HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_GGAF_01.23.2019Notice of Meeting for the
General Gov ernment and Finance Adv isory Board
of the City of Georgetown
January 23, 2019 at 4:30 PM
at Library: Friends Room 218 located at 402 West 8th Georgetown, Tx
The City o f G eo rgeto wn is committed to comp lianc e with the Americans with Dis abilities Ac t (ADA). If yo u
req uire as s is tanc e in participating at a p ublic meeting d ue to a disability, as d efined und er the ADA, reas onab le
as s is tance, ad ap tatio ns , or acc o mmo d ations will b e provid ed up o n req uest. P leas e c o ntact the City Sec retary's
Office, at leas t three (3) days prior to the sc hed uled meeting d ate, at (512) 930-3652 o r City Hall at 113 Eas t 8th
Street fo r add itional info rmation; TTY us ers ro ute through Relay Texas at 711.
Legislativ e Regular Agenda
A Review minutes fro m the Nov 28, 2018 General Government and Financ e Ad vis ory Board Meeting - Amy
Janec ka, Bo ard Liais o n
B Co nsideration and possible actio n to approve purchas ing autho rity for fuel c ard s ervices and related
products with FleetCor Tec hno lo gies d ba Fuelman in amo unt not to exc eed $875,000. – Stan Hohman,
Fleet Manager.
C Co nsideration and possible actio n to approve a Cons tructio n Contrac t with O’Haver Co ntracto rs of S an
Anto nio, Texas for the Co nstruc tion of F ire S tatio n No. 6 in the amo unt of $4,619,200. – Eric Jo hns on,
CIP Manager.
D Co nsideration and possible actio n to approve a Cons tructio n Contrac t with O’Haver Co ntracto rs of S an
Anto nio, Texas for the Co nstruc tion of F ire S tatio n No. 7 in the amo unt of $5,261,000. – Eric Jo hns on,
CIP Manager.
E Co nsideration and possible actio n to reco mmend ap p ro val o f a b usines s c ons ulting and IT s upport
services c o ntrac t with Itineris, N.A. to provid e s ervices thro ugh September 31, 2019 for $320,500 and to
provid e servic es for two additio nal years for an annual expend iture of $424,500. -Letic ia Zavala, Customer
Care Direc tor
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, Robyn Dens more, City S ecretary fo r the C ity of Geo rgeto wn, Texas , do hereby c ertify that this Notice of
Meeting was p o s ted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a p lace read ily acc es s ible to the general p ublic at all times ,
on the ______ d ay o f __________________, 2019, at __________, and remained so p o s ted fo r at leas t 72
c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the sc heduled time o f s aid meeting.
____________________________________
Ro b yn Densmo re, City Sec retary
Page 1 of 82
City of Georgetown, Texas
Government and Finance Advisory Board
January 23, 2019
SUBJECT:
Review minutes from the No v 28, 2018 General Go vernment and Finance Advis o ry Bo ard Meeting - Amy
Janecka, Bo ard Liais on
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Amy Janec ka, Bo ard Liais o n
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
DRAFT meeting minutes , Nov 28, 2018 Backup Material
Page 2 of 82
Minutes of Meeting of the
GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND FINANCE ADVISORY BOARD (GGAF)
City of Georgetown, Texas
November 28, 2018
The General Government and Finance Advisory Board met on Wednesday, Nov 28, 2018 at 4:30 PM
in Friends Room 218 of the Library, located at 402 West 8th Street, Georgetown, Texas.
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as d efined
under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon
request. Please contact the City Secretary’s Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting
date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route
through Relay Texas at 711.
Board Members Present: City Staff Present:
Tommy Gonzalez, Chair
Kevin Pitts
Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager
Leigh Wallace, Finance Director
Stu McLennan
James Bralski
Chere’ Heintzmann, Secretary
Chris Bryce, IT Director
Greg Berglund, Assistant IT Director
Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director
Jim Briggs, General Manager-Utilities
Glen Dishhong, Utility Director
Danella Elliott, Executive Assistant
Trish Long, Facilities Superintendent
Eric Nuner, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director
Mike Babin, Deputy General Manager, GUS
Amy Janecka, Finance Admin
Others present:
Filip Vanslambrouck with Itineris
Legislative Regular Agenda
Tommy Gonzalez, Chair called the meeting to order at 4:36 p.m.
A Review minutes from the Oct 24, 2018 General Government and Finance Advisory Board
Meeting - Amy Janecka, Board Liaison
Stu McLennan asked about the need for members not present to be noted on the minutes. Tommy
Gonzalez clarified that this was not required. No further questions or comments were made.
Motion to approve the minutes by Stu McLennan, second by Kevin Pitts. Approved 5-0
B Consideration and possible approval of an enhanced software maintenance & support, business
assurance, and operational software management contract with Itineris, N.A. and to approve
funding of $511,250.00 -Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director
Leticia Zavala presented the contract to the board and explained it was for services above and beyond
the basic service level. It will be over a 9 month time span and renewed next year and is needed for the
new software that was procured in 2015 and implemented in August 2018.
Page 3 of 82
Chere’ Heintzmann asked about the difference of the basic level and the enhanced level. Leticia
explained that with the basic level of service, any troubleshooting would have to go through multiple
channels within the city before being routed to Itineris for support. With the enhanced level contract,
troubleshooting can go straight to Itineris. The enhanced contract also includes any needed training that
staff may need while learning to use the new system. Chere’ also asked about the contract piece that
limits the number of help tickets that can be submitted. Filip Vanslambrouck stated that the limit is not
enforced, but it was further clarified that it could be enforced if desired by Itineris. Tommy Gonzale z
asked if the number limit on help tickets could be removed from the contract since it is not enforced.
Conversation then transitioned to an explanation of how the help tickets are tracked using a points
system, with points being based on the level of difficulty of the request as determined by Itineris. Chris
Bryce and Mike Babin helped to answer questions on what a points system looks like in use.
Chere’ then asked about negotiating a multi-year contract, possibly with tiered service levels, since the
services will be needed next year as well. Leticia let the board know that in three years, they will be
moving to the cloud and will no longer need the enhanced services. General discussion about multi-
year contracts, the cost savings, and various options within them followed. Leticia did let the board
know she priced a 2 year contract and they chose to move forward with the 9 month option. The board
expressed concern that the dollar amount for such a short contract is high. Laurie Brewer explained that
this contract is unlike other contracts largely due to the nature of the services needed and the short
turnaround time that is required when an issue arises. Mike Babin also went through each line item and
explained what the cost was covering.
Tommy Gonzalez and Kevin Pitts asked about the usual costs of such services and if other vendors
were priced. Leticia explained that Itineris is the only vendor that can provide this service. It was also
stated that this service is needed in order to utilize the new system. James Bralski asked if the enhanced
services have been in place since the new system was implemented. Leticia confirmed it has been in
place. James asked to see what types of tickets have been submitted thus far as a gauge on what the
point usage might look like going forward. This was discussed and it was determined this would not be
an accurate gauge since the first 3 months after system implementation are not an accurate gauge of
longer term needs.
Tommy stated that there should be a multi-year contract that covers the length of time that the enhanced
services will be needed. The board briefly discussed the logistics of this given the need for immediate
service and decided to approve the funding piece that goes through January 2019 and asked Leticia to
work with Itineris to bring the costs down through a multi-year contract and then bring the item back
to the January 2019 GGAF meeting. Tommy Gonzalez asked Filip Vanslambrouck if he saw any issue
with this plan of action and Filip indicated he saw no issue with it.
James Bralski motioned to approve $190,750 of funding to cover services through January 2019 with
the intent to further negotiate on the issues discussed for a multi-year contract which is to be finalized
by January 2019, and for more information on the points system and tickets submitted so far to be
provided in the meantime, 2nd by Chere Heintzmann. Approved 5-0
C Consideration and possible action to recommend approval of an annual contract for facility
access control, video surveillance, and security technician to be provided by Convergint
Technologies of Austin, TX in the amount of $84,700. Trish Long, Facilities Superintendent; Eric
Nuner, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director
Trish Long explained that this item is an annual renewal with a vendor that the City of Georgetown has
used the last 3 years. The Technician will provide all preventative maintenance needed and is also on
call 24/7 for after hour needs, such as to unlock or lock gates. Trish also explained that the cost to bring
this service in house is significantly higher due to the start-up costs of equipment and benefits.
Chere’ Heintzmann asked for clarification on the number of hours the technician would work and Trish
verified it is 20 hours a week during normal business hours plus any additional offsite work that is
Page 4 of 82
needed after hours. The after hours work is at no additional cost. James Bralski asked about the number
of hours the technician has been working over the last 3 years and if there has been any steady increase.
Trish informed everyone that it has been at 20 hours a week for the last three years and there is currently
no need to move to a full time employee.
Kevin Pitts motioned to approve, 2nd by James Bralski. Approved 5-0
Motion to adjourn by Kevin Pitts at 5:56pm, second by Chere Heintzmann, approved 5-0.
__________________________________ ____________
Tommy Gonzalez Date
Board Chair
__________________________________ ____________
Chere’ Heintzman Date
Board Secretary
__________________________________ ____________
Amy Janecka Date
Board Liaison
Page 5 of 82
City of Georgetown, Texas
Government and Finance Advisory Board
January 23, 2019
SUBJECT:
Cons id eration and p o s s ib le ac tion to approve p urc has ing authority fo r fuel c ard s ervic es and related
p ro d uc ts with F leetC o r Technologies dba Fuelman in amount no t to exc eed $875,000. – S tan Ho hman,
Fleet Manager.
ITEM SUMMARY:
This item is to req ues t autho rity to c o ntinue p urc has ing fuel card s ervic es and related p ro d uc ts und er the
TCPN contrac t that the City currently has with F leetC o r Technologies dba F uelman. Last year the
req uested amo unt fo r these s ervic es was $830.000.
Staff projec ts an increas e o f 5.4% in fuel us age whic h is based o n inc reas es s een in p revious years . In FY
2019 the City has s een a 4% inc reas e in the vehic le c o unt and an average of 4% over the p as t 4 years. Fuel
usage in the pas t 5 years has averaged a 5.4% inc reas e. T his average excludes the year that the Chis holm
Trail Water Dis tric t was acquired since we s aw a larger that normal inc reas e that year. Fuel us age is ac tual
gallons us ed , no t the pric e of the fuel. If the pric e of fuel had not c o me down bac k in Novemb er, then our
fuel s p end wo uld have been c lo s er to the las t years reques ted amo unt. With that in mind, staff is as king for
5.4% inc reas e o ver o ur req uest from las t year. The increase b rings the reques ted maximum amount to
s p end to $875,000. This is a no t to exc eed amo unt. Each year the contrac t is in p lace, staff will reques t
b udget authority to s pend under the c urrent c o ntract.
Fuelman was award ed a contrac t thro ugh the Cooperative Purchas ing Network (TC PN) under Contrac t
No. R5161501 effec tive April 1, 2017 thro ugh Marc h 31, 2020. This is for C ity fuel s ervices to inc lude
Fuelman card s for o ffs ite fuel p urc hases and management and s toc king (inventory) of the City’s ons ite fuel
s tatio n. In c ontinuing with Fleetcor Tec hno logies the City will keep the same billing and rep o rting s ystem
that we are c urrently us ing which includ es real time transac tion posting and exc ep tion alerts whic h help
red uc e the ris k of theft o r fraud ulent use.
Pric ing is b as ed o n OPIS wholesale cost pric ing as defined in the TCPN co ntrac t proposal p lus freight and
ap p licable taxes . OP IS (Oil P rice Information S ervic e) is an independ ent c ompany that trac ks and p ro vides
refiner terminal rac k pric es to resellers b y Rac k Market. Rack Market refers to where the p etroleum
p ro d uc ts are s o ld at the who les ale level from primary s to rage. F o r the Georgetown area this is typic ally the
Aus tin loading rac k where the tanker trucks fill up .
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Total annual c os t is not to exceed $875,000. This amount will c o ntinue to b e paid fro m the individ ual fuel
b udget acc o unts for each divis io n.
SUBMITTED BY:
Stan Hohman, Fleet S ervic es Manager
Page 6 of 82
City of Georgetown, Texas
Government and Finance Advisory Board
January 23, 2019
SUBJECT:
Cons id eration and p o s s ib le ac tion to approve a C o ns truc tion Co ntract with O’Haver Contrac tors o f San
Antonio , Texas fo r the Cons tructio n o f Fire Station No . 6 in the amount of $4,619,200. – Eric Johnson,
CIP Manager.
ITEM SUMMARY:
On Novemb er 16, 2018, the City of Geo rgetown is s ued a Req uest for Prop o s als for the Co nstruc tion of
Fire Station No. 6 and No . 7. The members of the s elec tion c o mmittee were Eric Jo hns o n, Tris h Long,
Clay Shell and Jeff Davis. Of the five res p ons es rec eived, the s electio n committee unanimo usly agreed that
O’Haver Contrac to rs , p ro vided the best value bas ed o n their proposal, and s ubs equent referral check.
The s electio n c o mmittee rec o mmends acc eptanc e of:
• Bas e Bid of $4,560,000
• Alternate 5 - $52,000 (Direct Cap ture Exhaus t)
• Alternate 7 - $7,200 (Additio nal Irrigatio n)
For a to tal co ntrac t amount of $4,619,200
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The total budget fo r F ire S tatio n No. 6 is $5,499,725. Includ ing:
• Cons truction
• Professional Services
• Owner Co ntingency
• Furniture, Fixtures and Eq uipment
• Commissioning
• Station Alerting
• Aud io Visual
• Materials Tes ting
• Sec urity
• Data Cab ling
Funding was approved by the Counc il in the 2018 Budget amendment. Fire S tatio n No. 6 is fund ed
thro ugh Certific ates o f Obligation whic h will be is s ued thro ugh the 2019 annual debt issuanc e. F und ing fo r
the initial d es ign work was provid ed by Emergenc y Services District No . 8.
SUBMITTED BY:
Eric Jo hns o n, CIP Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Fire Station 6 pres entation Pres entation
Bid Tab Backup Material
Page 7 of 82
GGAF
January 23, 2019
Fire Station No. 6
Construction Contract
Page 8 of 82
City of Georgetown
Location
Page 9 of 82
Fire Station No. 6
City of GeorgetownPage 10 of 82
Site Plan
City of GeorgetownPage 11 of 82
Floor Plan
City of GeorgetownPage 12 of 82
Background
•Released RFP –November 16, 2018
•RFP Due –December 19, 2018
•5 Respondents
–Don Kruger Construction Co.
–FT WOODS Construction
–Key Construction
–O’Haver Contractors
–Trimbuilt Construction
City of GeorgetownPage 13 of 82
Background cont’
•Evaluation Team
–Asst Chief Clay Shell
–Asst Chief Jeff Davis
–Trish Long, Facilities Superintendent
–Eric Johnson, CIP Manager
•O’Haver Contractors is recommended by
the team
City of GeorgetownPage 14 of 82
Contract
•Total Contract –$4,619,200
–Base Bid -$4,560,000
–Accept Alternate 5 -$52,000 (Direct Capture Exhaust)
–Accept Alternate 7 –$7,200 (Additional Irrigation)
City of GeorgetownPage 15 of 82
Budget -$5,499,725
City of Georgetown
Contract Total
Construction $4,619,200
Owner Contingency (5%)$230,960
Professional Services $131,000
Station Alerting $50,000
Other Contracted Services*$468,565
* Furniture, Equipment, A/V, Security, Data Cabling, Commissioning, Materials Testing
Page 16 of 82
Next Steps
•Sign Contracts
•Bonds
•Insurance
•Building Permits
•Construction
–Begin March 2019
–Completion March 2020
City of GeorgetownPage 17 of 82
Bid Invitation No.:201912
Division:Construction Services for Fire Station No. 6 & No. 7
Bid Opening Date:December 19, 2018, 2PM
ITEM#
Don Krueger
Construction
Victoria, TX
FT Woods,
Georgetown TX
Key Construction LLC,
Forth Worth, TX
O'Haver Constractors,
San Antonio, TX
Trinbuilt Construction,
Inc.
Austin, TX
International Finishers
Inc.,
FIRE STATION NO. 6
CALENDAR DAYS 365 270 300 330 355
Base Price 4,804,000.00$ 4,770,000.00$ 4,996,000.00$ 4,560,000.00$ 4,646,000.00$
A1 (51,000.00)$ (50,000.00)$ (45,000.00)$ (44,000.00)$ (58,700.00)$
A2 (16,000.00)$ (4,000.00)$ (9,800.00)$ (3,000.00)$ (22,500.00)$
A3 (1,000.00)$ (6,000.00)$ (16,000.00)$ (17,500.00)$ (1,130.00)$
A4 (9,900.00)$ (81,000.00)$ (120,000.00)$ (126,000.00)$ (121,000.00)$
A5 58,000.00$ 58,000.00$ 58,000.00$ 52,000.00$ 47,500.00$
A6 23,000.00$ 20,000.00$ 32,000.00$ 37,000.00$ 10,500.00$
A7 9,600.00$ 2,000.00$ 12,100.00$ 7,200.00$ 9,735.00$
A8 58,000.00$ 54,000.00$ 86,100.00$ 71,000.00$ 36,520.00$
SUBTOTAL 4,874,700.00$ 4,763,000.00$ 4,993,400.00$ 4,536,700.00$ 4,546,925.00$
FIRE STATION NO. 7
CALENDAR DAYS 365 281 300 330 355
Base Price 5,645,000.00$ 5,570,000.00$ 6,266,000.00$ 5,300,000.00$ 5,545,000.00$
A1 16,800.00$ 22,000.00$ 9,800.00$ 11,000.00$ 16,990.00$
SUBTOTAL 5,661,800.00$ 5,592,000.00$ 6,275,800.00$ 5,311,000.00$ 5,561,990.00$
FIRE STATION NO. 6
DISCOUNT (63,000.00)$ (50,000.00)$ -$ -$ (43,000.00)$
FIRE STATION NO. 7
DISCOUNT (63,000.00)$ (50,000.00)$ -$ (50,000.00)$ (43,000.00)$
TOTAL 10,410,500.00$ 10,255,000.00$ 11,269,200.00$ 9,797,700.00$ 10,022,915.00$
1 ORIGINAL 4 COPIES YES YES YES YES YES
DIGITAL YES YES YES YES YES
BID BONDS YES YES YES YES YES
ADDENDUM NO. 1-5
C&A
FOR REFERENCE ONLY - This document summarizes proposals received and some key pieces of information which may be located with a brief examination
of the proposals, and is not intended to replace a complete detailed evaluation of each proposal.
Fire 6 w/ alternates 4,871,600.00$ 4,830,000.00$ 5,066,100.00$ 4,619,200.00$ 4,703,235.00$
Fire 7 w/ alternates 5,661,800.00$ 5,592,000.00$ 6,275,800.00$ 5,311,000.00$ 5,561,990.00$
Fire 6&7 w/ alternate 10,407,400.00$ 10,322,000.00$ 11,341,900.00$ 9,880,200.00$ 10,179,225.00$
n
o
n
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
v
e
Page 18 of 82
City of Georgetown, Texas
Government and Finance Advisory Board
January 23, 2019
SUBJECT:
Cons id eration and p o s s ib le ac tion to approve a C o ns truc tion Co ntract with O’Haver Contrac tors o f San
Antonio , Texas fo r the Cons tructio n o f Fire Station No . 7 in the amount of $5,261,000. – Eric Johnson,
CIP Manager.
ITEM SUMMARY:
On Novemb er 16, 2018, the City of Geo rgetown is s ued a Req uest for Prop o s als for the Co nstruc tion of
Fire Station No. 6 and No . 7. The members of the s elec tion c o mmittee were Eric Jo hns o n, Tris h Long,
Clay Shell and Jeff Davis. Of the five res p ons es rec eived, the s electio n committee unanimo usly agreed that
O’Haver Contrac to rs , p ro vided the best value bas ed o n their proposal, and s ubs equent referral check.
The s electio n c o mmittee rec o mmends acc eptanc e of:
• Bas e Bid of $5,300,000
• Alternate 1 - $11,000 (Additio nal Irrigatio n)
• Disc o unt - $50,000 (For awarding b o th 6 &7)
For a to tal co ntrac t amount of $5,261,000
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The total budget fo r F ire S tatio n No. 7 is $6,250,000. Includ ing:
• Cons truction
• Owner Co ntingency
• Furniture, Fixtures and Eq uipment
• Commissioning
• Station Alerting
• Aud io Visual
• Materials Tes ting
• Sec urity
• Data Cab ling
Fire Station No. 7 is fund ed through Certific ates of Ob ligatio n which will be is s ued through the 2019 annual
d eb t is s uance.
SUBMITTED BY:
Eric Jo hns o n, CIP Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Fire Station 7 pres entation Pres entation
Bid Tab Backup Material
Page 19 of 82
Page 20 of 82
GGAF
January 23, 2019
Fire Station No. 7
Construction Contract
Page 21 of 82
City of Georgetown
Location
Page 22 of 82
Fire Station No. 7
City of GeorgetownPage 23 of 82
Site Plan
City of GeorgetownPage 24 of 82
Floor Plan
City of GeorgetownPage 25 of 82
Background
•Released RFP –November 16, 2018
•RFP Due –December 19, 2018
•5 Respondents
–Don Kruger Construction Co.
–FT WOODS Construction
–Key Construction
–O’Haver Contractors
–Trimbuilt Construction
City of GeorgetownPage 26 of 82
Background cont’
•Evaluation Team
–Asst Chief Clay Shell
–Asst Chief Jeff Davis
–Trish Long, Facilities Superintendent
–Eric Johnson, CIP Manager
•O’Haver Contractors is recommended by
the team
City of GeorgetownPage 27 of 82
Contract
•Total Contract –$5,261,000
–Base Bid -$5,300,000
–Accept Alternate 1 –$11,000 (Additional Irrigation)
–Discount -$50,000 (For awarding both 6 & 7)
City of GeorgetownPage 28 of 82
Budget -$6,250,000
City of Georgetown
Contract Total
Construction $5,261,000
Owner Contingency (8%)$420,880
Station Alerting $50,000
Other Contracted Services*$518,120
* Furniture, Equipment, A/V, Security, Data Cabling, Commissioning, Materials Testing
Page 29 of 82
Next Steps
•Sign Contracts
•Bonds
•Insurance
•Building Permits
•Construction
–Begin March 2019
–Completion March 2020
City of GeorgetownPage 30 of 82
Bid Invitation No.:201912
Division:Construction Services for Fire Station No. 6 & No. 7
Bid Opening Date:December 19, 2018, 2PM
ITEM#
Don Krueger
Construction
Victoria, TX
FT Woods,
Georgetown TX
Key Construction LLC,
Forth Worth, TX
O'Haver Constractors,
San Antonio, TX
Trinbuilt Construction,
Inc.
Austin, TX
International Finishers
Inc.,
FIRE STATION NO. 6
CALENDAR DAYS 365 270 300 330 355
Base Price 4,804,000.00$ 4,770,000.00$ 4,996,000.00$ 4,560,000.00$ 4,646,000.00$
A1 (51,000.00)$ (50,000.00)$ (45,000.00)$ (44,000.00)$ (58,700.00)$
A2 (16,000.00)$ (4,000.00)$ (9,800.00)$ (3,000.00)$ (22,500.00)$
A3 (1,000.00)$ (6,000.00)$ (16,000.00)$ (17,500.00)$ (1,130.00)$
A4 (9,900.00)$ (81,000.00)$ (120,000.00)$ (126,000.00)$ (121,000.00)$
A5 58,000.00$ 58,000.00$ 58,000.00$ 52,000.00$ 47,500.00$
A6 23,000.00$ 20,000.00$ 32,000.00$ 37,000.00$ 10,500.00$
A7 9,600.00$ 2,000.00$ 12,100.00$ 7,200.00$ 9,735.00$
A8 58,000.00$ 54,000.00$ 86,100.00$ 71,000.00$ 36,520.00$
SUBTOTAL 4,874,700.00$ 4,763,000.00$ 4,993,400.00$ 4,536,700.00$ 4,546,925.00$
FIRE STATION NO. 7
CALENDAR DAYS 365 281 300 330 355
Base Price 5,645,000.00$ 5,570,000.00$ 6,266,000.00$ 5,300,000.00$ 5,545,000.00$
A1 16,800.00$ 22,000.00$ 9,800.00$ 11,000.00$ 16,990.00$
SUBTOTAL 5,661,800.00$ 5,592,000.00$ 6,275,800.00$ 5,311,000.00$ 5,561,990.00$
FIRE STATION NO. 6
DISCOUNT (63,000.00)$ (50,000.00)$ -$ -$ (43,000.00)$
FIRE STATION NO. 7
DISCOUNT (63,000.00)$ (50,000.00)$ -$ (50,000.00)$ (43,000.00)$
TOTAL 10,410,500.00$ 10,255,000.00$ 11,269,200.00$ 9,797,700.00$ 10,022,915.00$
1 ORIGINAL 4 COPIES YES YES YES YES YES
DIGITAL YES YES YES YES YES
BID BONDS YES YES YES YES YES
ADDENDUM NO. 1-5
C&A
FOR REFERENCE ONLY - This document summarizes proposals received and some key pieces of information which may be located with a brief examination
of the proposals, and is not intended to replace a complete detailed evaluation of each proposal.
Fire 6 w/ alternates 4,871,600.00$ 4,830,000.00$ 5,066,100.00$ 4,619,200.00$ 4,703,235.00$
Fire 7 w/ alternates 5,661,800.00$ 5,592,000.00$ 6,275,800.00$ 5,311,000.00$ 5,561,990.00$
Fire 6&7 w/ alternate 10,407,400.00$ 10,322,000.00$ 11,341,900.00$ 9,880,200.00$ 10,179,225.00$
n
o
n
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
v
e
Page 31 of 82
City of Georgetown, Texas
Government and Finance Advisory Board
January 23, 2019
SUBJECT:
Cons id eration and p o s s ib le ac tion to rec o mmend approval of a bus iness co ns ulting and IT sup p o rt
s ervic es c o ntrac t with Itineris , N.A. to provide s ervic es through S ep tember 31, 2019 fo r $320,500 and to
p ro vide s ervic es fo r two ad d itional years for an annual exp enditure o f $424,500. -Leticia Zavala, Cus tomer
Care Direc tor
ITEM SUMMARY:
This contrac t is fo r pos t implementatio n s up p o rt o f the UMAX Cus tomer Info rmation S ystem us ed for
b illing and c us tomer interactio n. An interim s ervices contrac t was recommended b y GGAF and approved
b y Counc il fo r s ervices thro ugh January 2019.
This contrac t provid es s ervices thro ugh Sep tember 31s t, 2021. An upgrade to a c lo ud p ro d uc t is exp ected
in 2021. The goal o f this s ervic e c o ntract is to addres s s upport need s until the new mo d el is imp lemented.
Services p rovid ed are ab o ve the base level maintenanc e and sup p o rt inc lud ed with the s tand ard software
licens ing terms and inc ludes s ervic es in the following areas:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The expens e was ap p ro ved in the bud get (G L #540-5-0321-51-330 - Spec ial Services ). Sub s eq uent years
will b e bud geted thro ugh the IT Internal Servic es F und and alloc ated to the utility.
Page 32 of 82
SUBMITTED BY:
Leticia Zavala, C us to mer Care Directo r
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Service Delivery Contract pres entation Pres entation
Statement of Work Backup Material
Page 33 of 82
Service Delivery Contract -UMAX CIS System
GGAF
Meeting
1/23/2019
Page 34 of 82
Agenda -Service Delivery Contract (CIS)
•Project Overview
•Software Environment -2015 vs. Today
•Service Delivery Comparison
•Benefits
•Vendor Contract
•Questions
Page 35 of 82
Project Overview -History
•The CIS project was an “end of life” replacement for a
COBOL based proprietary system originally implemented
in 1994 that did not keep up with current growth.
•The CTSUD acquisition placed additional stress on the
system with the addition of 8,000 utility accounts.
•There was no integration with any other Utility software
systems which increased manual processes especially
when field work needed to happen.
Page 36 of 82
Project Overview -Drivers
•Benefits Included:
–Scalability for future growth
–Flexibility of a point of sale system
–Campaign management functionality for administration of
conservation programs
–Operating efficiencies through integrations with existing
systems
–Specialized billing options
–“Opt in” readiness for future deregulation
Page 37 of 82
Project Overview -Timeline
•Fall 2014:
–Released an RFP for consulting services
•Summer 2015
–Released RFP for CIS software
•Summer of 2016
–Council approved contract for new CIS Software
•Summer 2018
–CIS software was placed in production
•Fall 2018
–CIS Service Delivery contract began
Page 38 of 82
Software Environment -2014 -2015
•IT landscape different than today
–Software systems were generally “on premise”
systems located and maintained at/by the business
–Service as a Software (SaaS) for CIS software was
being introduced and considered “bleeding edge”
technology for the industry.
–On site support and technical resources were
needed to troubleshoot infrastructure and
performance issues.
Page 39 of 82
Software Environment -IT Catalyst Plan
•IT Catalyst Plan -For Today’s Environment
–Developed as a proactive strategy for
addressing City technology needs.
–Key strategic initiative over the next five (5)
years to adapt to the City’s growth and
changing IT needs
–Aggressively modernizing legacy apps(CIS, ERP,
Dev Tracking).
–Aggressively migrate software applications to the
Cloud to meet demand for software services.
Page 40 of 82
Software Environment -IT Catalyst Plan
•Strategies
•Cloud preferred:
–New apps: “Cloud First”
–Existing apps: Gradually replace with Cloud
•Focus on gaining business value:
–IT “soft” support skills (business analyst/system analyst staffing
model)
•Manage growth (infrastructure and technical staff):
–Embrace Cloud, minimize infrastructure.
–Leverage managed services contracts and utilize hosting.
•Governance:
–IT Steering Committee
–Collaborative culture
Page 41 of 82
Service Delivery Comparison
Vendor Support Item Itineris UMAX (CIS)Workday (ERP)Superion (911 Dispatch)
Basic call-in support X X X
Online help repository X X X
Software updates/patches X X X
Assigned customer success
representative X X
Hardware maintenance X X
Software environment
provided X X
Database
maintenance/tuning X X
Software tuning and
maintenance X X
System performance
monitoring X X
Front line troubleshooting of
issues X
On-site support X
Support for re-configuration
after business process
changes X
Total Cost:$548,000 $501,417 $174,187Page 42 of 82
Benefits
•Allow the Utility to adapt to the new CIS/UMAX system
•Knowledge transfer -“Don’t know what you don’t know”
–Configurations
–Nightly Batch Processes
–Interface failures
•Continuity of business operations
•Training and business processes reviews
–Staff retire, leave, sick
Page 43 of 82
Vendor Contract
Page 44 of 82
Vendor Contract -Service Catalog “Effort”
•Service Catalog -
–Pre-purchased effort to be used per year
•60 “man” days of work included annually
–Effort is for minor changes & requests
•Changes to existing functionality (rate changes, creating new users, etc.)
•Extracting/Manipulating existing data
•Ad-hoc data requests & reports
•Training
•Business process reviews
Page 45 of 82
Vendor Contract -Service Catalog
•Service Delivery Contract approved -Oct 2018 -Jan 2019
–Included effort = 20 effort days of work @ $1,000/day
•Minor Changes/Requests (Delivered) -110 hours 13.75 effort days
–Electric, Sewer, rate changes, CSS improvements, Cashiering.
•Minor Changes/Requests (In progress) -57 hours 7.10 effort days
–Consolidated bill modifications, Commercial Recycling modifications, Status updates
•Average monthly ticket volume Q4-2018: 70/month
108
82
45
32
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2018-Oct 2018-Nov 2018-Dec 2019-Jan
Monthly ticket inflow
Total: 267
Page 46 of 82
Vendor Contract -Service Catalog
•Service Delivery Contract -remainder of the fiscal year
–Included effort = 40 effort days of work @ $1,000/day
–Appendix F -Service Catalog with days of effort
•Travel
–Billed upon trip completion
Page 47 of 82
Vendor Contract -Contingency & Travel
•Contingency
–Used to offset overages above the contract amount
•Year 2:25 tickets per month
•Year 3:17 tickets per month
•Ticket inflows will be monitored monthly and quarterly to establish a
trend. Jointly, if needed, we will decrease ticket volumes. If average
ticket #’s still exceed values for 2 consecutive months contingency
funds will be billed at year end.
–Used to fund the impact analysis on efforts greater than 60
days
Page 48 of 82
Questions
Page 49 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}
Statement of Work
Prepared for: City of Georgetown, TX
December 27th, 2018
Page 50 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 2 of 33
Version Control
Revision History
Version Date Reason Author
1 12/27/2018
Initial draft –
Multiyear contract
with STD service
catalogue for
changes
Sailen Deshmukh
Sign off
Name Job Title Date
Leticia Zavala Customer Care
Director, GUS
Supporting Documentation
File Name Author Location
Incident Management Process.pdf Itineris Attachment
Change Management Process.pdf Itineris Attachment
Release Management Process.pdf Itineris Attachment
GUS - STD Service
Catalog_v1.0.xls Itineris Attachment
Page 51 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 3 of 33
Contents
1 Project Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 5
1.1 Document Purpose ................................................................................................................. 5
1.2 Objective ................................................................................................................................. 5
1.3 Customer Stakeholders ........................................................................................................... 6
2 Application Support & Maintenance Services ................................................................................ 6
2.1 Incident Management ............................................................................................................. 6
2.2 Minor Changes (STD Service Catalogue) ................................................................................. 7
2.3 Release, Change, Deploy & Configuration Management ....................................................... 8
2.4 SLA Management .................................................................................................................... 9
2.5 Batch & Interface Management: ............................................................................................ 9
2.6 Availability Management ...................................................................................................... 10
3 Application Support & Maintenance Organizational Structure .................................................... 11
3.1 Proposed Team Structure ..................................................................................................... 11
3.2 Roles & Responsibilities ........................................................................................................ 11
3.2.1 Service Provider Roles & Responsibilities: .................................................................... 11
3.2.2 Customer Roles & Responsibilities: .............................................................................. 13
3.2.3 Proposed Key Persons ................................................................................................... 13
3.3 Project Governance............................................................................................................... 14
3.4 Incident Management ........................................................................................................... 14
3.4.1 Incident Management Process: .................................................................................... 15
3.5 Change Management ............................................................................................................ 16
3.5.1 Change Order Management Process ............................................................................ 16
3.5.2 Change Control Process: ............................................................................................... 17
3.6 Change Management Authorization ..................................................................................... 19
3.7 Release Management ........................................................................................................... 19
3.7.1 Release Management Process: ..................................................................................... 20
3.8 General Project Assumptions ................................................................................................ 21
4 Deliverables ................................................................................................................................... 22
4.1 Table of Deliverables ............................................................................................................. 22
4.2 Acceptance Criteria ............................................................................................................... 22
5 Costs and Payment Schedule ........................................................................................................ 24
5.1 Cost ....................................................................................................................................... 24
5.2 Invoice and Payments ........................................................................................................... 24
5.3 Pricing Schedule .................................................................................................................... 25
5.4 Travel and Expense Guidelines ............................................................................................. 25
Page 52 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 4 of 33
5.4.1 Reimbursement for Travel Expenses ............................................................................ 25
5.4.2 Invoicing Travel ............................................................................................................. 27
6 Appendixes .................................................................................................................................... 28
6.1 Appendix A: RACI Model / Support Coverage ...................................................................... 28
6.1.1 RACI ............................................................................................................................... 28
6.1.2 Support Coverage.......................................................................................................... 31
6.2 Appendix B: Service Levers / Integration List ....................................................................... 31
6.2.1 Service Levers ................................................................................................................ 31
6.2.2 Integration List .............................................................................................................. 32
6.3 Appendix C: Incident Management Process ........................................................................ 33
6.4 Appendix D: Change Management Process ......................................................................... 33
6.5 Appendix E: Release Management Process ......................................................................... 33
6.6 Appendix F: Standard Catalogue .......................................................................................... 33
7 Approvals ...................................................................................................................................... 33
Page 53 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 5 of 33
1 Project Introduction
1.1 Document Purpose
This Statement of Work (the “SOW”) and any exhibits, appendices, schedules and attachments, the
terms of which are incorporated herein by reference, is entered into by and between the City of
Georgetown, TX, (the “Customer”) and Itineris NA, Inc (the “Service Provider”) on
____________________ pursuant to the Framework Agreement by and between the Customer and
the Service Provider dated [May 04th 2016] (the “Framework Agreement”), the terms of which are
incorporated herein by reference.
The Parties acknowledge and confirm the expiration on Sep 30th, 2018 of the initial Statement of Work
entered into between the Parties (dated May 04th, 2016), covering the services performed by the
Service Provider related to the Georgetown Utility Systems (GUS) Customer Information System (CIS)
Replacement Project.
This SOW sets forth the services to be performed by the Service Provider (the “Services” as further
described herein) related to the Georgetown Utility Systems (GUS) Customer Information System
(UMAX CIS) Application Maintenance & Support (the “Project”). Capitalized terms used in this SOW
and not separately defined in this SOW, shall have the respective meaning ascribed to such terms in
the Framework Agreement. This SOW, in conjunction with the appendixes (including the RACI and
interfaces and the matrix) represents the complete baseline for the scope of and the Services to this
SOW. All changes to this SOW will be managed in accordance with the Change Management Process
defined below.
In the event of conflict between the terms of this SOW and any other Statement of Work related to
the Framework Agreement, the scope of each Statement of Work shall be governed by the respective
terms and conditions of the relevant Statement of Work.
1.2 Objective
The UMAX CIS in operation is managed by the Customer on a day-to-day basis. The Service Provider
will provide Services to assist the Customer to make sure the system remains in a healthy state and to
stay current with regards to small changes of business requirements. These Services are additional
Services, on top of the services that are included in the Recurring License Fee as described in the
License Transaction Agreement in Schedule B (the “License Transaction Agreement”) to the Umax
Software License Terms (the “Software License Terms”).
The Customer strives to provide the best services to their customers minimizing the business
interruptions due to failures/releases in UMAX system. It plans to do that by adopting best in class
processes and tools to solve, document and eliminate the problems and by taking the Services from
the Service Provider.
Page 54 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 6 of 33
1.3 Customer Stakeholders
Name Role Responsibilities
Leticia Zavala Customer Care Director, Georgetown Utility
Systems
Cindy Pospisil CIS Project Manager, Georgetown Utility
Systems
Chris Bryce IT Director, City of Georgetown
Mike Babin Deputy General Manager, Georgetown Utility
Systems
2 Application Support & Maintenance Services
The Service Provider Team will work with the Customer Business and IT Staff in the following domains:
Incident Management
Release, Change, Deploy and Configuration Management
SLA Management
Batch & Interface management
Business Assurance – The Services will be rendered from the Service Provider offices.
However, part of the Services will be rendered from a customer location, with a maximum of
one (1) week/month.
2.1 Incident Management
In addition to the standard Software Support Services delivered as part of the Software License Terms,
these additional Services are rendered by the Service Provider to assist the Customer in quick
identification and resolution of support issues that arise.
Included activities
Included activities are:
Email based integration in the Service Provider helpdesk tool to facilitate integration with the
Customer ticketing tool (Jira); The integration is unidirectional (Jira -> TopDesk); The Service
Provider will share the email template and an email address to the Customer Team. The
Customer Team has to configure the same in JIRA;
Access and use of the Service Provider helpdesk tool for designated Customer key-users;
Propose solutions for support issues, be it additional instructions, configuration changes or
code fixes (in non-product software);
Assist Customer in problem management if issues are part of a larger issue;
Report on the service status and service performance on a monthly basis;
L2 (2nd Level Support) for support issues.
Service provider will monitor the inflow of tickets on a monthly basis, as well as, monitor the
average ticket trend on a quarterly basis. Based on ticket analysis and overall operation
Customer and Service provider will work together (if needed) to decrease ticket inflows via but
not limited to the following:
Implementing code & configuration changes,
Delivering knowledge base articles,
Page 55 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 7 of 33
Helping users by responding to how to queries,
Changing business process or work instruction.
If the average ticket inflows exceed the budgeted ticket volume/month for two (2) subsequent
months, Service provider will initiate discussions with Customer to use the contingency amount.
Out of scope activities
Out of scope activities include, but are not limited to:
Support Services as set out in the relevant Service Level Agreement in Schedule C to the
Framework Agreement or the relevant Maintenance and Support Agreement in Schedule E to
the Software License Terms;
Support issues as far as the number of tickets surpasses the maximum amount per month (35)
excluding product bug in year-1;
Any activities related to Change Management, Release Management, Deployment
Management and Configuration Management related to the support issues;
Support issues that are not related to the UMAX CIS, FO, CSS & Cashiering platform;
End-user training.
2.2 Minor Changes (STD Service Catalogue)
The standard scope of minor changes will be governed by the STD Service catalogue. A first version of
the STD Service Catalogue is attached in Appendix [F] to this SOW. These activities would be managed
through a service request in TopDesk Incident Management tool. Each STD Service Catalogue item will
be associated with a set number of pre-defined effort (“person” days).
Included activities
Minor changes contained in the STD Service Catalogue include, but are not limited to:
Simple administration
Change in setups to existing functionality – Price change, new user creations etc.;
Data Manipulation;
Ad-hoc data request / reports;
Addition/modification/Deletion of columns;
“How to” quires;
Data extract.
Any modification of the Standard (STD) Service Catalogue will be discussed and defined in
collaboration with the City.
Out of scope activities
Out of scope activities include, but are not limited to:
More than 60-person days of total effort in a year;
Code changes to implement new functionality;
Changes within the peripheral systems e.g. Paymentus, uCcentra, Esri etc.;
Development of new interfaces;
Deployment of the configuration changes into the Production Environment;
Acceptance testing on behalf of users.
Page 56 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 8 of 33
Prerequisites and boundaries
The STD Service Catalogue will be reviewed once per year and remain constant throughout
the year;
There is a maximum of 60-person days of total effort per year included for minor changes with
an exception of only 40 person days of effort during Year 1 , exceeding requests are new
change request (as per section 3.5). The Service Provider will pre-plan the resource capacity
for these efforts. The Customer will not be able to carry over the unused efforts from year to
year.
2.3 Release, Change, Deploy & Configuration Management
The Service Provider will provide Release, Deploy and Configuration management related activities for
the Customer. These Services are geared towards successfully deploying new versions of UMAX, the
Customer Self Service, Front Office and Cashiering on the Production Environment. Although small
changes can be made to the UMAX system, this is not the primary goal. Substantial changes as there
are interface modifications, upgrades and so on will be handled by a separate request.
Included activities
Included activities are:
-Representation included in the Change Advisory Board (CAB) described in section 3.6 that
decides on and finalizes the scope of the upcoming release;
Coordination of the release activities of the Service Provider & the Customer Personnel;
Deployment activities of the different components on the different Customer environments
Testing of delivered packaged product.
Out of scope activities
Out of scope activities include, but are not limited to:
Any changes which are not developed & implemented by the Service Provider;
Changes related to peripheral systems themselves e.g. Esri, uCcentra etc.;
Infrastructure related activities; These are to be performed by the Customer Personnel,
working closely with the Service Provider Release Manager;
Regression testing and acceptance of the release;
Structural and impacting changes to the Customer version of UMAX;
Releases as part of upgrades, service packs, new projects or upgrade or changes within the
peripheral systems;
Testing & Data validation as part of upgrades, service packs, new projects or upgrade or
changes to peripheral systems;
Acceptance of the release;
Deployment of configuration in production environment;
Prerequisites and boundaries
Designated Service Provider Personnel has access to the Customer systems with appropriate
access rights;
One maintenance release per month for a first (1st) year (to be evaluated after six (6) months);
A release calendar for the upcoming twelve (12) months is agreed on and reviewed on a yearly
basis;
Assistance is rendered off-site.
Page 57 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 9 of 33
2.4 SLA Management
As part of the Services, the Service Provider reports on a regular basis on the performance of the
Services. This report will indicate both ticket volumes and the performance in responding to and
resolving of tickets.
Included activities
Included activities are:
Delivery of a standard service report on a monthly basis;
Discussion of the service report;
Common escalation process for all Services rendered by the Service Provider.
Prerequisites and boundaries
Customer governance and escalation organization is set-up and known.
2.5 Batch & Interface Management:
As part of the regular daily routine, it is necessary to perform several operational validations to ensure
that the Solution is functioning as expected. The Service Provider will provide the necessary resources
to ensure the technical checks are executed. Any exceptions that are recorded during these checks
enter the normal procedure for exception handling.
Included activities
Included activities are:
Ensure all jobs are completed as per schedule;
Monitor inbound & outbound interfaces in UMAX;
Verify all batch jobs & interfaces are executed correctly through an automated process;
Categorizes exceptions and assign & follow up with Service Provider Team on resolution on
UMAX related issues;
Periodic system reconciliation of different interfaces;
Send out exception report, if any.
Out of scope activities
Out of scope activities include, but are not limited to:
Handling business exceptions that are recorded during the validations;
Business Reconciliation;
Handling infrastructure related exceptions that are recorded during the validations;
Biz talk monitoring & operations.
Prerequisites and boundaries
Designated Service Provider Personnel has access to the Customer systems with appropriate
access rights;
Batch schedule and schedule for other interventions are known to and agreed by the
Customer;
Services are rendered off-site.
Page 58 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 10 of 33
2.6 Availability Management
As part of the regular activities, the Service Provider will monitor the performance and availability of
the application and database (SQL-Server). The Service provider might use some automated script to
monitor application & database health. The Service provider will look after the monitoring results and
initiate Incidents and problems wherever there is an issue or even a risk of issue.
Included activities
Included activities are:
Monitor the performance and availability of the application and database (SQL-Server) in the
Production Environment;
Communication alerts need to be sent when the application and database are not available;
Leverage available tools to identify areas of poor application/program, database performance
(e.g. long running quires, DB growth etc.) and get them addressed;
Monitor growth and index fragmentation evolutions of DB and launch automated jobs to de -
fragment the indexes;
Performance and availability exceptions need to be reported, analysed and addressed by the
Service Provider Team;
Coordination with the Customer Infrastructure Team and other Support Teams;
RCA is required on recurring issues;
Monthly status & recommendations for improvement, if any.
Out of scope activities
Out of scope activities include, but are not limited to:
Monitoring performance & availability in the Non-Production Environment;
Network, VDI, Hardware & OS-level issues;
Capacity Management;
Disaster recovery drill;
Continuity Management.
Prerequisites and boundaries
Only availability management will be offered with a max of thirty-Six (36) days of effort in a
year.
Page 59 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 11 of 33
3 Application Support & Maintenance Organizational Structure
The proposed organizational structure will include a steering committee consisting of Business
Executives from both the Service Provider and the Customer, a Senior Manager from the Service
Provider and Senior Managers from the impacted departments within the Customer (the “Steering
Committee”). Other members will be invited as deemed necessary throughout the duration of the
SOW depending on the agenda and the then applicable needs.
3.1 Proposed Team Structure
Reporting to the Strategic Committee are the responsibility of the Customer IT Manager and the
Service Provider Manager. L2 and L3 Team has its own tasks and responsibilities.
3.2 Roles & Responsibilities
3.2.1 Service Provider Roles & Responsibilities:
Service Provider
Role
Responsibility
Service Delivery
Manager (SDM)
Manages business expectations, concerns and CTQs, and provides
strategic direction;
Ensures processes are in place for timely escalation of critical application
issues;
Page 60 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 12 of 33
Service Provider
Role
Responsibility
Acts as escalation point for unresolved application issues or process
failures;
Service Delivery Manager will also decide which Services are out of scope
and communicate to the Customer;
Ensures metrics collection and reporting systems are in place and
functioning properly;
Manages overall budget for service delivery.
Service Delivery Lead Advocates the Service Provider within the Customer organization;
Advocates the Customer’s interests within the Service Provider
organization;
Works on a day-to-day basis with the Customer’s lead to resolve issues
and to advance service projects (roadmaps);
Issue load balancing, first point of escalation for the Service Delivery
Team;
Runs the Change Advisory Boards with the Customer (together with Rel.
Manager);
Ensure issue prioritization for all open issues;
Provide functional support on application related issues;
Completes tasks and assignments to the Service Delivery Team; Facilitates
issue resolution across domain as required;
Impact analysis and estimation for all changes logged (together with the
Service Delivery Team);
Manages small to medium service projects (roadmap);
Ensure new releases going live on Production Environment do not affect
the existing businesses;
Manages budget for assigned work;
Drive Root Cause Analysis (RCA) & permanent fix;
Coordinate bug-fix/release activities.
L2 Team Analyse tickets based on priority;
Reply to business super users and create/update ticket for the issue filling
in necessary details;
Respond to ‘how to’ questions;
Assist the user in making a data change on the front end. If the issue
requires a backend change (Fix) then work with L3 Team;
Does preliminary testing before releasing the solution for acceptance
testing;
Liaison with L3 Team for development of bug & request for changes or
minor enhancements using STD Service catalogue;
Determine type of ticket – data, application use, break-fix etc. Resolve or
help resolve issue;
Create work-around solution for break-fixes that take a long time to
resolve.
Page 61 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 13 of 33
Service Provider
Role
Responsibility
L3 Team
Resolve UMAX related bugs;
Assist L2 Team to resolve critical issues;
Work on Request For Changes (RFCs) and roadmap projects;
Create Functional Design document;
Keep L2 Team informed about the new changes in the product.
3.2.2 Customer Roles & Responsibilities:
CUSTOMER Role Responsibility
Customer Project
Manager
Provide communication to the entire Customer Business Team relating to
the service delivery execution successes and issues;
Serve as a one-point contact of the Customer Team;
Manages Business expectations, concerns and CTQs, and provides strategic
direction;
Manages budget for assigned buckets;
Review and facilitate approval of Deliverables on timely basis throughout
the duration of the Project;
Jointly review and monitor progress on issues.
Customer Business
Lead/Sponsor
Responsible for stakeholder engagement within the Customer organization to
ensure successful delivery of the Project; This role will not be filled by a
dedicated Project resource.
Customer Super
Users
Provide business functional expertise to define the Business Operating Model
that the Solution will satisfy; This will involve key users from: Billing; Finance
and other departments as needed.
Customer IT
Manager
Responsible for all Customer IT input and approval of Deliverables during the
Project.
3.2.3 Proposed Key Persons
Role Name
Service Delivery Manager Sailen Deshmukh
Service Delivery Lead Filip Vanslambrouck
Page 62 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 14 of 33
3.3 Project Governance
The Project governance is implemented to support the service delivery and allow for efficient and
timely communication and decision making to all stakeholder levels both inside and outside of the
Service Delivery Team.
The Service Delivery Team Members use a variety of communication methods to deliver Project
information, including meetings, telephone calls, email & voicemail etc. The plan acts as a framework
and is an evolving document that is revised when appropriate. The communication plan ensures timely
and appropriate generation, collection, dissemination, and storage and ultimate disposition of Project
information to all stakeholders. The ‘representative’ elements of our communication plan are given
below:
Governance Meeting Frequency Service Provider’s Presence
Issue review stand-ups Weekly Yes
Change Advisory Board Bi-Weekly Yes
Issue review Stand-Ups
The Service Delivery Lead will conduct issue review stand up meetings with the Service Provider and
the Customer Team Members bi-weekly to prioritize the issues and to provide the status update on
issues.
CAB (Change Advisory Board) Meeting
The Service Provider Project Manager (SDM), Release Manager & Service Delivery Lead will attend
weekly CAB meetings to decide on changes and reach agreement on the planning and other
characteristics associated with changes.
3.4 Incident Management
All application support Incidents, service requests, changes, problems, and support issues shall be
tracked via the Service Provider centralized issue tracking system, TopDesk. All issues shall be tracked
via the Service Provider centralized Incident tracking system, TopDesk Incident Module. Application
Support Teams monitor assigned TopDesk queues for applications listed in scope based upon coverage
hours & criticality.
The Incident owner is responsible for ensuring all issue activity is documented within TopDesk
including research, findings and all communications (email, phone, skype chat, etc.) with the business
user. The intent of Incident notes is to provide a complete history of the activity required to resolve
an Incident.
Incident Management shall be given the highest priority, followed by break/fix, service request and
enhancement (request for change) work. This mix will vary based on several factors; e.g., break/fix
ticket volume and priority, business cycle timing. Unless specifically directed by the Customer IT
Manager every Incident will have a higher priority than any RFC. The combination of support activities
will fluctuate based on the needs and the focus of the Customer users. This mix may remain flexible
throughout the term of the framework agreement.
Page 63 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 15 of 33
3.4.1 Incident Management Process:
The following Incident Management Process ensures that the Incidents are managed effectively
during the SOW. The Customer and the Service Provider will use TopDesk to capture the Incidents
related to UMAX. Refer to Appendix C for the detailed step by step information about the Incident
management process flow.
Page 64 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 16 of 33
3.5 Change Management
The goal of the Change Management Process is to ensure that (i) standard methods and procedures
are used for efficient and prompt handling of all changes and (ii) all changes to UMAX systems are
documented for future references.
3.5.1 Change Order Management Process
The purpose of Change Management is to respond to changing business requirements while
maximizing value and reducing Incidents, disruption and rework. The objective of the Change
Management Process is to ensure that changes are recorded and then evaluated, authorised,
prioritised, planned, tested, implemented, documented and reviewed in a controlled manner and to
take necessary corrective action.
The control of change means the assessment of the impact, the importance and the cost of potential
and the determination by management on whether to approve them or not. Any approved changes
must be reflected in corresponding release schedule and (potentially) budget.
An approved Contract Change Order (CCO) is required for any scope change to this SOW. No Services
or billing will start until approved by the Customer Manager. The CCO effective start date will be the
approval date of the Customer Manager or some date in the future.
A change can fall into one of the below three categories.
1. Standard Changes (STD Service Catalogue):
A standard change is a change to a service or infrastructure for which the approach is pre-authorised
by Change Management that has an accepted and established procedure to provide a specific change
requirement. It would be dealt with standard STD Service catalogue services. The elements of a
standard change include:
There is a defined catalogue to initiate the request for change;
The activities/tasks are well known, documented and proven;
Authority is given in advance (these changes are pre-authorised); OR
The risk is usually low.
Standard catalogue will be invoked when any one of these four conditions is valid.
2. Normal Changes:
A normal change refers to changes that must follow the complete Change Management Process.
These changes will be outside of the STD Service Catalogue services. Normal changes are categorized
according to risk and impact to the business. For example, significant change – medium risk and impact
and major change – high risk and impact.
By definition a normal change will proceed through all steps of the Change Management Process and
those that are categorised as medium or high risk will be reviewed by the Change Advisory Board
(CAB). The activities of the normal change process include:
Identify & Record the request for changes;
Page 65 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 17 of 33
Review the request for changes;
Prioritize the changes;
Impact analysis & estimate the effort;
Approval to develop the changes;
Authorise to move it to production;
Implement the change in production; and
Review & close change record.
After receiving Change Requests, the Service Provider (i) evaluates the impacts to the Software and/or
the Solution, and (ii) determines the effort and cost.
The Service Provider reserves the right to request additional information from the Customer in order
to respond to the Change Request. The response from the Service Provider must include a Change
Quote for the work required to complete the change stating the estimated number of days of effort,
an estimated delivery date, and details of the technical approach for the proposed change and the
period of validity of the Change Quote (a "Change Order").
If a Change Request initiated by the Customer is reasonably considered by the Service Provider to be
complex, the Service Provider shall be entitled to charge the Customer the number of days of analysis
and cost required to enable the Service Provider to provide the Customer with a Change Quote in
respect of that Change Request. The Change Quote should also give detail of the technical approach
for the proposed Solution.
The Customer must approve any expenditure in writing, before the Service Provider commences
either analysis or development. The Customer shall respond within five (5) Business Days of receipt of
a Change Quote from the Service Provider, unless additional approval time is required due to the
Customer’s statutory requirements. This may be either approval (for the analysis or development to
proceed), cancellation or notification that further time shall be required by the Customer to consider
the Change Quote. The Customer shall in any event respond with a decision within the validity period
of the Change Quote.
On receipt of a duly signed authorization to proceed, the Service Provider shall supply the Services
that are the subject of the request and such Services shall be deemed services in accordance with this
day-to-day issue resolution.
3. Emergency Change
An Emergency Change (e.g. a hotfix) is reserved for changes intended to repair an error that is
impacting the business to a high degree or to protect the organisation from a threat and that cannot
be postponed until the next scheduled release. In case of Emergency Changes, the Service Provider
will follow a quicker process to move the changes into the production. Communication is done
between the Service Provider Service Delivery Lead and the IT Manager directly, without the need for
the written and signed Impact Analysis. Approval for installation of the Emergency Change is obtained
by email and registered in the related ticket.
3.5.2 Change Control Process:
The following Change Control Process ensures that changes are managed effectively during the SOW.
The Customer and the Service Provider will use TopDesk to capture the request for change.
Page 66 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 18 of 33
Refer to Appendix D for the detailed step by step information about the Change Management Process
flow.
Change management
Customer
Team
Itineris
Level 3 support
Customer
Product Manager
Itineris
SDM
Op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
Ph
a
s
e
ITI-1: High-level
analysis
(01. Submitted)
CUS-1: Log Or
update TopDesk
ticket
CUS-4: Extra
clarification
required?
Yes
SITI-2:Add costs and
effort estimation
(34. IA in progress)
No
CCUS-4: Approval
proces
SDM-1:Release
management
process
CUS-3: Analyze
impact analysis
(34. Wait for IA
Accept)
CCUS-5:
Approve
change?
34. Wait for IA
Accept)
No
ITI-2: Extra
information
needed from
CUS?
Yes
SITI-1: Determine
costs impact
analysis
(31. Sizing IA in
Progress)
ITI-3: Execute
impact analysis
(33. IA in progress)
CCUS-1:
Approval of
costs impact
analysis
(32. Wait for IA
sizing Accept)
Yes
CCUS-3: End
change procedure
No
ITI-5: Finalize
impact analysis
(33. IA In Progress)
ITI-4: Extra
information
needed from
CUS?
CUS-2: Provide extra
information
(51. Wait on
customer)
No
Yes
ITI-6:Provide extra
clarification
(33. IA In Progress)
YesCGE 2: Update
requirements?
No
No
CUS-5: Approve
suggested
solution?
Yes
Yes
No
SITI-3: Plan change
and communicate
(03. In progress)
ITI-7:Execute
change
(04. Developing)
ITI-8:Deliver change
(05. Ready for
delivery)
Change Request
Form
Page 67 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 19 of 33
3.6 Change Management Authorization
The following principal authorities from the Customer are involved in the Change Management
Process:
The Change Manager: Change Management Process owner and responsible for filtering,
accepting and classifying Change Order (CO’s).
o In addition, the Change Manager is responsible for securing appropriate authorization
to implement changes. Appropriate authorization may be provided by the Change
Manager or may require calling upon higher management (Steering Group).
The Change Advisory Board (CAB): Consensus advisory and decision board to decide on
changes and reach agreement on the planning and other characteristics associated with
changes.
o The CAB, whose exact composition may differ from one meeting to the other, typically
is composed of representatives of all sections, including the Service Provider and
representatives of the Customer and user communities;
o The main tasks involve assessment of required resources to implement changes (also
in time), potential conflicts with current operations, safeguarding appropriate
transfer and creation of documentation, integration/cross-referencing, impact
analysis on existing capacity, etc.
The principal authorities from the Service Provider involved in the Change Management Process are:
The Release Manager: Release the changes in different environments (Test, Acceptance &
Production)
The Service Delivery Lead (SDL): Working closely with the functional consultants and providing
architectural authority to decide upon changes and their impact cross the delivered Solution.
o Maintaining the functional integrity of the system cross all functional domains;
o In close relationship with the Service Provider Subject Matter Experts (SME) assessing
the functional impact against UMAX.
The Service Delivery Manager (SDM): Responsible for:
o guaranteeing proper control on cost and timelines;
o the Service provider resource allocation both on-site or off-site;
o escalating timely any outstanding issue to the Customer Change Manager or its
coordinators in order to deliver timely both the necessary impact analysis and the
Change Request implementation itself.
In order to manage this effectively, the Service Provider has an internal organization and Resource
Allocation Management Process whereas the Service Delivery Manager (SDM) takes part in.
3.7 Release Management
The goal of release and Deployment Management is to deploy releases into operation and establish
effective use of the Services in order to deliver value to the Customer. The Service Provider needs to
own/manage monthly releases on the applications that are in scope. These releases are classified as
Operational Releases.
Page 68 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 20 of 33
Operational Releases: All changes arising from the problem management, request for changes and
some of the STD catalog enhancements buckets are deployed to production by operational releases.
The frequency of releases would depend on various factors, it is safe to assume that one (1) release
per month would be reasonable and which can be increased/decreased based on the Customer’s
needs.
The activities are of the normal operational release process are
Define the release plan;
Define the scope of the release;
Take approval in the CAB;
Deploy & execute tests on environments;
Deploy on Production Environment.
3.7.1 Release Management Process:
The following Release Management Process ensures that releases are managed effectively during the
SOW. The Customer and the Service Provider will use TopDesk to capture the release scope using
major Incident.
Refer to Appendix E for the detailed step by step information about the Release Management process
flow.
Page 69 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 21 of 33
3.8 General Project Assumptions
The Customer will provide access to relevant applications to facilitate smooth transition of the
application to the Service Provider.
Any technological or organizational change related to and during the SOW would be
communicated in a timely manner.
In case of any change of scope, over and above the requirements mentioned in this SOW, Change
Control Procedure must be followed. This may result in additional cost.
The Service provider will be utilizing a common pool of resources for break/fix, enhancements and
change order, roadmap purposes.
The Customer will provide all Project specific software licenses to resources only.
The Customer will not manage/approve hours worked by the Service Provider resources.
Page 70 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 22 of 33
4 Deliverables
4.1 Table of Deliverables
The following list of Deliverables will be delivered during the SOW. The responsible Party for each
Deliverable are defined below.
Deliverable Delivery Dates Approval Responsible
Ticket resolution using TopDesk Daily on
Business Days
Customer Service Provider
Releases & Deployment
Release plan
Scope document
Testing instruction
Deploying the code in
different environments
Release notes
Monthly Customer Service Provider
Engagement Report Monthly Customer Service Provider
Support Coverage Daily on
Business Days
Customer Service Provider
Standard Catalog Yearly Customer Service Provider
Ensure the availability of the
Production, Shadow, Test &
acceptance environment
Daily on
Business Days
Customer Service Provider
Execute, Monitor & Analysis of
batch Jobs in case of failure
Daily on
Business Days
Customer Service Provider
Documentation related to
configuration changes,
enhancements
When required Customer Service Provider
4.2 Acceptance Criteria
All Deliverables will be reviewed by the Customer and approved in accordance with the acceptance
testing procedure.
Deliverable Acceptance Criteria
Ticket resolution using TopDesk The issues are resolved in the Production
Environment & Tickets are updated with
resolution information and closed @ TopDesk
Page 71 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 23 of 33
Deliverable Acceptance Criteria
Releases & Deployment
Release plan
Scope document
Testing instruction
Deploying the code in different
environments
Release notes
Releases are successfully deployed in
Production Environment and approved by the
Customer
Engagement Report The Service Provider shares the relevant
information through email to the Customer &
the Customer approves the report
Support Coverage Daily on Business Days The Service Provider Team is available at
their own office during the coverage period,
except Federal US holidays
Standard STD Service Catalogue Reviewed and approved by the Customer
Ensure the availability of the Production, Shadow &
acceptance environment
The Customer should able to perform their
daily tasks into these Production
Environments
Execute, Monitor & Analysis of batch Jobs in case
of failure
Review and approve the batch schedule &
analysis document in case of failure
Documentation related to configuration changes,
enhancements
Reviewed and approved by the Customer
Page 72 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 24 of 33
5 Costs and Payment Schedule
5.1 Cost
The duration of this SOW is valid from 01-FEB-2019 to 30-Sep-2021.The cost for Application
Maintenance & Support including business assurance, travel fees & expenses and contingency shall
not exceed $ 1,169,500.00(One Million One Hundred Sixty-Nine Thousand Five Hundred US Dollars)
The breakups of the cost are given below:
The Customer assumes that its team would be able to resolve some of the incidents by
themselves or would be able to perform some of the managed services tasks by their own in
Year-2 & Year-3. Hence, the inflow of tickets in Year - 2 & Year – 3 would remain below
25/month & 17/month respectively.
The Service provider may use the contingency amount for the remaining months of the year,
if the inflow of tickets goes beyond 25/month in Year-2 or 17/month in Year-3 for subsequent
2 months in a year.
o Monthly calculation methodology and review is provided in section 2.1 of this
document.
o Service provider will bill at the end of the fiscal year for months where ticket volume
went above 10% of budgeted count using the following matrix:
Case volume/month Additional Invoice
amount/month
Year - 2 > than 10% of 25/month <36 $2583.00
Year – 3 > than 10% of 17/month <26 $2583.00
>25 but <35 $4667.00
Additional effort to resolve tickets above 36/month would be charged on an hourly basis @
$175/hour.
The Customer will retain the contingency amount if the inflow of tickets does not go beyond
25/month in Year-2 or 17/month in Year-3.
5.2 Invoice and Payments
Year1 (B)Year2 Year3
Service Delivery Contract:Description Feb 19 - Sep 19 Oct 19 - Sep 20 Oct 20 - Sep 21
A. Business Consulting
Business Assurance Dedicated on-site resource (20% time)$47,500 $57,000 $57,000
Travel On-site Travel $19,000 $19,000 $19,000
B. IT Support Services
L2 Support Incident & problem resolution for L2 issues $76,000 $81,500 $81,500
Managed Services
Batch & Interface management;
release/deploy/change version management;
Service Catalog
$154,000 $200,000 $175,000
Availability Software & Management Monitoring software & databases ensuring
no significant downtime. $24,000 $36,000 $36,000
Contingency $31,000 $56,000
Total Contract $320,500 $424,500 $424,500
Page 73 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 25 of 33
The costs (section 5.1) shall be invoiced upfront on an annual basis.
Payments are due forty-five (45) days following invoicing. The total cost to the Customer for the
performance of the tasks contained in this SOW and engagement schedule shall not exceed the
amount shown, (i) except in the case of Change Orders agreed between the Parties or (ii) except in
case of any change to the preconditions and boundaries as described in section 2 & 5.1 of this SOW.
5.3 Pricing Schedule
The Service Provider shall invoice the Customer upfront in accordance with the following schedule (in
US dollars).
Invoice Date Amount($)
Feb-2019 $301,500.00
Oct-2020 $374,500.00
Oct-2021 $349,500.00
The invoice schedule, as defined hereinabove, shall exclude all travel, contingency, taxes and duties
(including but not limited to value added tax, withholding tax, local, state, and federal taxes, if any)
and all such amounts shall be additionally charged by the Service Provider to the Customer.
This budget has been estimated based on the preconditions and boundaries as described in section 2
& 5.1 in this SOW.
Both Parties commit to discuss and review, at least quarterly, the preconditions, boundaries and
budget and to make the necessary adjustments whenever needed to make sure the budget is aligned
to actual consumption.
5.4 Travel and Expense Guidelines
5.4.1 Reimbursement for Travel Expenses
The Customer shall reimburse for Expenses for travel as detailed in an amount not to exceed
$19,000.00. The Service Provider will invoice for travel 30 days after occurrence.
The Service provider Personnel will pursue value through the least expensive, yet most reasonable
and/or appropriate alternatives, and are expected to use preferred suppliers (i.e., airline, hotel, car
rental, etc.) where negotiated rates have been established.
The Service Provider would discuss with the Customer and seek for an approval prior to travel to the
Customer location. The Service Provider would invoice travel and other expenses on actuals as it incurs
along with the regular recurring monthly invoice. The Service Provider will report travel expenses
(budget vs actual) to the Customer time to time for further planning.
5.4.1.1 Airfare
The Customer shall reimburse for airfare not to exceed $1,000.00 round trip from locations within
North America, unless there is prior written approval from the Customer Project Manager. All air travel
Page 74 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 26 of 33
shall be “coach class” or that class that offers the lowest overall fare for the given itinerary. The Service
Provider shall book all air travel as far in advance as possible to take advantage of the air carrier’s best
rate.
If the Service providers’ employee elects to change a flight for their own convenience after the ticket
has been approved and booked, the Customer shall not reimburse for any charges incurred to change
the airline ticket and the Service Provider’ employee will be responsible for paying any charges
incurred to change the airline ticket.
If the Customer or Service Provider Manager request makes it is necessary to change a flight after it
has been approved and booked, the Service Provider will not be responsible for the charges incurred
to change the airline ticket, and the Customer shall fully reimburse the Service Provider for such flight
(in accordance with the terms of this SOW) provided they received prior approval from the City.
Alternate travel can be approved by the Service Provider and Customer Project Managers if the price
of the airline ticket is the same cost or less than the price of flying to the relevant Service Provider
Personnel’s home airport. This could include weekend stays that do not require a flight.
5.4.1.2 Parking
The Customer shall reimburse for actual cost of parking fees, tolls, and other road tariffs encountered
while traveling to/from airports or the Customer offices.
5.4.1.3 Mileage
Mileage rates will be consistent with the Internal Revenue Code annual rates posted while traveling
to/from airports or train stations.
5.4.1.4 Hotels
When overnight stay is appropriate, the Customer shall reimburse Service Provider for hotel lodging
expense, not to exceed $135 per night including applicable taxes or other tariffs. The Service Provider
agrees to pursue corporate or special rates at local hotels.
5.4.1.5 Rental Cars
Rental cars will be used for local travel at the destination city and the associated expenses (including
fuel) shall be recoverable and reimbursable.
Should two (2) to three (3) Service Provider Personnel travel to the destination city, a rental car shall
be shared whenever travel and work schedules permit. Should four (4) to seven (7) employees travel
to the destination city, two rental cars shall be shared, and reimbursable. Over seven (7) personnel
travelling to the destination city will be rare, and the number of rental cars will be considered on a
case by case basis.
Service Provider will rent cars with unlimited mileage and will work to minimize weekly rental car
costs.
Page 75 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 27 of 33
5.4.1.6 Per Diem
The Customer shall reimburse the Service Provider for each full day of travel/work that the relevant
Service Provider Personnel is on site with the Customer at a per diem rate of based on the amount
listed on the U.S. General Services Administration web site @
http://www.gsa.gov/portal/category/100120 for rates detailed for Round Rock, TX.
As a general rule of thumb, the break-out for the meals (incidentals are factored in within these
amounts) are as follows: Breakfast – 20%; Lunch – 30% and Dinner – 50%.
Per Diem charges will be invoiced without the requirement to submit meal expense receipts.
5.4.2 Invoicing Travel
Billing for travel related Expenses will be on a separate monthly invoice from the invoices from Service
Provider in respect of the Services. Expenses will be charged two (2) months after the Expenses have
occurred
Estimated travel costs are detailed as follows:
Hotel lodging per night according to GUS travel policy 135.00$ 4 540.00$
Meal allowances (per diem) per day according to GUS travel policy, official website
http://www.gsa.gov/portal/category/100120
Airfare economy class, actual costs assumed 457$/flight (incl. international flights)457.00$ 1 457.00$
Standard rental car assumed 45/day 45.00$ 4 180.00$
Fuel cost for rental car 15.00$ 1 15.00$
Taxi costs (travel between airport, hotel and customer)
Per Trip Total 1,587.00$
Number of trips 12
Total person days on-site 12 Weeks Project Total
No. of consultants on site / no. of trips 1 12 19,044.00$
Per Trip/FC
100 1 100.00$
Travel policy and assumptions Daily Rate Weekly Total
59.00$ 5 295.00$
Page 76 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 28 of 33
6 Appendixes
Appendix Description File name
Appendix A RACI model for each service Section 6.1.1
Appendix A Support coverage hours Section 6.1.2
Appendix B Summary of Services Section 6.2.1
Appendix B List of integrations Section 6.2.2
Appendix C Incident Management Process Incident Management Process.pdf
Appendix D Change Management Process Change Management Process.pdf
Appendix E Release Management Process Release Management Process.pdf
Appendix F Standard Catalogue GUS - STD Service Catalog_v1.0.xlx
6.1 Appendix A: RACI Model / Support Coverage
6.1.1 RACI
The table below lists the tasks and responsibilities in more detail using the standard RACI model. In
each Incident, following convention is used:
R: The Party is Responsible for the execution of this task according to the method as
specified in the mutual agreement;
A: The Party is Accountable for the end-result of the task;
C: The Party is Consulted during the task. This implies that the Party is either giving advice
during the execution of the task or performs a specific part of the task as mutually agreed;
I: The Party is (or can be) Informed of (the result of) the task.
Task CUSTOMER Service
Provider
Incident Management
Perform helpdesk function for end-users of the Solution, including the
registration of all issues and questions of users and the communication of
solutions to the end-user
AR I
Perform first line Incident investigation and resolution AR I
Perform second line Incident investigation and resolution ACI R
Escalate Incidents following the agreed-on procedures and templates
using the Service Provider helpdesk system
AR C
Perform third line Incident investigation and propose solutions to remedy
such Incidents
A R
Operate a helpdesk system for the use of the Customer Key-users to
register tickets to be handled by the Service Provider
AR
Create problem tickets based on Incidents that are caused by a larger issue A R
Create problem tickets if deemed necessary based on Incident recurrence CI AR
Page 77 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 29 of 33
Implement proposed configuration changes based on an Incident
investigation
AR C
Implement proposed changes in system usage instructions based on an
Incident investigation
AR C
Implement any software solutions to resolve bugs in the Customer specific
code and/or the Customer specific interfaces
C AR
Minor Changes (STD Service Catalogue)
Define STD Service catalogue CI AR
Approve STD Service catalogue & buy service efforts AR CI
Business impact analysis of the changes AR CI
UMAX system impact analysis of the changes CI AR
Impact analysis of the third-party peripheral systems (e.g. Ucentra, Esri
etc.)
AR CI
Perform the changes & testing within UMAX CI AR
Accept the changes in different environments AR CI
Advice on Go/No-Go for the changes based on the result of the tests AR CI
Decide on the Go/No Go for the changes AR
Release, Change, Deploy and Configuration Management
Define a yearly release schedule A R
Approve the yearly release schedule AR
Propose scope of the upcoming release AR
Escalate and propose any necessary changes to the release scope AR
Accept scope of the upcoming release AR
Ensure items in scope are delivered according to the release schedule A R
Create releasenotes for each release AR
Communicate availability of the different systems and environments to
end-users and customers
AR
Perform deploy activities for UMAX on the different environments A R
Perform deploy activities for Front Office on the different environments A R
Perform deploy activities for CSS, Cashiering on the different
environments
A R
Perform infrastructure related deploy activities on the different
environments
AR C
Implement any software solutions to provide enhancements in the
Customer specific code and/or the Customer specific interfaces
C AR
Coordinate all deploy activities on the different environments A R
Perform specific parametrization on the different environments as
needed for the release scope
A R
Perform specific data manipulation jobs on the different environments as
needed for the release scope
A R
Testing of delivered package in Service Provider Test environment CI AR
Perform acceptance testing on the different environments AR I
Accept the release on the different environments AR I
Advice on Go/No Go for the continuation of the release based on the
result of the tests
AR CI
Decide on the Go/No Go for the continuation of the release AR
Communicate progress of deploy activities to the Customer key-users AR
Page 78 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 30 of 33
Communicate progress of deploy activities to the Customer’s users and
customers
AR
SLA Management
Perform continuous follow up on the quality of Services delivered by the
Service Provider
AR
Report, on a monthly basis, on the Services delivered using the Service
Provider standard format
I AR
Present the monthly service report to the Customer C AR
Appoint a specific person within the Service Provider as a SPOC for the
Customer related to Service Delivery
I AR
Create and maintain a single governance and escalation organization
within the Service Provider to the Customer with all Services rendered to
Customer
I AR
Create and maintain a governance and escalation organization within the
Customer
AR I
Execute phase of the Operational Management (Batch & Interface)
Perform batch scheduling and scheduling of other processes A R
Ensure that all maintenance activities of related entities are known to all
parties involved
AR CI
Perform daily checks on the execution of the Nightly batch job &
interfaces on Business Days
A R
Assess all deviations from normal processing1 during the daily check A R
Report on all deviations from normal processing during the daily check AR
Evaluate issues related deviations from normal processing and propose
solutions for resolving the deviations
AC R
Resolve any issues related deviations that occur during normal processing AC R
Evaluate all business-related deviations from normal processing and
propose solutions for resolving the deviations
AR CI
Resolve any business-related deviations that occur during normal
processing
AR I
Evaluate all infrastructure related deviations from normal processing and
propose solutions for resolving the deviations
AR CI
Business Reconciliation and data validation AR CI
Report interface reconciliation related issues CI AR
Resolve & Reconciliation interface related issues within UMAX CI AR
Resolve & Reconciliation interface related issues within third parties AR CI
Performance & Availability Management
Monitor the performance & availability of the application and database
(SQL-Server) in the production environment through automated job
CI AR
Communication alerts need to be sent when the application & database
has failed P&A.
CI AR
Identify areas of poor application/program, database performance (e.g.
long running quires, DB growth etc.)
CI AR
Resolve poor application/program, database performance CI AR
Hardware & OS level issues & remediation AR CI
Normal processing is processing where results of the processing both with regard to number and type of errors and to duration of the
processing are within acceptable boundaries from a historical perspective or as can be expected based on system load
Page 79 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 31 of 33
RCA for recurring issues CI AR
Monthly status reporting & recommendations for improvement, if any CI AR
6.1.2 Support Coverage
Service Provider Team shall use its best efforts to provide support to the Customer’s business during
the below time zone.
Business Days Start End
Monday-Friday (except Federal US
holidays)
9 AM EST/EDT 5 PM EST/EDT
6.2 Appendix B: Service Levers / Integration List
6.2.1 Service Levers
Summary of the Services:
Service Lever Names In Scope
L2 Support Yes
L3 Support (UMAX Product issue resolution) Yes
L3 Support (MS AX2012) Yes
Custom component + Interface developed by
the Service Provider (Maintenance & Support)
Yes
Problem Management Yes
Minor Changes using STD catalogue (max 60-
person days of effort in a year)
Yes
Release, Change, Deploy and Configuration
Management
Yes
Batch & Interface Management Yes
SLA Management Yes
Availability & continuity and Capacity
management
Yes
System & Infrastructure management No
Find below the list which are supported by application Support Team.
Applications UMAX CIS, CSS, Front Office, Paymentus,
Cashiering (Mazik)
Version AX 2012
# of Customers (Accounts) < than 50,000
# of GUS Users < than 50
# of Interfaces Information is given below in section 6.2.2
Page 80 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 32 of 33
6.2.2 Integration List
Interface Frequency
Texas Disposal System
Export Customer Information 3
uCentra
Export customers 3
Export billing history 3
Export meters 3
Remote Connect/Disconnect Meters 4
Import Meter Reads 3
ESRI
Import Addresses 3
Export Premises and Services (+ Attributes)4
Import Premises Attributes 3
Import Service Attributes 3
Front Office > ESRI Map 4
My Permit Now
Check premises permits 4
RemitPlus - Import check payments in UMAX (payment transaction + image)
Transform and import payment file from RemitPlus 3
Transform and import cheque images from RemitPlus 3
Dataprose
Create / Export Zip file 3
Upload Zip File 3
Incode
Export and transform ledger transactions to Incode file 3
Export and transform refund requests to Incode 3
Princeton - Payment File
Transform and import payment file from Princeton 3
Checkfree - Payment File
Transform and import payment file from CheckFree 3
Metavante - Payment File
Transform and import payment file from Metavente 3
Infor - Assets
Import and create assets in UMAX inventory 3
Infor - Service Orders
Create a work order in Infor 4
Get work orders ON-HOLD in Infor 4
Cancel a work order in Infor 4
Get work orders COMPLETED in Infor 4
Milsoft - Export customer, service, meter and DNP information
Export Disconnect for Non-Pay (DNP)3
Export Customer, Service and Meter information 3
Cisco - Front Office IVR Integration
IVR - Front Office Integration 4
Paymentus Integration
Export CIF File 3
Export Broadcasts 4
Page 81 of 82
{00010366 / v / / GUS / ITINERIS / 01/17/2019}GUS-Application Maintenance & Support Statement of Work
Page 33 of 33
6.3 Appendix C: Incident Management Process
Incident
Management Process.pdf
6.4 Appendix D: Change Management Process
Change
Management Process.pdf
6.5 Appendix E: Release Management Process
Release
Management Process.pdf
6.6 Appendix F: Standard Catalogue
GUS - STD Service
Catalog_v1.xlsx
7 Approvals
Item # City of Georgetown City of Georgetown Itineris
Name Leticia Zavala Dale Ross John Beddingfield
Role Customer Care
Director
Mayor President
Signature
Date
Customer signature serves as an acceptance of the budget amount listed above as it relates to the description of work contained in
this Statement of Work. Your signature also indicates you have reviewed and agree to the scope of work as detailed in any
accompanying enclosures or attachments.
Page 82 of 82