BOARD AGENDA MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
Title
Approval of Consultant Agreement for $576,397 with MKThink for the Employee Workspace Project.
End
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
Approve the consultant agreement with MKThink (Consultant) for the Employee Workspace Project for an amount not-to-exceed $576,397, and authorize the Interim Chief Executive Officer or her designee to execute the agreement.
Body
SUMMARY:
The District plans, maintains and manages its facilities and implements capital improvements to maintain the life and value of its physical assets in compliance with the Board’s Ends Policies and Executive Limitations. The District’s Almaden Campus buildings are at full capacity during the summer of 2016 after including space for interns. Other factors such as growth/attrition of employees and space requirements as a result of District-wide program changes and reorganizations have also impacted the availability and efficient use of space at the District. The consultant agreement with MKThink will assess and evaluate the District’s workspaces and help the District to identify potential efficiencies in the use of workspaces and align them with the functions and responsibilities of each employee.
Background
There are many factors that affect the use of workspaces. Studies have shown that workspaces that are designed with employees’ jobs in mind and consider factors like lighting (including natural daylight), noise, temperature and occupant comfort improve the quality of life of employees and enhance productivity. The District’s current workspaces were designed and installed when the buildings were built or renovated.
There are nine buildings on campus and ten buildings (one leased in Sacramento) that house employees in office type workspaces. Most of these workspaces have not been evaluated or reassessed ever since they were installed. Many of the spaces were also designed with hard-walled conference rooms and offices for senior staff along the perimeter preventing natural light from reaching other employee workspaces. These workspaces are assigned based on whether one is a staff, supervisor or manager. For example, there are no distinct differences in workspace for a surveyor, a biologist, an associate engineer or an accountant even though they all perform different work with potentially different workspace requirements. In addition, workspaces for employees who perform work off-campus in the field are treated the same as those who work on campus and require a workspace for all working hours. Those workspaces are at many times empty and unoccupied. Other ancillary spaces like the cafeteria, lobbies, meeting rooms and outdoor patios haven’t been designed or considered for use for other purposes or for multiple uses.
The District’s Almaden Campus has approximately 201,000 square feet and there are approximately 788 people on campus including employees, interns, temporary staff and contractors. The Usable Square Feet ratio (calculated by dividing sq.ft. by the number of employees - 201,000/788) is 255. This ratio is used to determine the efficient use of space in a building; the lower the ratio, the higher the building’s space efficiency.
The International Facilities Management Association standard suggests that the ratio be less than 200. A Federal General Services Administration (GSA) 2012 Study and a CoreNet Global (a commercial real estate association) study (2009) found that most organizations had or were moving towards a ratio under 200 to reduce their real estate footprint and increase their environmental sustainability measures. The GSA later adopted 170 as the standard for all Federal buildings and used 80 as the standard for its Headquarters building in Washington D.C.
The consultant agreement with MKThink will assess and evaluate the District’s workspaces and help the District to identify potential efficiencies in the use of workspaces and align them with the functions and responsibilities of each employee. In addition, the Project will help determine what upgrades and improvements in work spaces will improve the efficient use of space to enable employees to achieve the core mission and responsibilities of the District. The Consultant will work with District staff, bargaining units, and Board members to evaluate, assess, and propose solutions to address employee workspace requirements on all buildings at District facilities.
The consultant agreement also includes tasks related to environmental sustainability. The consultant will evaluate and assess current District facilities for LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standard improvements and associated costs to obtain certification for existing buildings on the Almaden Campus.
Consultant Selection Process
On March 9, 2016, a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Employee Workspace Project was sent to more than 119 firms on the District’s Contract Administration System internet portal and on the national and Bay Area chapter websites of the American Institute of Architects. An optional pre-proposal meeting was held on March 24, 2016. Five consulting firms participated in the meeting. During the four-week proposal period, staff issued three addendums to: 1) Provide the PowerPoint presentation made at the pre-proposal meeting; 2) Change the due date of the proposal from April 15 to April 18, 2016 and 3) Respond to questions received from interested consultants. Three written proposals were received by the proposal submittal deadline of April 18, 2016.
A Consultant Review Board (CRB) consisting of three subject matter experts from the District evaluated the proposals. Two firms were subsequently invited to an oral interview. Both invited firms made in-person presentations to the CRB on May 3, 2016. The CRB unanimously recommended that staff proceed with contract negotiations with MKThink, as the highest-ranked firm.
Consultant Agreement Scope of Services
The consultant agreement includes the required tasks to be performed by the Consultant on the Project. A summary of the tasks, duration and the proposed cost breakdown is presented in Table 1. The tasks include project management, facility assessment, evaluation of current policies, workplaces, functions and space needs analysis, workspace programming, development of typical layouts, block space plans, alternate workspace strategies and programs, development of alternatives, costs and schedules, and LEED related evaluation and assessments. Staff expects that there might be a need for supplemental services given the number of meetings and outreach necessary for the project. Supplemental services also include possible tasks and costs for furniture/layout prototyping, digital workplace models, modeling, mapping and scenario simulation. These services are dependent on the findings, assessments and outcomes of the meetings with employees and the Board of Directors.
The Consultant will meet with approximately 783 employees and 100 interns, contract and temporary staff who are grouped under 57 units, 14 divisions, 3 business areas and 3 bargaining units. The consultant will also meet with the Board of Directors to solicit information and provide regular reports. This project will be overseen by a Project Steering Committee consisting of 3 members from the bargaining units (1 each from the Professional Management Association, the Engineer’s Society and the Employee Association), 1 member from the Labor Relations Office, the Deputy Administrative Officer of the General Services Division and the Facilities Unit Manager.
The Agreement provides for the Consultant to begin performing the services after Board approval of staff recommendations in this memo and complete the project by June 30, 2017.
Other information
On June 10, 2016 executive staff met with the three Bargaining Units’ (Professional Management Association, the Engineer’s Society and the Employee Association) Presidents and a representative of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE) Local 21 to solicit input and discuss the proposal. All three Bargaining Units were supportive of the proposal. Attachment 3 is a joint letter of support from the Bargaining units.
|
Table 1. SUMMARY OF TASKS, DURATION AND COST BREAKDOWN |
|
Description |
Duration From Notice to Proceed (days/months) |
Total Not-to-Exceed Fees |
|
Project Management |
Term of Agreement |
Costs for Meetings and Workshops Reflected in Tasks 2 through 11 |
|
Facility Assessment |
2 months |
$18,460 |
|
Current Policies, Workplace, Functions, and Space Needs Analysis |
4 months |
$184,720 |
|
Workplace Programming |
6 months |
$68,750 |
|
Development of Standards or Typical Layouts |
7 months |
$6,674 |
|
Development of Block Space Plans |
8 months |
$14,448 |
|
Develop and Propose Technology Solutions |
9 months |
$8,732 |
|
Develop and Propose AWS Strategies, Programs, and Policies |
9 months |
$8,732 |
|
Develop Alternatives and Provide Analysis, Costs, Schedules, and Options |
10 months |
$8,732 |
|
Communication and Approval |
11 months |
$46,678 |
|
Develop an Implementation and Estimated Cost Plan |
12 months |
$9,192 |
|
LEED Current State Assessment |
4 months |
$40,975 |
|
LEED Improvement Recommendations |
8 months |
$46,000 |
|
Supplemental Services |
Term of Agreement |
$114,304 |
|
Total Not-to-Exceed Fees |
|
$576,397 |
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The District has funds in the FY17 Almaden-Winfield Small Capital Project (No.60204016) for the consultant agreement’s amount of $576,397.
CEQA:
The recommended action does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it does not have the potential for resulting in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. The activities associated with the Employee Workspace Project are feasibility or planning studies and are exempt under CEQA guidelines 15262.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Consultant Agreement Justification
Attachment 2: Consultant Agreement
Attachment 3: Letter of Support
UNCLASSIFIED MANAGER:
Manager
Ravi Subramanian, 408-630-3021