City of Seattle

Department of Executive Administration

Purchasing and Contracting Services Division

Consultant Contracting

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPS)

Contents

Introduction 3

Chapter 1: Definitions, Contracting Ethics, and Prohibited Consultant Agreements 4

1.1 Definitions 4

1.2 Board of Ethics Code for Consultant Contracting 5

1.3 Prohibited Uses of Consultant Contracts 5

1.4 Prohibited Types of Consultant Agreements 6

Chapter 2: Obtaining Consultant Services 8

2.1 General Policy Governing Consultant Selection 8

2.2 Solicitations for Consultant Contracts valued at $39,000 (2006 limit) or less and Consultant Roster agreements valued at $232,000 (2006 limit) or less. 8

2.3 Solicitation Strategies for non-Roster Contracts valued at more than $39,000 (2006 limit) 8

2.4 Consultant Selection Criteria for Contracts of $39,000 (2006 limit) or more (non-roster) 10

2.5 Consultant Evaluation Committees 11

2.6 Final Selection by Department Head 11

2.7 Notice of Selection or Non-selection 12

2.8 Contract Filing Requirement 12

Chapter 3: Selection Procedures 13

3.1 Selection of Architects/Engineers 13

3.2 Other Specialized Contracting Requirements 14

Chapter 4: Insurance Requirements 15

4.1 Risk Management Checklist 15

4.2 Insurance Documentation 16

Chapter 5: Exemptions from Consultant Selection Procedures 17

5.1 Department Head Waiver/Documentation 17

5.2 Emergency Exemption & Adverse Effect Exemption 17

5.3 Sole Source Exemption 17

5.4 Use of Intergovernmental Service Contracts 18

Chapter 6: Executive and Legislative Oversight 19

6.1 Consultant Contracts less than $250,000 19

6.2 Consultant Contracts of $250,000 or more 19

6.3 Amendments 19

6.4 Consultant Contracts of $750,000 or More 20

6.5 Review and Monitoring of IT Contracts 20

6.6 City Council Oversight-Opinion Gathering Consultant Contracts 21

Chapter 7: Negotiations and Controlling Contract Costs 22

7.1 General Background 22

7.2 Development of Independent Scope of Work and Cost Estimate 22

7.3 Indirect Costs (Overhead and Fringe Benefits) 23

7.4 Evaluation of Fixed Fee or Profit 24

7.5 Documentation of Negotiations 24

7.6 Review of Invoices 24

7.7 Audit Responsibilities SMC 3.40.040 25

7.8 Selective Audit Responsibilities of the Department of Executive Administration 25

Chapter 8: Amendments to Consultant Contracts 26

8.1 General 26

8.2 Policy 26

8.3 Consultant Selection for Amendments 26

8.4 Appropriate Uses of Amendments 27

8.5 Amendments Outside the Original Scope of the Project 27

8.6 Large Contract Amendments 28

8.7 Department of Executive Administration Role 28

Chapter 9: Consultant Roster Program 29

9.1 Definitions 29

9.2 Consumer Price Index Adjustments 29

9.3 Departmental Use of Consultant Roster 29

9.4 Procedures for Using the Consultant Roster 30

9.5 Responsibilities for Consultant Roster Administration 31

9.6 Roster Administration by the Department of Executive Administration Description of Processes 31

Chapter 10: Standard Wording for Consultant Contracts 34

10.1 Explanation of Standard Wording 34

10.2 General Contract Requirements 34

10.3 City Attorney Review of Contracts 35

Chapter 11: WMBE, EEO, Equal Benefits and Other Reporting Requirements 36

11.1 Affirmative Efforts RequirementsSeattle Policy Findings 36

11.2 Affirmative Efforts in Employment and Contracting 36

11.3 Affirmative Efforts in Employment and Contracting-Contracts of $232,000 (2006 limit) or more 36

11.4 Affirmative Efforts in Employment and Contracting-Contracts of less than $232,000 (2006 limit) 37

11.5 Contract Boilerplate for Affirmative Efforts Requirements 38

11.6 Equal Benefits Compliance Declaration Form 38

Chapter 12: Performance Review and Evaluation 39

12.1 Purposes 39

12.2 Instructions 39

12.3 Scoring Criteria/Supplemental Comments 40

Chapter 13: Debarment of Consultants 42

13.1 City Policy and Authority 42

13.2 Debarment Terms 42

13.3 Responsibilities and Authority of the Director 42

13.4 Grounds for Debarment 43

13.5 Debarment Procedures 43

13 .6 Responsibilities following debarment 45

Introduction

The "Consultant Services Standard Operating Procedures" is written in accordance with the provisions of Seattle Municipal Code (SMC) Ch. 20.50 as well as various state, federal, and other local Laws governing the selection and use of consultants by the City of Seattle.

City policy encourages competitive selection of consultants. Competitive selection processes help ensure the City receives the best services at the best price. In addition, competitive selection processes provide opportunities to women and minority owned enterprises, small businesses, and all members of the consultant community to participate in the City's contracting processes. The practice of competitively selecting consultants enhances the City's reputation as being fair and open.

Departments are responsible for complying with SMC Ch. 20.50 and all City ordinances as well as all other applicable regulations or laws. In providing interpretation and advice to departments, the Director of Executive Administration affirms the policy of SMC Ch. 20.50 that a decision to contract, amend a contract, or approve a waiver to the consultant selection process is the responsibility of the individual department head contracting for the services. It is the department head's responsibility to ensure the integrity of the City's consultant contracting processes.

For an overview of the City's consultant selection processes, read the Consultant Contracting Quick Guide. Questions regarding these policies and procedures may be directed to the Contracting Services Section of the Department of Executive Administration at 684-0430.

Chapter 1: Definitions, Contracting Ethics, and Prohibited Consultant Agreements

1.1 Definitions

The Seattle Municipal Code defines terms relevant to these policies, procedures and consultant contracts as follows:

"Consultant" means any Person that by experience, training and education of the principals, officers or employees thereof has established a reputation or ability to perform specialized activities on a discrete, nonrecurring basis over a limited and pre-established term, as an independent contractor, delivering or providing for a monetary or other consideration, advice recommendation(s), report(s), analysis(es), evaluations(s), audit(s), survey(s), or other products of cognitive processes or expert or professional services including but not limited to services from any attorney, architect, accountant, public relations advisor, dentist, physician, surgeon, psychiatrist, psychologist, veterinarian, engineer, surveyor, appraiser, planning consultant, investment counselor, and actuary; provided, that the following shall not be deemed a "consultant":

a.) Any provider of services appropriate for a service contract pursuant to SMC Ch. 20.60 Purchasing and Procurement (such as janitorial or guard service, office equipment and vehicle maintenance, computer and peripheral equipment maintenance, microfiche and page printing services, boat dry-docking, etc.);

b.) Any expert witness retained by the Law Department in connection with anticipated or actual litigation, or by the City Council in connection with any hearing on the nomination or appointment of any individual as a municipal officer; and

c.) Any person retained for legal advice when, in the determination of the Law Department, a public solicitation process would likely adversely affect the City's legal interests or the attorney-client relationship.

Note: The meaning of the phrase "nonrecurring basis" as used in this section to define a consultant must be determined in the context of the rest of the definition of consultant. When read in that context, it is clear that the definition of consultant is not meant to include work that is of a repetitive and a non-cognitive, non-expert or nonprofessional nature. The "nonrecurring basis" requirement does not preclude a consultant from performing some repetitive, noncognitive tasks as part of a contract, provided that the primary purpose or essence of the contract is to provide services of a cognitive, professional or expert nature.

The phrase "over a limited and pre-established term" carries with it the intent that the duration or term of the contract be defined in the contract document. The phrase prohibits open-ended contracts with no termination provisions or contemplated end which provide one consultant with a virtual and unlimited monopoly in the provision of services to the City. The term is not meant to prohibit contracts and amendments for long term projects which require the ongoing services of a consultant to complete a project.

The application of the phrase "nonrecurring basis over a limited and pre-established term" shall be interpreted on a case by case basis by the department head contracting for services, consistent with the guidelines provided herein. Department heads are encouraged to seek the advice of the Law Department in cases where a proposed consultant contract may appear not to meet the definition of a consultant under these SOPS.

.

1.1.2 Contract: "Contract" means and includes all types of agreements between or among the City and one (1) or more consultants, regardless of the form of the agreement, for the procurement of Consultant services, and amendments thereto.

1.1.3 Department: :"Department" means any City department, office, board, commission, council agency or other administrative or operating part of the City, and any division or part or combination thereof.

1.1.4 Director: "Director" means the Director of Executive Administration.

1.1.5 Estimated to Cost: "Estimated to cost" means the anticipated charges for all activities that a consultant agrees to perform pursuant to contract, including expenses for which the consultant will be reimbursed, and the anticipated charges for all additional specialized activities to be performed by the consultant under all renewals, extensions, and amendments of the contract and under subsequent stages of the same project.

1.1.6 Person: Person" means individuals, businesses, associations, sole proprietors, partnerships, corporations, or limited liability companies.

1.2 Board of Ethics Code for Consultant Contracting

SMC Ch 4.16 (Code of Ethics) and these policies and procedures govern the circumstances in which the City may contract with current and former City officers and employees, with family members of City employees and other potential conflicts of interest. Should the Consultant being considered be a current or former City employee, have a family member who works for the City, or have a business relationship with an employee of the City, review the Code of Ethics definitions and requirements contained in SMC Ch 4.16, and review these policies and procedures by clicking on Ethics and reading those provisions.

Note: Any Department that contracts with a former City officer or employee for expert or consultant services within one (1) year of the latter's leaving City office or employment must promptly inform the Executive Director of the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission about the agreement.

Questions regarding these definitions and other ethics concerns may be directed to the Board of Ethics at 684-8500.

1.3 Prohibited Uses of Consultant Contracts

In developing consultant contracts, departments should refer to the definition of "Consultant" to ensure that the proposed activity is an appropriate use for a consultant contract. Consultant contracts may not be used for:

1.3.1 Acquisition of supplies, materials, equipment, or nonconsultant services (e.g., printing), except for those that are incidental to the performance of a consultant service.

1.3.2 Contracting for construction or construction-related activity, except for activity that is incidental to the performance of a consultant service. Any such work may be subject to prevailing wage requirements under State law that must be addressed as a requirement in the consultant agreement.

1.3.3 Contracting with an individual to act in the capacity of a City employee or contracting with an individual who has been nominated as a department head by the Mayor, but not yet confirmed by the City Council. Departments should contact the Personnel Department to discuss appropriate methods for compensating such individuals.

Because some contracts contain a mixture of consultant services along with acquisition or construction activity, departments should contact the Contracting Services Section for advice with questions about whether a proposed activity qualifies as a consultant service.

1.4 Prohibited Types of Consultant Agreements

1.4.1 Retainer Basis Contracts: Departments shall not enter into a Contract with any Consultant for performance of services on a retainer basis (whether for a term of years, or from year-to-year, or on another successive arrangement) for more than five (5) consecutive years. This restriction shall not apply to:

a.) A contract for services in connection with a particular project or activity, although the completion of the assignment may extend beyond five (5) years;

b.) A retainer agreement used to establish eligibility for placement on a roster from which Consultants are selected from time to time for particular assignments; or

c.) An agreement implementing a deferred compensation plan for City employees as contemplated by 26 USC Section 457.

1.4.2 Accounting/Auditing and Management Consulting Contracts: A department shall not contract with the same Consultant to perform either a) accounting or auditing services and b) management consulting services during the term of a current Contract or within one (1) year after completion of a Contract for either type of service.

Note: The City Auditor shall participate in the selection of all consultants providing auditing and accounting services in accordance with a memorandum of understanding entered into between the City Auditor and the Executive Department. The City department may determine the terms and conditions of the agreement, but any such agreement shall be subject to review by the City Auditor. All reports or financial statements submitted by such consultant shall be submitted to the City Auditor as well as the affected department or Executive Department office.

Chapter 2: Obtaining Consultant Services

2.1 General Policy Governing Consultant Selection

City policy encourages competitive selection of consultants. Competitive selection processes help ensure the City receives the best services at the best price. In addition, competitive selection processes provide opportunities to women and minority owned enterprises, small businesses, and all members of the consultant community to participate in the City's contracting processes. The practice of competitively selecting consultants enhances the City's reputation as being fair and open.

This chapter describes the general solicitation and selection processes for obtaining consultant services. Chapter 3 describes specific processes that govern the solicitation and selection of architects, engineers, landscape architects and land surveyors. If you are in need of an accounting/auditing contract, also read Chapter 1.4.2.

To review a summary of the City's general consultant solicitation and selection processes, click on Consultant Contracting Quick Guide and read a description of the general steps involved in obtaining consultant services.

2.2 Solicitations for Consultant Contracts valued at $39,000 (2006 limit) or less and Consultant Roster agreements valued at $232,000 (2006 limit) or less.

Solicitations for consulting services of less than $39,000 (2006 limit) and the use of the consultant roster may follow informal processes. (See Chapter 9.4 for procedures for using the Consultant Roster.)

The City's consultant SOPS do not require a formal advertised solicitation process for work expected to cost less than $39,000 (2006 limit). An informal solicitation process may be conducted by contacting 3-5 firms to discuss the City's scope of work, the firm's expertise and availability and then email a solicitation statement or conduct an informal phone solicitation. During this process, contact at least one women or minority owned business. Review the Consultant Contracting Quick Guide for directions on how to conduct and document the solicitation and selection process. You may also wish to review the Informal Solicitation form to prepare for and document informal solicitations.

2.3 Solicitation Strategies for non-Roster Contracts valued at more than $39,000 (2006 limit)

The solicitation strategy requirements for consultant services vary depending upon the dollar value of the contract.

2.3.1 Solicitation Process: For each contract, departments must evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of utilizing the Request for Proposals (RFP) process, the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) process, or a combination of the RFQ and RFP processes.

2.3.2 Advertisement Requirements: Any proposed Contract for consultant services estimated to cost more than $39,000 (2006 limit) (except for contracts with consultants from the Consultant roster) must be advertised. The advertisement must be in the City's official newspaper (currently, the Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce) for at least two (2) days which need not be consecutive. The advertisement must include:

a) A description of the services sought.

b) The name of the requesting department and the name and telephone number of a representative of the Department from whom additional information may be obtained.

c) An indication that the selection of the Consultant is subject to applicable laws and ordinances regarding equal employment opportunity (see wording in Chapter 11 if contract is expected to cost more than $232,000 (2006 limit.

d) If established or known:

* The range of fees the department will consider paying the consultant for the services to be provided.

* The time within which such services are to be provided.

* The anticipated beginning and completion dates of the work.

e) The date by which the consultant must submit a formal written response to the requesting department in order to be eligible for consideration.

An advertisement for a contract that may include future phases must state that further work may be awarded as an amendment or supplement to the original contract, and should define and describe the type of work to be included in additional phases.

Also include the general criteria that will be used to choose the consultant in the advertisement and post the advertisement on the appropriate City web page. See Sample Ads for a few examples of recent City advertisements.

2.3.3 Other Solicitation Efforts: In an effort to ensure that an adequate number of qualified consultants respond to the City's request for services, departments must include the following additional notification as part of the overall solicitation strategy:

Send a copy of either the advertisement or RFQ/RFP to all consultants known to the department who appear to be qualified for the work, including any women and minority owned firms who appear to be qualified for the work. (To view potential small and women and minority owned businesses, click on VCR ; select Consultant as the Category Type and then select a service category to find the names of minority and women owned consultant businesses by type of business consultant category.)

2.3.4 Solicitation Procedures for Contracts costing $250,000 or more: At a minimum, departments must comply with the solicitation requirements identified in Chapter 2.3.2 and 2.3.3 above. In addition, for consultant contracts Costing $250,000 or more, departments must evaluate whether additional solicitation strategies, as discussed below, are appropriate. The evaluation of whether additional solicitation strategies are appropriate must include an analysis of the market to determine the most effective means to ensure that an adequate number of qualified and competitive firms respond to the City's solicitation for consultant services. Specifically, departments must evaluate, at a minimum, the following issues:

a.) How many firms are available, qualified, and likely to respond to the solicitation for services based on the solicitation strategies required by Chapter 2.3.2 and 2.3.3 above?

b.) If an inadequate number of firms are likely to respond, thus limiting the competition to an unacceptable level, the department must develop additional solicitation strategies to ensure adequate competition. These additional strategies may include, but are not limited to, advertising in the City's official newspaper for more than the required two days, and advertising in appropriate regional and national publications or trade journals. The most effective and appropriate solicitation strategies to employ will most likely vary significantly on a contract-by-contract basis. Each department is responsible for ensuring that the solicitation strategies developed for each contract meet City objectives to obtain adequate competition on consultant contracts.

Note: Departments who are seeking consultant services expected to be $250,000 or more must complete a Finance and Council Contract Notification Form and submit it to Finance. (See Chapter 6.2 for more details.) The notification form should be completed by departments early in the planning stages of the contract, before any formal solicitation or advertising for the services has occurred and should note any additional solicitation strategies to be used by the department.

2.4 Consultant Selection Criteria for Contracts of $39,000 (2006 limit) or more (non-roster)

Every Request for Proposal (RFP) or other material in which consultants are given detailed information about consultant services sought by a department must include a detailed description of the evaluation criteria to be used, together with the maximum score or weighting to be given to each listed criterion and the deadline for submittal of a proposal or other responsive materials from a prospective consultant. (To read more about and to see examples of evaluation criteria, click on Consultant Proposal Evaluation Criteria.)

Seattle Municipal Code provides that the selection of Consultants shall be based upon evaluation criteria relevant to the services to be provided. Departments shall select Consultants based on factors including, but not limited to:

1. The competence and qualifications for the type of services to be provided.

2. The consideration the City will pay for such services (except for services under 39.80 RCW which governs the selection of architects, engineers, landscape architects and land surveyors, described below in which price may not be a consideration in the selection of these types of consultants), and

3. The affirmative action/equal employment opportunity record of the consultant.

Note: See Chapter 11.2 for a description of the Affirmative Efforts in Employment and Contracting a consultant must agree to in entering into a City contract.

2.5 Consultant Evaluation Committees

(For non-Roster contracts of $39,000 (2006 limit) or more)

City code requires the use of a departmental consultant evaluation committee for the selection of all consultants for contracts of more than $39,000 (2006 limit) with the exception of consultant roster agreements.

2.5.1 Membership of Consultant Evaluation Committee: The Department head shall appoint and use a Consultant Evaluation Committee that should include, where practical, representation by women and minorities. When applicable for capital improvement projects, consideration should be given to including (a) member(s) of the Seattle Design Commission, as a member or participant of the Consultant Evaluation Committee.

2.5.2 Duties of Consultant Evaluation Committee: The Consultant Evaluation Committee shall review the materials submitted by Consultants in response to a solicitation for work valued at more than $39,000 (2006 limit), except for those chosen from the consultant roster and then conduct a "committee investigation."

a.) Committee Investigation: Prior to making a recommendation, the Committee must conduct any investigation it considers necessary to obtain full information on the consultants being considered. Such investigation may include the following:

1. Interviews with representatives from the consulting firm.

2. Additional telephone conferences, if necessary, with representatives from the consulting firm.

3. Letters of inquiry to the consultants and/or their clients requesting specific additional information, or looking into the consultant's past performance.

4. Seattle Design Commission recommendations, when applicable for capital improvement projects, as required by SMC Ch. 3.58.

b.) Committee Recommendation Report: The code further states that the Committee shall report in writing its recommendations including, where possible, the ranking of the top five (5) consultants evaluated. The report shall describe any measurable differences among Consultants evaluated, together with an explanation of the evaluation processes used.

The Committee report should be filed with the contract file.

2.6 Final Selection by Department Head

The Code provides that the department head shall consider the report and recommendation of the committee in making the final selection. If the department head chooses not to accept the recommendation of the committee, he or she shall file a written explanation to be retained with the Department's records related to the Contract.

The code also provides that the department head shall make a goodfaith effort to rotate the award of Consultant contracts among Consultants evaluated as being equally qualified and capable of performing the desired services.

2.7 Notice of Selection or Non-selection

Following selection, the department must notify each consultant who responded to the solicitation, in writing, as to the final selection.

2.8 Contract Filing Requirement

The original Signature Copy of the contract must be filed with the City Clerk. The contract must be attached to the Contract and Amendment Transmittal Form, which may be printed by clicking on to this hyperlink.

Only upon request should a copy of the contract be provided to the Contracting Services Section.

Chapter 3: Selection Procedures

3.1 Selection of Architects/Engineers

State Law (RCW 39.80) contains specific procedures governing the solicitation and selection of architects, landscape architects, land surveyors, and engineers. The RCW requires that selection be based on the "most highly qualified" consultant. The following policies and procedures should, when applicable, be read and considered together with the selection procedures outlined in Chapter 2 of these Policies and Procedures.

Because price may not be used as a criterion for consultant selection of architects, landscape architects, land surveyors, and engineers, it is important to distinguish between professions and work that are covered by Chapter 39.80 RCW and those that are not covered by this Chapter. It is to the City's advantage to use price as one criterion for selection of consultants when permitted. This helps to ensure that the City is obtaining the most value for its money and represents good public policy.

3.1.1 Determining if Consultant Service is covered by RCW 39.80

a) RCW Definitions. Click on Architect, Engineer, Land Surveyor and Landscape Architect to read RCW definitions of work done by these professions.

b) Issues to Consider in Making a Determination: The general answer in distinguishing between work subject to the requirements of Chapter 39.80 RCW and work that is not subject to the requirements of Chapter 39.80 RCW is that if State law does not require that the work in question be performed by someone licensed or registered in one of these professions, then Chapter 39.80 RCW does not apply. If, on the other hand, State law requires that the work in question be performed by someone licensed or registered in one of these four professions, then Chapter 39.80 RCW would be applicable.

However, just because the scope of services for a particular contract is likely to or may be performed by someone who is licensed or registered in one of these four professions does not mean that Chapter 39.80 RCW applies. In order for Chapter 39.80 RCW to apply, the type of service the City is seeking must be required by State law to be performed by someone licensed or registered in one of these four professions. As an example, if the design of something requires the stamp of a licensed engineer, then the work must be performed by an engineer.

If a department is unsure about whether a particular service must be performed by one of these professions, please review the definitions and feel free to contact the Contracting Services Section (684-0430) in the Department of Executive Administration.

3.1.2 Solicitation and Evaluation Criteria

Departments must follow the Solicitation and Evaluation processes outlined in Chapter 2 with the following caveats:

a.) Consultant Roster Solicitations: A department may pursue a competitive process and choose to contract with a consultant from the consultant roster for various types of architects, landscape architects, land surveyors, and engineering services without formally advertising for these services. (The City annually advertises for the various specialties of these consultants and thus meets the advertisement requirements contained in RCW 39.80). The consultant roster however may not be used for contracts of more than $232,000 (2006 limit).

b.) Non-Roster Selection Advertisements: State law requires that the City advertise all other solicitations for architects, landscape architects, land surveyors, and engineering services regardless of the estimated costs of the service. Departments should follow advertising requirements listed in Chapter 2.3.2, but remember to omit ratings for costs.

c.) Evaluation: As noted above for architects, landscape architects, land surveyors and engineers Chapter 39.80 RCW requires a selection of the "most highly qualified" consultant. The evaluation criteria must be limited to factors that relate to a firm's qualifications and competence to perform the desired work and may not include factors related to the affirmative action/ equal employment opportunity record of a firm or to the cost, price, compensation, or other consideration to be paid for the services. See Consultant Proposal Evaluation Criteria for examples of evaluation criteria.

3.2 Other Specialized Contracting Requirements

3.2.1 Federally Funded Contracts: Departments must comply with applicable federal regulations, including the "Common Rule for Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements with State and Local Governments," for consultant contracts funded in whole or in part by federal monies. Departments must also comply with requirements imposed by the federal agency granting the funding. Call Contracting Services at 684-0430 to discuss how these requirements affect contract solicitation, evaluation and reporting requirements.

3.2.2 Capital Improvement Projects: Departments must comply with the requirements of the Seattle Design Commission Ordinance (SMC Ch. 3.58) regarding selection of consultants for capital improvement projects.

Chapter 4: Insurance Requirements

Risk Management establishes consultant contract insurance requirements to protect the City from loss should the consultant be negligent or breach a professional standard.

4.1 Risk Management Checklist

Departments must complete the Risk Management Checklist for every consultant contract. This form is available by clicking on Checklist. Instructions on completing the risk assessment are found on page three of the Checklist. The Checklist should be completed and saved in electronic form as a Word document. The purpose of the risk assessment process is to provide a review of the scope of work and the contract value, and assess risk based on the checkboxes that apply on the first page of the Checklist.

Note: if you are advertising for consulting services, complete the check list to obtain Risk Management review prior to preparing the formal solicitation advertisement.

After completing the Checklist, if the result is rated as:

a.) Low Risk (Green Field of the Checklist)

No insurance is required and Risk Management review is not necessary.

b.) Medium Risk (Green Field of the Checklist)

Standard Insurance applies and Risk Management review is not necessary.

c.) Medium High or High Risk (Red Field of the Checklist)

Risk Management review is necessary as additional coverages and higher dollar limits may be required. In this case, email the completed Checklist to Risk Management. Risk Management will complete and sign off on the Checklist and send it back to you.

If the risk classification is medium, medium high or high, the department must transfer the insurance requirements from the Checklist to the Addendum: Insurance Requirements and Transmittal Form (that may be printed by clicking on this hyperlink). The department should instruct the consultant to send the Addendum: Insurance Requirements and Transmittal Form to their insurance broker. The consultant's broker is responsible for attaching proof of the required insurance to the form and sending it back to both the department (if indicated) and to Risk Management. The Addendum Form should always be attached to consultant contracts, unless the scope of work is rated as Low and no insurance is required.

The Risk Management Division is authorized to establish all insurance requirements for the City. In some instances, the coverages and limits required may exceed the level of insurance maintained by the consultant. If this poses a problem, the department should discuss the issue with Risk Management. If a satisfactory resolution cannot be reached, the issue can be referred to the Director of Executive Administration. The Director will then consult with the Risk Management Director and the affected department head and staff before reaching a final decision.

4.2 Insurance Documentation

Note: This section describes the City's current standards for acceptable insurance documentation. It is intended to provide departments with the basic information to independently evaluate insurance documentation. However, departments, particularly those who do not routinely execute consultant contracts, should feel free to contact Risk Management (386-0071) with any questions.

The Addendum: Insurance Requirements and Transmittal Form has a box noting where the broker should send insurance certification. The standard requirement is for the consultant's insurance broker to send the certification directly to Risk Management. Risk Management then enters the information into the Insurance Database so the basic insurance information (although not an actual copy of the insurance certification) should always be available on the Inweb.

If a department wishes to review and maintain copies of insurance certification on file, check the box on the Transmittal Form to receive a copy of the proof of insurance. Standard (called Accord) certificates of insurance are usually issued as evidence for required insurance. It is a fairly simple process to compare the coverages and limits of liability specified in the Insurance Addendum with what is described on the first page of the Accord certificate.

In addition to the Accord certificate of insurance, the City must always receive evidence that the City is an additional insured under the consultant's Commercial General Liability policy. This proof cannot be met with the Accord certificate of insurance alone. It is also necessary to have an actual copy of the policy language or endorsement documenting that the City of Seattle is an additional insured.

Additional insured status on the policy is demonstrated in two ways:

1. There will be "blanket additional insured" language either in the policy language or on an endorsement. It will state, for example, that an entity is an additional insured if it is required by written contract. This form of additional insured is satisfactory proof of insurance.

2. Alternatively, the broker may furnish a policy endorsement that names "The City of Seattle" (or the department) as an additional insured.

Note: Please call Risk Management at 386-0071 if you have any questions about the insurance documentation or Checklist processes.

Chapter 5: Exemptions from Consultant Selection Procedures

City code (SMC 20.50.090) recognizes that the provisions requiring and related to formal advertised competitive selection processes, as outlined in Chapter 2, may be waived a) in emergencies, b) under some circumstances if it is determined that the competitive process would have an adverse effect on the City or c) if there is only one consultant who can provide the service.

The code also provides that competitive solicitation processes may be waived if services are obtained through cooperative and/or joint agreements with other governments.

5.1 Department Head Waiver/Documentation

The Department head can waive the consultant selection provisions of Chapter 2 if following a careful review; they can document and justify the selection waiver decisions outlined in 5.2-5.3 below.

Note: The justification requirements also apply to any amendment to a consultant contract for which the consultant was selected based on one of the consultant selection exemptions listed below. As documentation of such a waiver, the department head shall complete a written justification and maintain such justification in the department's file.

5.2 Emergency Exemption & Adverse Effect Exemption

The code provides that when a Department head determines that such provisions would adversely affect the City's interests either because an emergency exists or because compliance with such provisions would have a significant adverse effect, the Department head shall file a written explanation of the determination with the Contract. Click on Emergency or Adverse Effect for the items that must be covered in documenting an emergency or adverse effect exemption.

Note: Department heads should be aware that Chapter 39.80 RCW, which governs the selection of architects, engineers, landscape architects, and land surveyors, would preclude the use of an adverse effect waiver for these services.

Some circumstances in which adverse effect exemptions might be appropriate might include but are not limited to, the need to perform a confidential or surprise security review or evaluation or an anonymous management audit, or a determination that the cost, ability to complete the task in a timely manner, or potential liability issues related to having another consultant perform the work would not be in the City's best interests.

5.3 Sole Source Exemption

The code provides for a waiver from a formal advertised competitive selection process whenever a department head determines that only one (1) consultant is available with the expertise required to provide the services desired. The Department head must file a written explanation of the determination with the Contract. See Sole Source for the items that must be covered in the written determination.

5.4 Use of Intergovernmental Service Contracts

The code provides that competitive processes outlined in Chapter 2 may be waived whenever services are obtained for the City through cooperative and/or joint agreements with any state or governmental agency or subdivision thereof, or any other governmental unit or any public benefit nonprofit corporation.

Note: Department heads should be aware that Chapter 39.80 RCW, which governs the selection of architects, engineers, landscape architects, and land surveyors, requires the selection of the "most qualified" consultant, a decision that is based on performing the specific scope of work called for in a project. Because the scope of work involved in projects varies, it is unlikely that the other government's selection determination could apply for a City's project.

Each Department who wishes to use another government's consultant contract to obtain consultant services must:

1. Verify that the City of Seattle has existing inter-local agreements with the other public or non-profit entity. (Contact Purchasing Services at 684-0444 for a listing of all current interlocal agreements.)

2. Ask the contracting government for a copy of the contract, the proposal, the proposal tabulation form that summarizes proposal scoring, the newspaper ad advertising the engagement or the web posting of the engagement (if the government didn't keep a copy of the web posting, obtain the dates the posting took place). Note: Federal contracts may not include advertising.

3. Call the Contracting Services Section (684-0430) and make an appointment for Contracting Services to review and approve the use of the contract. Contracting Services will review the material from step 2 and if the materials are sufficient, notify the department that they may develop a contract with the Consultant using the appropriate standard City contract boilerplate.

4. Prior to contracting with the City, the Consultant must comply with the City's standard contracting requirements including the Equal Benefit Requirements if the contract will cost more than $39,000 (2006 limit). Departments should instruct the consultant to review the City's requirements at http://seattle.gov/contract/equalbenefits/. If the contract is for more than $232,000 (2006 limit), read the outreach plan requirements in Chapter 11.3 of these policies and procedures.

Chapter 6: Executive and Legislative Oversight

This chapter describes steps Departments must follow prior to contracting for large consulting services or contracting for Information Technology contracts exceeding 100 hours.

6.1 Consultant Contracts less than $250,000

For consultant contracts estimated to cost less than $250,000, there are no formal requirements to notify the Department of Finance (DOF) or brief the DOF and City Council. However, department heads are strongly encouraged to consider briefing the DOF and the City Council whenever a consultant contract deals with a highly visible project, is politically sensitive, or when the department is intending to declare an exemption from the normal consultant selection process based on sole source or adverse effect.

6.2 Consultant Contracts of $250,000 or more

The Department of Finance (DOF) has an interest in being notified and kept informed of the progress of large consultant contracts, specifically those estimated to cost $250,000 or more.

a.) Notification. In order to facilitate notification to DOF of large consultant contracts, departments are required to submit to DOF a completed Finance and Council Contract Notification form for all consultant contracts estimated to cost $250,000 or more.

b.) When to submit form. The form should be completed by departments early in the planning stages of the contract, and before any formal solicitation or advertising for the services has occurred.

c.) Where to submit form. The form should be sent to the department's budget analyst in DOF.

d.) How to submit form. Departments may use the Finance and Council Contract Notification form or provide the information required by the form in a memorandum or letter. To facilitate consistency, the information must be submitted in the same order as listed on the form.

6.3 Amendments

The Finance and Council Amendment Notification form must be submitted by departments for consultant contract amendments or supplements which will raise the estimated cost of the contract (original contract plus all amendments or supplements) to $250,000 or more, or for any single amendment or supplement estimated to cost $250,000 or more. The Amendment Notification Form should be submitted to DOF as soon as the need for the amendment becomes apparent or may incorporate all the content of the form into a department specific form, or provide the information required by the form in a memorandum or letter. To facilitate consistency, the information must be submitted in the same order as listed on the form.

6.4 Consultant Contracts of $750,000 or More

Both DOF and the City Council have a special interest in consultant contracts estimated to cost $750,000 or more, since these contracts commit the City to significant expenditures of public funds. Therefore, in addition to the notification requirements outlined in this Chapter (6.2 and 6.3 above), the department head is required to brief DOF and offer a briefing to the appropriate City Council committee chair for all consultant contracts estimated to cost $750,000 or more, as described below.

Briefing: Upon submittal of a Contract Notification Form, the department must contact DOF in order to schedule a briefing on the proposed consultant contract. The briefing must include a discussion of the issues addressed in the Finance and Council Contract Notification Form including a description of the solicitation strategies that the department has developed to ensure that there is adequate competition for the contract. Department heads are encouraged to schedule the briefings early in the development of the consultant contracting process. It is expected that the department and DOF will work together collaboratively in determining the best approach for proceeding with the consultant contract. The department head shall evaluate and consider modifying the proposed contracting process based on the review and analysis by DOF.

After the briefing and review by DOF, the department head is encouraged to forward to the appropriate City Council committee chair a copy of the Contract Notification Form or other information about the contract, and shall offer to brief the appropriate City Council committee chair.

The briefing requirements of this section also apply to:

1. Any consultant contract amendment or supplement estimated to cost $750,000 or more.

2. Any consultant contract amendment or supplement that causes the total dollar value of the contract (original contract plus all amendments and supplements) to equal or exceed $750,000.

6.5 Review and Monitoring of IT Contracts

The City has established an ongoing review and monitoring process for all information technology (IT) service contracts performed in the City that are anticipated to be for more than 100 hours. The review applies to all IT contracts which may be IT peak load and expert service contracts that are established under any mechanism, whether it's a City IT Staff Augmentation Contract, consultant contracts, Purchasing contracts, Consultant Roster Contracts or other professional services.

The purpose of the review is to help ensure that contract work is being performed consistent with an independent contractor (vs. employee) status.

For information regarding how your department is managing this process, please contact your Department's IT Section Manager. You may also call Purchasing Services at 684-8903 if you have any questions regarding IT review and monitoring processes.

6.6 City Council Oversight-Opinion Gathering Consultant Contracts

SMC Ch. 5.09 provides that no department may spend appropriated funds on opinion-gathering activities in the amount of $2,500 or more without seeking Council approval. Opinion-gathering activities include but are not limited to, public and internal/employee polls, surveys, questionnaires, focus groups, telephone calling, automated telephone calling, or other mechanisms the primary propose of which is to gather opinions or data from at least 10 persons. (Exceptions to required review are noted in SMC 5.09.020 Paragraph I.)

Approval must be obtained from the relevant City Council Committee. Read SMC Ch. 5.09 to review processes for the City Council's oversight of these activities.

Chapter 7: Negotiations and Controlling Contract Costs

7.1 General Background

The following are general business practices that departments should follow in negotiating and controlling the costs, especially of major consultant contracts. The following reflect some of the broad issues addressed in this chapter:

1. Know the project. In negotiating with consultants, it is important that the City identify a) the work that needs to be done, b) how much the work is likely to cost, and c) that the amount the City agrees to pay is reasonable, fair, and appropriate. Thus, the City should develop an independent scope of work and cost estimate prior to the negotiation process with the consultant.

2. Document negotiation process. As good management practices and from the public's perspective, it is important that the City demonstrate that negotiations with the consultant occurred to protect the City's interests. Reasonable documentation of the negotiations process should be maintained in the contract files.

3. Ensure payment is consistent with contract terms. Finally, it is important that the City review invoices to ensure that the payments to the consultant are consistent with the terms of the contract.

7.2 Development of Independent Scope of Work and Cost Estimate

The City has an interest in ensuring that its financial interests are adequately protected, the City is not unreasonably dependent upon a consultant, and the City has a clear understanding of proposed work to be accomplished through a contract or amendment.

7.2.1 Consultant Contracts: For every consultant contract estimated to cost $250,000 or more, the administering department must develop its own draft of the proposed scope of work and an independent cost estimate prior to the negotiation process, to ensure the reasonableness of the consultant's negotiating proposals and positions.

7.2.2 Consultant Amendments: For every consultant amendment estimated to cost $250,000 or more, the administering department must conduct or obtain an independent review of any scope of work developed by the consultant, and an independent review of the cost estimate provided by the consultant, in order to ensure reasonableness of both scope and estimates. The independent review of the scope and cost may be conducted by qualified staff in the administering department or another City department, or through an independent, outside expert.

7.2.3 Documentation: The administering department shall maintain records demonstrating its compliance with the requirements of this section. Click on Documenting Work Scope and Negotiations for an example of the form used by one department to documenting compliance with these provisions.

7.2.4 Justification for non-compliance with this Section: If an administering department is unable to comply with some or any of the requirements of this section, the department shall document in its contract files the reasons for its inability to comply.

7.3 Indirect Costs (Overhead and Fringe Benefits)

This section applies only to consultant contracts using a cost-plus fixed fee payment methodology.

Indirect costs are normally recovered by consultants as a percentage of direct salary costs, and consist of non-salary related indirect costs (overhead) and salary related indirect costs (fringe benefits).

7.3.1 Definitions:

a) Overhead. An indirect rate covering costs of the consultant that cannot be allocated to a specific contract and is generally reimbursed as a percentage of the base salary costs.

b) Fringe Benefits. An indirect rate covering costs associated with employees above and beyond salaries and generally reimbursed as a percentage of the base salary costs (i.e., reasonable sick leave, vacation and holiday pay, unemployment compensation insurance, FICA, retirement contributions, medical insurance, etc.).

7.3.2 Notification to Consultants: For all cost-plus fixed fee or other consultant contracts that require use of indirect rates, the administering department must:

a) Provide to the consultant the list of allowable and unallowable indirect rates (these may be printed by clicking on Overhead Costs noted in paragraph 3 below.

b) Inform the consultant that the City will only pay indirect rates consistent with the provisions outlined in paragraph 7.3.3 below.

c) Inform the consultant that they are responsible for only billing the City for allowable indirect rates.

d) Inform the consultant that charges to the City may be audited by the City Auditor or designee and are subject to adjustment based on an audit.

7.3.3 Overhead Expenses: The City has developed categories of costs generally allowed or disallowed as overhead as part of the compensation for City consultant contracts. The lists are not exhaustive. Costs are subject to audit for allowability based on contract terms, generally accepted accounting principles, reasonableness, documentation and allowability to the proper base. The Federal Acquisition Regulations shall be used as the definitive standard for allowable versus unallowable costs. Costs should have a basis in the company's established policy, plans or practices. Costs should not be discriminatory against the City. Exceptions may be allowable if fully documented and justified.

Click on Overhead Costs to see a listing of allowable overhead expenses and categories of costs that are not allowed either directly or as indirect expenses.

For further information, refer to Subpart 31.2 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, as of 2005. A full text version of the Federal Acquisition Regulations may be found at the following Internet Website address: http://www.acqnet.gov/far. (Subpart 31.2 is in FAR Reissue 2005-Volume 1).

7.4 Evaluation of Fixed Fee or Profit

In negotiating a contract or amendment on a cost-plus fixed fee basis, the City considers a reasonable fixed fee range to be 10-13% (of the consultant's total labor costs including base salary rate, overhead, and fringe benefits). In negotiating a fixed fee, the administering department should take into consideration the following factors, and others that may be relevant:

1. The level of risk involved in the work to be performed. Generally, the City should expect to pay a lower fixed fee for routine, low risk work, while unique or high risk work may warrant the payment of a higher fixed fee to compensate the consultant for the work.

2. The fixed fee paid to other consultants by the City for similar types of work.

3. The fixed fee paid to consultants for similar types of work by other large government agencies.

If the administering department negotiates a fixed fee that is above the 10-13% range, documentation shall be maintained in its contract files explaining why.

7.5 Documentation of Negotiations

The intent of this section is to ensure that a public record exists of the negotiating process on a contract or amendment valued at $250,000 or more. This public record or documentation is important in order to demonstrate that the City has negotiated compensation terms for a contract or amendment that are fair and reasonable.

In addition to items described in other sections of this chapter, the documentation in the contract files shall include a written narrative summary of the negotiation process describing how the contract negotiations resolved any differences between the consultant's cost proposal and the department's estimates, for contracts of $250,000 or more, or the department's evaluation of the consultant's proposal, for amendments of $250,000 or more. The level or standard of such documentation in the contract files shall be sufficient for, and acceptable to, the head of the administering department. See Documenting Work Scope and Negotiations for examples of documentation forms used by one City Department.

7.6 Review of Invoices

In order to ensure that the City's payments to a consultant are consistent with the terms of the contract, administering departments shall review all invoices submitted by a consultant prior to authorizing payment. For all consultant contracts valued at $250,000 or more (including any amendments that bring the total amount to $250,000 or more), and for all invoices for $10,000 or more (regardless of contract dollar amount), the review of invoices by administering departments shall include, but not be limited to, verification of the following:

1. That the figures included on the invoice have been accurately calculated.

2. That the labor rates, reimbursables, fixed fee, sub-consultant's rates, overhead and fringe benefits listed on the invoice are consistent with the terms of the contract or the most recent applicable amendment.

3. That the charges included on the invoice reflect activity for which the consultant has actually performed work.

4. That the charges included on the invoice are for work included in the contract or an amendment.

5. That for sub-consultant activity, the sub-consultant is recognized by the department as a legitimate sub-consultant for the contract or amendment.

6. That for any reimbursable expense exceeding $250, supporting documentation is attached to the invoice.

7. That any reimbursable expense claimed is permitted by the terms of the contract.

Each department shall develop invoice processing procedures consistent with the above review criteria that will document the internal process for invoice review and which positions are responsible for performing the invoice review and authorizing payments. Such procedures shall be submitted to the City Auditor for review and comment.

It is recognized that some consultants' invoices may require more or less review depending on the department's historical experience in evaluating invoices submitted by that consultant. In such cases, departments may develop more selective invoice review procedures, as long as they submit the procedure to the City Auditor for review and comments. If a more limited invoice review process is adopted, the administering department may be asked to provide documentation to demonstrate that continued review of all invoices is unlikely to generate significant cost savings to the City when compared with the cost of reviewing the invoices.

7.7 Audit Responsibilities SMC 3.40.040

The City Auditor is authorized to audit each Consultant Contract entered into by a Department to verify, among other things, that the procedures described in Ch. 3.40 have been followed; that the compensation or other consideration provided to any Consultant has been appropriate, under the circumstances; and that the contractedfor services were provided in a timely manner.

7.8 Selective Audit Responsibilities of the Department of Executive Administration

The Department of Executive Administration may conduct selective audits of consultant contracts and amendments executed by administering departments to verify that departments are complying with the Development of Independent Scope of Work and Cost Estimate Documentation of Negotiations requirements as well as other provisions of City Consultant Services Policies and Procedures.

Chapter 8: Amendments to Consultant Contracts

8.1 General

These policies and procedures establish consultant selection provisions related to amendments, define the types of amendments that are normally considered appropriate and within the original scope of a contract and those normally considered to be out of the original scope of the contract, and establish an advisory role for the Contracting Services Section of the Department of Executive Administration in offering advice to departments on amendments.

While it is recognized that legitimate amendments do occur on consultant contracts, it must also be recognized that amendments are not always the appropriate vehicle to be used. Each amendment must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis because these policies and procedures do not address all potential circumstances. It is expected that departments will exercise good judgment in determining whether a potential amendment is appropriate. The policies and procedures are not intended to be used as a legalistic check-list but to provide some basic guidance and philosophy on issues that should be considered in determining whether an amendment is appropriate, legal, and in the public's best interests. The sections on "Appropriate Uses of Amendments" and "Amendments Outside the Original Scope of the Contract" must be read together in making a determination as to the most appropriate course of action to pursue for accomplishing additional work.

8.2 Policy

City policy encourages competitive selection of consultants. Competitive selection processes help ensure the City receives the best services at the best price. In addition, competitive selection processes provide opportunities to women and minority owned enterprises, small businesses, and all members of the consultant community to participate in the City's contracting processes. The practice of competitively selecting consultants enhances the City's reputation as being fair and open.

The practice of competitively selecting consultants for work, instead of adding work by amendment to an existing contract, reduces the potential for time-consuming protests from the consultant community, which has an expectation that the City will be open and fair in the selection of consultants to perform the work. Department heads have authority to approve contract amendments and will be held accountable to the Mayor, City Council, and the general public for ensuring the integrity of the City's consultant contracting amendment process.

8.3 Consultant Selection for Amendments

8.3.1 General Provisions: Any amendment or modification to a consultant contract which, together with the original contract and any subsequent amendments, commits the City to pay for services estimated to cost $39,000 (2006 limit) or more, must comply with the consultant selection requirements of Chapter 2.3 and 2.4. of these SOPS. The following selection of Consultants for amendment provisions do not apply if competitive processes were followed as outlined in Chapter 2.3 and 2.4 of these policies and procedures.

8.3.2 Selection of Consultants for Amendments: If a consultant contract for less than $39,000 (2006 limit) is amended to $39,000 (2006 limit) or more due to unanticipated circumstances, and the selection procedures outlined in Chapter 2. 4. were not utilized by the department for the original contract, the department must comply with one of the following procedures, as appropriate:

a. Select the consultant for the amendment only after the normal selection procedures outlined in Chapter 2.3 and 2.4 have been followed for the amendment, OR,

b. Declare an exemption to the normal consultant selection procedures as outlined in Chapter 5 of these SOPS.

Note: An amendment to a consultant roster contract triggers this requirement if the original plus amendment cost of the contract exceeds $290,000 (2006 limit).

8.4 Appropriate Uses of Amendments

Departments are expected to exercise good judgment and common sense in evaluating whether a particular amendment is appropriate. The following criteria while not all inclusive, are intended to provide a general overview of the types of amendments that are normally considered to be within the scope of work of the original contract and appropriate for use on a consultant contract. As with any criteria, there are exceptions, and individual amendments must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

1. Additional work is of the same type and substance as described in the original contract.

2. Unforeseen conditions related to the original scope of work are encountered.

3. Compensation for delays related to the original scope of work.

4. Additional work or phases that are identified in the original advertisement or RFQ and/or RFP as potential work that may be added by amendment.

5. Changes that constitute a natural and logical progression of the original scope of work and do not constitute a new project.

6. Additional work that is part of a contract with planned phases that were contemplated in the original solicitation for services.

7. Additional work that does not cumulatively exceed 10% of the original contract amount that is necessary to respond to community, business, or neighborhood concerns.

8.5 Amendments Outside the Original Scope of the Project

The following criteria, while not all inclusive, are intended to provide a general overview of the types of work that are normally considered to be outside the original scope of a consultant contract and thus such work should not be included in amendments. As with any criteria, there are exceptions, and individual amendments should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Departments are expected to exercise good judgment and common sense in evaluating whether a particular amendment is appropriate. The higher the dollar value and percentage increase of the amendment, the more caution is required in evaluating the appropriateness of adding the work by amendment instead of executing a separate contract.

1. Additional work is of the same type and substance as described in the original contract, but is work for which a consultant should be competitively selected because of the magnitude or nature of the additional work.

2. Additional work is of a substantially different type and nature from the work described in the original contract.

3. Additional work that other consultants would not have reasonably anticipated and which could have been a factor in influencing which consultants expressed interest in the contract had they known about the additional work to be added by amendment.

4. Changes to the original scope of work that changes the basic character or nature of the contract so that it is essentially a new contract and not just a modified contract.

5. Significant additional work for which a separate consultant could have been competitively selected without negatively impacting the original contract scope of work.

8.6 Large Contract Amendments

Per SOP Chapter 6.3, the Finance and Council Amendment Notification form must be submitted by departments for consultant contract amendments or supplements which will raise the estimated cost of the contract (original contract plus all amendments or supplements) to $250,000 or more, or for any single amendment or supplement estimated to cost $250,000 or more. The Amendment Notification Form should be submitted to DOF as soon as the need for the amendment becomes apparent.

8.7 Department of Executive Administration Role

The Contracting Services Section of the Department of Executive Administration will review and advise if a Department wishes advice on amendments. In addition to providing advice, the Department of Executive Administration may conduct selective audits of consultant amendments to determine departmental compliance with these policies and procedures.

Chapter 9: Consultant Roster Program

The objectives of the Consultant Roster Program are to establish a pool of experts and technical support within the consultant community from which City departments can draw, save departments time and money in the selection and hiring of consultants, and provide the opportunity for small businesses (including women and minority owned) to obtain experience as prime consultants on City projects.

9.1 Definitions

The following are definitions that apply to the Consultant Roster Program.

1. Category: "Category" means a specific type of consultant service identified by a department or departments and has been included as a type of consultant service in the selection process for the Consultant Roster Program.

2. Roster: "Roster" means a list of qualified consultants selected for a particular category of services under the Consultant Roster Program.

9.2 Consumer Price Index Adjustments

The Code authorizes the Contracting Service Division to adjust the dollar thresholds to reflect increases in the local CPI index. Contracting Services will adjust the maximum contract value for a consultant roster contract, the maximum amount allowable by amendment, and the maximum dollar amount a consultant can receive from a department for a particular category of service for the calendar year.

Note: These CPI adjustments will also apply to the thresholds defining when a formal advertisement solicitation approach must be used to solicit consultant services as well as the threshold that governs compliance with the City's Equal Benefits provisions.

9.3 Departmental Use of Consultant Roster

A department may contract with a Consultant for projects within the appropriate category without soliciting proposals as previously set forth in Chapter 2.3 as long as each contract is estimated to cost no more than the current threshold and the department has determined that its needs can be fully met without soliciting proposals through public advertising. Currently a department may contract with consultants on the roster for projects estimated to cost no more than $232,000 (2006 limit), and may amend the original contract for additional work to a total Contract amount of $290,000 (2006 limit). Each department may only use a certified roster Consultant up to a maximum amount of $464,000 (2006 limit) per year, per roster Category.

When any consultant's contract amounts reach the annual maximum limit per category, they shall not be selected for work in that same category by the participating department for the remainder of the calendar year. (This annual limitation is department by category specific, not City-wide.) Each participating department is responsible for maintaining accurate records to ensure this limit is not exceeded.

9.4 Procedures for Using the Consultant Roster

The procedures for departments to follow in order to select a consultant through the Consultant Roster Program are as follows:

1. Review the current list of roster categories established for use by departments by clicking on Work Categories.

2. Determine which category includes the type of services required. If unable to find a category for the type of services desired, contact the Contracting Services Section at 684-0430 for assistance.

3. Individual firm's statement of qualifications may be viewed by clicking on Approved Consultants and selecting the category you are interested in. The screen then will list each business and note if it is a WMBE or small business. Click on the name of a firm to view a description of each firm's prior projects as well as the project experience of key firm members. The screen also displays the names of companies and the company's project manager (with phone number) who worked with the consultant. The company project managers can be called to check references/quality of the firm's work. The screen will also display the consultant firm's contact names, telephone number, e-mail and business addresses.

4. Call or email 3-5 firms, including at least one WMBE firm and ask if they are interested in your job; then email a solicitation statement. (Note: upon request, the Contracting Services Section can provide you with an electronic listing of firms and addresses by category). For smaller jobs you may wish to follow processes outlined in the Informal Solicitation document. You should prepare a set of questions to interview each qualified consultant, perhaps by telephone, to narrow the field.

5. Comply with the following criteria in selecting a consultant for a project:

a) Make efforts to rotate through all consultants in a particular category (while complying with the need to pick the most qualified firm if it is in a category involving services from an architect, engineer, landscape architect or land surveyor).

b) Select consultants based on their expertise and ability to complete the assigned project in a timely manner. You may wish to review the examples of Consultant Proposal Evaluation Criteria (by clicking on this hyperlink).

6. Contact the selected firm and begin negotiations on the scope and cost for the desired work.

7. After satisfactory negotiation between the selected consultant and the participating department, the department shall prepare a Roster Agreement for execution by the Consultant and the department head. The roster agreement is available by clicking on Consultant Roster Program Agreement.

8. Complete the Risk Management Checklist and read the instructions on page 3 of the form. If the project has been rated as medium risk or higher, proof of insurance is required and you must also transfer the insurance requirements from the Checklist to the Insurance Requirements and Transmittal Form. This form is available by clicking on Addendum: Insurance Requirements and Transmittal. Give the form to the consultant and ask them to send it to their insurance broker for return to the City per the instructions.

9. If the contract amount is more than $39,000 (2006 limit), the consultant must comply with the City's equal benefit provisions (to read more click on Equal Benefits).

10. Once you have the required proof of insurance, submit the Roster Agreement to the consultant for execution.

11. After the consultant has signed the Roster Agreement, obtain the signature of the department head or appointee on these documents.

12. File the original Roster Agreement with the City Clerk using the Contract and Amendment Transmittal form (click on hyperlink and print). Send a copy of the signed Roster Agreement to the consultant and notify the other consultants who submitted proposals of your selection.

9.5 Responsibilities for Consultant Roster Administration

1. The Contracting Services Section of the Department of Executive Administration is responsible for the administration of the Consultant Roster Program, including administration of the evaluation process for new roster applicants.

2. Departments participating in the Consultant Roster Program shall:

a. Assist Contracting Services in the consultant selection process.

b. Comply with the following criteria in determining consultant selection:

* Make efforts to rotate through all consultants in a particular category.

* Select consultants based on their expertise and ability to complete the assigned project in a timely manner.

c. Use the standard contract language for Roster Agreements.

d. Keep complete and accurate records of the process used for administration of the Consultant Roster Program, including accounting records of amounts obligated to consultants per category.

e. Notify Contracting Services if they have reason to believe that the consultant does not meet qualifications for the category or violated other requirements in contracting with the City.

9.6 Roster Administration by the Department of Executive Administration Description of Processes

The Contracting Services Section with the assistance of departments establishes the roster of qualified consultants for the use by any department for skills or services in specialized areas of knowledge or expertise.

The consultant rosters are based on the different consultant skills or services that the City is likely to need during the effective time of the consultant rosters.

9.6.1 Advertising: Contracting Services will advertise annually a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to establish a citywide Consultant Roster. The advertisement provides information about the skills or services needed by the City; the minimum qualifications to be placed on the particular consultant roster; the Roster Program contract dollar limits; the expected duration of the roster, if known; standard contract terms and conditions, if any; and a description of the process to be used for selecting consultants from the roster.

9.6.2 Application Review: Applications for the Consultant Roster Program category may be submitted at any time by consultants and shall be rated by a Consultant Evaluation Committee to include, at the direction of Contracting Services, subject matter experts in City departments. The Consultant Evaluation Committee shall, at least on a quarterly basis, review such ratings and make recommendations for selections to the roster. Consultants shall be evaluated for placement on a roster category on the basis of the experience the consultant has in performing the category work or service and meet the minimum qualifications set forth in the request for qualifications.

During the existence of a roster, Contracting Services will perform, with assistance as needed from participating departments, ongoing evaluations of any new consultant application. All consultants found to be qualified will be added, except as a roster category may be limited to small businesses. A consultant may be removed from the roster at the discretion of the Director.

9.6.3 Roster Membership: Placement on a consultant roster makes a consultant eligible for consideration and possible selection by a participating department for providing services. Placement on a roster does not guarantee any consultant any contract for any amount. In addition, per Code, the City reserves the power to amend or repeal the Consultant Roster Program and to change or discontinue the roster program at any time.

9.6.4 Small Business Only Categories: Whenever fifteen (15) or more consultants qualify as "small business concerns" in a single roster category, the category shall consist only of those consultants classified as a "small business concern." If fourteen (14) or fewer such consultants are qualified to be placed on a roster, consultants for that roster category shall be selected without regard to their eligibility under the small business criteria.

A consultant may provide evidence of its qualification as a "small business concern" by:

1. Asserting that it is a Small Business under the Small Business Act of the United States, 15 USC Section 632, and its implementing regulations, 13 CFR Part 121 or any successor legislation or regulations; or

2. Showing certification as defined in any City program designed to encourage the utilization of small businesses.

9.6.5 Duration of Consultant Rosters: Contracting Services will endeavor to review the current status of each consultant on the roster, at least once every two years. A consultant roster shall remain in effect until such time as the Director determines it is in the best interests of the City to terminate the roster. Departments may petition the Department of Executive Administration for the establishment or disestablishment of a roster, or a roster category, when the existing rosters or roster categories do not meet the needs of the department.

9.6.6 Deletion of Consultants from a Roster: The Director of Executive Administration may delete a consultant from the City's Roster Program at his or her discretion.

9.6.7 Authority of the Department of Executive Administration to delete consultants: Examples of reasons for deletion from a Roster: The following are some examples of reasons for removal of a consultant from City-wide Consultant Roster:

a. The consultant requests deletion from the roster(s).

b. The consultant is found to be in default in the performance of a City contract or is disqualified from City contracting, or the consultant has failed to file applicable business and occupation tax reports; or does not possess a valid City business license, or other state licenses or certifications necessary to practice the particular profession.

c. The consultant has made a material misrepresentation in its response to the Consultant Roster Program solicitation. A misrepresentation is material if the consultant would have been ineligible for placement on a roster if the facts were fully known.

d. For any other reason that the Director of Executive Administration deems to be in the interests of the City to do so.

Chapter 10: Standard Wording for Consultant Contracts

10.1 Explanation of Standard Wording

10.1.1 General: The Department of Executive Administration issues three Consultant Services Boilerplates that can be accessed by clicking on the following hyperlinks:

a) A Mini Consultant Agreement (for non-roster contracts of less than less than $15,000),

b) Consultant Roster Program Agreement boilerplate (less than $232,000 (2006 limit and the

c) Standard Consultant Agreement (greater than $15,000 and nonroster)

These three boilerplates contain standard contract provisions that should be used for consultant contracts. The standard wording is necessary in order to comply with various City ordinances and to protect the City's interests.

10.1.2 Changes in the wording. Some sections (generally highlighted in red in the on-line boilerplate agreements) may need to be modified by administering departments to meet the particular needs of the project. Other sections may need to be added by the administering department. Any modifications or additions to any of the standard contract wording should be made only after approval by the City Attorney's Office.

References in the standard wording to the "Consultant" may be changed, as necessary, by the administering department to match the designation of the other contracting party as such designations appear in the remainder of the contract (e.g., "contractor", "service provider", "firm", "designer", etc.).

10.1.3 Department to supply information for certain sections. The standard agreement includes sections for Term of Agreement, Scope of Work, Payment, Payment Procedures, and addresses for Notices and Deliverables. These sections must be specifically written and filled in by the administering department for each contract. Departments should ensure that the Scope of Work language is detailed and specific, and provides enough description to hold the consultant accountable for performing the intended work.

10.1.4 Insurance. The standard agreements contain instructions on insurance documentation. In most instances, the Risk Management Addendum: Insurance Requirements and Transmittal form will be referenced in the Insurance section of the boilerplate and attached to the agreement along with the proof of insurance. Risk Management should be consulted (386-0071) if you have any questions or concerns.

Please call the Contracting Services Section (684-0430) of the Department of Executive Administration if you have any questions about the City's boilerplate insurance requirements.

10.2 General Contract Requirements

The City's boilerplate agreements if properly completed should meet the following requirements. Every Contract between or among the City and a Consultant shall:

1. Be in writing and signed by at least one authorized representative of each contracting party.

2. Include a specific and detailed description of the scope of work or services to be provided by the Consultant(s) and the products of any sort to be delivered to the City.

3. Include the maximum amount of compensation to be paid and any other consideration to be provided to the parties to the Contract, together with a description of the timing and method(s) of such payment and any retainage to be held.

4. Include the date the Contract is effective and the date the Contract expires.

5. Contain all equal employment opportunity, women and minority business enterprises, and affirmative efforts provisions required by law, ordinance, rule or regulation.

6. Provide the authority of the City to audit the consultant's books and records with respect to services to be provided, costs thereof, and compensation paid therefore.

7. Include any appropriate or required funding or other provisions related to the source of funding.

8. Contain legal relations and/or insurance sections as deemed necessary by the awarding department with advice from the City Attorney and/or the Risk Management regarding the amount of general liability and/or professional liability insurance necessary to protect the City's interests.

9. Include the consultant's City of Seattle Business License number for all consultants whose business address is within the City of Seattle or whose business address is outside the City of Seattle and the amount of the contract exceeds $5,000. See SMC 5.45.040 for business license requirements.

10.3 City Attorney Review of Contracts

All such contracts providing compensation of a value of $39,000 (2006 limit) or more shall be subject to review by the City Attorney of, among other things, the form; the specificity of descriptions of work to be performed for and products or results to be delivered to the City; and liability, insurance, indemnification and bonding provisions. The City Attorney will review contracts for less than $39,000 (2006 limit) upon the request of a department head.

Chapter 11: WMBE, EEO, Equal Benefits and Other Reporting Requirements

11.1 Affirmative Efforts RequirementsSeattle Policy Findings

The City finds that minority and women businesses are significantly under-represented and have been underutilized on City Contracts. Additionally, the City does not want to enter into agreements with businesses that discriminate in employment and in the provision of services. The purpose and intent of this chapter is to maximize practicable opportunities for increased participation by minority and women owned and controlled businesses, as long as such businesses are underrepresented, and to ensure that City contracting practices do not support discrimination in employment and services when the City procures public work, goods, and services from the private sector. (SMC 20.42.010)

11.2 Affirmative Efforts in Employment and Contracting

Consultants entering into contracts with the City must agree to make affirmative efforts to solicit women and minorities if they are adding staff for the City project. If a consultant intends to subcontract out any part of a contract instead of performing the work itself, then the consultant also must use affirmative efforts to solicit women and minority firms for subcontracting opportunities within the contract scope of work. Consultants agree to make such efforts as a condition of their contracts with the City. Although not a condition of contracting, affirmative efforts may also include, but are not limited to, establishing voluntary employment aspirational goals for women and minorities and establishing voluntary aspirational goals for subcontracting to Women and Minority Businesses.

At the request of each City department, consultants must furnish evidence of the consultant's compliance with these solicitation requirements and provide records necessary to document:

1)If hiring, affirmative efforts to employ women and minority group members; 2) If subcontracting, affirmative efforts to subcontract with women and minority businesses on City contracts; and 3) the consultant's non-discrimination in the provision of goods and services.

See Women and Minority Owned Business for definition of terms used in this section.

11.3 Affirmative Efforts in Employment and Contracting-Contracts of $232,000 (2006 limit) or more

Each Department is responsible for informing potential consultants of the City's Affirmative Efforts contract requirements, For contracts of $232,000 (2006 limit) or more, each Department must request a Consultant Outreach Plan and review and approve the Plan prior to entering into contract negotiations with the top rated consultant.

The following is a summary of the steps involved in administering the Affirmative Efforts provisions of the contract. (A general guideline for carrying out the following tasks is available by clicking on Guidelines for Evaluating Outreach Plan.)

11.3.1. Solicitation Notice: Departments are to specify in advertisements the City's standard Affirmative Efforts requirements. They should also include the Outreach Plan and instructions with their other formal solicitation RFP/RFQ materials. A template for the suggested advertisement and Outreach Plan RFP/RFQ instructions is available by clicking on Solicitation Statements & Instructions. The outreach plan form template is available by clicking on Outreach Plan.

11.3.2 Pre-Solicitation Meetings. Departments should describe Affirmative Efforts requirements at any pre-submittal meetings and review requirements of the Outreach Plan

required of the top rated consultant(s).

11.3.3 Outreach Plan Analysis: Following the rating of proposals, the department must review and approve the outreach plan for the top rated consultant(s). The department may not enter into negotiations with the top rated consultant(s) until they have reviewed and approved the outreach plan(s). See the Guidelines Outreach Plan Administration for suggestions on outreach plan review.

11.3.4 Plan ReviewApproval: If the Department determines that the consultant satisfies the Affirmative Efforts requirements, it is recommended that the department prepare a written statement summarizing the Affirmative Efforts the consultant noted in its outreach plan and include the summary in Selection Notice issued by the department. The Successful Consultant's Outreach Plan should be attached to any resulting contract.

11.3.5 Plan ReviewIssues: The Department may contact the top rated consultant(s) to clarify or obtain additional information regarding the Outreach Plan. If the Department believes there are remaining issues with the information from the plan, they must consult with the Contracting Services Section (684-0430). Failure to establish voluntary aspirational goals shall not be grounds to disapprove the outreach plan.

11.3.6 Reporting Requirements: Departments may wish to monitor the consultant's compliance with the contract's Affirmative Efforts requirements and establish reporting requirements. See the Guidelines Outreach Plan Administration.

11.3.7 Reports on Closeout: It is recommended that Departments prepare a final review of the Consultant's compliance with the Outreach Plan solicitation requirements and that they may wish to recap the EEO hiring and subcontracting that occurred on the project. Note: They may wish to use either their own periodic reporting template to summarize subcontracting payments and WMBE participation or they may ask the consultant to recap subcontract payments using the optional "Final Subcontract Payment Form" noted in the City's boilerplate contract agreements and available by clicking on Final Contract Payment Form.

11.4 Affirmative Efforts in Employment and Contracting-Contracts of less than $232,000 (2006 limit)

Consultants doing business with the City must comply with Affirmative Efforts requirements; however, there are no formal Outreach Plan requirements for contracts of less than $232,000 (2006 limit). If a department believes a contract of under $232,000 (2006 limit) presents significant subcontracting opportunities, they may include Outreach Plan requirements in their solicitation materials and contracts.

11.5 Contract Boilerplate for Affirmative Efforts Requirements

Except as provided below, departments shall use the standard contract boilerplate language regarding non-discrimination and affirmative efforts to provide opportunities for employment to minorities and women and when subcontracting, to solicit from Women and Minority Business Enterprises, unless the contract involves federal funds and has DBE goal requirements mandated by the Federal funding agency.

If Federal funding is involved, departments are responsible for complying with all applicable solicitation requirements and for inserting all appropriate contract provisions in the consultant boilerplate when one of its contracts is subject to additional requirements due to funding or grant requirements. For instance, contracts funded with USDOT federal-aid must include applicable Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) requirements and the Department must coordinate with Contracting Services to ensure compliance with these DBE requirements. For other types of funding or grant requirements, Contracting Services may, upon request, assist a department in determining the applicable solicitation or contract requirements that may apply in addition to the City's requirements.

11.6 Equal Benefits Compliance Declaration Form

For all Consultant contracts, including Consultant Roster Contracts, of $39,000 (2006 limit) or more, the department must ensure that the consultant has completed the Equal Benefits Compliance Declaration form, indicating that they are in compliance with SMC Ch. 20.45 and the Equal Benefits Program requirements. The Equal Benefits Program Information is available by clicking on Equal Benefits or going to http://seattle.gov/contract/equalbenefits/. A copy of the completed form must be sent to the Contracting Services Section of the Department of Executive Administration, Mail Stop SMT-41-12.

Departments and prospective consultants may contact the Contracting Services Section at 684-0430 with any questions about Equal Benefit provisions.

Chapter 12: Performance Review and Evaluation

12.1 Purposes

The City's performance appraisal process is designed to support project managers in the management of consultants. It can serve as a tool:

1. To promote direct and honest communications between you and a consultant and facilitate the discussion of your expectations about project cost/budget, schedule, technical concerns, communications/reporting and project management.

2. To motivate good consultant performance since the evaluation will be a primary source of information for future reference checks for the consultant. A good rating makes it more likely the City would choose the consultant for other similar work.

3. To track good performance and issues as they arise, by using the evaluation form as an electronic diary to note/comment on good performance and issues over the course of the project.

4. To help reestablish performance expectations when the consultant or City project managers change or work phases are completed; and serves as a vehicle to discuss project concerns, prior progress, and future expectations.

5. To document and serve as notice to consultants of concerns with poor performance and should be used to document poor performance that could lead up to debarment of the consultant from doing further work with the City. (See Chapter 13 Debarment of Consultants for grounds for debarment and a description of the debarment process.)

12.2 Instructions

1. Include the performance evaluation form in your RFP/RFQ solicitation documents.

2. Discuss the performance form with the consultant at your first meeting to establish project performance expectations. (You may wish to prepare for the meeting by reviewing the more detailed criteria on the Supplement page so you can better describe your project expectations). At the meeting convey your expectations for the project schedule, budget, technical concerns, project reports/communication expectations and your expectations for project management. The consultant should also be asked to describe their concerns for the project and any special technical concerns, data or other support that may be needed from the City in the course of the project.

3. The Performance Evaluation of Consultant Service form must be completed at the conclusion of each consultant contract. The form must be filed in the department's contract file. Click on Performance Evaluation to print the form. Complete the front page for less complex projects/contracts of less than $39,000 (2006 limit) and complete the supplemental comments section for more complex and larger contracts ($39,000 or more).If criteria do not apply, write NA to indicate the criteria is not relevant for the consultant's engagement. Feel free to adopt supplemental criteria that may be more appropriate for the project.

Interim Evaluations are recommended:

1) At phase transitions;

2) When any project management changes occur;

3) To alert a consultant of poor performance; and

4) Annually if none of the other conditions occur.

4. Sign and give a copy of the performance appraisal to your supervisor or contract coordinator for their signature. Once the form is signed by your department, give a copy of the completed form to the consultant.

5. Each department should handle any rating dispute (short of a formal debarment process that must be discussed with the Contracting Services Section) and may elect to include a copy of any comments the consultant may wish to include with the performance appraisal form.

6. File the completed performance evaluation form in the department's contract file.

12.3 Scoring Criteria/Supplemental Comments

Ratings are on a ten point scale ranging from 9 or 10 for superior to 1 or 2 for deficient, inadequate or substandard performance. A score of 5 or 6 meets requirements. (Note: notify Contracting Services at 684-0430 of any final average score of 1-2.)

The following are some general suggestions/examples of matters you may consider in preparing your expectations for the consultant performance at the beginning of the project as well as comments you may wish to note as you are preparing supplemental comments for all contracts of more than $39,000 (2006 limit).

Negotiations: Were they "reasonable" in negotiating the contract? Were they flexible and willing to compromise when something new or unforeseen came up? Did the right person negotiate for the firm or did you have to go through a lengthy approval process?

Cost/Budget: Other factors to consider include whether they had the appropriate mix of staff on the project or was there concern they charged for higher cost specialties when lower-cost staff might appropriately have been able to do the work? Were they able to identify and suggest ways to control costs or did they develop options for saving costs when problems occurred? Were expenses and non-salary charges appropriate? Did they exceed the project budget prior to department authorization? Note any high/low points in the comments section.

Schedule: Were they diligent in monitoring the schedule and did they give plenty of warning about factors impacting milestones and scheduled completion? Were they responsible for schedule delays or problems? Were they proactive in monitoring schedule and did they let you know as soon as a factor influencing schedule was known? Did they express a willingness/ability to address problems with the schedule? If the project wasn't on schedule/or exceeded schedules, note it in the comments section. Note in comments section any delay in responding to our comments on partial products (for example, 30/60/90% complete design reviews).

Technical Quality: Note in the comments section the technical quality of their work. Were designs constructible? Were they able to spot problems and modify actions or did you have to point them out? Were their quality control efforts appropriate and of high quality?

Communications: Was it easy to get their attention? Were communications easy? Did they treat you as the customer? Did they clearly understand the project? Were comments responded to in a timely manner? Note good or bad communication points in the comments section.

Management: This factor focuses on the Consultant's project manager as well as the firm. Were progress reports reliable, did you feel misled about project progress? Did the consultant project manager seem on top of staff/subs and know what was going on? Were the key people identified during the selection process actually used on the project? Were you surprised by anything on the project? Note what you thought was good or bad performance in the comments section.

Chapter 13: Debarment of Consultants

13.1 City Policy and Authority

The City desires to do business only with consultants who are responsible and fulfill their contractual commitments. These procedures implement the provisions of SMC Ch. 20.70 (governing the debarment of consultants) and include criteria and procedures related to the debarment of persons, associations, partnerships, corporations, or other legal entities that have performed services for the City under a City Consultant contract.

13.2 Debarment Terms

Debarment means a formal process that results in an Order of Debarment that prevents a Consultant from entering into a contract with the City or acting as a subconsultant on any City contracts, for a period not to exceed five years. Click on Debarment Definitions for a definition of terms used in this section.

13.3 Responsibilities and Authority of the Director

1. Seattle Municipal Code Ch. 3.04 gives the Director of Executive Administration the authority to administer the City's contracting processes. Such authority is administered through the Department of Executive Administration's (DEA) Purchasing and Contracting Services Division (P/CSD).

2. The Director has the authority to debar consultants to prevent them from entering into certain contracts with the City of Seattle in accordance with SMC Ch. 3.04, SMC Ch. 20.50 and SMC Ch. 20.70.

3. The Director is authorized by SMC Ch. 20.70 to establish these Procedures, applicable to all City departments, for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of that Chapter.

4. The Director, through the Purchasing and Contracting Services Division (P/CSD) of the Department of Executive Administration (DEA), shall assist City departments in interpreting these Procedures, and shall serve in an advisory role to departments on matters related to these Procedures.

5. The Director shall have the authority to delegate any or all of his/her duties and/or responsibilities under these Procedures in accordance with SMC Ch. 3.04 and SMC Ch. 20.70.

6. In lieu of invoking the Debarment process, the Director may, but is not required to, enter into a voluntary agreement with a Consultant providing that the Consultant will not submit a proposal for any City contract, and will not act as a subconsultant on any City contract, for a period not to exceed five years.

13.4 Grounds for Debarment

The following are grounds for debarment:

1. The consultant has received overall performance evaluation ratings of deficient, inadequate, or substandard on three or more City contracts.

2. The consultant has failed to comply with City ordinances or contract terms, including but not limited to ordinance or contract terms relating to small business utilization, discrimination or equal benefits.

3. The consultant has abandoned, surrendered, or failed to complete or to perform on or in connection with a City contract.

4. The consultant has failed to comply with contract provisions including but not limited to professional standards of performance, timeliness of performance or safety standards.

5. The consultant has submitted false or intentionally misleading documents, reports, invoices or other statements to the City in connection with a contract.

6. The consultant has colluded with another consultant to restrain competition.

7. The consultant has committed fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a contract for the City or any other government entity.

8. The consultant has failed to cooperate in a City debarment investigation.

9. The Consultant has failed to comply with provisions of the City's Fair Employment Practices Ordinance (SMC Ch. 4.14), the City's Fair Contacting Practices Ordinance (SMC Ch. 14.10), the City's Equality in Contracting Ordinance (SMC Ch. 20.42) or the City's Nondiscrimination in Benefits Ordinance (SMC Ch. 20.45) and any other applicable local, state or federal non-discrimination laws.

13.5 Debarment Procedures

The following are procedures to follow to pursue debarment of a Consultant.

13.5.1 Notice of Investigation: The director or any contracting authority may initiate an investigation of a consultant by:

a) Notifying the consultant in writing that an investigation has been initiated and the allegations that form the basis for the investigation.

b) Serve the Notice of Investigation form on the consultant either personally or by certified mail.

c) Forward a copy of the Notice of Investigation to the attention of the Director of the Purchasing and Contracting Services Division (P/CSD) of the Department of Executive Administration (DEA).

The consultant shall have 21 days from the Date of Service to file an answer to the allegations.

13.5.2 Investigation Results: A Contracting Authority contracting authority shall complete a written statement of the results of the investigation, which shall state at a minimum:

a) The allegation(s).

b) The conclusions(s) reached regarding the allegation(s).

c) The facts upon which the conclusion(s) are based.

d) The investigator's recommendation, including a recommended length of debarment, if any.

If the investigation is performed by a Contracting Authority other than DEA, the investigation results, signed by the director or his/her designee of the Contracting Authority, shall be sent to DEA. DEA will then personally serve or send by certified mail the results of the investigation to the consultant.

13.5.3 Findings and Notice of Debarment: DEA will then:

a) Consider the results of the investigation and the Consultant's answer, if any.

b) Make a preliminary determination on whether the Consultant should be debarred (within six months of the Date of the Service of the Notice of Investigation).

c) Provide the Consultant with DEA's findings. (The matter will be dismissed if DEA fails to act within six months or fails to provide notice to the Consultant that there is good cause to extend the period of the investigation for a specific period of time.)

If after reviewing the results of the investigation and the consultant's answer to the allegations, if any, DEA determines that the Consultant should be debarred, DEA will notify the Respondent of the City's intent to issue an Order of Debarment.

13.5.4 Notice of Debarment: The written Notice of Debarment will be personally served or sent by certified mail. The Notice of Debarment shall include:

a) A statement that the City intends to issue an Order of Debarment prohibiting the Respondent from submitting a proposal on a Contract with the City acting as a consultant or subconsultant.

b) State the reasons for debarment, including the allegations(s), the conclusions(s) reached regarding the allegation(s), and the facts upon which the conclusion(s) are based.

c) The proposed length of debarment.

d) Information on how the Respondent can contest the Notice of Debarment.

If DEA determines that the consultant should not be debarred, it shall issue a written determination to that effect.

13.5.5 Notice Protest: A Respondent may contest the Notice of Debarment by filing a written Notice Protest with the DEA no later than 14 days after the Date of Service of the Notice of Debarment. Unless waived by DEA, filing a notice is an administrative remedy that the Respondent must exhaust before seeking judicial review.

If the Respondent does not timely contest the Notice of Debarment, DEA will issue an Order of Debarment, which sets forth:

a) The contracting activities from which the Respondent is barred from participating.

b) The length of time of the debarment.

c) A statement of the facts upon which the debarment is based.

d) A response to any written comments submitted by the Respondent.

The Notice Protest filed by the Respondent must:

a) State the reasons why the Respondent alleges the Notice of Debarment is erroneous.

b) Provide copies of any documents that support the Respondent's arguments.

c) Provide the names and/or sworn written statements of all witnesses who have knowledge of relevant information related to the proposed debarment.

d) Identify any other specific information that supports the Respondent's arguments.

e) Specify a desired remedy.

The Respondent may request a hearing to discuss the Notice Protest, and if such request is granted, may only discuss those issues raised in the Notice Protest unless DEA allows otherwise. If a hearing is held, DEA shall have the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the grounds exist for an Order of Debarment.

DEA shall consider the Notice of Debarment, the Respondent's Notice Protest, and if a hearing is held, the evidence presented at the hearing. DEA shall issue a final written decision and order regarding whether the Respondent should be debarred. If DEA issues an Order of Debarment, that Order shall state:

a) The contracting activities from which the Respondent is barred from participating.

b) The length of the debarment.

c) Findings and conclusions upon which the Debarment is based.

DEA's decision shall be the final administrative decision of the City.

13 .6 Responsibilities following debarment

13.6.1 Department of Executive Administration:

a.) Notify all City Departments when a consultant has been debarred. The notification shall include the consultant's name, duration of the debarment, and scope of debarment.

b.) Maintain a list of debarred consultants and make that list available to the public.

c.) In exceptional circumstances, DEA may authorize a Contracting Authority to accept a proposal from a consultant that has been debarred or may authorize a City department to approve a subconsultant that has been debarred. DEA may grant such exceptions only after it determines that an emergency exists, that strict adherence to these Procedures would have a significant adverse effect on the City's interests, or that the Debarred Consultant or subconsultant is the only entity that can satisfy the requirements of the Contract.

13.6.2 Responsibilities of Contracting Authorities:

Contracting Authorities shall not accept a contract proposal from a Debarred Consultant and shall not approve any contract or accept a proposal that includes a subconsultant who has been debarred except as provided in 13.6.1.

Consultant Standard Operating Procedures

DEA, Purchasing & Contracting Services Division

46

File: SOPS.doc

Revised: 6/1/2006