Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda_GGAF_06.24.2020
Notice of Meeting for the General Gov ernment and F inance Adv isory B oard of the City of Georgetown June 24, 2020 at 4:30 P M at Georgetown P ublic L ibrary, 402 W 8th Street Georgetown, T X 78626 T he C ity of G eorgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require as s is tance in partic ipating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reas onable as s is tance, adaptations , or ac commodations will be provided upon request. P leas e c ontact the C ity S ec retary's O ffic e, at leas t three (3) days prior to the sc heduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or C ity Hall at 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626 for additional information; T T Y users route through R elay Texas at 711. P lease note that a quorum of the Ge ne ral Gover nment and F inanc e A dvisory B oard may not all be pr esent at the same physic al location. Some membe rs may inste ad participate in this mee ting fr om one or mor e r emote locations in an effor t to advanc e the public health goal of limiting face to fac e mee tings and to c ontain the spr ead of C O V I D-19. In addition, ther e may be occ asions whe n the audio transmission may not be c le ar or may be inte rr upted. In those instance s, the mee ting will continue so long as a quorum is still pre se nt. With the Gover nor ’s O rder, all C ity B uildings ar e following these proc edur es: Masks are reco mmended P hysical distancing; 6 fee t be twe en you and anyone not in your household P r actice good hygie ne and wash your hands If any of the se apply, do not visit: known close contact with C O V I D -19 P e rson, fever gre ater or e qual to 100.0 degr ee s F ahre nheit, diffic ulty bre athing or shortness of br eath, cough, loss of taste or smell, sore thr oat, c hills, headache, diar rhea or musc le pain. L egislativ e Regular Agenda A C ons ideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the F ebruary 26, 2020 meeting -- Danella Elliott, Executive As s is tant B Elec tion of Vic e C hair and S ec retary for the G eneral G overnment and F inance Advis ory Board -- Tommy G onzalez, Board C hair C R eview and dis cus s board purpose and bylaws -- Tommy G onzalez, Board C hair D R eview of the C ity C ounc il’s Boards and C ommissions Attendance P olicy --Danella Elliott, Board Liaison E P resentation and dis cus s ion with pos s ible ac tion regarding a utility technology review of the C ity’s C us tomer Information S ys tem and Meter Data Management sys tems -Laurie Brewer, As s is tant C ity Page 1 of 120 Manager F Disc ussion and possible s election of JP Morgan C has e for Bank Depos itory S ervices for a two year and eight month period beginning S eptember 1, 2020 through April 30, 2023, with options to renew for up to two additional one year terms (maximum of four years eight months ) - Elaine Wils on, C G F O , C ontroller Adjournment Ce rtificate of Posting I, R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary for the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas, do hereby c ertify that this Notic e of Meeting was posted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626, a plac e readily acc es s ible to the general public as required by law, on the _____ day of _________________, 2020, at __________, and remained s o posted for at leas t 72 c ontinuous hours prec eding the s cheduled time of said meeting. __________________________________ R obyn Dens more, C ity S ec retary Page 2 of 120 City of Georgetown, Texas Government and Finance Advisory Board June 24, 2020 S UB J E C T: C onsideration and pos s ible ac tion to approve the Minutes of the F ebruary 26, 2020 meeting -- Danella Elliott, Exec utive Assistant IT E M S UMMARY: F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: .. S UB MIT T E D B Y: Danella Elliott AT TAC H ME N T S: Description Type Draft Minutes 02.26.2020 Backup Material Page 3 of 120 Minutes of Meeting of the GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND FINANCE ADVISORY BOARD (GGAF) City of Georgetown, Texas Feb 26, 2020 The General Government and Finance Advisory Board met on Wednesday, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:30 PM at City Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr 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 defined 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 808 Martin Luther King Jr Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Board Members Present: City Staff Present: Tommy Gonzalez, Chair Chere’ Heintzmann, Secretary Stu McLennan James Bralski David Morgan, City Manager Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager Leigh Wallace, Finance Director Trish Long, Facilities Superintendent Stan Hohman, Fleet Manager Eric Johnson, CIP Manager Cindy Pospisil, Customer Care Ops Manager Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director Elaine Wilson, Controller Christi Rawls, Assistant Controller Bridget Weber, Assistant to the City Manager Mayra Cantu, Management Analyst Amy Mertink, Admin Assistant Others present: Adam McCane, Weaver and Tidwell representative Legislative Regular Agenda Tommy Gonzalez called the meeting to order at 4:31 p.m. A Review minutes from the Dec 4, 2019 General Government and Finance Advisory Board Meeting -Amy Mertink, Board Liaison Motion to approve by James Bralski, 2nd by Stu McLennan, approved 4-0 B Review and possible action to recommend acceptance of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and the independent audit for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2019. Elaine S. Wilson, Controller Elaine Wilson reviewed what the CAFR is and the requirements for it. She then went over the contents of the CAFR. Adam McCane reviewed the audit process and each step within it. He let the board know that Weaver is issuing an unmodified opinion of the city’s CAFR, which is the highest level. Tommy Gonzalez asked about new and closed funds being highlighted and Adam clarified that they are included but not called out. The board and team discussed this and determined it would be useful to add a summary page to highlight new and closed funds. It was also requested that the presentation to council include information on past audit findings that have been remediated. Motion to approve by James Bralski, 2nd by Chere Heintzmann, approved 4-0 Page 4 of 120 C Discussion and possible recommendation to approve issuance of a Purchase Order for utility bill printing and mailing services through 2/21/2021 to Dataprose LLC pursuant to a piggyback clause in an agreement with the City of Plano at an annual cost of $288,960. --Cindy Pospisil, Customer Care Manager; Leticia Zavala, Customer Care Director Cindy Pospisil explained the need for this purchase order and let the board know that this vendor has been used by the city since 2001. A RFP on this item will be done later this year. The board discussed electronic billing with the team and the team talked through the efforts that have been made to date. Additional efforts were discussed, including a campaign focused on the message to “help the city save your money” by choosing paperless billing. Motion to approve by James Bralski, 2nd by Chere Heintzmann, approved 4-0 D Consideration and possible action to approve purchasing authority for fuel card services and related products with Fleetcor Technologies dba Fuelman in amount not to exceed $875,000. – Stan Hohman, Fleet Manager. Stan Hohman let the board know this is a not to exceed amount for fuel card services, which has been well utilized. The amount is the same as the last request and we are currently well under it. Motion to approve by James Bralski, 2nd by Stu McLennan, approved 4-0 E General discussion of funding and use of the Facilities Internal Services Fund (ISF) and upcoming capital maintenance expenditures. – Trish Long, Facilities Manager; Eric Johnson, Facilities Director Trish Long reviewed the history of the ISF and went over upcoming projects. She showed what is included and what is not included in the Facility ISF. Trish also went over the timing and expense planning for the upcoming projects. No voting needed. Motion to adjourn meeting by James Bralski, 2nd by Stu McLennan, approved 4-0. Meeting adjourned at 5:57pm. __________________________________ ____________ Tommy Gonzalez Date Board Chair __________________________________ ____________ Chere’ Heintzman Date Board Secretary __________________________________ ____________ Amy Mertink Date Board Liaison Page 5 of 120 City of Georgetown, Texas Government and Finance Advisory Board June 24, 2020 S UB J E C T: Election of Vice C hair and S ecretary for the G eneral G overnment and F inanc e Advisory Board -- Tommy G onzalez, Board C hair IT E M S UMMARY: F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: .. S UB MIT T E D B Y: Karen F ros t, As s is tant C ity S ec retary Page 6 of 120 City of Georgetown, Texas Government and Finance Advisory Board June 24, 2020 S UB J E C T: R eview and disc uss board purpos e and bylaws -- Tommy G onzalez, Board C hair IT E M S UMMARY: T he purpos e of the G eneral G overnment and F inance Advis ory Board is to review and analyze the general government and finance activities of the C ity, to inc lude but not limited to the following areas: * F inance administration to include fisc al matters, debt and treas ury management and the C ity budget * Ac counting, to inc lude financial reporting * P urc hasing * Munic ipal C ourt * F acilities maintenanc e, inc luding cons truction and renovation of C ity fac ilities * Vehic le services * Information technology * C ompensation and benefits * C ity ins urance * And other related items as rec ommended by the C ity Manager F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: .. S UB MIT T E D B Y: Karen F ros t, As s is tant C ity S ec retary AT TAC H ME N T S: Description Type GGAF Bylaws approved and s igned 2015 Backup Material Page 7 of 120 Page 8 of 120 Page 9 of 120 Page 10 of 120 Page 11 of 120 Page 12 of 120 Page 13 of 120 City of Georgetown, Texas Government and Finance Advisory Board June 24, 2020 S UB J E C T: R eview of the C ity C ouncil’s Boards and C ommis s ions Attendanc e P olic y --Danella Elliott, Board Liais on IT E M S UMMARY: S ec. 2.36.010.D - Duties of members . of the C ode of O rdinanc es : Each Member is res ponsible to attend meetings prepared to disc uss the issues on the agenda. D.Attendanc e by Members is integral to s uc cess of the commission, committee or board. It is C ounc il policy to require a minimum of 75 perc ent attendanc e of each Member at eac h regularly s cheduled meeting inc luding s ubc ommittee meetings . A Member shall be allowed two excus ed absences for the Member's pers onal medical care, required medic al c are of a Member's immediate family member (as defined by C ity O rdinanc e), or Member's military s ervic e that shall not count against the 75 perc ent attendanc e requirement. Written notice s hall be sent to a Member and the Member's C ity C ounc il representative when it appears the Member may violate the attendance policy by being abs ent from more than 25 percent of regularly s cheduled meetings, including subcommittee meetings. Excessive absenteeism may res ult in the Member being replac ed by the C ouncil. If a Member is removed from a c ommittee, commission or board, that pos ition shall be cons idered vacant and a new Member s hall be appointed to the Board in ac cordance with S ection 2.36.040. F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: .. S UB MIT T E D B Y: Karen F ros t, As s is tant C ity S ec retary Page 14 of 120 City of Georgetown, Texas Government and Finance Advisory Board June 24, 2020 S UB J E C T: P res entation and disc ussion with possible action regarding a utility tec hnology review of the C ity’s C ustomer Information S ystem and Meter Data Management s ystems -Laurie Brewer, Assistant C ity Manager IT E M S UMMARY: Many decisions were guided with a previous vision for the Utility sys tems which have s inc e c hanged. T his pres entation reviews the C ity's history implementing utility tec hnology within Water, Elec tric , I T and C ustomer C are, in particular the C ustomer Information S ystem and Meter Data Management s ystems . R ecommendation of a possible review by G artner, Inc . to as s es s the s ystems . F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: $210,000.00 C onsultant F ee for G artner to do Analys is and As s es s ment. F unded by Elec tric , Water and I T funds . S UB MIT T E D B Y: Mayra C antu on behalf of Laurie Brewer, As s is tant C ity Manager AT TAC H ME N T S: Description Type CIS ASsessment and AMI-MDM Propos al Backup Material Utility Technology Review Pres entation Pres entation Page 15 of 120 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates.This presentation, including all supporting materials, is proprietary to Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates and is for the sole internal use of the intended recipients. Because this presentation may contain information that is confidential, proprietary or otherwise legally protected, it may not be further copied, distributed or publicly displayed without the express written permission of Gartner, Inc. or its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 CIS Assessment & AMI-MDM Analysis Proposal 15 May 2020 Engagement: 330063873 Page 16 of 120 1 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Cover Letter Dear Mr. Bryce: Gartner, Inc. (Gartner) is pleased to present the City of Georgetown (City) with this proposal to conduct an assessment and analysis of your Customer Information System (CIS), and Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) and Meter Data Management (MDM) systems. The key objectives of the engagement: ▪Evaluate the City’s CIS business processes against the current CIS system, identify gaps or areas for opportunities, and explore alternative options to improve the City’s CIS operations and supporting technologies ▪Evaluate the business value provided by the AMI and MDM systems to enable the City to meet its smart meter information needs Gartner Consulting understands the strategic importance of this initiative and will work with you to improve the City’s CIS operations and assess your AMI and MDM. ▪Our proven methodology combined with our seasoned practitioners allow us to execute with speed and confidence ▪Our perspective on the future direction of CIS, Advanced Metering Infrastructure, Meter Data Management and IoT engenders the development of an industry leading strategy ▪Our advice is independent and objective, so we focus on your immediate strategic needs with no downstream interests ▪We possess unparalleled knowledge of the vendor and solution marketplace to enable smart technology decisions ▪We will collaborate with you to deliver a City-specific actionable set of recommendations Our offer is valid through 15 June 2020. If this proposal represents your requirements, please sign the Authorization Page and return the entire proposal to William W ong at william.wong@gartner.com. Please let us know if you have any questions. We thank you for this opportunity and look forward to the possibility of partnering with the City on this important strategic initiative. Sincerely, William Wong Managing Partner, Gartner Consulting Cc: Allix Jackson, Account Executive Page 17 of 120 2 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Contents Section 1: Gartner Overview Section 2: Executive Summary Section 3: Scope of Work Section 4:Project Management Section 5: Appendix ▪Scope ▪Approach Detail ▪Deliverables Detail ▪Our Understanding and Gartner Response ▪Proposal Approach Overview ▪Project Team Biographies ▪Timeline ▪Project Team Overview ▪Project Management and Control ▪Assumptions ▪Investment Summary ▪Changes to Scope ▪Validity Period and Further Assurances ▪Authorization Page 18 of 120 3 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Section 1: Gartner Overview Page 19 of 120 4 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Gartner is the world leader in research and advisory services About Gartner ▪Founded in 1979 ▪15,000+ associates in 100+ offices around the world ▪32 consecutive quarters of double-digit growth ▪Member of the S&P 500 ▪Deep global insight into every major business function Clients we serve Customer Svc. & Support Finance Human Resources Information Technology Legal Marketing & Communications Sales & Service Supply Chain ▪300,000+ professionals across all business functions ▪12,000+ distinct organizations in more than 100 countries ▪C-suite members from small companies to global, multinational enterprises ▪74% of the Global 500 rely on Gartner for insight and advice 74% of the Global 500 About Gartner Page 20 of 120 5 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Research Industry’s largest database 135,793 documents across 1,372 technology and business topics Advisory Services Unique client perspective 2,000+ analysts conduct 380,000+ one-to-one client interactions annually Consulting Results on initiatives 2,000 custom engagements a year fueled by 14,000 peer benchmarks Events Networking with peers 55,000 professionals a year attend 75+ worldwide events About Gartner All Gartner services are grounded in our world-class Research insights Page 21 of 120 6 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Gartner Consulting capabilities are fueled by Research but contextualized to City of Georgetown’s specific business objectives Application Transformation Benchmark Analytics Data & Market Analytics Digital Business & Technology Infrastructure & Platforms •Application Strategy •Architecture and Integration •Development and Support (Agile/DevOps) •IT Spend and Cost Benchmarks •Price Benchmarks •Industry-Specialized Benchmarks •Data Management and Governance •Data Analytics and Insights •Market Opportunity Assessments •Digital and IT Strategy •Disruptive Technologies Strategies •Organization and Governance •I&O Strategy •Data Center Modernization •IT Service Management •Platform Strategy Contract Optimization Project & Portfolio Management Security & Risk Management Sourcing & Vendor Ecosystems •Optimize costs and reduce the risks of high-value, long- term, IT contracts •Project and Program Oversight •Project and Program Risk Assessments •Security Maturity and Capability Assessments •Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery •Threat and Resiliency Management •Adaptive Sourcing Strategy •Vendor Selection and Negotiations •Vendor Management Consulting Solution Areas About Gartner Consulting Page 22 of 120 7 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Utility clients rely on Gartner insights to support their mission-critical priorities Page 23 of 120 8 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Section 2: Executive Summary ▪Our Understanding and Gartner Response ▪Gartner’s Proposed Approach to Conducting the CIS Assessment and the AMI-MDM Analysis Page 24 of 120 9 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Key Objectives Objective 1 ▪Evaluate the City’s CIS business processes against the current CIS system, identify gaps or areas for opportunities, and explore alternative options to improve the City’s CIS operations and supporting technologies Objective 2 ▪Evaluate the business value provided by the AMI and MDM systems to enable the City to meet its smart meter information needs Workstream 1: CIS Assessment Workstream 2: AMI-MDM Analysis Page 25 of 120 10 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Executive Summary –Workstream 1 (CIS Assessment) Our Understanding and Background Gartner’s Proposed Response City of Georgetown (the City) has invited Gartner to submit a proposal to conduct an assessment of their new CIS (Itineris), which they implemented in 2018. ▪The CIS implementation was a migration from a legacy system that involved a significant level of complexity/customization with the Itineris implementation ▪The new CIS has experienced several issues, leading to: –severe challenges in Billing operations –a large volume of CIS-related tickets ▪The City has concerns that the lift-and-shift strategy and the complexity of some of their current business processes may be contributing to their CIS issues ▪City of Georgetown seeks an independent assessment of their CIS implementation in order to facilitate: –remediation of outstanding billing issues –reduction in operational challenges –improved business outcomes Gartner proposes to conduct an assessment and analysis of City of Georgetown’s CIS implementation and develop an approach for resolving the current challenges with the implementation. ▪Gartner will partner with City of Georgetown for the following: –Conduct a review of the City’s CIS business processes, business capabilities, and business needs –Complete an assessment of the functional capabilities of the Itineris CIS –Conduct a gap analysis between the City’s business needs and the CIS’ functional capabilities –Conduct a high-level analysis of open CIS-related tickets, including categories, distribution, trends and ticket management processes –Develop a set of recommendations and a prioritized high- level roadmap for a going-forward strategy (including alternative options) to mitigate outstanding billing issues and closing gaps between current CIS capabilities and the City’s business needs –Recommend metrics for measuring CIS value –Provide insights into CIS best practices among peer utilities CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 26 of 120 11 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Executive Summary –Workstream 2 (AMI-MDM Analysis) Our Understanding and Background Gartner’s Proposed Response City of Georgetown (the City) has invited Gartner to submit a proposal to conduct an analysis of their Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) and their Meter Data Management (MDM) systems. ▪The City seeks an independent assessment of how they utilize the capabilities of their AMI and MDM systems ▪The City would like a recommendation on whether their smart- meter data acquisition and processing business needs are being met using the AMI and MDM systems Gartner proposes to conduct a high-level assessment of the business value provided by the City of Georgetown’s AMI and MDM systems. ▪Gartner will partner with City of Georgetown for the following: –Conduct an assessment of the City’s AMI and MDM system functionality –Conduct an analysis of the City’s business needs that are currently being met using the AMI and MDM platforms –Develop recommendations to best serve the smart meter information needs of the business –Recommend metrics for measuring AMI-MDM value, and provide comparable benchmark data –Provide insights into AMI-MDM utilization best practices among peer utilities AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Page 27 of 120 12 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Section 3: Scope of Work ▪Scope ▪Approach Detail ▪Deliverables Detail Page 28 of 120 13 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Workstream 1: CIS Assessment Page 29 of 120 14 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Utility CIS Functionality Account Management Product / Service Management Order Processing Rate Design Billing Bill Presentment Payment Processing Accounts Receivable Collections Gartner Magic Quadrant for Utilities Customer Information Systems (ID: G00336433) Customer Interaction Channels Digital Interaction Channels Customer Self- Service ChannelsCRM MDM Financial Information Outage Management Work & Asset Management Payment Gateway Content Management Reporting & Analytics Data Warehouse Bolt-ons / Integrations CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 30 of 120 15 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Sample CIS Business Capability Model Order Processing Service Order Completion Field/ Service Order Management Collections Collections Management Special Collection Program Support Delinquency & Bankruptcy Management Deposit Management Write Offs Account Adjustment Management Rate Design Rate & Rate Plan Management Account Management Customer Account Management Service Point Management Product/Rate Association Self Service Support Customer Service Script Support Special Program Management Account Search Fraud Management Customer Contact Management Accounts Receivable Payment Plan Management Financial System Integration Accounts Receivable Management Product/Service Management Service Activation/ Deactivation Work & Asset Management Integration Emergency Call Management In CIS Scope Integration Payment Processing Third-party Payment Processing In-house Payment Processing Payment Reversals Payment Reconciliation Customer Payment Management Statement Preparation Internal Bill Messages Statement Presentment Statement Printing External Bill Messages Billing Special Program/ Service Billing Service Rating & Billing Fee Calculation Budget Billing Bill Estimation Usage Data Management Cancel/Rebill Processing Tax Calculation Retail Choice ManagementCI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 31 of 120 16 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Sample CIS Business Capability Model Assessment Artifact Order Processing Service Order Completion Field/ Service Order Management Collections Collections Management Special Collection Program Support Delinquency & Bankruptcy Management Deposit Management Write Offs Account Adjustment Management Rate Design Rate & Rate Plan Management Account Management Customer Account Management Service Point Management Product/Rate Association Self Service Support Customer Service Script Support Special Program Management Account Search Fraud Management Customer Contact Management Accounts Receivable Payment Plan Management Financial System Integration Accounts Receivable Management Product/Service Management Service Activation/ Deactivation Work & Asset Management Integration Emergency Call Management Major gaps exist Integration Payment Processing Third-party Payment Processing In-house Payment Processing Payment Reversals Payment Reconciliation Customer Payment Management Statement Preparation Internal Bill Messages Statement Presentment Statement Printing External Bill Messages Billing Special Program/ Service Billing Service Rating & Billing Fee Calculation Budget Billing Bill Estimation Usage Data Management Cancel/Rebill Processing Tax Calculation Retail Choice Management Minor gaps exist Minimal/no gaps exist CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 32 of 120 17 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Gartner will conduct an assessment and analysis of the City’s CIS functionality and processes in order to develop recommendations to enhance the services and value it provides to the organization. This will include: ▪Data collection and CIS current state assessment including: ‒A high-level assessment of key business processes such as Rating, Billing, and customer record management, and key best practice recommendations utilized among peer Utilities ‒An assessment of met and unmet CIS operational requirements ‒Analysis of the Itineris CIS’ functional capabilities, including a high level assessment of interfaces ‒A high-level assessment of key CIS issues and the support process for billing issues ‒An analysis of gaps between business needs and CIS capabilities ‒Definition of metrics for measuring value derived from the CIS ▪Recommendations, including: ‒Initiatives to enhance the City’s CIS implementation (including alternative options) ‒Key CIS utilization best practices Project Scope The scope of this project includes: People (Organization)Process and Technology Location (Geography) ▪City of Georgetown’s core CIS team ▪Key CIS process owners and functional users ▪Other key IT stakeholders ▪CIS business process ▪CIS configured functionality (Itineris) ▪Discovery interviews and workshops will be conducted remotely via teleconference bridge CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 33 of 120 18 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Perform Current State Business Capability & Needs Assessment Approach Overview Conduct Project Kickoff 1 Perform Current State CIS Capability & Support Assessment Conduct Alternatives Analysis 3 Define Improvement Actions & Roadmap 4 Gartner Activities ▪Set up project management activities for the engagement and conduct kick-off ▪Establish the list of participants for the ‘discovery’ process and the overall workshop schedule ▪Review City submitted current state documentation ▪Conduct up to 2 interviews with key IT and business resources Deliverables ▪Kick-off materials Duration ▪Week 1 Kickoff Gartner Activities ▪Review the implemented CIS functionality (including high- level interface assessment) ▪Review key CIS billing issues, trends and support process ▪Conduct up to 6 interviews/discovery sessions with key IT resources Deliverables ▪Current State CIS Capability and Support Findings Duration ▪Weeks 3 -5 Gartner Activities ▪Conduct analysis to determine gaps between business needs and CIS functional capabilities ▪Recommend metrics to measure CIS business value ▪Collate CIS utilization best practices amongst peers ▪Identify candidate CIS implementation and support improvement initiatives and alternatives ▪Conduct workshops to confirm current state and analysis results Deliverables ▪Gap Analysis ▪Assessment Report (including current state, support recommendations and CIS best practices) ▪CIS Value Metrics Duration ▪Weeks 5 -7 Gartner Activities ▪Conduct a workshop to review and prioritize identified initiatives ▪Develop CIS implementation improvement roadmap ▪Prepare and present executive report Deliverables ▪Roadmap & Improvement Initiatives ▪Executive Report Duration ▪Weeks 7 -8 INITIATION AND BASELINE RECOMMENDATIONS & ROADMAPANALYSIS Gartner Activities ▪Conduct high-level assessment of CIS business processes ▪Assess CIS business capabilities using the Gartner Business Capability Model ▪Review current CIS-related business needs ▪Conduct up to 6 interviews/discovery sessions with key IT and business resources Deliverables ▪Current State Business Capability & Needs Findings Duration ▪Weeks 1 -3 2 5 CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 34 of 120 19 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Gartner anticipates completion of this CIS Assessment engagement over an 8 week timeframe* *This schedule is dependent on the assumptions included in this proposal. Weekly status call Step 2 –Business Capability & Needs Assessment Step 3 –CIS Capability & Support Assessment Step 4 –Alternatives Analysis Step 5 –Roadmap & Final Report Key Deliverables ▪Kick-off meeting ▪Project plan ▪Gap analysis ▪CIS value metrics ▪CIS best practices ▪Recommend- ations ▪Roadmap ▪Summary Executive report ▪Current state Business findings Step 1 –Project Kickoff Workshop Executive summary ▪Current state Technology findings Workshop CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 35 of 120 20 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Objective ▪Initiate the project by setting the foundation for a successful engagement that is delivered on time and within budget, and achieves business objectives Activities Performed by Gartner ▪Hold kickoff meeting with core leadership team ▪Assess CIS business capabilities using the Gartner Business Capability Model ▪Understand CIS-related business processes ▪Review current CIS-related business needs / documentation ▪Conduct up to 2 interviews/discovery sessions with key IT and business leadership City Responsibilities ▪Ensure attendance at kickoff meeting by Project Sponsor, Project Manager, and other key stakeholders as determined prior to kickoff ▪Identify key stakeholders for interviews and workshops, schedule interviews and workshops, participate as required ▪Provide documentation as requested Deliverable(s) ▪Kickoff Materials ▪Project Plan ▪Status report template Time Frame ▪Week 1 Assumptions ▪Gartner will conduct up to two (2) interviews with key stakeholders (1 to 3 participants each) Step 1: Project Kick-Off Setting the foundation for successful engagement Step 5 CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 36 of 120 21 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Objective ▪Gain an understanding of current CIS-related business capabilities and needs Activities Performed by Gartner ▪Analyze the City’s CIS-related business capabilities using the Gartner Business Capability Model ▪Conduct high-level assessment of current CIS-related business processes ▪Assess met and unmet CIS-related business needs ▪Conduct up to 6 interviews/discovery sessions with key representatives from the business and IT City Responsibilities ▪Ensure attendance at meetings by Project Sponsor, Project Manager, and other key stakeholders as determined prior to kickoff ▪Schedule interviews and workshops, and participate as required ▪Provide documentation as requested Deliverable(s) ▪Current State Business Capability & Needs Findings Time Frame ▪Weeks 1-3 Assumptions ▪Gartner will conduct up to six (6) interviews with key stakeholders (1 to 3 participants each) ▪Gartner may require additional follow-up meetings to conduct further due diligence and clarifications where appropriate ▪Detailed business process analysis is not in scope Step 2: Perform Current State Business Capability & Needs Assessment Establish a common understanding of the current state Step 5 CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 37 of 120 22 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Step 3: Perform Current State CIS Capability & Support Assessment Establish a common understanding of the current state Objective ▪Gain understanding of the configured/implemented functional capabilities of the current CIS implementation (Itineris) Activities Performed by Gartner ▪Conduct up to 6 interviews/discovery sessions with key IT resources to: –Assess CIS functionality as currently implemented at the City –Conduct high-level assessment of CIS interfaces –Conduct high-level assessment of billing issues and trends City Responsibilities ▪Ensure attendance at and participation in workshop meetings by Project Sponsor, Project Manager and other key stakeholders, as determined prior to meeting ▪Provide documentation as requested ▪Review, and provide timely and substantive feedback on working documents and interim deliverables ▪Review, and approve deliverables, as necessary Deliverable(s) ▪Current State CIS Capability and Support Findings Time Frame ▪Weeks 3-5 Assumptions ▪Gartner will conduct up to six (6) interviews with key stakeholders (1 to 3 participants each) ▪Information to support the current state CIS Capability and Support assessment will be obtained through interviews and documentation. Direct access to the CIS application and review of application configuration / code is out of scope. Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 38 of 120 23 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Step 4: Conduct Alternatives Analysis Develop analysis of CIS implementation, support gaps and alternative options Objective ▪Identify gaps between the current CIS implementation and support in comparison to business needs Activities Performed by Gartner ▪Conduct analysis to determine gaps between business needs and CIS functional capabilities ▪Conduct high-level assessment of CIS support process ▪Identify trends in Billing tickets ▪Recommend metrics to measure CIS value ▪Collate CIS utilization best practices ▪Identify initiatives: –Candidates for improvement of the CIS as currently implemented –Alternatives to the current CIS implementation –CIS support process improvement (high level) ▪Conduct workshop to confirm current state and analysis results City Responsibilities ▪Ensure attendance at and participation in workshop meetings by Project Sponsor, Project Manager and other key stakeholders, as determined prior to meeting ▪Provide documentation as requested ▪Review, and provide timely and substantive inputs and feedback on working documents and interim deliverables ▪Review, and approve deliverables, as necessary Deliverable(s) ▪CIS Assessment Report (including current state, support process improvement recommendations and CIS best practices) ▪Gap Analysis ▪Recommended metrics for measuring CIS value Time Frame ▪Weeks 5-7 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 39 of 120 24 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Step 5: Define Improvement Actions & Roadmap Develop comprehensive recommendations and roadmap Objective ▪Develop a list of actions that can be taken and a high-level roadmap for making improvements to the City’s CIS implementation Activities Performed by Gartner ▪Lead workshop to review and prioritize CIS improvement initiatives ▪Develop roadmap for CIS implementation improvement ▪Develop and present executive report Assumptions ▪Scope does not include development of duration, cost or resource estimates for improvement roadmap ▪Scope does not include fit analysis, implementation duration, cost or resource estimates for alternative solutions City Responsibilities ▪Review, and provide timely and substantive feedback on working documents and interim deliverables ▪Review and approve final deliverables Deliverable(s) ▪Roadmap and Improvement Initiatives ▪Executive Report Time Frame ▪Weeks 7-8 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 40 of 120 25 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Approach Detail Summary of Deliverables Step Deliverables Step 1: Conduct Project Kick-Off ▪Kickoff Materials ▪Project plan ▪Weekly status report template Step 2: Perform Current State Business Capability Assessment ▪Current State Assessment of Business Capabilities and Needs Step 3: Perform Current State CIS Capability Assessment CIS Issue Assessment and Billing Support Assessment ▪Current State Assessment of CIS Functional Capabilities and Support Step 4:Conduct Alternatives Analysis ▪Gap Analysis (between capabilities and business needs) ▪Assessment Report (including current state, support process improvement recommendations and CIS best practices) ▪CIS Value Metrics Step 5: Define Improvement Actions & Roadmap ▪Roadmap and Improvement Initiatives ▪Executive Report CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 41 of 120 26 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Workstream 2: AMI –MDM Analysis Page 42 of 120 27 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 AMI and MDM Platform (illustrative) Service Consumption Points Smart Meters Wide Area Communication Network AMI Head End System MDM System Downstream Systems (CIS, OMS, WMS, GIS, Data Warehouse, BI platform etc.) Raw Interval Usage Data Collated Usage Data Operations-ready Usage Data AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Service Provisioning Commands Service Provisioning Instructions Service Provisioning Requests Meter Status Data Meter Status Data Operations-ready Meter Status Data Page 43 of 120 28 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Project Scope People (Organization)Process and Technology Location (Geography) ▪City of Georgetown’s core AMI and MDM team ▪Key AMI and MDM process owners and functional users ▪Other key IT stakeholders ▪AMI and MDM functionality ▪AMI and MDM supporting processes ▪Discovery interviews and workshops will be conducted via teleconference bridge Gartner will conduct an assessment of the City of Georgetown’s AMI and MDM systems in order to determine the business value delivered to the City by these systems. This will include: ▪AMI and MDM system current state functionality review ▪AMI and MDM system business needs assessment ▪Metrics recommendation for measuring AMI-MDM value ▪Reporting on AMI-MDM utilization best practices among peer utilities ▪Final assessment and recommendation development The scope of this project will include: AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Page 44 of 120 29 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Workstream 2 (AMI-MDM Analysis) Approach Overview Perform MDM Business Needs Assessment 2 Gartner Activities ▪Conduct a high level analysis of the business needs that are supported by and desired from the AMI and MDM system ▪Conduct interviews/ discovery sessions with select IT and business resources Deliverables ▪AMI and MDM Business Needs Findings Duration ▪Weeks 2 -3 Conduct Business Value Analysis 3 Gartner Activities ▪Conduct analysis to determine the value provided to the City by the AMI and MDM systems ▪Develop recommendations to best serve the smart meter information needs of the business ▪Develop recommendation for metrics to measure AMI-MDM business value ▪Collate industry best practice insights for AMI-MDM utilization Deliverables ▪Business Value Analysis (including AMI-MDM value metrics) ▪AMI-MDM Best Practices Duration ▪Week 3 INITIATION AND BASELINE ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Perform AMI and MDM Current State Assessment Gartner Activities ▪Gain a high level understanding of the functionality provided by the City’s AMI and MDM systems ▪Conduct interviews/ discovery sessions with select IT and business leadership Deliverables ▪Current State AMI and MDM functionality Findings Duration ▪Weeks 1 -2 1 Develop Final Report 4 Gartner Activities ▪Prepare final assessment report ▪Conduct a workshop to review and validate assessment results, including current state findings, business needs findings, business value analysis and final recommendation ▪Prepare and present executive report Deliverables ▪Assessment Report ▪Executive Summary Duration ▪Week 4 AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Page 45 of 120 30 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Gartner anticipates completion of this AMI-MDM Analysis engagement over a 4 week timeframe* *This schedule is dependent on the assumptions included in this proposal. Weekly status call Step 1 –AMI & MDM Current State Assessment Step 2 –AMI & MDM Business Needs Assessment Step 4 –Final Report Workshop Executive summary Step 3 –Business Value Analysis Key Deliverables ▪Kick-off meeting ▪Project plan ▪Assessment Report ▪Executive Summary report ▪Current state findings ▪AMI and MDM Business Needs ▪Business Value Analysis ▪AMI-MDM value metrics recommendation ▪AMI-MDM Utilization best practices AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Page 46 of 120 31 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Objective ▪Gain an understanding of the functionality provided by the City’s AMI and MDM systems Activities Performed by Gartner ▪Review existing City of Georgetown AMI and MDM-related documentation ▪Continue interviews with key stakeholders to assess the functionality provided by the City’s AMI and MDM systems, including integration with downstream systems and known issues (if any) ▪Interview participants are anticipated to include representatives of the business as well as IT and OT as applicable City of Georgetown Responsibilities ▪Ensure attendance in interview meetings by Project Manager and other key stakeholders as determined prior to kickoff ▪Schedule interviews and workshops, participate as required ▪Provide documentation as requested Deliverable(s) ▪Current State AMI and MDM Functionality Findings Time Frame ▪Weeks 1-2 Assumptions ▪Gartner will conduct up to four (4) interviews with key stakeholders ▪Gartner analysis will be based on AMI and MDM functional capabilities gathered from interviews of City resources ▪Gartner will not have direct access to any City applications or databases ▪Gartner may require additional follow-up meetings to conduct further due diligence and clarifications where appropriate Step 1: Perform AMI and MDM Current State Assessment Establish a common understanding of the current state AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Page 47 of 120 32 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Step 2: Perform AMI and MDM Business Needs Assessment Establish a common understanding of business needs Objective ▪Gain a high-level understanding of the City’s business needs met by/expected from the AMI and MDM systems Activities Performed by Gartner ▪Conduct interviews with key stakeholders to assess the needs of the business that are met/not met through use of the AMI and MDM systems City of Georgetown Responsibilities ▪Ensure attendance at and participation in workshop meetings by Project Manager and key stakeholders, as determined prior to meeting ▪Provide documentation as requested ▪Provide MDM needs data to Gartner as requested ▪Review, and provide timely and substantive feedback on working documents and interim deliverables Deliverable(s) ▪Current State Business Needs Findings Time Frame ▪Weeks 2-3 Assumptions ▪Gartner will conduct up to two (2) interviews with key stakeholders ▪Gartner analysis will be based on MDM functionality requirements gathered from interviews of City resources. ▪Gartner will not have direct access to any City applications or databases ▪Gartner may require additional follow-up meetings to conduct further due diligence and clarifications where appropriate Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Page 48 of 120 33 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Step 3: Conduct Business Value Analysis Develop analysis of business value provided by the AMI and MDM systems Objective ▪Determine the value the business is currently receiving from the City’s AMI and MDM platform Activities Performed by Gartner ▪Perform analysis to identify business value delivered by the AMI and MDM systems ▪Develop recommendations to best serve the smart meter information needs of the business ▪Recommend metrics to measure AMI-MDM value ▪Collate AMI-MDM utilization best practices among peer utilities City of Georgetown Responsibilities ▪Ensure attendance at and participation in workshop meetings by Project Sponsor, Project Manager and other key stakeholders, as determined prior to meeting ▪Provide documentation as requested ▪Review, and provide timely and substantive inputs and feedback on working documents and interim deliverables ▪Review and approve final deliverables Deliverable(s) ▪Business Value Analysis ▪Recommended metrics for measuring AMI-MDM value ▪Utility industry AMI-MDM utilization best practices Time Frame ▪Week 3 Assumptions ▪Development of the business value analysis will be dependent on the outcomes of the AMI and MDM functionality analysis and business needs analysis Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Page 49 of 120 34 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Step 4: Develop Assessment Report and Recommendation Objective ▪Develop and present assessment findings and a final recommendation Activities Performed by Gartner ▪Develop a Final Assessment Report ▪Conduct workshop to: –Confirm analysis results –Review recommendations ▪Prepare and present executive summary City of Georgetown Responsibilities ▪Ensure attendance at and participation in workshop meetings by Project Sponsor, Project Manager and other key stakeholders, as determined prior to meeting ▪Review, and provide timely and substantive feedback on working documents and interim deliverables ▪Review and approve final deliverables Deliverable(s) ▪Assessment Report ▪Executive Summary Report Time Frame ▪Week 4 Assumptions ▪Gartner will conduct one (1) workshop with key stakeholders ▪The final recommendation for business value provided by the AMI and MDM systems will be developed based on the understanding of the functional capabilities and business needs of the City’s AMI and MDM systems acquired through the previous steps. ▪Other considerations (technical, licensing, financial, resource impacts etc.) are outside the scope of this engagement Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Page 50 of 120 35 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Approach Detail Summary of Deliverables Step Deliverables Step 1: Perform AMI and MDM Current State Assessment ▪Current State Assessment Report Step 2: Perform AMI and MDM Business Needs Assessment ▪AMI and MDM Business Needs Report Step 3:Conduct Business Value Analysis ▪Business Value Analysis Report ▪AMI-MDM Value Metrics Report ▪AMI-MDM Utilization Best Practices Step 4:Develop and present Final Report ▪Assessment Report ▪Executive Summary ReportAM I -MD M A n a l y s i s Page 51 of 120 36 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Section 4: Project Management ▪Timeline ▪Project Management and Control ▪Project Team Overview ▪Assumptions ▪Investment Summary ▪Changes to Scope ▪Validity Period and Further Assurances ▪Authorization Page 52 of 120 37 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Gartner proposes delivering the two workstreams in parallel over an 8 week timeframe* *This schedule is dependent on the assumptions included in this proposal. Weekly status call Step 2 –Business Capability & Needs Assessment Step 3 –CIS Capability & Support Assessment Step 4 –Alternatives Analysis Step 5 –Roadmap & Final Report Step 1 –Project Kickoff Workshop Executive summaryWorkshop Step 1 –Current State Assessment Step 2 –Business Needs Assessment Step 4 –Final Report Executive summaryStep 3 –Business Value Analysis AM I -MD M A n a l y s i s CI S A s s e s s m e n t Page 53 of 120 38 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 ▪A number of crucial activities are accomplished via Gartner’s project management process, namely: ▪Our project management process guides reporting, risk mitigation and project control throughout and includes: –Weekly written status report including project progress, key activities executed/planned and risks/issues –Gartner will be in constant communication with stakeholders to ensure full awareness of activities, the associated timeline and actions required to ensure efficient control of project change –Specifying project stakeholder interaction Project Management and Control Progress Reporting Risk Management Performance Metrics Quality Deliverables Budget Management Schedule Management Client Communication Page 54 of 120 39 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Project Team Overview Organization Chart Gartner has created an organization structure for this project that ensures high -level sponsorship and quality assurance, strong day-to-day project management, a focused team of project consultants, and deep subject matter expertise. Proposed team members are shown below. Gartner will be able to confirm resources upon execution of this SOW. City Sponsor Chris Bryce City Project Manager TBD Gartner Engagement Manager Sudeep Kappadan Gartner Utility Consultant TBD Gartner Research Analyst Ethan Cohen Gartner Managing Partner Will Wong Gartner Account Partner Allix Jackson Gartner SME & Quality Assurance Alfredo Villalobos Gartner Research Analyst Zarko Sumic Page 55 of 120 40 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Gartner Associate Functional Role Responsibilities William Wong Engagement Sponsor ▪Ensure that Gartner activities support City goals ▪Build and maintain a long-standing relationship with City ▪Provide high-level oversight to the project and become more heavily involved should any issue resolution be necessary Sudeep Kappadan Engagement/Project Manager ▪Be responsible for the day-to-day management of project initiatives ▪Ensure that project deliverables are completed on time and meet the Gartner quality standards ▪Act as the primary point of contact for the Gartner team ▪Work closely with City to ensure that Gartner is meeting its needs Alfredo Villalobos Quality Assurance Specialist ▪Provide day-to-day consulting support for project steps ▪Provide subject matter expertise as needed throughout the project ▪Participate in deliverable creation, deliverable review and client presentations as needed ▪Provide quality assurance review of Gartner project plan and Gartner deliverables throughout the project ▪Ensure value through use of the Gartner Project Management Life Cycle detailed in this document TBD Project Consultant ▪Provide day-to-day consulting support for project steps ▪Be supported by additional project consultants as needed Ethan Cohen Zarco Sumic Research Analyst ▪Support the Gartner project team by providing a context-sensitive perspective to issues specific to City based on Gartner industry-leading research ▪Participate in analysis and comparisons, and review deliverables as needed Project Team Overview Gartner Roles and Responsibilities Page 56 of 120 41 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Project Team Overview City Roles and Responsibilities Role Estimated Time Responsibilities City Project Manager 20-25% of time throughout the engagement for: weekly status calls, scheduling and logistics, workshops, validation sessions ▪Attend weekly status meetings ▪Provide supporting documentation ▪Identify participants for interviews and workshops ▪Logistics for interviews, workshops, and other on-site activities ▪Gartner Point-of-Contact (POC) City Subject Matter Experts 15-20% of time for the duration of the engagement for weekly status calls, workshops and draft deliverable validation sessions ▪Provide supporting documentation ▪Participate with interviews and/or workshops ▪Participate with review and validation of deliverables ▪Participate with workshops throughout engagement ▪Provide input and feedback of draft deliverables to finalize City Key Stakeholders 10-15% of time during on-site interviews (1 to 1.5 hours per interview) and workshops ▪Participate with interviews and follow up, as needed ▪Participate with workshops throughout engagement Page 57 of 120 42 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Assumptions Page 1 of 2 The deliverables, schedule, and pricing in this document are based on the scope, approach, and the following assumptions. City Participation ▪City will designate a project lead to act as the primary point of contact for this engagement. The project lead will be expec ted to work closely with the Gartner employees as needed and will: (a) approve project priorities, detailed task plans and schedules; (b) facilitate the scheduling of Gartner interviews with appropriate client personnel; (c) notify Gartner in writing of any project or performance issues; and (d) assist in resolving project issues that may arise ▪The work effort described in this proposal assumes that City personnel are available to assist in the project as defined in t his Proposal, per the project schedule and to participate in discovery, clarification, and validation interviews/discussions/work sessions in a timely manner and on an ad hoc basis as needed. If City personnel are not available, a change of scope may be necessary ▪City will schedule the resources for project interviews, discussions, and work sessions and provide meeting facilities as nec essary ▪City will make resources available for interviews and workshops to be defined in the project plan outlined in Step 1 of this proposal ▪City will review and approve the final deliverable within five (5) business days. If no formal approval or rejection is received within that time, the deliverable is considered to be accepted by City Page 58 of 120 43 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Assumptions Page 2 of 2 Data Collection ▪Existing documentation will be made available to the Gartner team as needed per the workstream detailed project plans ▪Project pricing is based on the assumption that Gartner will conduct up to sixteen (16) interviews (14 for CIS Assessment and 6 for AMI- MDM Analysis) of City staff members (in group or individual settings) and that the City will arrange all sessions with City p ersonnel. Additionally, Gartner is prepared to conduct up to three (3) validation workshops (2 for CIS Assessment and 1 for AMI -MDM Analysis) ▪Existing application functionality and business needs inventory exists with information that has been validated within the City ▪All interviews, discussions, work sessions will take place via telephone as described in this proposal and/or as agreed to at project kickoff Place of Performance ▪Due to the COVID-19 situation, all project work will be conducted remotely through online meetings and collaboration tools General Assumptions ▪Availability of key personnel as outlined in the project biographies section of the Appendix are available at an mutually agreed to start date. As the actual project start date is finalized, proposed individuals may not be available. In this event, we will work with th e City to identify alternative personnel with appropriate skills and background ▪All deliverables will be developed using Microsoft products (for example, Project, Excel, Word and PowerPoint) ▪Detailed/in-depth review of business processes, product capabilities, system architecture and infrastructure, and support proces ses are excluded from the scope of this project ▪Any requests for additional information (beyond the details described in the tasks above) that are made by the City will be considered a change in scope for this engagement and will be handled accordingly (see Changes to Scope section of this proposal) Page 59 of 120 44 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Investment Summary ▪Gartner will conduct the Consulting steps outlined in this Proposal for a firm -fixed price of USD $210,000. Gartner will submit invoices as outlined in the schedule below: Workstream Step Deliverable(s)Total 1: C I S A s s e s s m e n t Step 1.1: Project Kickoff Project Kick-off Materials, Project Plan $14,500 Step 1.2: Data Collection & Current State Review Current State Business Capability Assessment $45,000 Step 1.3: Assessment & Analysis Strategies Current State CIS Capability Assessment $45,000 Step 1.4: Recommendations & Roadmap Analysis and Assessment $40,000 Step 1.5: Final Roadmap Final Report and Roadmap $25,000 ▪Both workstreams and their respective steps are bundled into the fixed fee price of $210,000. Any changes to workstreams and/or reduction to steps will not necessarily result in a direct reduction in pricing assigned to each step as the step pricing is intended for payment milestone invoicing purposes only. ▪Travel and expenses are included in the fees above. ▪All invoices are payable net thirty (30)days from date of invoice. While we do not itemize billing for professional services, we agree and will comply with any reasonable requests for records substantiating our invoices. ▪If City requires a purchase order (PO) number, please specify the PO number in the Authorization section and forward a copy o f the PO, with this agreement, to William Wong, william.wong@gartner.com. Ensure that the PO includes all labor and travel expenses quoted in this Proposal. Any pre-printed terms on the PO that are in addition to or in contradiction of the terms of this agreement shall be inapplicable Workstream Step Deliverable(s)Total 2: A M I -MD M An a l y s i s Step 2.1: Perform AMI and MDM Current State Assessment Current State Report $7,500 Step 2.2: Perform Business Needs Assessment Business Needs Report $12,000 Step 2.3: Conduct AMI-only Fit Analysis Fit Analysis Report $12,000 Step 2.4: Develop and present Final Report Final Assessment Report & Executive Summary $9,000 Total Fixed Fee:$210,000 Page 60 of 120 45 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Changes to Scope ▪The scope of this project is defined by this Proposal/Statement of Work. All City requests for changes to the SOW must be in writing and must set forth with specificity the requested changes. As soon as practicable, Gartner shall advise City of the cost and schedule implications of the requested changes and any other necessary details to allow both parties to make an informed decision as to whether the y will proceed with the requested changes. The parties shall agree in writing upon any requested changes prior to Gartner commencing work ▪As used herein, “changes” are defined as work activities or work products not originally planned for or specifically defined by this SOW. By way of example and not limitation, changes may include the following: –Any activities not specifically set forth in this SOW –Providing or developing any deliverables not specifically set forth in this SOW –Any change in the respective responsibilities of Gartner and City, including any reallocation or any changes in engagement or project manager staffing –Any rework of completed activities or accepted deliverables –Any investigative work to determine the cost or other impact of changes requested by City –Any additional work caused by a change in the assumptions set forth in this SOW –Any delays in deliverable caused by modification of acceptance criteria in this SOW –Any changes requiring changes to research analyst time or resources Page 61 of 120 46 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Validity Period and Further Assurances ▪The Proposal, including the Statement of Work, is valid through 15 June 2020 ▪Gartner Research and Consulting recommendations are produced independently by the Company’s analysts and consultants, respectively, without the influence, review or approval of outside investors, shareholders or directors. For further information on the independence and integrity of Gartner Research, see “Guiding Principles on Independence and Objectivity” on our website, gartner.com or contact the Office of the Ombudsman at ombudsman@gartner.com or +1 203 316 3334 Page 62 of 120 47 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 This Proposal/Statement of Work is submitted under the terms and conditions of the Texas Department of Information Services (DIR) Deliverables-Based IT Services (DBITS) contract with an effective date of November 10, 2017 with the State of Texas. When signed by Gartner, Inc. and City of Georgetown, this Proposal/Statement of Work is an attachment to and governed by the Contract Number DIR-TSO-4030 between the parties. These two documents will set forth the relationship between the parties for this engagement. This Statement of Work may be modified at any time provided such changes (i) are agreed by the parties in writing and (ii) where applicable, are in accordance with the Change Order provision. Authorization DATE PRINT NAME AND TITLE SIGNATURE SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF GARTNER, INC. DATE PRINT NAME AND TITLE SIGNATURE AGREED ON BEHALF OF CITY OF GEORGETOWN PO NUMBER (If applicable) Page 63 of 120 48 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Section 5: Appendix ▪Project Team Biographies Page 64 of 120 49 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Sudeep Kappadan is a Director with Gartner Consulting and has over 20 years of experience in IT strategy definition, program management, project management and solution delivery. He has deep experience in the Utilities industry, which he combines with his program manage ment and program delivery skills to drive client success. Mr. Kappadan has led technology strategy development, program management and project management efforts for business transfor mation, business- technology alignment and project turnarounds. Mr. Kappadan’s recent project experience includes: ▪For a Utility —The client wanted to modernize their aging and brittle technology stack. Mr. Kappadan and his team helped the client in performing a current-state assessment, identifying gaps and developing a multiyear roadmap for replacing their work management, asset management, work scheduling, and time-keeping platforms as part of an overall IT strategy. ▪For a Utility —Led multivendor teams that planned and delivered portions of the work management, asset management and time-keeping platform modernization roadmap he had helped define for the client. Program scope included solution selection, budget planning, risk evaluation and complex integrations with multiple legacy systems. ▪For a Utility —The client wanted to transform their model for engaging with new and existing utility customers. Mr. Kappadan helped define a technology solution roadmap to enhance customer engagement through mobile-enabled customer-facing and internal portals integrated with Work and Asset Management, Supply Chain, Inventory, Geographic Information System (GIS), Scheduling, Financial Information Management (FIM), Customer Information System (CIS) and Enterprise Content Management (ECM) platforms. The roadmap was coordinated with Organizational Change Management (OCM) processes on the business side. ▪For a Utility —Led an effort to analyze process and system gaps, and to subsequently select and implement a Wholesale Power Demand Forecasting, Scheduling and Settlement system for the client. He also advised the client in the definition and implementation of IT governance, Project Management Office (PMO), project prioritization, resource allocation and stakeholder reporting processes. ▪For a Utility —This client was focused on innovation and geographic footprint expansion. To enable this, Mr. Kappadan helped them adopt Agile methodologies in both IT and their business. He also delivered an innovative technology solution for a pre-paid power product along with repeatable solutions and processes to support rapid expansions into new Retail markets. ▪For a Telecom Service Provider —Led a multivendor team that delivered a complex ordering and service provisioning system as part of a marquee fiber-based broadband rollout for a Fortune 50 client. ▪For a Telecom Solution Provider —Led gap analysis, system conversion and integration efforts for Customer Care and Billing (CC&B) systems for several U.S.- based and international wireless and fixed line clients. Mr. Kappadan has an M.B.A. from the University of Texas, Dallas, and is a PMI -certified Project Management Professional (PMP). Project Team Biographies Sudeep Kappadan, Director, Gartner Consulting Page 65 of 120 50 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Alfredo Villalobos is an Expert Partner with Gartner Consulting with broad experience in strategic positioning of technology,operations and technology leadership. Mr. Villalobos has functioned as the Chief Technology Officer of a large healthcare system and as an advisor to the Chief Technology Office of a Texas state agency. His experience also includes developing IT Strategies, Enterprise Architectures and optimizing IT operations for healthcare, educational, governmental and commercial enterprises in the United States and Latin America. Over the past 25 years, Mr. Villalobos has served in leadership roles in the Network Services practice of IBM Global Services, in the Business Process Management and Network Solutions practice of Accenture (previously Andersen Consulting), the telecommunications area of SHL Systemhouse (which became part of MCI), and at Unisys Corporation. Mr. Villalobos has a degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Kansas and is fluent in both English and Spanish. Representative IT Leadership, Governance and Strategy Experience: ▪For the United States Air Force —Participated with a “think tank” group of the Air Force to determine how ‘Smart Bases’ and the Internet of Things could be ha rnessed to improve the life of an Airman, enhance the experience of visitors, and improve the security posture of the base.The effort included a week long Design Thinking sprint that brought together the experience and knowledge of Air Force personnel and IT industry experts. The outputs of the Design Thinking sprint provided the Air Force with a series of prioritized initiatives to further design, solution and implement in a pilot environment. Gartner developed an architecture framework and a roadmap for implementation of the initiatives and transitioned the effort to an organization within the Air Force who would then review and revise internal policies, develop final detailed designs and lead the procurement efforts and deployment. ▪For the Texas Department of Information Resources -Functioned as the Program Director for a Statewide Security Program working in conjunction with the State CISO. Mr.Villalobos’ role included developing and overseeing the governance model for the program, interfacing directly with all Texas agencies executive leadership, coordinating all activities and execution of initiatives surrounding the security program, and coordination of Gartner and State resources to perform the training and ongoing activities committed through the Program. Also established the governance and charter for the State Information Security Advisory Committee (SISAC) that was created to provide security advisory counsel to the state’s leadership. ▪For the Texas Department of Insurance –Led the development of a governance model to help prioritize, oversee and manage risks of IT Projects. Worked directly with the Executive Directors of the agency and gained participation from key agency executives for implementation. ▪For a leading Healthcare System —Functioned as the Chief Technology Officer for its centralized IT organization. Under the responsibilities of the CTO were th e System’s IT Operations group and the Strategic Implementation teams (PMO). As part of the role, Mr.Villalobos also provided guidance to the Enterprise Architecture group and worked closely with the Business Analysis and Planning group. The overall Healthcare System included a Health Plan business unit, a Home Health business unit, a Medical Center, a Preferred Physicians business unit, a centralized services business unit and a Foundation unit. ▪For an Institution of Higher Education —Led an IT assessment and IT strategic plan of their Information Technology organization focusing on its alignment with the bu siness imperatives and key initiatives, its governance models, its organization structure and its infrastructure technology Project Team Biographies Alfredo Villalobos, Expert Partner, Gartner Consulting Page 66 of 120 51 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 William Wong is a Managing Partner with Gartner Consulting —based out of the Gartner offices in Austin, Texas —and a Subject Matter Expert within the State and Local Government industry group focused on serving Texas government clients. Mr. Wong has over 20 years of experience in managing and delivering on key IT initiatives including Sourcing (including RFP/SOW Development), Project Oversight/Quality Assurance, Enterprise Application Modernization, IT Strategy and Application Assessments. ▪For a large State transportation agency —Mr. Wong provided subject matter expertise and advisory services for the Director of Applications. The role included providing strategic guidance in software development life cycle/application development, conducting project health checks, and providing project oversight for key initiatives. ▪For a large Texas city client –Mr. Wong led a job architecture and compensation study to help the IT organization move from a project-based to product-based delivery model and recalibrate their compensation ranges to improve talent acquisition. ▪For a large water utility client –Mr. Wong was engaged in a modernization effort to migrate to an enterprise asset management platform and implement a new permitting solution. ▪For a large Texas county client —Mr. Wong was responsible for multiple initiatives including a data center migration strategy, procurement support for a large initiative, Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC) initiative, and a multiple year project oversight for an enterprise implementation. ▪For a large City client—Mr. Wong led the City’s procurement efforts to replace their existing Permitting and Licensing system. Scope of work included business case development, identifying future state business use cases, technology architecture, RFP development, vendor evaluation and selection, program oversight and Independent Verification and Validation (V&V.) ▪For a Texas city client —Mr. Wong was engaged to assist the City with their IT modernization efforts associated with their permitting and licensing initiative. Scope of work included use case development, sourcing strategy, solution architecture definition, technical requirements, Request for Proposal development, program oversight, and IV&V. ▪For large Texas community college client —Mr. Wong was responsible for working with the client’s leadership team to manage and oversee the procurement efforts of their ERP (Human Capital Management and Financials) solution, from business case development through vendor evaluation/selection. ▪For city client —Mr. Wong was engaged to manage with the sourcing of an ERP Human Capital Management solution. This work included business case development, strategy definition, use case development, proposal development, and assisting the City with the procurement process. Mr. Wong earned his Master’s and Bachelor’s degrees from Carnegie Mellon University and has received two U.S. patents for his technology-based process improvement architectures. He also has a Six Sigma green belt. . Project Team Biographies Will Wong, Managing Partner, Gartner Consulting Page 67 of 120 52 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Suggested Gartner Research ▪ID G00411186 Market Guide for Utility Customer Information Systems, Zarko Sumic, 4 November 2019 ▪ID G00368583 Strategic Roadmap for Utility Customer Information Systems, Zarko Sumic, 15 November 2018 ▪ID G00389059 Market Guide for Advanced Distribution Management Systems, Zarko Sumic, 19 June 2019 ▪ID G00450510 Market Guide for Meter Data Management, Zarko Sumic, 23 December 2019 ▪ID G00389114 Hype Cycle for Digital Grid Transformation Technologies, 2019, Zarko Sumic, 30 July 2019 ▪ID G00355733 10 Critical Actions Water Utility CIOs Should Take to Move Digital Initiatives Forward, Nicole Foust and Ethan Cohen, 5 November 2019 Page 68 of 120 53 © 2020 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. and its affiliates. RESTRICTED | May 2020 | CIS Assessment and AMI-MDM Analysis 330063873 Gartner Contacts Allix Jackson Account Executive Gartner Research Phone: 512 948 0531 allix.jackson@gartner.com Sudeep Kappadan Director, Energy & Utilities Gartner Consulting Phone: 972 948 9408 sudeep.kappadan@gartner.com William Wong Managing Partner Public Sector Gartner Consulting Phone: 512 589 9886 william.wong@gartner.com Page 69 of 120 Utility Technology Review Gartner Study Page 70 of 120 OVERVIEW •History •Project and Changes •Costs/Investments •Challenges •Then Vs. Now •Proposal •Recommendation Page 71 of 120 •The City was implementing many technological changes in 2009: •Citywide software (IT) Master Plan •Replacing an end-of-life utility automated meter reading (AMR) system •Evaluating customer information system (CIS) capabilities for post AMR implementation •A Utility Office review was completed as a result of a reorganization. Pivotal function areas were identified that could provide issue resolution in one place. •“meter to cash” billing services for all utilities (electric, water, sewer, drainage, & garbage) •The department was tasked to serve the utilities in a larger capacity •This more visible role was the catalyst for the evolution of the department into a Customer Care environment HISTORY Page 72 of 120 PROJECTS AND CHANGES 2009–2013 Automated Meter Reading (AMR) Replacement Project 2009 Financial Information & Customer Information System Replacement -Not Completed 2009–2014 Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) Software 2014–2019 Acquisition/Merger of Chisolm Trail Special Utility District (CTSUD) 2015–2018 Customer Information System (CIS) Replacement Project Page 73 of 120 COST Project Cost AMR Replacement Project $10,000,000 CIS/Financial Upgrade Project $500,000 *Not Completed Meter Data Management (MDM) $300,000 Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) Software $1,400,000 Customer Information System (CIS) Replacement Project $4,072,737 Page 74 of 120 ITINERIS/UMAX CHALLENGES –2015 to Now •Data Migration of Legacy system not included in the initial pricing •Staff changes impacted project as decisions previously made during project scoping had to be modified later in the project •Organizational philosophies required UMAX to be adapted to current processes. The business was unable to adapt processes to the new system capabilities •Complex system, lack of internal technical knowledge, & difficulty in scaling staff resources to support a system with a high level of support demand lead to errors after software fixes and updates affecting billing and seamless continuity •Reporting on system data is difficult at best and requires specialized skill sets to create reports, impacting operational and strategic business review Page 75 of 120 •The Itineris UMAX customer information system has so far shown that it requires a level of support much higher than forecasted by the preliminary studies conducted by the vendor and selection consultants. •Business and technology leaders in the City agree that the ongoing systems will require long-term growth in staffing, consulting, and technology resources to derive value from the system. This will add further overhead costs to the utility. SUPPORT Evaluation Criteria Cayenta Itineris Baseline Point Total 84.4369221 84.59137587 Functional Fit Percentage 84%85% Core Hardware & SoftWare Costs 0.00 1.26 0.00 8.31 Services and Expenses Costs 5.00 4.21 33.00 27.79 0.00 2.00 0.00 13.23 Core Hardware & SoftWare Costs $452,600 $392,800 (Cost sheet Sections 1 - 5)0.00 1.26 Services and Expenses Costs $1,354,067 $1,493,600 (Cost sheet Sections 6 - 8)5.00 4.21 On-Going Support/Maintenance Costs $625,225 $521,357 (Cost sheet Columns H, I, J, K & L)0.00 2.00 5 Year Total Cost 2,431,892 2,407,757 On-Going Support/Maintenance Costs Page 76 of 120 SUPPORT (cont.) Lack of system knowledge has impacted the complex network of system integrations intended to fully automate all processes and standardize service offerings causing system failures. These failures affect several integrated systems driving even larger support requirements and have potential to create system- wide failures. The complexity and intricacies of the UMAX system make it prone to failure. Numerous system failures have occurred. These are typically due to system updates & patches that unexpectedly impact intricate pieces of the system that support staff are either unaware of, or unable to check on a routine basis. Page 77 of 120 CURRENT SUPPORT •IT-personnel-6 •Systems Analysts (2) •Architect (1) •Managers (2) •GIS integrations (1) •Customer Care (3) •Business Analyst (1) •Reporting, testing, business process review/development•Operational Managers –PT (2) •Analytical management of operational processes ANTICIPATED FUTURE SUPPORT •IT-personnel –9 •Add Integration Architect (1) •Add Lead System Analyst (1) •Add Cloud Architect (if UMAX 365) •Customer Care (4) •Business Analyst (1) •Reporting, testing, business process review/development •System Analyst (1) •System configurations •Operational Managers –PT (2) •Analytical management of operational processes STAFFING Page 78 of 120 THEN VS. NOW Page 79 of 120 LARGE UTILITY Then •The Customer Care department would offer utility billing services to other jurisdictions on a contract basis, thus increasing their customer base and generating additional revenue. Now •Current resources do not allow the City to offer these services, and after the acquisition of the Chisolm Trail Utility District cities like Round Rock, Leander, and Liberty Hill have expressed interest in taking over customers and water lines within their region, effectively transferring those customers to them and reducing the number of Georgetown customers. Page 80 of 120 IN-HOUSE ELECTRIC MARKET Then •The Electric utility would build a full-fledged, in- house energy marketing function with a large technology ecosystem around that function as well. It would be similar to ecosystems leveraged by much larger utility providers. That new technology ecosystem would be driven by data provided by a large CIS-MDM-AMI meter-to-cash ecosystem. Now •The City has since determined there is much more value in outsourcing its energy market business to large scale providers that have significantly more resources to engage with the market. The organization has yet to be able to financially support the implementation of a data analytics function to transform the data generated meter-to- cash technologies into useful information. Page 81 of 120 SYSTEM INTEGRATION Then •Substantial, highly complex integrations with other technology systems would be implemented to create a level of automation that would allow the technology systems to scale rapidly with the utility. Now •Lack of knowledge leads to integrations having minimal value, are costly to support, and their complexity often results in system outages or errors in processes. Page 82 of 120 RATES Then •City of Georgetown rates were competitive with other retailers and municipal utilities Now •Georgetown electric rates are some of the highest in the State of Texas. Largely due to overhead costs. Page 83 of 120 RATE STRUCTURES & CONSERVATION Then: •The utility would invest significantly in the creation of unique and expansive conservation programs, including non- standard rate structures, to define itself as a unique and innovative business. Now: •Complex rate structures add complexity to the CIS system that may not be supportable or sustainable under current financial conditions. Unique conservation programs would require additional investment in technology. Page 84 of 120 NOW •The City has done good work in moving operations and customer programs into the new millennium. •Since 2010, “Customer Operations” has evolved into a larger role within each utility, acting as point of contact for all customer interactions instead of only a billing point of contact. When these technology and operational projects were begun in 2009, a different philosophy and direction was being prescribed and followed. While fully supportive of changes in vision and strategic goals, it is important to step back and understand the framework that was in play during the time the original decisions were made to gain clarity and understanding. Page 85 of 120 FUTURE •CIS and MDM system that can easily be supported and is in scope with the utility system we have •Create a system that adds value to our customers •Reduction in risk within the CIS and MDM systems •Staff with the needed business system and data skillsets to support the system •Understanding the 10-year cost of ownership to ensure we have adequate personnel and financial support Page 86 of 120 PROPOSAL-GARTNER STUDY •Evaluate current MDM and CIS system to determine: •Cost of ownership (staffing and financial) •Risk levels •Expectations for the system •Operating models of Customer Care and IT •System’s functional scope •Determine whether these systems are still appropriate and utilizing the analysis to drive future strategic decisions around the meter-to-cash technology ecosystem Page 87 of 120 RECOMMENDATIONS •Have Gartner conduct a utility technology review to analyze the systems in place •Cost - $210,000 •Funding Sources – Shared between Water, Electric and Information Technology Funds •Utilize the study for future strategic decisions regarding the MDM and CIS systems Page 88 of 120 QUESTIONS? Page 89 of 120 City of Georgetown, Texas Government and Finance Advisory Board June 24, 2020 S UB J E C T: Dis cus s ion and pos s ible selec tion of J P Morgan C hase for Bank Depository S ervic es for a two year and eight month period beginning S eptember 1, 2020 through April 30, 2023, with options to renew for up to two additional one year terms (maximum of four years eight months) - Elaine Wilson, C G F O , C ontroller IT E M S UMMARY: Background T he C ity currently has an agreement with J P Morgan C hase to provide bank depository s ervic es . T he current c ontract will expire August 31, 2020 with no additional renewal options . J P Morgan C hase was s elected through a competitive proposal process las t conduc ted in 2015. R FA Process O ur investment advis ory contrac t inc ludes preparation of R FA, review and selec tion of new depository banking services. Valley View C onsulting, L.L.C ., prepared the R FA and reviewed the res ponses for our bank depository s ervic es . T he C ity received respons es to the R equest for Applic ations for Depos itory S ervices from the following G eorgetown banks : J P Morgan C hase BBVA C ompass Bank Independent Bank Verabank Each bank was evaluated bas ed on its ability to provide the technic al and c ustomer service s upport for the C ity’s depository needs, as well as the eas e of use of technology to provide efficient means for staff to administer funds. F ees were reviewed to determine the best value to the C ity. Additional operational fac tors and ris ks were als o part of the evaluation and were used to make this rec ommendation with a new initial term to mitigate thes e fac tors in the future. S taff will bring the approved recommendation for award and des ignation of s taff to negotiate a final contrac t to the C ounc il meeting on July 14, 2020 and will bring a new contrac t for C ounc il approval before the end of Augus t. C ontrac ts will be reviewed by Legal. Tim P inon from Valley View C onsulting, LLC will be present at the meeting. F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: .. S UB MIT T E D B Y: Elaine Wils on, C G F O , C ontroller AT TAC H ME N T S: Page 90 of 120 Description Type Bank Depos itory Presentation FY 2020 Pres entation Valley View RFA Analysis Backup Material Valley View Recap Backup Material COG Bank Depos itory Selection Summary Backup Material Page 91 of 120 Bank Depository RFA & Selection GENERAL GOVERNMENT & FINANCE ADVISORY BOARD JUNE 24, 2020 Page 92 of 120 Background & Terms Texas Local Government code, Chapter 105 requires we solicit applications every 5 years Current bank depository is JPMorgan Chase JPMorgan Chase has been the City’s depository since 2006 Current contract expires August 31, 2020 No renewal options remaining Due to certain factors considered, the City is looking to change the new initial contract term Page 93 of 120 Background & Terms Valley View Consulting provides depository evaluation services as part of our Investment Advisory Services agreement. Valley View’s knowledge in this area gives the City an apples to apples comparison in all aspects of the evaluation including but not limited to cost of service, compensating balances and earnings credit, to better compare the banks’ bids and make a recommendation. Page 94 of 120 Background & Terms Approximately 12 City departments make deposits to the bank either daily or every other day Approximately 20-30 employees interact with the depository daily or weekly through deposit services, image cash letter services, online-reporting services, positive pay services, wire transfers and ACH transmission services Additionally, the City’s IT department helps to support integrations with the different systems citywide. Page 95 of 120 Services Requested On-line banking services Controlled disbursement account Zero balance account Positive pay Account reconciliation service ACH ACH debit blocking BAI2 file transmission Wire Transfers Remote deposit capture/Image Cash Letter Consumer bill pay processing Funds availability Employee check cashing Returned check reprocessing Account analysis Audit confirmations Page 96 of 120 Evaluation Criteria Ability to perform and provide the requested services Reputation & quality of service Cost of services Transition costs, retention/transition offers & incentives Funds availability Interest paid on interest bearing accts Earnings credit rate on compensating balance Physical location within municipal boundaries Convenience of location(s) Page 97 of 120 Evaluation Criteria (con’t) Completeness of application Financial strength and stability of institution Previous service relationship with the City Page 98 of 120 Evaluation Criteria – Additional Factors and Risks The City just spent $33,840 in setup and testing of bank integrations between the Workday Financial system and JPMorgan Chase (Incumbent bank). Staff is still working through Workday conversion related issues to stabilize the system prior to fiscal year and audit. Bank integrations are stable at this time. Transition to a new bank will require 8-12 weeks of transition set up and testing which will crossover into fiscal year-end. This will be the first year-end close in the new Workday financial system which will require staff dedication to the close process to ensure a timely and accurate year end close and a successful audit. Staff turnover COVID-19 Pandemic Page 99 of 120 Applications Received JPMorgan Chase BBVA Independent Financial Verabank While Independent Financial and Verabank submitted applications with overall lower costs, they were not able to provide all the required services requested. Page 100 of 120 Fees –Cost of Service JPMorgan Chase waived 3 months of fees as a retention incentive. BBVA waived 2 months fees plus $11,000 for transition costs, with $2,000 in set up fees (net $9,000 to cover transition). Estimated transition costs for BBVA $36,000. Both offered incentives for scanners and bank bags. Est. Monthly Fees for Svcs Est. 1 Yr 8 Mo. Fees for Svcs Est. 2 Yr 8 Mo. Fees for Svcs BBVA Compass Bank ($3,356)($89,253)($127,325) JPMorgan Chase ($4,090)($74,073)($123,153) Page 101 of 120 Earning Potential Both banks offered a hybrid earnings credit rate (ECR), which includes both soft and hard interest earnings While costs for services are locked in for the term of the contract, ECR and actual hard interest earnings are “bank managed” and subject to change at the bank’s discretion Since the evaluation started, rates have lowered at some banks Hybrid ECR rates bid have no floor (no guaranteed minimum) We include them in the evaluation, but are not an overriding factor Page 102 of 120 Initial Term Comparison Est. 2 Yr 8 Mo. Fees for Svcs Est. 2 Yr 8 Mo. Potential ECR/Interest Earnings Est. 2 Yr 8 Mo. Net Fees BBVA Compass Bank ($127,325)$116,535 ($10,790) JPMorgan Chase ($123,153)$65,259 ($57,894) Est. 1 Yr 8 Mo. Fees for Svcs Est. 1 Yr 8 Mo. Potential ECR/Interest Earnings Est. 1 Yr 8 Mo. Net Fees BBVA Compass Bank ($89,253)$72,834 ($16,419) JPMorgan Chase ($74,073)$40,787 ($33,286) Page 103 of 120 Differences in Service Provided JPMorgan Chase Bank Assessment paid by City Free Deposit bags BBVA Compass Bank Bank Assessment waived Free deposit bags, endorsement stamps, and deposit slips Page 104 of 120 Recommendation Our recommendation is stay with our incumbent, JPMorgan Chase due to the following: Based on cost of service including incentives and transition costs Costly conversion costs, including staff time required Workday integration costs already incurred Workday system stabilization before year end Year end close of new financial system brings new processes and requirements for staff Page 105 of 120 Bank Depository RFA & Selection RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL JULY 14, 2020 QUESTIONS? Page 106 of 120 JPMorgan Chase (Incumbent) BBVA Independent Financial VeraBank Evaluation Criteria 1 Ability to perform and provide the required and requested services; 2 Reputation of applicant and quality of services; 3 Cost of services; 4 Transition cost, retention and transition offers and incentives; 5 Funds availability; 6 Interest paid on interest bearing accounts and deposits; 7 Earnings credit calculation on compensating balances; 8 Completeness of application and agreement to points outlined in the RFA; 9 Physical location within municipal boundaries; 10 Convenience of locations; 11 Previous service relationship with the City; and 12 Financial strength and stability of the institution. Required Bank Services 1 Online Banking Services Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 Controlled Disbursement Account Yes Yes No No 3 Zero Balance Accounts Yes Yes Yes Yes 4 Positive Pay and Account Reconciliation Service Yes Yes Yes Yes 5 ACH Yes Yes Yes Yes 6 ACH Debit Blocking and Filtering Yes Yes Yes Available May 2020 7 Consumer Bill Pay Processing Yes Yes No Yes 8 Remote Deposit Capture Yes Yes Yes Yes 9 Wire Transfers Yes Yes Yes Yes 10 Post No Checks Yes Yes Yes Yes 11 Tamperproof Bank Bags Yes Yes No No 12 Bank Supplies No Yes No No 13 Funds Availability Yes Yes Yes Yes 14 Employee Check Cashing Yes Yes Yes Yes 15 Returned Check Reprocessing Yes Yes Yes Yes 16 Account Analysis Yes Yes Yes Yes 17 Bank Statements Yes Yes Yes Yes 18 Payment for Services Yes Yes Yes Yes 19 Account Settlement - Required Quarterly Yes Yes No, Monthly only Yes 20 Research Yes Yes Yes Yes 21 Bank Errors Yes Yes Yes Yes 22 Investment Account Yes Yes Yes Yes City of Georgetown, Texas Primary Depository Bank Services - RFA #202008 DETAIL RESPONSE ANALYSIS OF DEPOSITORY BANK SERVICES Page 107 of 120 JPMorgan Chase (Incumbent) BBVA Independent Financial VeraBank City of Georgetown, Texas Primary Depository Bank Services - RFA #202008 23 Audit Confirmations Yes Yes Yes Yes 24 Balance Assessment/Recoupment Fee Fee passed in full to the City. Waived for the full contract term Fees apply only to non- interest bearing accts Waived 25 Reserve Requirement No Waived Yes 10%Yes 11.5% 26 Earnings Credit Rate / Formula / Floor Managed rate Currently 0.28% No floor Managed 0.50% as of 3/31/20 on NIB Accts / No Floor One time available change to index rate 90 Day T-Bill less 0.10% with no floor. <500K = 0.45% <1M = 0.50% >1M = 0.55% Bank Managed No Floor 0.50% Bank Managed No Floor Services That May Be Considered 1 Bank Provided ATM No Yes - additional pricing for an AllPoint ATM No No 2 Integrated Disbursement Services Yes Yes No No 3 Electronic Data Interchange Yes Yes Yes Yes 4 Courier or Armored Car Services Yes, fee passed in full through analysis No No No 5 Smart Safe Yes Yes No No Collateral Requirements 1 Collateralization Yes w/Qualifier Yes Yes Yes 2 Collateral Amount Yes w/Qualifier Yes Yes Yes 3 Collateral Custody - Custodian Yes - FRB FHLB Atlanta - LOC Yes - TIB Yes - TIB 4 Collateral Releases and Substitution Yes Yes Yes Yes 5 Collateral Report Yes Yes Yes Yes 6 Board Resolution Yes Yes, if required, BBVA asserts no FIRREA is needed for LOCs Yes Yes Investment Activities 1 Direct Investment Alternative Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 Certificates of Deposit Yes Yes Yes Yes 3 Security Clearance/Safekeeping Services Yes - BNYM Yes Yes - TIB Fee schedule provided No Overdraft Provisions 1 Net Overdraft Defined - Collective Deposits Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 Notification Yes Yes Yes Yes 3 Daylight Overdrafts Yes Yes DODs not tracked Response blank Other Stipulations 1 Regulation Notifications Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 Notification of Incoming Wire Transfers Yes Yes Yes Yes Page 108 of 120 JPMorgan Chase (Incumbent) BBVA Independent Financial VeraBank City of Georgetown, Texas Primary Depository Bank Services - RFA #202008 3 Right to Cancel Under Federal or State Law Rulings Yes Yes Yes Yes 4 Access to Bank Records Yes Yes Yes Yes 5 Right to Open and Maintain Other Accounts Yes Yes Yes Yes 6 Secondary Bank Depository Yes Yes Yes Yes 7 Right To Terminate Yes (30 Days Notice)Yes Reciprocal w/90 days written notice Yes 8 Terms Fixed Yes Yes Yes Yes 9 One Relationship Officer Larnell Camus 512-479-2720 Edward Hanna 512-869-1126 John Rossi 512-931-0077 Michael Purifoy 512-869-8181 x4627 Miscellaneous 1 Semi-Annual Meeting Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 Formal Agreement Required Yes - refer to exceptions in RFA Yes Yes Yes Required Response Attachments 1 Account Analysis - pro-forma Yes Yes Yes Yes 2 Rate Basis Yes Yes Yes Yes 3 Sample Collateral Agreement Yes Yes Yes Not provided 4 Security Measures Yes Yes Yes Yes 5 Technology Specifications Yes Yes Yes Yes 6 Sample Safekeeping Agreement Yes Yes Yes S/K Not offered 7 Sample Safekeeping Report Yes Yes Yes S/K Not offered 8 Securities Safekeeping Fees Yes Yes Yes S/K Not offered 9 Investment Account Information Yes Yes Yes Not provided 10 Summary Business Continuity Plan Yes Yes Yes Yes 11 References Yes Yes Yes Yes 12 Sample FIRREA Compliant Document Yes Yes Yes Not provided 13 Completed Fee Schedule in Excel Yes Yes Yes Yes Other Considerations 1 Transition/Retention Allowance N/A $ 10,000.00 N/A N/A 2 Waived Service Fees Fee waiver of 1st 3 months Waiver of net service fess for 1st two months, but based on current ECR listed, the balances would cover the fees. N/A N/A 3 Remote Deposit Scanners 2 scanners at no cost to City 2 scanners at no cost to City N/A N/A Page 109 of 120 JPMorgan Chase (Incumbent) BBVA Independent Financial VeraBank City of Georgetown, Texas Primary Depository Bank Services - RFA #202008 4 New Supplies Free deposit bags for life of contract Free deposit bags, endorsement stamps, and deposit slips for life of contract. First order of checks and deposit slips ordered through Indpendent Financial N/A 8,740,000 8,740,000 8,740,000 8,740,000 Proposed Fees - Banking Services Monthly Fee Estimate w/o Stop Auto Renewal and with BAI added in (4,090)(3,356)(2,502)(1,005) 934 Waived 392 Waived (81,800)(67,119)(50,039)(20,100) (130,880)(107,391)(80,062)(32,160) Earnings Credit 0.28%0.50%0.40%0.50% Bank Managed - No Floor Bank Managed - No Floor Bank Managed - No Floor Bank Managed - No Floor 0.00%0.00%10.00%11.50% 17,528,571 8,054,292 8,339,760 2,725,424 8,740,000 8,054,292 8,339,760 2,725,424 2,039 3,356 2,502 1,005 Earnings Credit for 1 Year 8 month term 40,787 67,119 50,039 20,100 65,259 107,391 80,062 32,160 (41,013)0 0 0 (65,621)0 0 0 Interest Income Estimate Managed rate at 0.28%, also offered a MMDA at 0.20% Managed Rate with Index option of 90 Day T- Bill rate less 10 bps. Can be exercised one time, at anytime during contract. Floor of 0.50% <$5M = FF minus 25bps >$5M =FF minus 10bps >$25M=FF Int Bearing Accts rate is 60% of the Fed Funds Target Rate (0.00% - 0.25%) 0.28%0.50%0.50%0.15% 0 685,708 400,240 6,014,576 0 286 167 752 0 5,714 3,335 15,036 0 9,143 5,337 24,058 Investment Balance Monthly Investment Income 2 Year 8 Month Investment Income 1 Year 8 Month Investment Income Interest Rate Balance Required to Cover All Fees Monthly Earnings Credit less Reserve Earnings Credit for 2 Year 8 month Term Net Fees for 2 Year 8 Month Term Rate Basis Target DDA Compensating Balance Net Fees for 1 Year 8 Month Term Reserve Requirement FEE ANALYSIS OF DEPOSITORY BANK SERVICES Historical Bank Balance MEMO Balance Assessment Fee Fees for 2 Years and 8 Months Earnings Credit Rate Rate Basis Fees for 1 Year and 8 Months Page 110 of 120 JPMorgan Chase (Incumbent) BBVA Independent Financial VeraBank City of Georgetown, Texas Primary Depository Bank Services - RFA #202008 (41,013)5,714 3,335 15,036 (65,621)9,143 5,337 24,058 Contract Incentives 6,152 - 0 0 - 9,000 0 0 1,200 1,200 0 0 375 2,200 0 0 (36,000) (36,000) (36,000) (33,286)(16,419)(32,665)(20,964) (57,894)(10,791)(30,663)(11,942) Rates As of: 8,740,000 8,740,000 8,740,000 8,740,000 0.14%0.14%0.14%0.14% 0.05%0.05%0.05%0.05% 0.00% - 0.25%0.00% - 0.25%0.00% - 0.25%0.00% - 0.25% 0.47%0.47%0.47%0.47% Rates on Date of RFA Submission 8,740,000 8,740,000 8,740,000 8,740,000 0.17%0.17%0.17%0.17% 0.09%0.09%0.09%0.09% 0.00% - 0.25%0.00% - 0.25%0.00% - 0.25%0.00% - 0.25% 0.22%0.22%0.22%0.22% Historical Bank Balance 91-Day T-Bill Discount Rate Fed Funds Rate (Effective) Fed Funds Rate Target Local Government Investment Pool Tuesday, June 16, 2020 Scanners Tamperproof Bags & Supplies/year 2 Year 8 Month Income with Contract Incentives Included Wednesday, April 15, 2020 Historical Bank Balance 91-Day T-Bill Discount Rate Fed Funds Rate (Effective) Fed Funds Rate Target Local Government Investment Pool Cost of Transition to a New Bank (as estimated by City staff) 1 Year 8 Month Income with Contract Incentives Included Transition/Retention Allowance 2 Year 8 Month Income/(Cost) Estimated Waived Fees 1 Year 8 Month Income/(Cost) Page 111 of 120 2428 Carters Mill Road, Huddleston, VA 24104-4003 540.297.3419 June 16, 2020 Ms. Leigh Wallace, CGFO Finance Director City of Georgetown 808 Martin Luther King, Jr. Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Dear Ms. Wallace: Thank you for the opportunity to assist the City of Georgetown (the “City”) with this Depository Bank Services Request for Applications (the “RFA”) project. This assistance was provided to the City as a service included in the Investment Advisory Services agreement. The objective of this engagement was to assist the City in selecting a primary depository bank following the expiration/termination of the current contract which ends August 31, 2020. For reasons stated below the new contract period will be a term of two-years and eight months commencing September 1, 2020 and continuing through April 30, 2023. Alternatively, an initial term of one-year and 8 months with a one-year extension at the City’s option would be an acceptable term. Procedure The project began with the establishment of a Calendar of Events to ensure that the required project steps were performed in a timely and sequential manner. The process for selecting a primary depository bank is governed by the State of Texas Local Government Codes: Chapter 105 Municipal Depository Act; Chapter 176 Conflict of Interest Act; Chapter 2256 Public Funds Investment Act; and Chapter 2257 Public Funds Collateral Act. In addition to complying with these State statutory requirements, it was necessary to comply with the City’s financial and purchasing policies, and Investment Policy. The RFA procedure was conducted as follows: 1. Analyzed bank service usage and balance records. Page 112 of 120 Page 2 of 6 2428 Carters Mill Road, Huddleston, VA 24104-4003 540.297.3419 2. Reviewed bank accounts and statements. 3. Established the minimum required banking services and potential additional services. 4. Developed a list of eligible financial institutions within the City’s municipal boundaries: a. BancorpSouth Bank b. Bank of America, N.A. c. BBVA USA d. Capital One, N.A. e. Extraco Banks, N.A. f. First National Bank Texas g. First Texas Bank h. Independent Financial i. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (Incumbent) j. Prosperity Bank k. R Bank l. Regions Bank m. SouthStar Bank, S.S.B. n. VeraBank, N.A. o. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 5. Contacted each of the identified financial institutions. 6. Drafted the RFA for review and approval. 7. Advertised as required. 8. Posted the RFA documents on the City’s website. 9. No additional RFA requests were received as a result of the required advertisement. 10. Held a non-mandatory pre-application tele-conference that was attended by representatives of: a. BBVA USA b. Independent Financial c. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (Incumbent) d. R Bank e. SouthStar Bank, S.S.B. 11. By the deadline, four applications were received: a. BBVA USA b. Independent Financial c. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (Incumbent) d. VeraBank, N.A. Page 113 of 120 Page 3 of 6 2428 Carters Mill Road, Huddleston, VA 24104-4003 540.297.3419 This process created a competitive environment with four banks submitting applications. The evaluation of the applications was based on, but not limited to, the following considerations, in no particular order of priority: 1. Ability to perform and provide the required and requested services. 2. Reputation of applicant and quality of services. 3. Cost of services. 4. Transition cost, retention and transition offers and incentives. 5. Funds availability. 6. Interest paid on interest bearing accounts and deposits. 7. Earnings credit calculation on compensating balances. 8. Completeness of application and agreement to points in the RFA. 9. Physical Location within municipal boundaries. 10. Convenience of location(s). 11. Previous service relationship with the City, and 12. Financial strength and stability of the institution. In addition to the considerations listed above, the following categories of financial and operational elements were considered: Fees - Depository Services Each bank provided a proposed schedule of fees based on the monthly volumes of specific services to be provided to the City. The banks committed to keep the fees fixed for the initial contract period. Earnings Earnings Credit: Earnings credit generates “earnings” that can only be used to offset banking fees. Earnings credit above the applicable fees is not paid to the City as interest. Hard-dollar Interest: Hard-dollar interest is regular interest earnings that represents true earnings that can be used in any manner at the City’s discretion. Earnings credit, hard-dollar interest, or a combination of the two, can be used to offset any services charges. Retention/Transition Incentives: JP Morgan Chase and BBVA USA offered incentives to the City. Transition Costs: Transitioning from one bank to another is a project that normally can take up to 3 months, requiring management and staff time and can include costs for supplies and potential programing costs to achieve Page 114 of 120 Page 4 of 6 2428 Carters Mill Road, Huddleston, VA 24104-4003 540.297.3419 compatibility between the City’s and bank’s systems. The projection of this potential cost has been estimated by City staff to be $36,000 and has been included in the table. Current Interest rate environment: In the current rate environment, it should be noted that, while fees were proposed as fixed, the ECR and interest rates were quoted as “bank managed” and subject to change at any time at the banks discretion. Recently we have seen banks reduce rates that were originally quoted in RFAs, for both earnings credit and interest earnings options. For that reason, it is reasonable to minimize the significance of quoted rates as part of the decision-making process for comparative purposes. With “bank managed” earnings credit rates being lower than the City’s other liquid investment options it would be reasonable to plan to cover any fees from the investment earnings that the city generates outside of the depository bank. Operational considerations: There are several important operational considerations that also impact the choice of the City’s Primary Depository Bank at this time: 1. The City staff would like to modify the new bank contract term to two years and eight months, resulting in an end date that would prevent the City from having to switch banks during the year- end closing and annual audit period. 2. The City has implemented a new accounting system, and this will be the first year-end closing of the City’s records that will form the basis from which the audited financials will be generated. 3. The City recently implemented banking integrations between JPMorgan and the Workday Financials System. This new system just went live in April. To complete this project, the City spent $33,840 in consulting fees, plus the cost for set up and testing. 4. There has been staff turnover within the accounting function that has resulted in several vacancies that may or may not be filled and trained by the time the new depository contract period begins. 5. In addition to these challenges, the City staff has been impacted by the additional work and challenges created by the Covid19 pandemic, which has put additional demands on available resources. Page 115 of 120 Page 5 of 6 2428 Carters Mill Road, Huddleston, VA 24104-4003 540.297.3419 The following table summarizes the financial analysis of the proposals: Conclusion The City is required by Texas Local Government Code to solicit for Depository Bank Services at a minimum of every five years. The timing of this solicitation process has come at an inopportune time for the City. The financial markets have declined dramatically and have created uncertainty that has impacted the banks willingness to offer and commit to reasonably attractive rates for an extended period. The City is emerging from a major financial system conversion which creates operational challenges that must also be factored into the evaluation process. For the reasons stated above, the City feels that a shortened contract term is in its best interest at this time. Selection of a Primary Depository Bank is a decision that impacts the City’s accounting, cash management, and investment functions in a way that no other procurement does. While cost of services is important, it is also especially important that the services that the City receives can be delivered reliably and as efficiently as possible. Proposed Fees ($81,800)($67,119)($50,039)($20,100) Projected Earnings Credit and or Hard Interest $40,787 $72,833 $53,374 $35,036 Incentives (Est.)7,727 13,867 0 0 Transition Costs (Staff Est)0 (36,000)(36,000)(36,000) Net Income (Cost)($33,286)($16,419)($32,665)($20,964) Proposed Fees ($130,880)($107,391)($80,062)($32,160) Projected Earnings Credit and or Hard Interest $65,259 $116,534 $85,399 $56,218 Incentives (Est.)7,727 16,067 0 0 Transition Costs (Staff Est)0 (36,000)(36,000)(36,000) Net Income (Cost)($57,894)($10,791)($30,663)($11,942) Financial Summary Initial 1 Year/8 Month Term JPMorgan Chase BBVA USA Independent Financial VeraBank 2 Year/8 MonthTerm JPMorgan Chase BBVA USA Independent Financial VeraBank Page 116 of 120 Page 6 of 6 2428 Carters Mill Road, Huddleston, VA 24104-4003 540.297.3419 It is important for the City to be able to obtain the services that they currently utilize and also be able to take advantage of new services that, based on technological advances, will become available during the next term. The City requires a bank that can provide a technologically advanced infrastructure and software system that addresses the ever-changing banking environment and future challenges. Two of the four banks (JP Morgan Chase and BBVA USA) that submitted applications are among the largest banks in the United States and are on the forefront of banking innovation. Both can also provide all the services the City requires and likely will be able to bring new innovative solutions to the City in the future. Two regional banks (Independent Financial and VeraBank) submitted applications that were lower in overall cost, however, they were lacking in the ability to provide all of the services that the City currently utilizes and/or will likely choose to utilize over the term of the new contract. Based on the City’s evaluation, the detailed financial analysis and the stated operational considerations, we concur with staff’s findings that JP Morgan Chase represents the “most advantageous” application for the City at this time for the following reasons: 1. As the incumbent, JP Morgan Chase has been an excellent and proven business partner to the City, 2. JP Morgan Chase can provide all the services the City requires at this time, and will likely require in the future, 3. JP Morgan Chase’s proposed cost of services is comparable to current costs, 4. Since JP Morgan Chase is the incumbent depository there will be no disruption and associated transition costs, 5. JP Morgan Chase’s application was complete and in agreement with the points outlined in the RFA. 6. JPMorgan Chase exhibited acceptable financial strength and adequately passed the bank service test. The recommended contract term is proposed to be two years and 8 months, commencing September 1, 2020. Please contact E.K. Hufstedler, Tim Pinon Richard Long, or me to discuss any questions or additional information needs. Thank you for this opportunity to serve the City of Georgetown. Sincerely, Thomas H. Ross Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. Page 117 of 120 Bank Depository Services 2020 RFA – Summary for GGAF Staff recommends the City continue its relationship with JPMorgan Chase Bank. This bank has consistently provided high quality and responsive services. A summary of the proposals, criteria and considerations are included in this memorandum. Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 105 Municipal Depository Act requires us solicit applications for depository services every five years. We are also required to follow PFIA, the City’s financial and purchasing policies, and our Investment Policy. Criteria and Services Requested The City solicited applications for bank depository services and received back two applications. The applications were evaluated on, but not limited to, the following criteria, in no particular order of priority: 1. Ability to perform and provide the required and requested services; 2. Reputation of applicant and quality of services; 3. Cost of services; 4. Transition costs, retention and transition offers and incentives; 5. Funds availability; 6. Interest paid on interest bearing accounts and deposits; 7. Earnings credit calculation on compensating balances; 8. Completeness of application and agreement to points outlined in RFA; 9. Physical location within municipal boundaries; 10. Convenience of location(s); 11. Previous service relationship with the City; and 12. Financial strength and stability of institution. The evaluation analysis was performed by Valley View Consulting, L.L.C. is attached. Proposers and Evaluation The City received four proposals from: • JPMorgan Chase (incumbent) • BBVA Compass Bank. • Independent Financial Bank • Verabank The original pricing proposals received are summarized below. Pricing was not a controlling factor in the evaluation, but is always a consideration. The proposals were comparable in many of the services solicited. Both institutions had good financial strength and the ability to provide the bank services requested to meet the City’s needs. Both banks offered fixed terms for the full five years. Fees – Cost of Service JPMorgan Chase offered to waive 3 months fees as a retention incentive. BBVA Compass offered two months waived fees and $11,000 cash for transition costs (with $2,000 in set up fees, net transition costs are $9,000). These plus the transition costs were factored into the overall estimated fees shown below: Page 118 of 120 Est. Monthly Fees Est. 1 Yr 8 Mo Fees Est. 2 Yr 8 Mo Fees BBVA Compass Bank ($3,356) ($89,253) ($127,325) JPMorgan Chase ($4,090) ($74,073) ($123,153) Earnings Potential Both banks offered a hybrid earnings credit rate (ECR). Balances maintained at the bank would earn credit to help offset the monthly bank fees. At the time of the RFA, the City’s average bank balances were approximately $8,740,000. Again, while interest earning a factor, the ECR and interest rates are “bank managed” and subject to change at any time at the banks discretion. Earnings shown are based on rates at time of bid. Est. 1 Yr 8 Mo. Fees Est. 1 Yr 8 Mo. Earnings Credit & Interest Est. 1 Yr 8 Mo. Net Fees BBVA Compass Bank ($89,253) ($72,834) ($16,419) JPMorgan Chase ($74,073) ($40,787) ($33,286) Est. 2 Yr 8 Mo Fees Est. 2 Yr 8 Mo Earnings Credit & Interest Est. 2 Yr 8 Mo. Net Fees BBVA Compass Bank ($127,325) ($116,535) ($10,790) JPMorgan Chase ($123,153) ($65,259) ($57,894) Additional Factors and Risks Considered: • Workday Conversion expenses – The City just spent $33,840 in setup and testing of banking integrations between Workday and JPMorgan for the Workday Financials Go-Live in April • Transition to a new depository bank will take approximately 8-12 weeks due to integration setup and testing. This transition period will therefore run into the City’s fiscal year end close out and audit preparation period. o Staff needs to devote time and resources to closing out the year timely and accurately o Staff will be working with consultants on the close out process throughout this time period • Workday conversion – staff is still working through conversion related issues to stabilize the system prior to year-end and audit. This will be the first year-end close in the new system which by itself will add additional challenges to the year-end process. • Staff turnover/vacant positions – staff has experienced high turnover in the last year due to the Workday implementation. Staff is in the process of filling 3 vacant positions. • The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in additional demands of staff. Recommendation While cost of service is an important factor in the evaluation, the City has other important factors and risks that were considered as well. Major considerations in our recommendation are: Cost of Service including incentives and transition costs. Conversion costs – while BBVA has offered a net $9,000 cash to offset conversion costs, we believe our true conversion costs would be closer to $36,000 when you take into account consulting costs, and staff time of the various departments that would be involved – Accounting, Customer Care, Legal, and IT. Page 119 of 120 Consulting costs already incurred to integrate JPMorgan with Workday Staff is still working to stabilize the Workday financial system before year end. Banking integrations are stable at this time. This will be the first fiscal year-end close in a new financial system. Staff needs to dedicate its time and resources to the new close process to ensure a timely and accurate close and audit. Therefore, our recommendation is to stay with the incumbent, JPMorgan Chase. They have provided us with efficient and consistent services, excellent customer service and have a proven track record. Page 120 of 120