18,924.00 Delivery of final report Milestone 7 – Final Once the Department’s comments and concerns are received by CPSM the combined final report will be delivered to the city within 15 days. Completed 106 - 141 days from Launch Day Options for Council Meeting Dates: May 22, 2018 June 12, 2018 June 26, 2018 $12,000.00 TOTAL COST $106,620.00 Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services Additional Services Should the City desire additional support or in-person presentation of findings, CPSM will assign staff for such meetings at a cost of $2,000 per day/per meeting along with reimbursement of travel expenses. Additional support or in-person activities, and any associated costs, shall be approved in advance by the Program Manager in writing. Such additional services shall not exceed $10,000. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services EXHIBIT C INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS For Consultant Services Agreement Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Consultant will maintain insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below. Consultant will use existing coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth here, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. Consultant acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds available to City in excess of the limits and coverage required in this agreement and which is applicable to a given loss, will be available to City. Consultant shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance: General Liability Insurance using Insurance Services Office "Commercial General Liability” policy form CG 00 01 or the exact equivalent. Defense costs must be paid in addition to limits. There shall be no cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per occurrence. Business Auto Coverage on ISO Business Auto Coverage form CA 0001 including symbol 1 (Any Auto) or the exact equivalent. Limits are subject to review, but in no event to be le ss than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per accident. If Consultant owns no vehicles, this requirement may be satisfied by a non- owned auto endorsement to the general liability policy described above. If Consultant or Consultant's employees will use personal autos in any way on this project, Consultant shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person. Workers Compensation on a state-approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by law with employer's liability limits no less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per accident or disease. Excess or Umbrella Liability Insurance (Over Primary) if used to meet limit requirements, shall provide coverage at least as broad as specified for the underlying coverages. Any such coverage provided under an umbrella liability policy shall include a drop down provision providing primary coverage above a maximum $25,000 self-insured retention for liability not covered by primary but covered by the umbrella. Coverage shall be provided on a "pay on behalf” basis, with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. Policy shall contain a provision obligating insurer at the time insured's liability is determined, not requiring actual payment by the insured first. There shall be no cross liability exclusion precluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another. Coverage shall be applicable to City for injury to employees of Consultant, sub-consultants or others involved in the Work. The scope of coverage provided is subject to approval of City following receipt of proof of insurance as required herein. Limits are subject to review but in no event less than $2,000,000 (Two Million Dollars) per occurrence. Professional Liability or Errors and Omissions Insurance as appropriate shall be written on a policy form coverage specifically designed to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the consultant and "Covered Professional Services" as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this agreement. The policy limit shall be no less than $1,000,000 (One Million Dollars) per claim and in the aggregate. The policy must "pay on behalf of" the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend. The policy retroactive date shall be on or before the effective date of this agreement. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services Insurance procured pursuant to these requirements shall be written by insurers that are admitted carriers in the state of California and with an A.M. Bests rating of A- or better and a minimum financial size VII. General conditions pertaining to provision of insurance coverage by Consultant. Consultant and City agree to the following with respect to insurance provided by Consultant. 1. Consultant agrees to have its insurer endorse the third party general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insureds the City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers using standard ISO endorsement No. CG 20 10 or an approved equivalent. If completed operations coverage is excluded, the policy must be endorsed to include such coverage. Consultant also agrees to require all contractors, and subcontractors to do likewise. 2. No liability insurance coverage provided to comply with this Agreement shall prohibit Consultant, or Consultant's employees, or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. Consultant agrees to waive subrogation rights against City regardless of the applicability of any insurance proceeds, and to require all contractors and subcontractors to do likewise. 3. The worker’s compensation policy is to be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation. The insurance company, in its endorsement, agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers for losses paid under the terms of this policy which arise from the work performed by the named insured for the City. 4. All insurance coverage and limits provided by Contractor and available or applicable to this agreement are intended to apply to the full extent of the policies. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any other agreement relating to the City or its operations limits the application of such insurance coverage. 5. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing. 6. No liability policy shall contain any provision or definition that would serve t o eliminate so-called "third party action over" claims, including any exclusion for bodily injury to an employee of the insured or of any contractor or subcontractor. 7. All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional requirements by the City, as the need arises. Consultant shall not make any reductions in scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period) that may affect City's protection without City's prior written consent. 8. Proof of compliance with these insurance requirements, consisting of certificates of insurance evidencing all of the coverages required and an additional insured endorsement to Consultant's general liability policy, shall be delivered to City at or prior to the execution of this Agreement. In the event such proof of any insurance is not delivered as required, or in the event such insurance is canceled at any time and no replacement coverage is provided, City has the right, but not the duty, to obtain any insurance it deems necessary to protect its interests under this or any other agreement Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services and to pay the premium. Any premium so paid by City shall be charged to and promptly paid by Consultant or deducted from sums due Consultant, at City option. 9. Certificate(s) are to reflect that the insurer will provide 30 days notice to City of any cancellation of coverage. Consultant agrees to require its insurer to modify such certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, or that any party will "endeavor" (as opposed to being required) to comply with the requirements of the certificate. 10. It is acknowledged by the parties of this agreement that all insurance coverage required to be provided by Consultant or any subcontractor, is intended to apply first and on a primary, non - contributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self-insurance available to City. 11. Consultant agrees to ensure that subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project that is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with subcontractors and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review. 12. Consultant agrees not to self-insure or to use any self-insured retentions or deductibles on any portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it will not allow any contractor, subcontractor, Architect, Engineer or other entity or person in any way involved in the performance of work on the project contemplated by this agreement to self -insure its obligations to City. If Consultant's existing coverage includes a deductible or self-insured retention, the deductible or self- insured retention must be declared to the City. At that time the City shall review options with the Consultant, which may include reduction or elimination of the deductible or self-insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions. 13. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the City will negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increased benefit to City. 14. For purposes of applying insurance coverage only, this Agreement will be deemed to have been executed immediately upon any party hereto taking any steps that can be deemed to be in furtherance of or towards performance of this Agreement. 15. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any insurance requirement in no way imposes any additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder in this or any other regard. 16. Consultant will renew the required coverage annually as long as City, or its employees or agents face an exposure from operations of any type pursuant to this agreement. This obligation applies whether or not the agreement is canceled or terminated for any reason. Termination of this obligation is not effective until City executes a written statement to that effect. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services 17. Consultant shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Consultant's insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City within five days of the expiration of the coverages. 18. The provisions of any workers' compensation or similar act will not limit the obligations of Consultant under this agreement. Consultant expressly agrees not to use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its officers, elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. 19. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended as limitations on coverage, limits or other requirements nor as a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any given policy. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue, and is not intended by any party or insured to be limiting or all-inclusive. 20. These insurance requirements are intended to be separate and distinct from any other provision in this agreement and are intended by the parties here to be interpreted as such. 21. The requirements in this Section supersede all other sections and provisions of this Agreement to the extent that any other section or provision conflicts with or impairs the provisions of this Section. 22. Consultant agrees to be responsible for ensuring that no contract used by any party involved in any way with the project reserves the right to charge City or Consultant for the cost of additional insurance coverage required by this agreement. Any such provisions are to be deleted with reference to City. It is not the intent of City to reimburse any third party for the cost of complying with these requirements. There shall be no recourse against City for payment of premiums or other amounts with respect thereto. 23. Consultant agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against Consultant arising out of the work performed under this agreement. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City. Exhibit A: Agreement for Consultant Services CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTANT I, HEREBY CERTIFY that I am Thomas J. Wieczorek, Director, of Center for Public Safety Management, LLC, whose address is 475 K Street NW, Suite 702, Washington, DC 20001, and that I here represent has not: a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above consultant) to solicit to secure this Agreement. b) Agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the Agreement; or c) Paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above consultant) any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with, procuring or carrying out the Agreement; Except as here expressly stated (if any); I acknowledge that this certificate is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. _________________ ___________________________________ Date Signature Thomas J. Wieczorek, Director Center for Public Safety Management, LLC P R O P O S A L F O R COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC SAFETY RESOURCE ANALYSIS ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT, LLC 475 K STREET NW STE 702 • WASHINGTON, DC 20001 WWW.CPSM.US • 716-969-1360 Exclusive Provider of Public Safety Technical Services for International City/County Management Association C E N T E R F O R P U B L I C S A F E T Y M A N A G E M E N T , L L C Exhibit A Exhibit B to Resolution November 20, 2017 Office of the City Manager City of Rohnert Park 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA Attn: Public Safety Resource Analysis RFP The Center for Public Safety Management, LLC, the exclusive provider of public safety technical assistance for the International City/County Management Association, is pleased to submit this proposal for an analysis of the Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety. As outlined in our proposal, CPSM understands that public safety departments offer unique opportunities and challenges for operation and improvement. The CPSM team will be composed not just of individuals with traditional police and fire department expertise; the team will include experts who helped conduct the first research and development of public safety agencies and went on to successfully operate the combined operatons. The team members have expertise drawn from across the world in fire, police, EMS, and dispatch as well as creating and operating public safety departments – both from the position of a director as well as the city manager. The CPSM approach for Rohnert Park is unique and more comprehensive than ordinary accreditation or competitor studies. In general, our analysis involves the following major outcomes: ▪ Examine the department’s organizational structure and culture; ▪ Perform gap analysis, comparing the “as is” state of the department to the best practices of industry standards; ▪ Recommend a management framework to ensure accountability, increased efficiency and improved performance in the individual disciplines of the public safety department; ▪ Conduct a data-driven forensic analysis to identify actual workload which is critical when determining staffing and equipment levels for a public safety department; ▪ Identify and recommend appropriate staffing and deployment levels for every discrete operational and support function in the department. This proposal is specifically designed to provide the local government with a thorough and unbiased analysis of emergency services in your community. We have developed a unique approach by combining the experience of dozens of subject matter experts in the areas of emergency services. The team assigned to the project will have hundreds of years of practical experience managing emergency service agencies, a 1 record of research, academic, teaching and training, and professional publications, and extensive consulting experience completing hundreds of projects nation-wide. The team assembled for you will be true “subject matter experts” not research assistants or interns. While covered in this proposal in more detail, you asked three questions of submitters. CPSM was created 10 years ago and has continually provided services to ICMA members both as part of the non-profit organization as well as the last three as a stand- alone organization (bios in proposal). We have conducted more than 290 studies in 41 states and provinces at the contracted budget. All were completed as agreed upon and many of our clients have requested additional assistance or retained us for repeat work. Our reference list is provided in the proposal with specific studies similar to Rohnert Park in size or composition. ICMA has provided direct services to local governments worldwide for almost 100 years, which has helped to improve the quality of life for millions of residents in the United States and abroad. I, along with my colleagues at CPSM, greatly appreciate this opportunity and would be pleased to address any comments you may have. You may contact me at 616-813-3782 or via email at twieczorek@cpsm.us or Leonard Matarese at 716.969.1360 or via email at lmatarese@cpsm.us . Sincerely, Thomas J. Wieczorek Director Center for Public Safety Management. LLC 1 STUDY DESIGN AND APPROACH PUBLIC SAFETY – THERE IS A DIFFERENCE A cross-trained public safety department operates differently than the traditional fire and police agency. There are three critical areas that need to be evaluated when evaluat ing public safety operations: 1. Workload. Police workload studies are a component of accreditation and CPSM’s forensic data-based analysis is one of the only such evaluations provided to cities. The CPSM process involved research and development from a variety of stakeholders over the past 25 years. In public safety agencies workload is not only important to police; the fire side must also be included because of the potential for multiple calls for service between the two disciplines. While workload is not a factor for most fire departments, in public safety agencies workload dedicated to meeting calls for service in both disciplines must be considered to determine if staffing is properly deployed. 2. Response Time. For most traditional police agencies, response time is not a factor in the majority of calls for service. However, in public safety agencies, response time is critical for containing fires to the point or room of origin and successful outcomes of calls for Emergency Medical Service. If agencies are fully deployed – meaning the workload is exceeding 60 percent of available time – response times can often be impacted for both police and fire/EMS calls for service. Determining the total response times (call answering, call processing and dispatch, turnout, and travel time) is therefore critical when looking at options for maintaining or improving service delivery. 3. Risk management. Agencies often overlook the key component in meeting NFPA Standard 1710 and 1720 – risk assessment. Deployment, particularly in the fire side of a public safety agency, must be based on the risks. If the agency has not completed a comprehensive risk assessment, it is difficult to determine if deployment is correct – both in terms of equipment as well as personnel. Are risks eval uated using a process or is risk determined on an as-you-go basis? The progressive agencies CPSM has worked with around the world conduct and routinely evaluate the risks and hazards in the community to continually improve service delivery. CPSM will assign individuals to this project who not only have an understanding of best practices in fire and police, but will include public safety experts. CPSM’s team conducted some of the first research and development of the public safety concepts leading to successful implementation that continues today. The team has not only investigated public safety but converted agencies to public safety from traditional stand-alone departments and then managed those public safety departments both as directors as well as city managers. No other competitor offers the depth and experience of the CPSM teams. 2 THE CPSM APPROACH – FIRE/EMS In addition to evaluating the City of Rohnert Park as a public safety agency, CPSM will evaluate the different components against best practices from around the world. Our process is data based in order to quantify how Rohnert Park specifically compares to these best practices as well as assist the City in evaluating if recommendations are successful and lead to improvement. One cannot improve something that cannot be measured! CPSM noted that Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety’s Fire Division has seen a steady increase in the number of calls for service: from 3324 in 2012 to 4084 in 2016. This trend has been seen throughout the United States and Canada and is driven, in large part, but calls for medical assistance. In Rohnert Park, medical assistance calls accounted for 2525 of the 4084 calls in 2016 and is likely to continue increasing if it follows trends CPSM sees from projects. The question that must be considered is how to create a sustainable model for responding to these increasing numbers, particularly in the public safety environment. Operations Review Using information analyzed by the data team, an operational assessment by C PSM technical experts will be conducted to evaluate the deployment of emergency resources. The CPSM team will evaluate equipment, maintenance, records, policies, procedures, mapping, implemented technology and innovations, facilities, training, and staff to create recommendations for future service delivery. The team may meet with elected and appointed officials as well as identified community leaders to determine the outcome they are seeking from deployment of resources. Observations and recommendations will be developed around key performance and analysis areas in the completion of the report and include: ▪ Comprehensive Data Analysis - Incident Type Workload - Response Time - Unit Workload - Analysis of Busiest Hour ▪ Governance and Administration - Organizational Structure - Organizational Leadership - Staffing and Deployment - External Relationships ▪ Organizational Behavior/Management/Processes - Time Allocation of Staff - Organizational Communication - Strategic Planning - Performance Measurement ▪ Financial Resources (Operating and Capital Resources)Programs (To include fire suppression, EMS, fire prevention, public education, fire investigation, technical rescue, hazardous materials, emergency management, , and other service delivery programs) 3 ▪ Risk Management/All hazards approach to community protection ▪ ISO/Accreditation Benefit Analysis Using GIS technology we will review the current locations of deployed equipment and stations with recommendations developed for the future. Key to making these determinations will be response time for dispatched units and call density. The CPSM data team has created a methodology for determining resource utilization that quantifies the maximum and minimum deployment of personnel and equipment. It is unlike any other approach currently used by consultants and is indicative of the desire by CPSM to deliver the right resources at the right time. Fire Suppression Services Fire departments staff their stations and train their personnel to respond to a wide array of fire and vehicular accident emergencies. In addition, many departments use the long intervals between calls for service for a variety of fire prevention, training and station activities. Research in the United Kingdom as well as by FEMA has shown that the most cost-effective approach to fire deployment is the elimination of calls. If a call is received, eliminating hazards decreases the risk faced by first responders and may result in a more positive outcome. These preventive strategies should include building effective code enforcement and fire prevention activities as well as strong public education programs promoting smoke detectors fire extinguisher use and placement in homes and businesses. The effort may also include early fire suppression through the use of automatic sprinkler systems and other fire protection systems. All of these prevention and response challenges are illustrated below. Fire Incident Progression FIRE DEPARTMENT ACTIONS FIRE CHALLENGES Unit Utilization Life Safety Property Conservation Early Suppression Early Detection & Reporting Fire Prevention Code Enforcement Smoke / Fire Alarms Extinguishers Automatic Sprinklers Rapid Response Medic -Rescue Rapid Response Fire 4 The resulting data study CPSM completes will gather and analyze data on the efficiency and effectiveness of the current deployment on the fire runs. Resource utilization will be quantified for concentration, location, and unit utilization. The study will also analyze fire call data to provide a comprehensive review of how fire services are delivered to the community including a detailed analysis of work loads and response times. The analysis of the workloads should begin with an in-depth study of the types of calls handled and their severity. The goal of this data gathering would be to explicate the fundamental nature of the fire challenge faced by the Fire Department. The study will pay special attention to fires reported in residences or buildings. Some examples of questions to be answered as a part of the study include: What was the average response time of the first arriving fire suppression unit capable of deploying extinguishing agent? How long did the engine companies work at the scene? For each call type, we will determine the time spent on-scene and the manpower personnel who worked the scene. This data will be aggregated to determine an overall average total time spent on fire calls per 24-hour period and by shift for each engine company. It will document any dramatic variations by time of day and day of week as well as seasonal variations. It will also require the review the department’s non-emergency productive hours that fire personnel carry out between emergency calls. The study will also analyze data to determine the proportion of calls and the associated workload that arise within the community’s borders compared to mutual aid calls. Response time is an important statistic in emergency service systems. We will determine: ▪ Average response time of first arriving fire suppression unit capable of deploying extinguishing agent. ▪ Distribution of response times for different call categories ▪ Response time for the second arriving engine company, where possible We will also identify and review calls that experienced unusually long response times. CPSM will use a risk-based system to evaluate the deployment methodology used by the department. An all hazard risk-hazard assessment Is necessary when evaluating if resources are properly deployed in a traditional fire/EMS department; it adds the police dimension when looking at Public Safety Departments. CPSM’s team includes an expert in conducting risk analysis with the approach of instructing Rohnert Park Staff on how to conduct the analysis so that it can be regularly reviewed and maintained. Staff must know the risks, hazards, and threats that the department faces; such an analysis does little good in a book on a shelf. It is for that reason that CPSM engages staff in this process. From the risk-hazard analysis, decisions can be made on how much staff is required to confine incidents to room or location of origin and plan for larger scale events that may require mutual aid from surrounding communities. The risk-hazard analysis is more commonly known in the Emergency Management Profession as a THIRA – Threat, Hazazrd Identification, Risk Assessment. 5 EMS Emergency Medical Services Fire Departments provide emergency medical services in addition to fire suppression duties. Rohnert Park reported 2525 incidents that were medical related in 2016 out of 4084 calls for service. In this project we will analyze EMS call data to provide a comprehensive review of emergency medical services including a detailed analysis of workloads and response times. The analysis of the workloads will begin with an in-depth study of the types of calls handled and their severity. The goal is to explicate the fundamental nature of the emergency medical challenge faced by the community’s Fire Division. We will pay special attention to the most critical emergencies such as heart attack and serious vehicular accidents. We will also look at the level of EMS care being provided and evaluate the options and impacts of providing EMS care at the EMT, Intermediate or Paramedic levels. For each call type, we will determine the time spent on-scene and the manpower personnel who worked the scene. These data will be aggregated to determine an overall average total time spent on fire calls per 24-hour period for each ambulance company and the unit hour utilization (UHU). We will also determine how much EMS calls contribute to the workload of fire engine companies since they also respond to most calls. We will document any dramatic variations by time of day and day of week as well as seasonal variations. Response time is an important statistic in emergency service systems. We will determine not only average response time but also the distribution of response times for different call categories. We will also identify and review calls that experienced unusually long response times. Medical Incident Progression EMS DEPARTMENT ACTIONS EMS CHALLENGES Early Detection / Reporting Early Action Stabilize Transport Public Education Public & Targeted Education Public CPR / AED Training Rapid ALS Response ALS Transport Medical Prevention 6 ANALYSIS OF THE BUSIEST HOURS OF THE YEAR Fire departments often speak of the “worst case scenario” or “resource exhaustion” when developing staffing and deployment plans. In reality, on agency can never staff for the worst case scenario, because whatever situation can be envisioned, there can always be a more serious event that can be planned. For a public safety department this calculation is critical: if calls for service and workload exceed the capacity of either division, resources will be drawn from the other. If neither division has sufficient resources to perform the workload demanded of the department, other areas are likely impacted such as response times, total resources, deployed, mutual and automatic aid, and staff burnout. What is needed to make staffing and apparatus decisions is a clear understanding of what levels of demand can reasonably be expected over specific periods of time in a specific jurisdiction. For example, what are the busiest calls for service times over a one year period and what levels of staffing and apparatus were needed to handle this workload? To answer this question requires a detailed analysis of calls for service, broken down minute by minute, identifying which units were busy and how many units remained available to respond to a new call for service. More sophisticated analysis can take into consideration available mutual aid resources. There is significant variability in the number of calls from hour to hour and the frequency of simultaneous or overlapping calls. One special concern relates to the fire resources available for the highest workload hours. We tabulate the data for each of 8760 hours in the year. We identify how often the fire department will respond to more than a specified number of calls in an hour. In studying call totals, it is important to remember that an EMS run typically lasts, on average, a different amount of time than a fire category call and this will vary depending upon whether EMS transport is provided. Example of “Busiest Hour Analysis” What follows is an example of a CPSM study of a fire department with 17 units staffed all the time. For the vast majority of these high volume hours, the total workload of all units combined is equivalent to 3 or fewer units busy the entire hour. For the ten highest volume hours, 0.1% of the hours, the total workload exceeded 3 hours. All of these high volume hour s occurred between 10 a.m. and 9 p.m. The hour with the most work was between 1000 and 1100 on September 12, 2009. The 21 calls involved 34 runs (a “call” is an incident and a “run” is a unit response). The combined workload was 417 minutes. This is equivalent to 7 firefighting units being busy the entire hour. However, in the City there are 17 units staffed all of the time. During the worst portion of the hour, there were always at least 5 units still available to respond immediately. Only 5 of the 17 unit s were busy more than 30 minutes during this hour. The hour with the most calls was between 1400 and 1500 on October 13, 2009. The 23 calls involved 28 runs. The combined workload was 379 minutes. This is equivalent to between 6 and 7 firefighting units being busy the entire hour. However, in the city there are 17 units staffed all of the time. During the worst portion of the hour, there were always at least 7 units still available to respond immediately. Only 3 of the 17 units were busy more than 30 minutes during this hour. 7 Table 1. Frequency Distribution of the Number of Calls Number of Calls in an Hour Frequency 0-5 6397 6-10 2263 11-15 98 16 or more 2 Observations: ▪ A total of 6,397 hours (73%) in a year have received 0-5 calls. ▪ A total of 2,263 hours (25.8%) in a year have received 6-10 calls. ▪ A total of 100 hours (1.2%) in a year have received 11 or more calls. Table 2. Top Ten Hours with the Most Calls Received HOURS Number of Calls Number of Runs Total Busy Minutes 13-Oct-2009 1400 23 28 379 12-Sep-2009 1000 21 34 417 20-Jun-2009 2000 15 16 252 02-Feb-2009 1900 15 16 213 10-Jul-2009 1000 14 15 226 15-Feb-2009 1900 14 20 317 29-Jul-2009 1700 14 18 274 23-Feb-2009 1100 14 15 180 17-Mar-2009 1500 14 17 193 01-Mar-2009 1800 13 14 185 8 Table 3. Deployed Minutes by Unit for the Hour between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. on 12-Sep-2009 Station 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 Number of Units Unit E1 E2 T2 E3 T3 E4 T4 E5 E6 E7 T7 E9 E10 E11 E12 E13 E14 Busy Free 0-5 3.3 1 16 5-10 1.9 0.7 5 3 14 10-15 3.1 5 5 3.7 0.6 4.8 5 7 10 15-20 5 4.3 5 0.5 5 5 4.4 4 8 9 20-25 4.4 1.1 4.4 5 3.8 5 5 7 10 25-30 5 5 5 5 5 5 12 30-35 4.6 5 5 5 2.7 5 12 35-40 5 5 3.1 5 5 1.3 6 11 40-45 5 5 5 1.2 0.7 0.7 4.9 5 1.6 9 8 45-50 5 5 5 1.8 5 1.8 1.9 1.6 5 4.9 1.7 11 6 50-55 0.9 5 5 4.5 3.3 5 5 2.5 0.8 2.5 5 5 12 5 55-60 5 5 5 0.8 3.1 5 4.1 5 5 5 5 11 6 Total 12.5 12.3 0.0 40.6 40.5 23.1 11.3 0.0 4.1 14.3 11.8 34.8 8.4 39.6 43.2 16.5 19.0 Note: The numbers in the cells are the busy minutes within the 5 minute block. The cell values greater than 2.5 are coded as red. Observations: ▪ Between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. on September 12, 2009, the fire department responded to 21 calls and dispatched 34 units to these calls. ▪ In the city there are 17 units staffed all of the time. During t he worst portion of this hour, there were always at least 5 units still available to respond immediately. Only 5 of the 17 units were busy more than 30 minutes during this hour. 9 Figure 1. Workload by Unit and Call Type for the Hour between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. on 12-Sep-2009 Observations: ▪ Engine companies E3, E11 and E12 were busy more than 40 minutes during this hour. ▪ Truck T3 was busy more than 40 minutes during this hour. ▪ Eleven units were busy less than 20 minutes. Two units responded to no calls. Table 4: Overlapped Call Analysis Scenario Frequency Percent No Overlapped Call 1,536 48.5 Overlapped with another call 1,113 35.2 Overlapped with two calls 388 12.3 Overlapped with three calls 102 3.2 Overlapped with four or more calls 26 0.8 Observations: ▪ 48.5 percent of emergency incidents had no overlapped call. ▪ 35.2 percent of emergency incidents overlapped with another call. ▪ 12.3 percent of emergency incidents overlapped with two calls. ▪ 4.0 percent of emergency incidents overlapped with three or more calls. 10 POLICE DIVISION CPSM has reviewed documents in the RFP and that were provided on -line. The Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety’s Police Division is divided into: Patrol Services and Support Services (that include investigations, community-oriented problem solving unit or COPS, traffic unit, records bureau and property evidence room, and communications). CPSM understands that workload efficiency and scheduling are critical components. The following process used by CPSM delivers an unique, evidence-based product capable of answering both questions as well as providing the basis for further drilling down to develop other data driven decisions. The CPSM team developed a standardized approach to conducting analyses of police departments by combining the experience sets of dozens of subject matter experts. We begin projects with a request for data, documents and worksheets. Next, we extract raw data on calls for service from an agency’s computer aided dispatch system. This process also ensures that the communications division that serves the Public Safety Department is operating within national standards as well as processing calls for service efficiently, effectively and safely. The data are sorted and analyzed to identify performance indicators (i.e., response times, workload by time, multiple unit dispatching, etc.) for comparison to industry benchmarks. Performance indicators are valuable measures of agency efficiency and effectiveness. The findings are shown in tabular as well as graphic form and follow a standard format for presentation of the analyzed data. While the format will be similar from community to community, the data reported are unique to the specific agency. CPSM also conducts an on-site operational review. Here the performance indicators serve as the basis for the operational reviews. Prior to any on-site arrival of a CPSM team, agencies are asked to compile a number of key operational documents (i.e., policies and procedures, assets lists, etc.). Most on-site reviews consist of interviews with management and supervisors, as well as rank and file officers; attendance at roll calls and ride-alongs with officers. We review case files with investigators and observe dispatch operations to assess compliance with the provided written documentation. As a result of on- site visits and data assessments, our subject matter experts produce a SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the department). We have found that this standardized approach ensures that we mea sure and observe all of the critical components of agencies. Additionally, this methodology can be integrated with ongoing support customized to the unique needs of your community. Strategic planning, risk assessment, and training services are also available to assist with the implementation of CPSM recommendations and developing new processes and programs that may arise as implementation evolves. The following information describes the CPSM approach to studying, understanding, evaluating, and reporting on police departments around the country. Although no two police departments are the same, a standardized approach to department evaluation ensures a rigorous and methodological process that permits benchmarking, comparing, and assessing within the context of the best practices of American law enforcement. However, each locality has unique characteristics that present policing challenges. Integrating a standardized approach within the context of local variability permits an accurate assessment of the org anization in its political environment, and further permits CPSM to offer recommendations that comport with the best practices in policing, yet tailor-made for the client community. 11 I. Benchmark the community It is essential to understand the service levels, protection needs, community dynamics, and overall environment within which the police department operates. If necessary to do so, the CPSM study may involve interviews directed at stakeholders in the community which could include elected officials and employee labor representatives who would be contacted to solicit their opinions about the department, the public safety needs of their constituency, and the perceived gaps in service levels currently provided. CPSM may work with the agency to identify community members that can provide this important information. Additionally, the department will be compared to organizations of similar size with respect to crime, demographics, and cost - efficiency. II. Patrol Operations Police agencies routinely speak about “recommended officers per 1,000 population” or a “National Standard” for staffing or comparisons to other municipalities. There are no such standards, nor are there “recommended numbers of “officer per thousand”. The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) states; “Ready-made, universally applicable patrol staffing standards do not exist. Ratios, such as officers-per-thousand population, are totally inappropriate as a basis for staffing decisions.” Staffing decisions, particularly in patrol, must be made based upon actual workload and very few police agencies have the capability of conducting that analysis. Once an analysis of the actual workload is made, then a determination can be made as to the amount of discretionary patrol time that should exist, consistent with the local government’s ability to fund. CPSM’s team of doctoral level experts in Operations Research in Public Safety have created in The CPSM Patrol Workload & Deployment Analysis System© the ability to produce detailed information on workload even in those agencies without sophisticated management information systems. Using the raw data extracted from the police department’s CAD system our team converts calls for service into police services workload and then effectively graphs w orkload reflecting seasonally, weekday / weekend and time of day variables. Using this information the police department can contrast actual workload with deployment and identify the amount of discretionary patrol time available (as well as time commitment s to other police activities. Police service workload differentiates from calls for service in that calls for service are a number reflecting the incidents recorded. Workload is a time measurement recording the actual amount of police time required to handle calls for service from inception to completion. Various types of police service calls require differing amounts of time (and thus affect staffing requirements). As such, call volume (number of calls) as a percentage of total number of calls could be significantly different than workload in a specific area as a percentage of total workload. The graph below demonstrates this difference in units. CPSM has found that the most effective way to manage operations, including policing, is to make decisions based upon the interpretation and analysis of data and information. To achieve this, a data analysis of police department workload, staffing and deployment will be conducted. By objectively looking at the availability of deployed hours and comparing those to the hours necessary to conduct operations, staffing expansion and/or reductions can be determined and projected. Additionally the time necessary to conduct proactive police activities (such as team-led enforcement, directed patrol, community policing and selected traffic enforcement) will be reviewed to provide the city with a meaningful methodology to determine appropriate costing allocation models. 12 Workload vs. deployment analysis sample This is one of the ways we show the amount of available, non-committed patrol time compared to workload. As you can see we break out the various activities, convert them to time and then compare to available manpower. The deployment is based upon actual hours worked. So in this example, at noon there are approximately 9 hours of work (including citizen initiated & officer initiated calls for services, including traffic) and administrative activities (meals, vehicle, reports, etc.). There are approximately 15 man hours of available resources meaning that at that hour, on average, of the 15 officers on duty 9 are busy on activities. The area shown in green and brown is uncommitted time. This is the area where staffing decisions impact – it becomes a policy issue as to how much uncommitted time a city wants, and is willing to pay for. Figure 7: Deployment and Main Workload, Weekdays, Summer Hour 2321191715131197531 20 15 10 5 0 P e r s o n n e l P a tro l Dire cte d p a tro l wo rk O u t-o f-s e rvice wo rk P o lice -in itia te d wo rk O the r-initia te d wo rk 13 Figure 8: Workload Percentage by Hour, Weekdays, Summer 2220181614121086420 100 80 60 40 20 0 Hour P e r c e n t a g e Workload vs. Deployment – Weekdays, Summer Avg. Workload: 6.5 officers per hour Avg. % Deployed (SI): 57 percent Peak SI: 89 percent Peak SI Time: 6:15 a.m. The CPSM study will result in the calculation of service demands placed on the department, workload levels, service times for calls for service, and response times. This information is developed by first extracting data from the departments CAD system. The extracted information is then processed and workload is calculated. This workload is then compared to deployment levels. The product of this analysis is the variance between service demands and available personnel, and appropriate recommendations made for staffing levels and an optimal deployment schedule to meet these service demands. This permits exploration of the following questions: ▪ What are the service demands made by the public as measured through the CAD system? ▪ What is the workload? ▪ Based on this workload is the alignment of Districts and Divisions appropriate? ▪ Based on the workload is the shift schedule aligned appropriately and what alternatives to the current shift plan are most efficient? ▪ How many police officers and supervisors are need to staff the patrol function in order to meet the workload demands placed on the agency? ▪ How long does it take to respond to calls for service (both response time and tot al time) and what ways are there to reduce these times? ▪ How many officers are assigned to each call and what are the ways to minimize these assignments? 14 ▪ What categories of call, and in what frequency, does the agency handle and what measures can be adopted to minimize unnecessary responses? ▪ How much time is spent on administrative duties? ▪ How much time is spent on directed patrol activities and specialized enforcement? The study will determine the gaps in patrol coverage and recommendations for modifying temporal and spatial deployment. With the appropriate “best fit” of patrol coverage identified, a determination can be made about the exact number of officers required to meet service demands, and in what shift/district/division combinations to maximize res ources. In addition to the analysis of patrol operations from the CAD system and workload, the CPSM study will focus on the qualitative aspects of patrol. The study will observe officers on patrol through ride-alongs, interviews, and general observations. We will amass all available documents, plans, and data available to understand the patrol approach in the department. We will observe the special operations teams, the problem/nuisance unit, etc. to evaluate their role within the overall mission of the department and patrol operations. We will evaluate the performance of the units, identify improvement opportunities, and justify and recommend appropriate staffing levels The CPSM study will also evaluate the implementation of technology on patrol, weapon s available, and equipment used with opportunities for improvement. CPSM advocates community policing as its operational philosophy. Members of the CPSM team are currently working with the COPS office and Bureau of Justice on the latest research involving body-worn cameras and the next generation of community policing models. The CPSM study would evaluate the implementation of community policing, in quantifiable and anecdotal terms, and identify improvement opportunities where appropriate. Similarly, the CPSM study would evaluate the relationship of patrol operations with the rest of the department. To what extent does this bureau work, coordinate, and communicate with the other operational and support functions of the department? How should it? What are the strategic, management, and planning functions of the department with regards to the patrol function and how does patrol operations respond to the mission of the organization? How are crime, traffic, disorder, and quality of life problems handled? III. Investigations The CPSM study will assess investigations – both reactive and proactive. The CPSM team will explore the following questions: ▪ Staffing – Are there sufficient investigators available to handle the workload? ▪ Workload – What is the workload; how many cases do investigators handle; is the specialization appropriate? ▪ Case management – Is there an effective case management system in place? ▪ Effectiveness & Efficiency – How much time does it take to investigate cases? Are victims kept informed? Are cases cleared and offenders held accountable? How much overtime is spent? ▪ Intelligence – How is intelligence gathered and disseminated (inside and outside the department)? Does the investigations function make use of intelligence? ▪ Civilianization opportunities – What are the potential areas for civilianization? ▪ Technological opportunities – Is technology being leveraged to improve investigations? ▪ Crime scene – Are crime scenes being processed efficiently, and are appropriate follow- up investigations being conducted? 15 ▪ Proactive Investigations – the same approach and inquires found in sections above are applied to each specialized investigative unit in the department. - Narcotics - Violent Offenders - Warrants and Fugitives - Bombings and Arson - Fraud/Cyber crimes - All other specialized investigations units CPSM will essentially evaluate each investigative unit operating in the agency. This evaluation will make an assessment of the performance of the unit, how the unit operates within the overall mission of the department, compare operations to best practices in law enforcement, identify improvement opportunities, and identify appropriate staffing levels. IV. Administration and Support Once again, CPSM will evaluate every administrative and support unit in the police department. This evaluation will involve: ▪ Staffing; ▪ Workload; ▪ Civilianization possibilities; ▪ Cost saving opportunities; ▪ Out-sourcing opportunities; Best practice comparisons and opportunities for improvement. The CPSM team has subject matter experts in police management and administration and will explore administration and support activities in the area of professional standards (Internal investigations, hiring and recruitment, disciplinary system, promotional system), training (both academy and in-service), records management, evaluating the critical, frequent, and high liability policies, facility, fleet, equipment, information technology, property management system, laboratory, planning and research, sick -time management, overtime, communications and dispatch, etc. In general, we look at every unit identified as a discrete operational/support entity for the following: ▪ Describe the functions of the unit; ▪ Evaluate the performance of the unit. In most cases this is a quantitative; evaluation, but in units not appropriate for quantification, a qualitative evaluation is provided; ▪ Identification of improvement opportunities ▪ An evaluation and justification, and recommendation for appropriate staffing levels. V. Organizational Culture During the operational evaluation described above, organizational “themes” emerge. What does the department “think” about providing police service to the community and how does this thinking align with the stated mission and department policies? How does the department interact with the community and internally with its own members? In general, what is the culture of the organization? The culture of a police organization is a reflection of its members and the community it serves. Through focus groups, interviews, and observations, the CPSM team will evaluate operational 16 readiness and need. This part of the CPSM study is critical to the overall success of the project as it provides a better understanding of the police department and how the workload, staffing, and community dynamics shape the mission, goals, operations, and needs of the organization. In addition, as an option, every member of the department can be given the opportunity to participate in an anonymous survey. This survey is designed to und erstand the culture of the department, assess internal and external communications, and determine what it “thinks” about various elements of organizational life. VI. Organizational Structure and Administration Based on the above, we are able to analyze current management structure and practice and make recommendations to improve organizational administration. The product of this analysis is a proposed staffing mode. The product of this analysis also generally ends up with a leaner, flatter, and more efficient organizational design. VII. Performance Management The overarching philosophy of the CPSM approach is to evaluate the police department in terms of performance management. Identifying workload, staffing, and best practices is just the beginning. It is also important to assess the organization‘s ability to carry out its mission. Essentially, does the police department know its goals, and how does it know they are being met. It is very difficult for an organization to succeed at any given level of staffing unless it has a clear picture of success. How does the department “think” about its mission, how does it identify and measure what’s important to the community, how does it communicate internally and externally, how does it hold managers accountable, and how does it know th e job is getting done? The CPSM team will evaluate the department and make recommendations to assist with improving capacity in this area, if necessary. In addition, CPSM can offer performance management training and mentoring services to support organizational success. 17 CONSULTANT WORK PLAN PROJECT SCHEDULE Milestone 1 – Full execution of the agreement Agreement will identify Project Launch date. Milestone 2 – Project Launch We will conduct an interactive telephone conference with local government contacts. Our project leads will launch the project by clarifying and confirming expectations, detailing study parameters, identifying agency point of contacts and commencing information gathering. Milestone 3a – Information Gathering and Data Extraction – 30 Days Immediately following project launch, the operations leads (Police and Fire) will deliver an information request to the department. This is an extensive request which provides us with a detailed understanding of the department's operations. Our experience is that it typically takes an agency several weeks to accumulate and digitize the information. We will provide instructions concerning uploading materials to our website. When necessary, the lead will hold a telephone conference to discuss items contained in the request. The team lead will review this material prior to an on-site visit. Milestone 3b – Data Extraction and Analysis – 14 Days Also immediately following the project launch the Data Lead will submit a preliminary data request, which will evaluate the quality of the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system data. This will be followed by a comprehensive request for data from the CAD system to conduct the response and workload analysis. This request requires a concerted effort and focused response from your department to ensure the timely production of required for analysis. Delays in this process will likely extend the entire project and impact the delivery of final report. The data team will extract one year’s worth of Calls for Service (CFS) from the CAD system. Once the Data Team is confident the data are accurate, they will certify that they have all the data necessary to complete the analysis. Milestone 3c – Data Certification – 14 days Milestone 4a – Data Analysis and Delivery of Draft Data Report – 30 days Within thirty days of data certification, the analysis will be completed and a draft, unedited data report will be delivered to the department for review and comment that outlines the Police and Fire Divisions. After the data draft report is delivered, an on-site visit by the operations team will be scheduled. Milestone 4b – Departmental Review of Draft Data Report – 14 days The department will have 10 days to review and comment on the draft unedited data analysis. During this time, our Data team will be available to discuss the draft report. The Department must specify all concerns with the draft report at one time. Milestone 4c – Final Data Report – 10 days After receipt of the department's comments, the data report will be finalized within 10 days. Milestone 5 – Conduct On-Site Visit – 30 days Subject matter experts will perform a site visit within 30 days of the delivery of the draft data report. Milestone 6 – Draft Operations Report – 30 days Within 30 days of the last on-site visit, the operations team will provide a draft operations report to the department point of contact. Again the department will have 10 days to review and comment. 18 Milestone 7 – Final Report 15 days Once the Department’s comments and concerns are received by CPSM the combined final report will be delivered to the city within 15 days. TOTAL ELAPSED TIME: 105 – 135 days 19 CONSULTANT QUALIFICATIONS THE ASSOCIATION & THE COMPANY International City/County Management Association (ICMA) The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) is a 100 year old, non -profit professional association of local government administrators and managers, with approximately 9,000 members located in 32 countries. Since its inception in 1914, ICMA has been dedicated to assisting local governments in providing services to its citizens in an efficient and effective manner. Our work spans all of the activities of local government – parks, libraries, recreation, public works, economic development, code enforcement, Brownfield’s, public safety, etc. ICMA advances the knowledge of local government best practices across a wide range of platforms including publications, research, training, and technical assistance. Our work includes both domestic and international activities in partnership with local, state and federal governments as well as private foundations. For example, it is involved in a major library research project funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and provided community policing training in Panama working w ith the U.S. State Department. It has personnel in Afghanistan assisting with building wastewater treatment plants and has teams in Central America providing training in disaster relief working with SOUTHCOM . The ICMA Center for Public Safety Management (ICMA/CPSM) was one of four Centers within the Information and Assistance Division of ICMA providing support to local governments in the areas of police, fire, EMS, Emergency Management and Homeland Security. In addition to providing technical assistance in these areas we also represent local governments at the federal level and are involved in numerous projects with the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security. In each of these Centers, ICMA has selected to partner with nationally recognized individuals or companies to provide services that ICMA has previously provided directly. Doing so will provide a higher level of services, greater flexibility and reduced costs in meeting member’s needs as ICMA will be expanding the services that ICMA can offer to local government. For example, The Center for Productivity Management (CPM) is now working exclusively with SAS, one of the world’s leaders in data management and analysis. And the Center for Strategic Management (CSM) is now partnering with nationally recognized experts and academics in local government management and finance. Center for Public Safety Management, LLC (CPSM) is now the exclusive provider of public safety technical assistance for ICMA and provides training and research for the Association’s members and represents ICMA in its dealings with the federal government and other public safety professional associations such as CALEA and CPSE. The Center for Public Safety Management, LLC maintains the same team of individuals performing the same level of service that it has for the past ten years for ICMA. CPSM’s local government technical assistance experience includes workload and deployment analysis, using our unique methodology and subject matter experts to examine department organizational structure and culture, identify workload and staffing needs as well as industry best practices. We have conducted over 290 such studies in 41 states and Canadian provinces and more than 200 communities ranging in size from 8,000 population Boone, IA to 800,000 population Indianapolis, IN. 20 Thomas Wieczorek is the Director of the Center for Public Safety Management. Leonard Matarese serves as the Director of Research & Program Development. Dr. Dov Chelst is the Director of Quantitative Analysis. Chief Michael Iacona is Senior Manager for Fire/EMS. CPSM has completed its projects at the agreed upon budgets and has not had cost overruns. It has been regularly requested to perform additional work for its clients and has worked along with ICMA to expand services offered to communities. 21 PROJECT STAFFING The proposal will look at the full public safety department operations with specific analysis of the police, fire and EMS services of Rohnert Park. For this project, the CPSM has assembled a premier team of experts from a variety of disciplines and from across the United States. The goal is to develop recommendations that will enable it to produce the out comes necessary to provide critical emergency services consistent with the community’s financial capabilities. The team will consist of a Project Manager, two Team Leaders and several senior public safety Subject Matter Experts selected from our team specifically to meet the needs of the community. The fire/EMS management organizational chart for the project includes the following Key Team Members PROJECT MANAGER Leonard Matarese, MPA Thomas J. Wieczorek FIRE TEAM LEADER Joseph Pozzo, MPA DATA TEAM LEADER Dov Chelst, Ph.D. 22 The police division organizational chart for the project includes the following Key Team Members PROJECT MANAGER LEONARD A. MATARESE, MPA, ICMA-CM, IPMA-CP Director of Research and Project Development, ICMA Center for Public Safety Management BACKGROUND Mr. Matarese is a specialist in public sector administration with particular expertise in public safety issues. He has 44 years’ experience as a law enforcement officer, police chief, public safety director, city manager and major city Human Resources Commissioner. He was one of the original advisory board members and trainer for the first NIJ/ICMA Communi ty Oriented Policing Project which has subsequently trained thousands of municipal practitioners on the techniques of the community policing philosophy over the past 18 years. He has managed several hundred studies of emergency services agencies with particular attention to matching staffing issues with calls for service workload. Recognized as an innovator by his law enforcement colleagues he served as the Chairman of the SE Quadrant, Florida, Blue Lighting Strike Force, a 71agency, U.S. Customs Service an ti- terrorist and narcotics task force and also as president of the Miami-Dade County Police Chief’s Association – one of America’s largest regional police associations. He represents ICMA on PROJECT MANAGER Leonard Matarese, MPA DATA TEAM LEADER Dov Chelst, Ph.D. POLICE TEAM LEADER Carol RasorCarol E. Rasor- Cordero, Ph.D. 23 national projects involving the United States Department of Homel and Security, The Department of Justice, Office of Community Policing and the Department of Justice, Office Bureau of Justice Assistance. He has also served as a project reviewer for the National Institute of Justice and is the subject matter expert on several ICMA / USAID police projects in Central America. As a public safety director he has managed fire / EMS systems including ALS transport. He was an early proponent of public access and police response with AEDs. Mr. Matarese has presented before most major public administration organizations annual conferences on numerous occasions and was a keynote speaker at the 2011 annual PERF conference. He was a plenary speaker at the 2011 TAMSEC Homeland security conference in Linköping, Sweden and at the 2010 UN Habitat PPUD Conference in Barcelona, Spain. He has a Master’s degree in Public Administration and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science. He is a member of two national honor societies and has served as an adjunct faculty member for several universities. He holds the ICMA Credentialed Manager designation, as well as Certified Professional designation from the International Public Management Association - Human Resources. He also has extensive experience in labor management issues, particularly in police and fire departments. Mr. Matarese is a life member of the International Association of Chiefs of Police and of ICMA. DATA ASSESSMENT TEAM DOV CHELST, PH.D. Director of Quantitative Analysis BACKGROUND Dr. Chelst is an expert in analyzing public safety department’s workload and deployment. He manages the analysis of all public safety data for the Center. He is involved in all phases of The Center’s studies from initial data collection, on-site review, large-scale dataset processing, statistical analysis, and designing data reports. To date, he has managed over 140 data analysis projects for city and county agencies ranging in population size from 8,000 to 800,000. Dr. Chelst has a Ph.D. Mathematics from Rutgers University and a B.A. Magna Cum Laude in Mathematics and Physics from Yeshiva University. He has taught mathematics, physics and statistics, at the university level for 9 years. He has conducted research in complex analysis, mathematical physics, and wireless communication networks and has presented h is academic research at local, national and international conferences, and participated in workshops across the country. SENIOR PUBLIC SAFETY SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT DAVID MARTIN, PH.D. Senior Researcher in the Center for Urban Studies, Wayne State University BACKGROUND Dr. Martin specializes in public policy analysis and program evaluation. He has worked with several police departments to develop crime mapping and statistical analysis tools. In these 24 projects he has developed automated crime analysis tools and real-time, dashboard-style performance indicator systems for police executive and command staff. Dr. Martin teaches statistics at Wayne State University. He is also the program evaluator for four Department of Justice Weed and Seed sites. He is an expert in the use of mapping technology to analyze calls for service workload and deployments. SENIOR PUBLIC SAFETY DATA ANALYST SARITA VASUDEVAN, M.S., M.S., MBA BACKGROUND Sarita Vasudevan specializes in data analysis and database design to analyze public safety agencies. Sarita has worked on over 45 projects for police and fire departments across the United States. Prior to CPSM, Sarita worked as a Vice President with the Corporate Technology group at Morgan Stanley, as a senior implementations consultant with the Global Solutions Delivery group at Ariba Inc. and as a Technical manager in the Consultancy Services group at Oracle Corporation. Sarita Vasudevan has a M.S in Statistics from Rutgers University, a M.S. in IEOR from the University of California, Berkeley and an MBA from the Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta. SENIOR PUBLIC SAFETY DATA ANALYST PRISCILA MONACHESI, M.S., B.A. BACKGROUND Priscila Monachesi is a Senior Data Analyst with CPSM and has worked on over 40 data analysis projects for city and county public safety agencies. She has over ten years’ experience as a Project Leader/Senior System Analyst in auto manufacturing and financial systems. She has a M.S in Statistics from Montclair State University, a B.A. in Economics from Montclair State University, and a Technical Degree in Data Processing from Pontifícia Universidade Católica in Brazil. SENIOR PUBLIC SAFETY DATA ANALYST SARAH WEADON, B.A. BACKGROUND Sarah Weadon has over 15 years’ experience consulting with local, state, and federa l government agencies in the areas of data and geospatial analysis, database and application development, and project management. She has worked with over 40 public safety agencies across the U.S. and Canada, providing data and geospatial analysis of respo nse times, call trends, and station locations. Her skill in understanding the results of the analyses in the broader context of each client’s budget, political, and overall reality, supports the development of 25 practical, actionable recommendations. Ms. Wea don holds a Bachelor’s degree in Classical Languages. PUBLIC SAFETY DATA ANALYST SHAN ZHOU, PH.D. BACKGROUND Dr. Shan Zhou specializes in the analysis of police data. Shan brings extensive experience in scientific and clinical data analysis . Prior to CPSM, she worked as an associate scientist at Yale School of Medicine. Shan has a MS in Business Analytics and Project Management from University of Connecticut and a PhD in Cell biology, Genetics and Development from University of Minnesota. PUBLIC SAFETY DATA ANALYST RYAN JOHNSON, B.A. BACKGROUND Ryan Johnson is a new addition to the CPSM data analyst team, specializing in the analysis of fire data. He has helped complete fire analysis projects for several cities and has handled ad hoc requests for modeling optimum staffing levels for police departments. Ryan brings experience in financial data analysis from the telecom expense industry, where he was the lead analyst for four clients; 3 fortune 500 companies and the Top Architectural Engineering Firm in t he country. He also brings experience in spatial analytics from his time with Homeland Security. Ryan has a B.S. in Economics from Georgia State University and he is completing his M.A. in Economics from Rutgers University. OPERATIONS ASSESSMENT TEAM – FIRE AND EMS UNIT SENIOR MANAGER OF FIRE AND EMS CHIEF JOSEPH POZZO, MPA, CFO Currently the Assistant Director of Human Resources for Volusia County, Florida; Former Deputy Director, Volusia County Department of Public Protection; former Director and Fire Chief, Volusia County, Florida, former Fire Chief, Loudon County, Virginia, former Fire Chief Portsmouth, Virginia. BACKGROUND Joe has a thirty-eight (38) year career in public service. Since 2015, Joe has served as the Assistant Director of Human Resources for Volusia County, Florida (3,200 employees), where he manages the employee relations, benefits administration, and occupational health services functions and teams, as well as assist the Human Resources director with the management and negotiation of six collective bargaining agreements/units. Joe is also deeply involved in developing and implementing the County’s Diversity and Inclusion initiative. 26 Joe took a leave of absence in 2014 from the Center for Public Safety Management to assist the City of Port Orange, FL transition the fire department from the city’s public safety administrative model. While in Port Orange, Chief Pozzo was responsible for the reformation of the fire department to include the operations and management of this career department that delivers fire, EMS first response, and emergency management services to over 56,000 citizens living within 27 square miles. Joe has served as the Deputy Director of the Department of Public Prote ction Volusia County, Florida, where he was responsible for the day-to-day operations of Fire, EMS, Emergency Management, Medical Examiner, Beach Safety, Corrections, and Animal Services. He was formerly Fire Chief of Volusia County Fire Services, where he developed and implemented a service model designed to introduce EMS transport into the agency, incorporate fleet efficiencies, and enhance the wild land/urban interface efforts. Prior to Chief Pozzo’s appointment in 2010 in Volusia County, he served as the Chief of the Loudoun County Department of Fire and Rescue. This agency is a combination fire and rescue system providing fire, rescue, and emergency management services in one of the fastest growing counties in the nation. The fire and rescue system during Chief Pozzo’s tenure provided these services to over 275,000 permanent residents living in 520 square miles of diverse suburban and rural area located within the National Capital Region. Fire, Rescue and Emergency Management services were executed through 450+ career staff and over 1400 volunteer members operating out of nineteen stations. Prior to his appointment with Loudoun County, Chief Pozzo served as Chief of the Portsmouth Fire, Rescue and Emergency Services Department. This agency is one of the oldest professional departments on the eastern seaboard and served over 95,000 residents during Chief Pozzo’s tenure. Chief Pozzo also served in the City of Virginia Beach, Va. Fire Department for 19 years reaching the level of Battalion Chief prior to embarking on his career as a Fire Chief/Director. Joe holds a Master of Public Administration degree from Troy University where he graduated with honors, a B.A. in Public Administration from Saint Leo University and several associate degrees including an AAS in Fire Science and Protective Services and numerous technical certifications. He holds the Chief Fire Officer Designation from the Center for Public Safety Excellence, and is a Certified Professional in Human Resources through the Society of Human Resource management (SHRM). DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT, LLC THOMAS WIECZOREK Retired City Manager Ionia, MI; former Executive Director Center for Public Safety Excellenc e BACKGROUND Thomas Wieczorek is an expert in fire and emergency medical services operations. He has served as a police officer, fire chief, director of public safety and city manager and is former Executive Director of the Center for Public Safety Excellence (formerly the Commission on Fire Accreditation International, Inc.). He has taught a number of programs at Grand Valley State University, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and Grand Rapids Junior 27 College. He has testified frequently for the Michigan Municipal League before the legislature and in several courts as an expert in the field of accident reconstruction and fire department management. He is the past-president of the Michigan Local Government Manager’s Association; served as the vice-chairperson of the Commission on Fire Officer Designation; and serves as a representative of ICMA on the NFPA 1710 career committee. He most recently worked with the National League of Cities and the Department of Homeland Security to create and deliver a program on emergency management for local officials titled, “Crisis Leadership for Local Government Officials.” It has been presented in 43 states and has been assigned a course number by the DHS. He represents ICMA on the NFPA 1710 and 173 0 Standards Committees and is a board member on the International Accreditation Service, a wholly owned subsidiary of the International Code Council. He received the Mark E. Keane “Award for Excellence” in 2000 from the ICMA, the Association’s highest award and was honored as City Manager of the Year (1999) and Person of the Year (2003) by the Rural Water Association of Michigan, and distinguished service by the Michigan Municipal League in 2005. SENIOR MANAGER OF FIRE AND EMS CHIEF MIKE IACONA, M PA (RET.) Retired Fire Chief/Director Flagstaff Fire Department, Flagstaff Arizona; former Director and Fire Chief , Orange County, Florida Fire Rescue Department. BACKGROUND Chief Iacona has 38 years of fire service experience, with the last 17 years as Fire Chief. He currently serves as fire chief for the City of Flagstaff, Arizona and has held this position since 2002. Prior to this, he was the Director of Orange County Fire Rescue, Florida, which included oversight of the County’s emergency management functions. In addition to duties associated with fire chief, he has served in various capacities, rising through the ranks from to fire fighter/paramedic to chief fire officer. Mike has led a fire training division, was the Chief of Operations, served as Emergency Manager in EOC Operations, was Chief Negotiator in multiple IAFF Contract deliberations. He has supervised the development of several fire master plans, was a volunteer fire fighter coordinator, led multiple fire code adoption processes, was in charge of personnel and payroll functions and implemented fire impact fees. He also has wildland fire experience, supervising a fuel management program, the adoption of a Wildland Interface Code, and the adoption of a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Chief Iacona holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration and did his undergraduate work in Urban Planning at Florida Atlantic University, in Boca Raton, FL. He is a graduate of the National Fire Academy’s Executive Fire Officer Program and attended The Progr am for Senior Executives in State and Local Government at the Harvard Kennedy School. 28 SENIOR ASSOCIATE GERARD J. HOETMER, MPA Retired Executive Director of Public Entity Risk Institute, Fairfax, Virginia BACKGROUND Gerry Hoetmer is an expert in fire services, emergency management, and risk management. He served as the founding executive director of the Public Entity Risk Institute, a nonprofit organization that provided training, technical assistance, and research on risk management issues for local government and other public and quasi-public organizations. During his tenure as executive director he was a member of the National Academy of Sciences Disaster Roundtable. Prior to his position as executive director at PERI, Mr. Hoetmer worked at ICMA for 19 years, most recently as the director of research and development. He has written extensively on local government emergency management, the fire service, code enforcement, and risk management issues. Seminal works include the first report to Congress on fire master planning and the first edition of Emergency Management: Principles and Practices for Local Government. In addition to providing expert testimony before Congress and local arbitration boards on fire staffing and scheduling issues, Mr. Hoetmer represented ICMA on the NFPA 1500 Standard on Occupational Safety and Health; NFPA 1201, the Standard for Providing Emergency services to the Public; and the NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments. Mr. Hoetmer has developed and conducted training programs and seminars at FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute and the National Fire Academy in Emmitsburg, Maryland. He holds a Bachelors from the State University of New York, New Paltz and the Master of Public Administration degree from the University of Colorado at Denver. SENIOR ASSOCIATE CHIEF JOHN (JACK) BROWN (RET.), BA, MS, EFO Director, Arlington County Office of Emergency Management, Retired Assistant Chief Fairfax County Fire & Rescue Department BACKGROUND Jack Brown’s 40 year public safety career includes 29 years with the Fairfax County, Virginia Fire & Rescue Department, where he retired as Assistant Fire Chief of Opera tions. He served in a number of operational and staff positions, including the Office of the Fire Marshal where he attained NFPA certification as a Fire Inspector II and Fire Investigator. As an investigator, he conducted post fire and post blast investigations, assisting in the prosecution of offences involving arson and illegal explosives. He served as a Planning Section Chief and Task Force Leader for the Fairfax County Urban Search and Rescue Task Force (VA TF-1). He deployed to Nairobi, Kenya as Plans Chief in response to the 1998 embassy bombing and as Task Force Leader on a deployment to Taiwan in response to an earthquake in 1999. Upon his retirement from Fairfax County in 2000, he became the Assistant Chief for the Loudoun County Department of Fire, Rescue and Emergency Management, where he led a team of firefighters to the Pentagon on 9/11 and assisted the Arlington County Fire Department as the 29 initial Planning Section Chief for the incident. Jack served as Planning Section Chief on a Northern Virginia multi-jurisdictional emergency management task force that reestablished the New Orleans Emergency Operations Center just after Hurricane Katrina. He retired from Loudoun County in 2006 to pursue a career in emergency management. Brown retired from the Coast Guard Reserve as a Chief Warrant Officer 4, specializing in port safety and security, with 33 years of combined Army and Coast Guard Reserve service. After 9/11, he served on active duty for 47 months, including 15 months in the Middle East. He received the Bronze Star Medal for actions in Baghdad, Iraq while supporting combat operations during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Brown holds a bachelor’s degree in Fire Science Administration from the University of Maryland and a master’s degree in Quality Systems Management from the National Graduate School, Falmouth, Massachusetts. He is a 1997 graduate of the National Fire Academy’s Executive Fire Officer Program at the National Emergency Training Center, Emmitsburg, Maryland. He has been an adjunct professor at the Northern Virginia Community College and the University of the District of Columbia in the Fire Science curriculums. He is a graduate of the Executive Leadership Program in the Center for Homeland Defense and Security at the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California. ASSOCIATE CHIEF PETER J. FINLEY, JR. (RET.), BA, EFO Retired Chief of Department City of Vineland Fire Department and Winslow Township Fire Department. Past President NJ Career Fire Chiefs Association. BACKGROUND Pete Finley’s 36 year career in the fire and emergency services includes 28 in a career capacity with several different fire departments. He has served as Chief of Department for two New Jersey Fire Departments, most recently the Winslow Township Fire Department where, si gnificant among other accomplishments, he was responsible for the planning, establishment and initial deployment of the career component of the department as it transitioned from fully volunteer to combination status. Prior to that he served for more than 20 years with the City of Vineland Fire Department holding every operational rank (Firefighter, Fire Prevention Specialist, Captain, Deputy Chief, Fire Chief) including 4 ½ years as Chief of Department. In this position he initiated significant changes within the department including implementing numerous improved operational and safety initiatives, updating and modernizing equipment, providing the department’s first ever formal officer training and development program, and, significantly increasing the capabilities of the regional hazardous materials and special operations response team. During his tenure the department received more than one million dollars in various grants. He formerly commanded the Vineland Rescue Squad gaining significant EMS operations and command experience, and, completing a complete overhaul of that organization’s operations. Chief Finley currently serves as an Adjunct Professor in the Fire Science Program at Camden County College. In addition, since his retirement, he has been invo lved in conducting numerous fire department operational readiness and organizational evaluations including several under the auspices of the United State Coast Guard related to domestic port security assessments. He has also been involved in the development and administration of a number of fire service promotional examinations and assessment processes. Chief Finley received his Associate in Applied Science degree from Atlantic Community College in New Jersey, and, earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Fire Science/ Administration from 30 the University of Maryland. He is a 2003 graduate of the National Fire Academy’s Executive Fire Officer Program earning an Outstanding Research Award for his 2002 paper titled, “Residential Fire Alarm Systems: The Verification and Response Dilemma”. He has earned more than two dozen state and national fire service certifications, most of them the highest level attainable. Chief Finley has been a member of a number of fire service organizations and served on numerous committees throughout his career. In 2008 and 2009 he served as President of the New Jersey Career Fire Chiefs Association, a professional association that represents and advocates for the interests of the state’s full time professional fire chiefs and the fire service in general. From 2003–2005 he was a member of the Training and Education Committee of the Governor’s Fire Service and Safety Task Force. OPERATIONS ASSESSMENT TEAM – POLICE UNIT SENIOR ASSOCIATE CAPTAIN CAROL E. RASOR-CORDERO, PH.D. (RET). Retired Captain, Pinellas County, Florida Sheriff’s Office, Associate Professor Public Safety Administration, St. Petersburg College BACKGROUND Dr. Rasor-Cordero is a retired Captain from the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office in Florida. During her 25 year career in law enforcement, she served in various divisions to include: Patrol Operations, Crimes Against Children, Economic Crimes, Training, Community Services, and Court Security. While serving as the Commander of the Community Services Division, she establi shed the Domestic Violence Unit, the Sexual Predator and Offender Unit, and the Citizen’s Community Policing Institute. She served as the agency’s training advisor and played a significant role in transforming the Pinellas County Police Academy from a vocational program to a progressive program that offers college credit at St. Petersburg College. She served as team leader for the agency’s Hostage Negotiation Team and implemented the agency’s Critical Incident Stress Management Team. Dr. Rasor - Cordero has conducted research examining the relationship between personality preferences of executive level and mid-level law enforcement/corrections leaders and exemplary leadership practices. She has an extensive background as an educator and trainer. As a program director for St. Petersburg College, Carol established the first and only academic on-line gang-related investigations track in the nation. She developed the course Evolving Leaders in a Changing World for the Southeastern Public Safety Leadership I nstitute at St. Petersburg College which is a six part series and approved for college credit. She designed a three part series for implementing, managing and evaluating community policing for the Florida Regional Community Policing Institute and delivere d the training throughout Florida to mid-level and executive level leaders. Carol has developed and delivered training in the high liability areas of firearms, defensive tactics and driving. She has served as an evaluator for the project “An Evaluation of the National Justice Based After School Pilot Program” for the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and a consultant for the Bureau of Justice Assistance evaluating the training needs of the Atlanta Police Department’s Narcotics Unit. She has authored articles and presented at numerous conferences. Dr. Rasor - Cordero is currently an associate professor for the College of Public Safety Administration, St. Petersburg College. She holds a Ph.D. in Education, Master and Bachelor 31 Degrees in Criminal Justice from the University of South Florida. She is a graduate of the Police Executive Research Forum Senior Management Institute for Police. SENIOR ASSOCIATE INSPECTOR JAMES E. MCCABE, (RET.) PH.D., M. PHIL., M.A., B.A. Professor of Criminal Justice, Sacred Heart University, Retired NYPD Inspector BACKGROUND Dr. McCabe retired as an Inspector with the New York City Police Department after 20 years of service. As Inspector his assignments included Commanding Officer of the NYPD Office of Labor Relations and Commanding Officer of the Training Bureau. As a Deputy Inspector he was the Commanding Officer of the Police Academy with direct supervision of over 750 staff officers and 2,000 recruits. As Executive Officer, Police Commissioner’s Office. His field experience includes, Commanding Officer, 110th Precinct, Executive Officer, 113th Precinct, assignment to the Operations Division/Office of Emergency Management and uniform patrol as on officer and Sergeant in Manhattan. He has published extensively and pr esented to numerous conference including Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences: He holds a Ph.D. and M. Phil, in Criminal Justice, from CUNY Graduate Center, an M.A. in Criminal Justice, from John Jay College, an M.A. in Labor and Policy Studies, SUNY Empir e State College, and B.A. in Psychology, CUNY Queens College, June, 1989. He is a graduate of the Executive Management Program, Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, and the FBI National Academy. SENIOR ASSOCIATE DEPUTY CHIEF WAYNE HILTZ (RET) Former Interim Chief of Police at Pasadena and Irwindale Police Departments BACKGROUND Wayne has 33 years of experience in municipal law enforcement. This includes a broad range of experience in nearly every facet of policing from patrol, gang enforcement, and undercover narcotics to internal affairs investigations and community relations. The last 13 years were spent at command and executive levels. In his capacity as Deputy Police Chief, he served as the chief operating officer of the Pasadena Police Department, responsible for all day to day operations including internal audits and inspections. As well, he was responsible for operations related to the Tournament of Roses Parade and Rose Bowl events to include World Cup Soccer and BCS Championship games. For a period of nearly two years, he served in the capacity of Interim Chief of Police at both the Pasadena and Irwindale Police Departments. He has extensive experience in managing budgets, and has served as a budget instructor for the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. He was selected by the Los Angeles County Police Chiefs Association to represent the 45 member agencies in negotiations for Homeland Security Grants for a three year period. He also served as Pr esident of the San Gabriel Peace Officers Association. He has served on the boards of community based organizations with focus on addressing homeless issues, substance abuse, and juvenile violence. Wayne holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Police Scienc e and Administration from 32 California State University at Los Angeles. Executive training includes the FBI Southwest Command College and the Senior Management Institute for Police. SENIOR ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR PAUL E. O’CONNELL, PH.D., J.D. Chair of Criminal Justice Department, Iona College, New Rochelle, New York, former NYPD Training Officer. BACKGROUND Dr. O’Connell is a leading expert on the application of Compstat model Police Management principles to public administration organizations. He has been a full time member of the Criminal Justice faculty at Iona College in New Rochelle since 1994. He received his Ph.D. from CUNY where his doctoral thesis was the history and development of the Compstat model of Police Management. Dr. O’Connell began his professional career in criminal justice in 1981, serving the New York City Police Department first as a police officer, and then as a Police Academy instructor, in-service trainer and curriculum developer. After receiving an MPA in 1984 and J.D. in 1989, he worked as a trial attorney with the firm of Cummings & Lockwood in Stamford, CT. Presently, he is the chair of Iona College’s Criminal Justice department, where he also conducts funded research, publishes scholarly papers and lectures widely on the topics of police performance measurement, integrity management and law enforcement training systems. Dr. O’Connell has provided consulting services to a variety of government agencies, including assessment of existing policing policies and practices and development of proactive management strategies. Over the years, he has collaborated with the Center for Technology in Government (Albany, NY), Giuliani Partners (New York, NY) and the Center for Society, Law and Justice (University of New Orleans). Dr. O’Connell recently was awarded a Fulbright Grant working with the Turkish National Police. SENIOR ASSOCIATE CHIEF MARILYN DIAZ (RET.), B.S., M.S. Retired Chief of Police, Sierra Madre, and Retired Commander, Pasadena, California Police Department. BACKGROUND In 1974 Marilyn Diaz began her career when she was hired as the first woman to be directly assigned as a patrol officer in the Pasadena Police Department. She promoted through the ranks, and in 2006 Marilyn retired as a Commander, where she led the Administrative Services and Field Operations Divisions. In March of 2006 Marilyn was appointed as Sierra Madre’s Chief of Police. Chief Diaz was the first woman in Los Angeles County to become chief of a municipal police department. Marilyn retired from the Sierra Madre Police Department in December 2011. Ms. Diaz has a Master’s degree in Education from the University of Southern California, and earned her Bachelor’s degree in Police Science at California State University, Los Angeles. Marilyn Diaz has served on the boards of Women at Work, Boy Scouts of America, Pacific Clinics, and the Caltech Women’s Club. Marilyn also serves as a docent for the Caltech Architectural 33 Tour Service, and is on the Caltech Women’s Club Board. Marilyn is President of the Rotary Club of Sierra Madre for 2013-2014. She also teaches Youth Protection at the Rotary District level. ASSOCIATE CHIEF DEMOSTHENES M. LONG (RET.) ED.D. JD, MA Former Assistant Chief of NYPD, Commanding Officer NYPD Police Academy, Former Deputy Commissioner / Undersheriff Westchester County Public Safety Department BACKGROUND Chief Long has 30 years law enforcement experience, including 21 years with The New York City Police Department where he retired as Assistant Chief. His assignments included Commanding Officer, School Safety Division, where he managed 4,600 police officers and school safety agents and administered an operating budget of $133 million. He served as Commanding Officer, Office of Deputy Commissioner Community Affairs where he was responsible for developing, implementing and assessing programs to strengthen police/community relations; Commanding Officer, Police Academy, responsible for providing entry-level, in-service, promotional and executive level training for 53,000 uniform and civilian members of the Department; Executive Officer, Office of the First Deputy Commissioner and Executive Officer, 47th Precinct and also assignment as Supervisor of Patrol for 17 Bronx Precincts, Transit Districts and Housing Police Service Areas. After retiring from the NYPD he was appointed as First Deputy Commissioner / Undersheriff for the Westchester County Department of Public Safety. Responsibilities include the administrative planning, organization, coordination, execution and control of the fiscal, administrative, support and training functions of the 325 member police department. He holds a Doctor of Education Degree in Executive Leadership from St. John Fisher College, aJuris Doctor Degree from New York Law School, and Master of Arts and Bachelor of Science degrees from John Jay College of Criminal Justice. 34 FEES AND COMPENSATION PROPOSED FEES The quotation of fees and compensation shall remain firm for a period of 90 days from this proposal submission. CPSM proposes two options: The first would be that CPSM will conduct the analysis of the public safety department: police, fire, and EMS divisions for $94,620 exclusive of travel. CPSM would propose $12,000 or the actual expenses (whichever is less) for a travel budget that would be in addition to the work proposal with an anticipation of 8 trips by the team. Option 2: If the City desires a one-price bid, the price would be $106,620. The project would be billed in three installments: 40% within 14 days of signing the contract; 40% with delivery of the police, fire and EMS draft data analysis; 20% with delivery of the final reports. Following delivery of the draft reports, the city will have 30 days to provide comments as to accuracy and a final report will be delivered within 30 days of the comment period. Deliverables” Draft reports for police, fire/EMS will be provided for department review in electronic format. In order to be ecologically friendly, CPSM will deliver the final report in computer readable material either by email or CD or both. The final reports will incorporate the operational as well as data analysis. Should the municipality desire additional copies of the report, CPSM will produce and deliver whatever number of copies the client request and will invoice the client at cost. Should the City desire additional support or in-person presentation of findings, CPSM will assign staff for such meetings at a cost of $2,000 per day/per meeting along with reimbursement of travel expenses. Deliverable Milestone Expected Date of Milestone Deliverable Amount Contract signing and launch meeting 1, 2 & 3a in Project milestone schedule provided Within 14 days $37,848.00 Data extraction for all divisions, analysis, draft reports submitted to city 3b and c; 4a, b and c 60 to 88 days $37,848.00 Operations team visit and delivery of draft operations reports 5, 6, 7 30 days from delivery of data report $18,924.00 Delivery of final report 7 14 days from draft delivery (provided city turnaround) $12,000 travel costs TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $106,620 35 CONCLUSION Part of ICMA’s mission is to assist local governments in achieving excellence through information and assistance. Following this mission, Center for Public Safety Management, LLC acts as a trusted advisor, assisting local governments in an objective manner. In particular, CPSM’s experience in dealing with public safety issues combined with its background in performance measurement, achievement of efficiencies, and genuine community engagement, makes CPSM a unique and beneficial partner in dealing with issues such as those being presented in this proposal. We look forward to working with you further. 36 REFERENCES PAST & CURRENT ENGAGMENTS 1. Morgan Hill, CA-Operational and Administrative Analysis Fire Chief Derek J. Witmer CAL FIRE-Santa Cruz Unit 15670 Monterey Rd. Morgan Hill, CA 95037 Witmer.Derek@fire.ca.gov (408) 778-8600 In this comprehensive analysis CPSM was asked to review the cooperative agreement between the City of Morgan Hill and CAL FIRE, making recommendations regarding its pricing, service delivery, staffing, support functions and system efficiency. 2. Hermosa Beach, CA-Operational and Administrative Analysis Fire Chief David Lantzer Hermosa Beach Fire Department 540 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dlantzer@hermosabch.org (310) 376-2479 In this analysis CPSM reviewed the organizational structure of this municipal fire agency, evaluating its level of service, physical plant and a review of cost efficiency efforts that could be considered in joint service operations, consol idation and outsourcing of services. 3. Leduc, Alberta: Emergency Services Collaboration Area Study Ms. Joyce Tustian, Director WMC (Western Management Consultants) 10609 124 Street NW Edmonton, Alberta T5N 1S5 tustian@wmc.ca (780) 401-2822 CPSM was utilized to design the organizational structure, service model and deployment strategy for a consolidated county-wide system, incorporating services from municipalities, county government, provincial government and an airpo rt authority. 4. Sugar Land, Texas: Fire Phase I - White Paper Regarding Overtime Mr. Steve Griffith, First Assistant City Manager City of Sugar Land 2700 Town Center Blvd. N. Sugar Land, TX 77479 sgriffith@sugarlandtx.gov (281) 275-2341 37 In this analysis CPSM was retained to identify the causes for escalating overtime expenditures and provide recommendations for reducing expenditures through service efficiencies. 5. Tulsa, Oklahoma: Operational and Administrative Analysis Mr. James Twombly, City Manager City of Tulsa 175 East 2nd Street Tulsa, OK 74103 jtwombly@cityoftulsa.org (918) 576-5199 In this comprehensive analysis, CPSM was asked to evaluate the current delivery model and to provide alternative deployment and staffing models. We also were asked to evaluate the paramedic services provided through an EMS Public Utility Model (PUM) and to explore options for implementing a community paramedic health intuitiv e. 6. Grosse Pointe Park and Grosse Point Public Safety Consolidation Mr. Peter J. Dame, City Manager of Grosse Point (City) City Manager position at Gross Pointe Park is currently open Grosse Pointe, Michigan pjdame@grossepointecity.org 313-885-5800 CPSM assisted the City of Grosse Pointe park with creating one of the first public safety departments in the “Pointes” which are five cities on the east side of the Detroit. Grosse Pointe City followed and CPSM also assisted the two communities on options for consolidation. 7. Police studies • Prescott, AZ Alison Zelms, Deputy City Manager 928-77-1220 alison.zelms@prescott-az.gov El Centro, CA Alvaro Ramirez, Executive Commander 760-337-4860 aramirez@ecpd.org Wauwatosa, WI Jim Archambo, City Administrator 414-479-8915 jarchambo@wauwatosa.net St. Cloud, MN Michael Williams, City Manager 320-656-3601 michael.williams@co.stearns.mn.us Rocky Mount, NC Charles Penny, City Manager 252-972-1329 charles.penny@rockymountnc.gov North Port, FL Kevin Vespia, Police Chief 941-429-7306 kvespia@northportpd.com Auburn, AL Charles Duggan, City Manager 334-501-7261 cduggan@auburnalabama.org 38 Cedar Park, TX Brenda Eivens, City Manager 512-401-5020 brenda.eivens@cedarparktexas.gov Yuba City, CA Steven Kroeger, City Manager 530-822-4602 citymanager@yubacity.net Wyoming, MI Curtis Holt, City Manager 616-530-6265 holtc@ci.wyoming.mi.us Sandy Springs, GA John McDonough, City Manager 770-206-1414 jmcdonough@sandyspringsga.gov Our other clients: LOCALITY STATE PROJECT Kenai AK Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Auburn AL Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Auburn AL Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Dothan AL Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Casa Grande AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Florence AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Lake Havasu AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Lake Havasu AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Pinal County AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Sheriff’s Office Prescott AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Prescott AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Queen Creek AZ Police Strategic Plan Queen Creek AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Scottsdale AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Tucson AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Youngtown AZ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Alameda CA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Burbank CA Analysis of Investigations Workload / Staffing Carlsbad CA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services El Centro CA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Hermosa Beach CA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire services Hermosa Beach CA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Palm Desert CA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Palo Alto CA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Morgan Hill CA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Morgan Hill CA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services San Jose CA SWOT Analysis of Police and Fire Services San Mateo Co. CA Dispatch Operations Review Santa Ana CA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Santa Clara CA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Santa Monica CA Police Chief Selection Sonoma County CA Performance Measurement Analysis 39 Stockton CA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Stockton CA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Yuba City CA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Yuba City CA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Federal Heights CO Comprehensive analysis of Police Services Federal Heights CO Comprehensive analysis of Fire Services Littleton CO Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Steamboat Springs CO Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Cheshire CT Police Management Review Southington CT Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Dover CT Comprehensive Analysis of Police Department Dover CT Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Alachua FL Expert Witness Law Enforcement Issues BCCMA FL Analysis of Sheriff’s Contract Services Citrus County FL Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Delray Beach FL Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Delray Beach FL Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Dunedin FL Police Consolidation Review Hollywood FL Police Internal Affairs Review Indian River Shores FL Public Safety Staffing Analysis Indian River Shores FL Public Safety Study Jacksonville Beach FL Police Chief Selection Jupiter FL Police and Fire Jupiter Island FL Public Safety Consolidation Kenneth FL Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Miami Beach FL Comprehensive analysis of Fire Services North Port FL Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Pasco County FL Comprehensive analysis of Fire Services Pompano Beach FL Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Venice FL Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Camden County GA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Camden County GA Police Consolidation Study Garden City GA Preliminary Analysis Public Safety Merger Sandy Springs GA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Department Johns Creek GA Analysis of Fire Services Boone IA Public Safety Consolidation Hayden ID Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Jerome ID Analysis of Police Services Glenview IL Comprehensive Analysis of Police & Fire Services Glenview IL Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Glenview IL Dispatch Operations Review Highland IL Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Highland Park IL Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Consolidation Highwood IL Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Consolidation Lake Bluff IL Analysis of Fire Consolidation Lake Forest IL Analysis of Fire Consolidation 40 Lake Zurich IL Comprehensive Analysis of fire services Naperville IL Police Department Staffing & Deployment Analysis Western Springs IL Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Indianapolis IN Analysis of Police Workload & Deployment Services Plainfield IN Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Topeka KS Preliminary review of Fire Department Northborough MA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Northborough MA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Algonquin MD Performance Measurement Study Annapolis MD Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Ocean City MD Dispatch Operations Review Ann Arbor MI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Auburn Hills MI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Auburn Hills MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Benton Harbor MI Public Safety Consolidation Chesterfield Twp. MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Delta Township MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Delta Township MI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Detroit Public Schools MI Police Department Review Douglas MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Flint MI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Flint MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Grand Rapids MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Grand Rapids MI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Grosse Pointe MI Public Safety Consolidation Grosse Pointe Park MI Public Safety Consolidation Kentwood MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police & Fire Services Mott Community College MI Comprehensive Analysis of Public Safety Services Novi MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Novi MI Comprehensive analysis of Fire Services Oshtemo Township MI Police Workload / Contract for Services Analysis Petoskey MI Public Safety Consolidation Plymouth MI Fire Services Consolidation Royal Oak MI Public Safety Consolidation Saginaw MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Saginaw MI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services So. Kalamazoo Fire Auth. MI Financial Analysis of Fire Authority St. Joseph MI Public Safety Consolidation Sturgis MI Public Safety Analysis Mott College MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Troy MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Troy MI Review of Fire Administration and Inspections Wyoming MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services 2012 Wyoming MI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services 2012 Wyoming MI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services 2009 Wyoming MI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services 2009 41 Kentwood MI Analysis of Police Services Consolidation Kentwood MI Analysis of Fire Services Consolidation Mankato MN Public Safety Study Moorhead MN Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services St. Cloud MN Police Strategic Planning Review St. Cloud MN Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services St. Louis MO Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services St. Louis MO Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services St. Louis MO Standard of Response Cover and risk assessment Bald Head Island NC Public Safety Consolidation Chapel Hill NC Comprehensive Analysis of police services Davidson NC Fire Consolidation Study Greenville NC Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Oxford NC Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Oxford NC Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Rocky Mount NC AED Grant assistance Rocky Mount NC Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Grand Island NE Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Grand Island NE Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services South Sioux City NE Fire Services Strategic Plan East Brunswick NJ EMS Study Oradell NJ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Paterson NJ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services South Orange NJ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Westwood NJ Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Ruidoso NM Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Bernalillo NM Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Boulder City NV Police Organizational Study Henderson NV Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Las Vegas NV Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services North Las Vegas NV Fire Workload Analysis Garden City NY Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Long Beach NY Comprehensive Analysis of Fire and EMS services North Castle NY Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Oneonta NY Comprehensive Analysis of Fire and EMS services Oneonta NY Fire Apparatus Review Orchard Park NY Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Ossining NY Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Rye NY Police Chief Selection Watertown NY Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Cincinnati OH Police Dispatch Review Huron OH Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Huron OH Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Independence OH Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Independence OH Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Sandusky OH Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services 42 Dayton OH Police Internal Affairs Review Broken Arrow OK Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Broken Arrow OK Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Edmond OK Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Jenks OK Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Jenks OK Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Muskogee OK Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Tulsa OK Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Bend OR Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Grants Pass OR Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Grants Pass OR Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Grants Pass OR Public Safety Strategic Plan Development Ontario OR Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Ontario OR Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Cumru Township PA Police Chief Selection Cumru Township PA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Ephrata PA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Farrell PA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Lower Windsor Twp. PA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Tredyffrin Township PA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Jamestown PA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services East Providence RI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services East Providence RI Expert Witness Fire Issues Beaufort SC Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Beaufort SC Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Walterboro SC Comprehensive Analysis of Public Safety Dept. Germantown TN Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Johnson City TN Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Johnson City TN Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Smyrna TN Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Smyrna TN Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Addison TX Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Addison TX Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Baytown TX EMS Study Belton TX Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Belton TX Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Belton TX Police Chief Selection Belton TX Fire Chief Selection Cedar Park TX Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Conroe TX Fire Services Analysis and Standard of Response Frisco TX Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Highland Village TX Fire Review Lucas TX Fire and EMS Analysis Prosper TX Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Round Rock TX Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Victoria TX Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services 43 Washington City UT Comprehensive Public Safety Analysis Hampton VA Police Chief Selection Loudoun County VA Comprehensive Analysis of Sheriff Services Loudoun County VA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Lacey WA Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Spokane Valley WA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Vancouver WA Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Vancouver WA Police Chief Selection Dunn County WI Comprehensive Analysis of Sheriff Department Wauwatosa WI Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Wauwatosa WI Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services Jackson Hole WY Police Consolidation Review Laramie WY Comprehensive Analysis of Police Services Teton County WY Police Consolidation Review Leduc, Canada AB Comprehensive Analysis of Fire Services. Leduc County AB Fire Consolidation Plan