C7P-Accept Recommendation Unarmed Security Guard ServicesGUIVIIVII:S::iiUN II t:M ::iUIVIIVIAKY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution OfThe Mayor And City Commission OfThe City Of Miami Beach, Florida, Accepting The Recommendation Of
The City Manager Pertaining To The Ranking Of Proposals, Pursuant To Request For Proposals (RFP) No. 01-2013ME, For
unarmed security guard services.
Ke Intended Outcome Su orted:
Increase resident rating of public safety services; and maintain crime rates at or below national rates.
Supporting Data (Surveys, Environmental etc:
Item Summary/Recommendation:
On December 24, 2013, RFP No. 01-2013ME was issued with an opening date of March 1, 2013. A pre-proposal conference
to provide information to the proposers submitting a response was held on January 11, 2013. Twelve proposals were
received.
On April18, 2013, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 135-2013, appointed an Evaluation Committee (the
"Committee"). On May 17, 2013 the Committee convened to shortlist the proposers. On June 24, 2013, the Committee re-
convened to receive presentations of the shortlisted proposers and further discuss the proposers' qualifications, experience,
and competence. Following the preliminary scoring of presentations and Q&A session, the Committee deliberated extensively
on individual perceptions of the proposers' qualifications, experience, and competence. In deliberating the Committee
discussed, in general, the following advantages and disadvantages of each proposal. The Committee discussed that G4S
Security Solution offered the highest quality proposal overall, but had submitted the highest cost out ofthe five (5) shortlisted
proposers. The Committee discussed that Kent Security offered cutting-edge technology that would be beneficial to the City,
including point of view cameras on the guards and installation of cameras in all supervisor patrol vehicles which will report
images via internet to the dispatch command center. However, the Committee discussed that Kent Security did not offer
uniforms and guard appearance at the same level of quality as had other proposers. Finally, the Committee discussed that 50
State Security Service offered a good proposal, but offered less technological innovation and a higher cost than Kent
Security. Following the deliberation process, a motion was presented by Julio Magrisso, seconded by Michael Silverman, and
unanimously approved by all Committee members, to recommend the following final ranking of proposers: 1) G4S Security
Solutions; 2) Kent Security; 3) 50 State Security Service; 4) McRoberts Protective Agency; 5) Allied Barton Security Services.
RECOMMENDATION
After receiving the recommendation of the Committee, the City Manager exercised his due diligence in evaluating the results
of the Committee evaluation process and finds the arguments noted in the attached memo. After carefully reviewing the
results of the Committee evaluation process, qualifications and relevant similar contracts and the likelihood of the City's ability
to negotiate a successful contract, the City Manager recommends to the Mayor and City Commission that authorize
negotiations and contract execution with G4S.
ADOPT THE RESOLUTION
Advisory Board Recommendation:
INA
Financial Information:
Source of
Funds: 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
OBPI Total
$
$
$
$
$
Account
0463-000349
168-1124-000349
Financial Impact Summary: The annual cost associated with City-wide security guard services is subject to funds availability
approved through the annual budgeting process. Account information and availability offunds shall be verified and approved
for each request prior to procuring the services. The funding and accounts noted above are the FY 2014 budget amounts
endin Commission a roval.
Cit Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Alex Denis, Extension 6641
Ml 338
AGENDA nEM _;::;(;;_,_7....;.__P __
DATE 7-(7-{3
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachfl.gov
COMMISSIO MEMORANDUM
I
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Memb rs of the Ci
FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
DATE: July 17, 2013
SUBJECT:A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR D CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY
MANAGER PERTAINING TO THE RANKING OF PROPOSALS, PURSUANT TO
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. 01-2013ME, FOR UNARMED SECURITY
GUARD SERVICES.
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
KEY INTENDED OUTCOME SUPPORTED
Increase resident rating of public safety services; and maintain crime rates at or below national
rates
FUNDING
Funding in the amount of $3,153,000.00 will be allocated during FY 2014 as follows:
$1,049,000.00
$ 315,000.00
$ 350,000.00
$ 95,000.00
$ 557,000.00
$ 289,000.00
$ 498,000.00
$3,153,000.00
480-0463-000349
142-6976-000349
463-1990-000349
467-1996-000349
011-1120-000349
011-1122-000349
168-1124-000349
The annual cost associated with City-wide security guard services is subject to funds
availability approved through the annual budgeting process. Account information and
availability of funds shall be verified and approved for each request prior to procuring the
services. The funding and accounts noted above are the FY 2014 budget amounts pending
Commission approval.
BACKGROUND
Since April 2, 2007, the City has been under contract agreement No.34-05/06 with Security
Alliance LLC (Security Alliance), to provide Unarmed Security Guard Services at locations
around the City, as shown in Appendix "A".
The current contract also allows for as-needed security guard services City-wide. The
provision of security guard services City-wide is managed by the Police Department.
The contract was set to expire on April 30, 2012. However, at its July 18, 2012, the City
Commission approved a month-to-month extension of the contract to allow for time to rebid the
services. Consequently, on October 31, 2012, the City Manager exercised the month to month
extension.
339
Commission Memorandum-RFP # 01-2013 Unarmed Security Guards
July 17, 2013
Page 2
RFP PROCESS
On December 24, 2013, RFP No. 01-2013ME was issued with an opening date of March 1,
2013. A pre-bid conference to provide information to prospective proposers was held on
January 11, 2013. Sixty seven prospective prospers downloaded the solicitation from The
Public Group, which resulted in the receipt of the following twelve proposals:
1. 50 State Security Service, Inc
2. Allied Barton Security Services
3. FPI Security Services
4. G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc.
5. Kent Security
6. McRoberts Protective Agency, Inc.
7. Navarro Group LLd. Inc.
8. Ocasa Logistics Solutions
9. Platinum Group Security
10. Responsible Security Inc.
11. SFM Security
12. US Security
On April 18, 2013, the City Manager via Letter to Commission (LTC) No. 135-2013, appointed
an Evaluation Committee (the "Committee") for the purpose of evaluating the proposals
received in accordance with the criteria established in the RFP. Subsequent to the
appointment of the Committee and resulting from scheduling and other conflicts experienced
by certain Committee members, changes to the Committee composition were required which
resulted in the final list of Committee members:
• Mickey Minagorri, Committee Chair, Resident and Leadership Academy
Graduate
• John Bowes, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate
• Tony Kanieswski, Director, Property Management, City of Miami Beach
• Julio Magrisso, Assistant Director, Parks and Recreation Department, City of
Miami Beach
• Michael Silverman, Resident and Leadership Academy Graduate
SHORT-LISTING OF PROPOSERS
The Committee convened on May 17, 2013 to evaluate proposals received and shortlist the
proposers for further consideration. The Committee discussed the proposals received and was
provided with an overview of the project, information relative to the City's Cone of Silence
Ordinance and the Government Sunshine Law; Performance Evaluation Surveys, and an
analysis of the financial strength of all proposers, pursuant to the financial information provided
by each firm, was presented by Alison Williams, the Finance Department Chief Accountant.
The Committee was instructed to score and rank each proposal pursuant to the evaluation
criteria established in the RFP, which was as follows:
10
10
25
inancial Strength as evidenced by the CPA reviewed/audited
financial statements, third-art re orts.
otal cost
340
Commission Memorandum-RFP # 01-2013 Unarmed Security Guards
July 17, 2013
Page 3
Additional points, over the aforementioned potential points were to be allocated, if applicable
and in accordance to following ordinances.
LOCAL PREFERENCE: The Procurement personnel assigned an additional five (5) points to
Proposers, which are, or include as part of their proposal team, a Miami Beach-based vendor
as defined in the City's Local Preference Ordinance. Two (2) proposers, G4S Secure Solutions
and SFM Security, were eligible for Local preference.
VETERANS PREFERENCE: The Procurement personnel assigned an additional five (5)
points to Proposers, which are, or include as part of their proposal team, a small business
concern owned and controlled by a veteran(s) or a service-disabled veteran business
enterprise, as defined in the City's Veterans Preference Ordinance. Two (2) proposers, 50
State Security Service, Inc. and McRoberts Protective Agency, Inc., were eligible for Veterans
preference.
The Committee discussed its individual perceptions of the proposers' qualifications,
experience, and competence, and further scored and ranked the proposers accordingly. The
Committee's preliminary rankings pursuant to the proposal evaluation short-listing phase were
as follows:
The Committee recommended shortlisting the five (5) top-ranked companies: G4S Secure
Solutions, McRoberts protective Agency, 50 State Security, Allied Barton, and Kent Security.
The scores clearly indicated a noticeable difference between the aforementioned companies
and the other seven (7) companies. A motion was presented by Julio Magrisso, seconded by
Angel Vazquez, and unanimously approve by the committee to recommend shortlisting the top
five (5) proposers and invite them back for presentations.
341
Commission Memorandum-RFP # 01-2013 Unarmed Security Guards
July 17, 2013
Page4
PRESENTATIONS AND QUESTION & ANSWER (Q&A) SESSION
On June 24, 2013, the Committee met to receive presentations from the short-listed firms.
After presentations and question and answer sessions with each firm, the Committee
individually scored each firm on the criteria outlined in the RFP as a basis for deliberations.
The Committee's preliminary rankings after the presentations and Q&A session were as
follows:
Following the preliminary scoring of presentations and Q&A session, the Committee
deliberated extensively on individual perceptions of the proposers' qualifications, experience,
and competence. In deliberating the Committee discussed, in general, the following
advantages and disadvantages of each proposal. The Committee discussed that G4S Security
Solution offered the highest quality proposal overall, but had submitted the highest cost out of
the five (5) shortlisted proposers. The Committee discussed that Kent Security offered cutting-
edge technology that would be beneficial to the City, including point of view cameras on the
guards and installation of cameras in all supervisor patrol vehicles which will report images via
internet to the dispatch command center. However, the Committee discussed that Kent
Security did not offer uniforms and guard appearance at the same level of quality as had other
proposers. Finally, the Committee discussed that 50 State Security Service offered a good
proposal, but offered less technological innovation and a higher cost than Kent Security.
Following the deliberation process, a motion was presented by Julio Magrisso, seconded by
Michael Silverman, and unanimously approved by all Committee members, to recommend the
following final ranking of proposers:
~l!iedJ?~GQD§~£YEi!ySef'{!c:;es ···-~~~·······=····················L •......... ~: .. , ........... ~ ...... ,
.. The Committee conditioned the ranking proposers as noted
below
The Committee recommended that Administration engage in negotiations with G4S Security
Solutions, as the top-ranked firm, providing that G4S Security Solution was willing to lower its
costs to the City by 10%. In the event that the Administration was unable to negotiate an
agreement with G4S Security Solution, the Committee recommended that the Administration
engage in negotiations with Kent Security, as the second-ranked firm, providing that Kent
Security included the proposed technological innovations and improved the quality and
appearance of its uniforms .. In the event that the Administration was unable to negotiate an
agreement with Kent Security, the Committee recommended that the Administration engage in
negotiations with 50 State Security Service, as the third-ranked firm, providing that 50 State
Security Service lowered its costs to the City.
342
Commission Memorandum -RFP # 01-2013 Unarmed Security Guards
July 17, 2013
Page 5
Please refer to Appendix "B" for cost proposals received from all proposers.
PROFILE OF TOP-RANKED FIRM -G4S SECURITY SOLUTIONS
G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. ("G4S) traces its beginnings in the U.S. back to 1954 when
George Wackenhut founded The Wackenhut Corporation in Miami, Florida. After 48 years of
unprecedented growth and becoming one of the largest security companies in America. The
Wackenhut Corporation merged with Group 4 Falck and then in 2004, Group 4 Securicor was
formed from the merger between Securicor pic and Group 4 Falck A/S's security business. In
2010, G4S Wackenhut changed its name to G4S to represent the integrated global brand of
security solutions.
G4S has over 110 locations throughout the United States and began operations in Florida in
1958. G4S' Miami Area Office has been in operation since 1966 and operates 24 hours a day,
seven days a week. The G4S Miami Office and Satellite Miami Beach Office will oversee the
City of Miami Beach's account.
G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc., headquartered in Jupiter, Florida, is a wholly owned
subsidiary of G4S pic, the largest employer quoted on the London Stock Exchange. With
operations in 125 countries worldwide and over 657,000 employees, G4S is a leading provider
of security solutions, specializing in outsourced business processes and facilities in sectors
where security and safety risks are considered a strategic threat.
G4S provides over 60,000 weekly hours of service for government contracts, representing
over 3,120,000 hours of security service per year. This includes several contracts that have
been running for more than 30 consecutive years. The following is a list of local agencies that
G4S provides services to:
• Orange County, Orlando, FL;
• Jacksonville Sheriff's Office, Jacksonville, FL
• Broward County, Ft. Lauderdale, FL
• City of Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL
• State of Florida, Division of Administrative Hearings
• Sarasota County, Sarasota, FL
• Collier County, Naples, FL
• City of Houston, Houston, TX 7
• Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Nashville, TN
• Department of Homeland Security-Federal Protective Services, Albany, NY
• City of Portland, Portland, OR
• City of San Diego, San Diego,
• Federal Medical Center, Lexington, KY
• Milwaukee, WI
• Durham County, Durham, NC
• City of El Paso, El Paso, TX
G4S' strength in providing additional staffing for special events, temporary and emergency
situations is a tremendous asset to the City. With over 1,500 qualified, vetted, trained, and
uniformed G4S personnel available to draw from in Dade and Broward counties alone, G4S
offers a trouble-free and time-saving solution to staffing the many special events and/or short
term situations the City of Miami Beach is often tasked with. G4S has successfully provided
services to the City of Miami Beach during Memorial Day Weekend for the past two (2) years.
343
Commission Memorandum -RFP # 01-2013 Unarmed Security Guards
July 17, 2013
Page 6
MANAGER'S DUE DILIGENCE AND RECOMMENDATION
After receiving the recommendation of the Committee, the City Manager exercised his due
diligence in evaluating the results of the Committee evaluation process and finds as follows:
• In Phase 1 of the evaluation process, evaluation of proposals and short-listing, G4S
Secure Solutions received the overwhelming majority of 1st place votes. Kent Security
received only one (1) first place vote and 50 State Security received no first place
votes. Additionally, the scores from this phase indicated a very wide spread between
G4S and all other proposers.
• In Phase 2 of the evaluation process, interviews, the Committee initially ranked G4S
and 50 State as tied for first place based on a tabulation of the rankings and not
individual scores. However, a closer review of the Committee member scores reveals
that G4S received a greater number of points, 489 total points, to the total number of
points received by 50 States of 473 total points.
• It is clear from the results of both phase 1 and phase 2 of the evaluation process that
the committee considered G4S as the top-ranked proposer. On the other hand, the
Committee only ranked 50 State and Kent third and fifth respectively during the phase
1 evaluation and vacillated several times during the phase 2 evaluation over which firm
was to be ranked second or third.
After carefully reviewing the results of the Committee evaluation process, qualifications and
relevant similar contracts and the likelihood of the City's ability to negotiate a successful
contract with G4S, the City Manager recommends to the Mayor and City Commission that
authorize negotiations and contract execution with G4S.
CONCLUSION
The Administration recommends that the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami
Beach, Florida accept the recommendation of the City Manager pertaining to the ranking of
proposals, pursuant to request for proposals (RFP) No. 01-2013ME for unarmed security
guard services; authorizing the administration to enter into negotiations with the top-ranked
proposer, G4S Security Solutions; and further authorizing the mayor and city clerk to execute
an agreement upon conclusion of successful negotiations by the Administration.
T:\AGENDA\2013\July 17\Procurement\RFP-01-2013 ME Unarmed Security Guards -Memo.doc
344
Commission Memorandum -RFP # 01-2013 Unarmed Security Guards
July 17, 2013
Page 7
APPENDIX "A"
SECURITY GUARD LOCATIONS INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF SERVICES
RFP#01-2013 UNARMED SECURITY GUARD SERVICES
(11:00p,rn to '7:00a.m.)= 392
Board Walk South
en and Flashli ht
Vehicle Radio,
: & Sunday of each month 6
NIA · 36 Hours MonthlY
345
GUARDS EST. HOURS no,OOO/YEAR I $19.20 I $18.81 I $18.60 $20.71 $18.50 I $20.18 I $16.00 I $22.04 I $16.70 I $17.95 $19.87 ~ling Rate$ 0) r/Hour: $2,496,14.2.00 $2,445,300.00 $2,418,00(.!.00 $2,622,1011.00 $2,405,000.00 $2,623,400.00 $2,080,000.00 l $2,865,200.00 $2,171,000.00 $2,333,SOI'U.lo $2,583,100.00 SUPERVISORS EST. HOURS 30,000/Year $22.60 I $19.21 $19.75 I $24.01 $19.50 I $22.41 I $16.00 $23.04 I $17.90 $17.95 I $20.30 Billing Rate$ Per/Hour: Total: TOTAL GAAND TOTAL
RESOLUTION TO BE SUBMITTED
347