Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/03/2001, C10 - REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TO FURNISH UNIFORM AND LINEN SERVICES-SPECIFICATION NO. 90291 council -3-0I j acEnba RepoRt 61D C I T Y O F SAN L U I S O B I S P O FROM: Michael D. McCluskey, Public Works Director Prepared By: David Elliott, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TO FURNISH UNIFORM AND LINEN SERVICES - SPECIFICATION NO. 90291 CAO RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) Approve the "Request for Proposals to Furnish Uniform and Linen Services, Specification No. 90291" 2) Authorize distribution of the request for proposals 3) Authorize the City Administrative Officer to award a contract if contract prices are within the annual cost estimate of$65,300 DISCUSSION Background The existing contract for uniform and linen services expired on June 30, 2001 and is continuing on a month-to-month basis until a new contract is awarded and takes effect. This RFP covers contract uniform and linen services from October 1, 2001 to June 30, 2005. Focusing on Experience and Capability rather than Price With operations and maintenance contracts, sometimes awarding a contract to the firm with the lowest price works well. But using this approach for the existing uniform and linen services contract has created problems. The existing contractor (which was awarded the contract on the basis of lowest price) has continually cut comers in its service in order to make money at its low prices. The consequences have included: • Threadbare uniforms long overdue for replacement • Ill-fitting uniforms • Sloppy and unsightly repair work • Repairs to worn and damaged uniforms when replacementwouldhave more appropriate • Inconsistent laundering service,where employees have been left with no clean uniforms As a result, employees have been generally dissatisfied with the service, and their uniforms have not projected a positive image for the City. To remedy this situation, Public Works has drafted an RFP that calls for proposing firms to submit two sealed envelopes, the first with a qualifications proposal (including general C1©- 1 Council Agenda Report—RFP to Furnish Uniform and Linen Services Page 2 information, references, and insurance information) and the second with a price proposal. The RFP then lays out the following three-phase selection process: 1) A review committee opens the qualifications proposal and selects three to five firms for follow-up interviews. 2) The review committee interviews the selected firms and ranks them. 3) The review committee opens the submitted price proposals and uses price information to further evaluate the proposals and recommend the best firm. This approach has worked well for other recently awarded operations and maintenance contracts. It should attract proposals from well-established companies and should allow the review team (composed of employees from Public Works and Utilities) more flexibility to consider qualifications as well as reasonableness of prices. Public Works estimates that prices with a reputable, reliable contractor for locations now served by a low-bid contractor may be somewhat higher than existing prices. Longer Contract Term The length of most Public Works and Utilities operations and maintenance contracts has been two to four years. The recommended term for this contract is four years (actually three years and nine months) with an option to extend for another two years. To facilitate budgeting for operations, Public Works tries to keep contracts aligned with the City's two-year financial plans. The initial four-year contract term and the two-year extension will coincide with the two-year financial plan cycle. A longer term has the following advantages: • It allows contractors to recover startup and capital costs over a longer period. Consequently, contract prices can be lower. • It makes budgeting for contract costs more predictable because contract prices remain stable. • It eliminates frequent and time-consuming contract solicitations. • It reduces the inevitable disruption that occurs whenever there is a change in contractor. The transition period for such a change usually requires temporary but intensive supervision from Public Works employees which takes them away from their regular duties. Other Changes from the Existing Specification There are three other specification changes that should be mentioned: 1) The contractor must furnish new uniforms for all employees every two years. This requirement will eliminate problems with the contractor trying to cut costs by postponing replacement of threadbare uniforms. 2) Since the mid-1980's the City has purchased uniform jackets rather than renting them as with other uniform garments. This arrangement was originally included in the contract because of the high initial cost of the jackets. Because the cost of a jacket is now only slightly more c1©z Council Agenda Report—RFP to Furnish Uniform and Linen Services Page 3 than the cost of a pair of work pants, there is no reason to continue the practice of buying jackets. For this reason jackets will now be rented instead of purchased. 3) Work shorts will be available where appropriate for parking enforcement officers, water service workers, and park maintenance workers. (When wearing shorts would compromise worker safety, employees must wear work pants.) FISCAL IMPACT Estimated Annual Annual Additional Contract Budget Budget Costs Amounts Needed 8 General Fund Programs $39,100 $32,700 $8,900 3 Water Fund Programs 10,100 8,900 1,200 1 Parking Fund Program 2,900 2,100 800 2 Sewer Fund Programs 9,300 7,500 1,800 1 Golf Course Fund Program 1,600 1,300 300 1 Whale RockTund Program 2,300 1,200 12100 $65,300 $53,700 $14,100 Uniform and linen services are budgeted for across sixteen operating programs and six funds administered by four departments. Without exception the annual amounts budgeted in each program were less than the estimated contract costs. Review of the budget preparation worksheets available for each program indicates that the amounts shown as spent over the first six months of 2000-01 for uniform and linen service reflected payments for only five months of service. Because of that situation, all four departments inadvertently projected lower amounts than are apparently needed each year. Because the additional costs are relatively minor and are spread across several operating programs, the affected departments are confident they can cover these costs within existing budgets. In this way the City can avoid appropriating money from fund reserves so early in the fiscal year. In the unlikely event that additional costs cannot be absorbed within existing budgets, appropriations will be requested as a mid-year adjustment. The request for proposals is available for review in the Council reading file. L\Council Agenda Reports\90291 Uniform and Linen Services