The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutM-90-038324 CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM - Honorable Mayor and (((� n(� TO GATE iti/�11 FILE Members of the City , _ mmission Consultant Contract SUBJECT for M/WBF Disparity Study - Set Asile Orlinance _ FROM Cesar 1. Od i o REFERENCES City Manager ENCLOSURES. RECOMMENDATION It is respectfully recommended that the City Commisii:)n authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract, in substantially the attached corm, with the `irm of D.J. Miller & Associates, an Atlanta -based, Black minority firm. The purpose of this contract will be to conduct the r,e:-earch required to prepare a report containing the extent of disparity that exists between the City's procurement with Hispanic, Black and women - owned businesses and others and to design a prescriptive plan for the utilization of riispanic, Black and women -owned businesses to reduce any identified disparity. This contract will not exceed $125,000, the funds For which have been identified in FY'90's budget. (See attachments) BACKGROUND Last year, the City Attorney advi3ed the City Commission (see attached) that a January, 1989 Supreme Court decision rendered in the case of the City of Richmond v. the J.A. Croson Company dictated the need for the City to have what is commonly referred to as a "Minority Business Disparity Study", prepared to support the City'z Minority/Women Business Affairs and Procurement Program, should we be similarly faced with a legal challenge. At the Commission's directive to conduct this study, funds were allocated for this activity in this year's budget, based upon a survey of the amounts allocated for similar studies by the Dade County School Board - $180,000; Metro -Dade County - $425,000; and Broward County Inter -Local - $250,000. As a result, we advertised on February 7 and 8, 1990 in the Miami Review, Miami Times and Diario Las Americas for Letter3 of Interest and Statements of Qualifications For consultants to conduct a Disparity Study for the City of Miami. In addition, we mailed letters; to nineteen (19) consultant Firms who had previously expressed an intersat in the project. We received nine (9) responses from the firms, noting their proposed budgets. (See Exhibit A) zy No-r IDtj 30- 383 honorable 1"4ay()r and P:a.ge 2. City Commission Members Con s1ittant Disparity Study Utilizing our budgeted figure o` $125,000, we Gelected for interview three (3) firms whose responses assured us that they Could provide us with the proEeSlional result which w.-2 require. The three (3) Eirms/teams we invited to meet with us to discuss their qualifications were: D.J. Miller & Associates, MGT of America, Inc., and KPMG Peat Marwick. StaEE from the Departments of Development, General Services, Planning and Public Work: served as the review panel. The City Attorney' s Office was also represented at the presentations. The result o` the proce3s, concluded on March 12, 1990, was that the firm of D.J. Miller & Associates was recommended as th-y firm most qualified for our purposes. This firm is conducting the Dade County School Board's Disparity Study, which is scheduled to be completed next month. It i�3 our opinion that we will realize a savings, through their utilization of data collected E.or the School 3oard, which will compen3ate for the travel costs which will be required. Additionally, the firm utilized the services of a local Hispanic firm in the School Board contract and indicated that they will engage this `irm as a subcontractor, should they be awarded the City of Miami's contract. 21 W Honorable Mayor and TO Members of the City mmission FROM Cesar q . Od i o City Manager RECOMMENDATION CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDAZ4 = INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE yl A FILE Consultant Contract SUBJECT : for M/ WBE Disparity Study - Set Aside Orrl inance REFERENCES ENCLOSURES It is respectfully recommended that the City Commis:si:)n authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract, in substantially the attached form, with the `irm of D.J. Miller & Associates, an Atlanta -based, Black minority firm. The purpose of this contract will l r, to conduct the r.e:,earch required to prepare a report containing the extent of disparity that exists between the City's procurement with Hispanic, Black and women - owned businesses and others and to design a prescriptive plan for the utilization of Tii span ic, Black and women -owned businesses to reduce any identified disparity. This contract will not exceed $125,000, the funds for which have been identified in FY190's budget. (See attachments) BACKGROUND Last year, the City Attorney advized the City Commission (see attached) that a January, 1989 Supreme Court decision rendered in the case of the City of Richmond v. the J.A. Croson Company dictated the need for the City to have what is commonly referred to as a 0114inority Business Disparity Study", prepared to support the City's Minority/Women Busina33 Affairs and Procurement Program, should we be similarly faced with a legal challenge. At the Commission's directive to conduct this study, Funds were allocated for this activity in this year's budget, based upon a survey of the amounts allocated for similar studies by the Dade County School Board - $180,000; Metro -Dade County - $425,000; and Broward County Inter -Local - $250,000. As a result, we advertised on February 7 and 8, 1990 in the Miami Review, Miami Times and Diario Las Americas for Letters of Interest and Statements of Qualifications for consultants to conduct a Disparity Study for the City of Miami. In addition, we mailed letters to nineteen (19) consultant firms who had previously expressed an interest in the project. We received nine (9) responses from the firms, noting their proposed budgets. (See Exhibit A) ZV_1 V0 i 10 r 99- 383 Honorable Mayor and pale 2 City Commission Members C,:)nstiItant Di spar i'::y Study Utilizing our budgeted figure of $125,000, we selected for interview thrae (3) firms whose responses assured us that they could provide us with the professional result which w�� require. The threw (3) Eirms/teams we invited to meet with us to discuss their qualifications were: D.J. Miller & Associates, MGT of — America, Inc., and KPMG Peat Marwick, StaEE from the Departments — of Development, General Services, Planning and Public Works -- served as the review panel. The City Attorney's Office was also represented at the presentations. The result ref the process, concluded on March 12, 1990, was that the Eirm of D.J. Miller & Associates was recommended as the firm most qualitied for our purposes. This firm is conducting the Dade County School Board's Disparity Study, which is .scheduled to be completed n?xt month, It i•3 our opinion that we will realize a savings, through their utilization of data collected c.or the School 3oard, which will compensate for tha r_cavel cost:i which will be required. Additionally, the Firm utilized the services of a local 4ispanic firm in the School Board contract and indicated that they will engage this firm as a subcontractor, should they be awarded the City of Miami's contract. Z 90- 383 V III II I II I I i III. Ili I'ill�l I �llilil��4i ii lrll�l� ipllliil Ili��'ullll I loilll III I u�l ill, I1 i i I� II I I I I I I I Ili I ,' I .I III EXHIBIT A LIST OF RESPONSES TO LETTERS OF INTEREST FIRM LOCATION MINORITY ACTUAL DISPARITY NAME Becker Consulting Services; Inc. CSR, Inc. D.J. Miller & Associates Emerson Consultants, Inc. Financial Research Associates, Inc. KPMG Peat Marwick MGT of America, Inc. N.E.R.A./ Joint Venture with Contract Compliance The Tetra Group (!j STATUS STUDY EXPERIENCE Miami Female None PROPOSED $95,000 0 Washington Female None $235,000 (negotiable) Atlanta Black 3road NTE $200,000 (negotiable) Miami Slack None $109,000 (negotiable) Tallahassee Female Some $248,708 Miami Non -Minority/ Some Not estimated minority subs Tallahassee Nor: -Minority,/ Broad $241,675 , minority subs (adjustable) Washington Non -Minority/ Broad LN1TE 5495,000 minority partner (negotiable) Dallas Black None NTE $150,000 , Y I Y I Y I �I�f ..._ _a ;;_: ,. �._.._.. �. �.. �•w.�."._. ... v..,a.v a. - u::..r.ar...�t .v-�..- e..' 'FAi[YS1�_' C_ T C.F M_ a M REPORT OF EXPOCITURES BY SECTZON co G _ 05 FISCAL NCNTH PORTIGM: OF YCAR EXPIRES A! - ti Y. XPA97 ENT 9: SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS FY 31 OIVISION 10 MISCELLANEOUS SECTICH 81 SET ASIDE 0QDINAKC£ FUG 01 GENERAL FU O PUZOXCT C0000a NOT SUBFLA40 RELA, rT �D RP7 &FC:GEP0QT NO. :6: 0s/.Ol9Q AS CF 02f:8)90 "• -4DE'X % OF REVISED "' E X P E N 0 I T U R E S `' OUTSTANDING QEMA:N-N-� C=E OESCRIPT=CN BUDGET ANNUAL BUCGXT CtM A93UTH CURR Y-T--J LAST Y-:-0 04CUUSRANCE 3ALANCE 000773 D41ERNAL SE'RV CHGES PQZNT SHOP 0.0 67 300996 BUDGET RESERVE 0.3 125.300 P%=ECT oc0000 0.0 :25.:00 67 FUNO 01 O.O 125,000 07 SECTION el 0.0 125.:70 67 '�i�'9A1'''��"P ��i''��''� ��'� �a�l� !il I "�;��il'i��,�� ,��l, ��, ��,��,�� FI'�o��; � ��i�, �,� �I��I� i�;�l� ��I��p��i.��i��p�l;�l►�� i'��l1�� ,�� SPYLUTAL PRC WVIS AW) AC -JY, rS Miscellaneous Contingent Fund Miami Congressional Workshop Reimb. for Official "ctions International Salsa Employee Drug Screening Pre-emplo}nnent Physical Reimbursement - Abandoned Cars Gibson Memorial Oratorical Commission or Status of Wanen Book Fair Street Lighting Job Outreach Project Coconut Grove Playhouse Special Events Aviation Avenue Building Financial Services Police Recruitment rdm (Maximo Gomez Park) Kizanba Debt Service - Parks Bonds Goverment of Haiti Bay of Pigs veterans Assoc. New Music America Debt Service -(lousing Bonds Reserve - Self In,-.,jrance Affirmative Action Plan Coconut Grove Care Dade Miami Criminal Justice Oc uzcil International Trade Pranotion Minority & Wanen Business Affairs Industrial Engineering Management Audits Strategic Planning Office of Professional C7cmpliance Day Front Park Trust ecniprehensive Planning Consultant Set Aside ordinance Sunshine State Bonds Economic consultant Miami New World Center Special Assesment District Taxes Bnployee Training Subtotal Total. N4MIDED B U r 3� FY, 89 $ 612,974 15,000 75,000 50,000 30,000 .-0- 20,000 10,000 25,000 75,000 4,155,000 49,000 50,000 200,000 520,000 -0- 90,000 -0- 25,000 683,323 67,500 25,000 30,000 411,853 11000,000 45,000 20,000 35,000 525,000 150,227 703,463 400,000 375,000 259,123 -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- $ 10,732,463 $ 34,370,492 103 RD UOTIED Bu=G FY' 90 $ 655,767 15,000 75,000 50,000 30,000 65,000 20,000 15,000 25,000 75,000 4,155,000 -0- 50,000 200,000 500,000 100,000 -0- 35,000 50,000 786,360 -0- 25,000 -0- -0- 1,000,000 45,000 20,000 -0- 681,195 188,703 703,463 480,000 442,052 231,437 245,382 78,000 125,O00 612,756 48,000 50,000 56,000 20,000 $11,954,135 $34,670,471 CI VOGC, $ 42,813 -0- -0- -0- -0- 65,000 -0- 5,000 -0- -0- -0- (49,000) -0- -0- (20,000) 100,000 (90,000) 35,000 25,000 103,037 (67.500) -0- (30,000) (411,853) -0- -0- -0- (35,000) 156,195 38,476 -0- 80,000 67,052 (27,686) 245,382 78,000 125,000 612,756 48,000 50,000 56,000 20,000 $ 1,221,672 $ 299,979 O 90- 38 (;err OF t�if,r��i, FFcnir)A INTER -OFFICE: MEMORANDUM ". Tr, I'llnora 19 Mayor and DATr March 5, 1990 rn.E Membof the City mission suFUr_cr Status Report Re. M/WBE Disparity Study Cesar H, ndio City Manager nrrrnruWA: rncl n9UREr, Last year the City Attorney advised you of the anticipated impact the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of J. A. Crown. inc. v. City of Richmond might hive on th., Ci ty s--Ifi noriTyTWomen Business 1CTFai rs and—Procurenent Prngram. The City Attorney also recommended that we proceed to conduct, a new di spari t:y study to establish the statistical predicate to defend our program should the Association of General Contractorq or some other ?ntity bring legal action. as ncctlrrPd in Ri chmond, �qai nst the Ci t,y' s program. StafF from th,� City Attorney's offic^ and the Office of Minority/Women Business Affairs subsequently met with your staFf to discuss this matter and th(i Funds to conduct such a study mere identified in this fiscal year's budget. Resultantly therefore, pl?asn find a copy of the Invitation for Letters of Interest and Statements of Qualifications which was issued February 6, 1.990 to begin the competitive negotiations and i process for selecting a firm to conduct such a study. We anticipate the completion of this process and a recommendation to you at the first commission meeting in April. Attachment: (1) I •