HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1986/02/18 Item 12 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 12
Meeting Date 2/18/86
ITEM TITLE: Resolution / 132 Approving agreement with Warren, McVeigh
and Griffin, Inc. for consulting services for evaluating
health insurance bids and authorizing Mayor to execute the
agreement
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Personneietk.
REVIEWED BY: City Manager., 4 t (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
In order to determine if a change in the City' s group health insurance
provider (Travelers Insurance Company) would be in the best interest of the
City, it has been decided to seek bids from other carriers. The current
carrier (Travelers) and the insurance coverage provided is specifically a part
of two Memoranda of Understanding and, therefore, any changes are subject to
negotiations. Because of this, a committee representing employees bargaining
groups along with staff was formed to provide input to management in the
selection process. The first step was the selection of a consultant to assist
the City in evaluating the bids. Staff and committee have unanimously agreed
on the consultant that is recommended to be used in evaluating the bids for
health insurance coverage.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution approving agreement.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Management staff and the employee committee met several times beginning early
last year to develop the Request for Proposal documents, both for consulting
services and for the health insurance company bids and/or self-administered
programs. The Request for Proposal (RFP) for the consultant was developed and
distributed to ten firms. Proposals were received back from six of the firms
contacted. All consultant proposals and the associated costs received are
tabulated below:
1 . Armtech - $4,400 - $5,400 ($5,400 maximum)
2. Robert Driver Company - $1 ,000 (maximum)
3. The Epler Company - $7,000- $9,000 + 20% for expenses ($9,000 maximum)
4. William Mercer-Meindinger, Inc. - $95 - $160 per hour (no limit)
5. Warren, McVeigh and Griffin, Inc. - $4,250 - $5,400 + out-of-pocket
expense ($5,400 maximum)
6. The Wyatt Company - $8,000 - $10,000 ($10,000 maximum)
Page 2, Item 12
Meeting Date 2/18/86
Upon receipt of the above consultant proposals, the committee evaluated each
proposal against criteria that were previously developed. Key criteria points
included:
1. Office location
2. Responsiveness to City' s RFP
3. Consultant' s professional qualifications
4. Consultant's proposed approach in evaluating health insurance bids.
5. Consultant' s cost
EVALUATION OF RFP's
Employee representatives who evaluated the written proposals were:
Sol Allen representing CVEA
Mike Miller representing POA
Staff evaluating these proposals were:
Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance
Signe Ann Thorsen, Director of Personnel
A summary of their evaluations of the six proposals is presented below.
SUMMARY RATING SHEET
PROPOSALS - CONSULTANT FOR HEALTH INSURANCE BID REVIEW
PRESENTATION
CONSULTANT
FIRM LOCAL OFFICE CLEAR? RESPONSIVE? CLIENT LIST? QUALIFICATIONS FEE
ARM TECH Laguna Hills yes yes yes, but moderate $5,400 maximum
California few clients to good
listed
ROBERT F. DRIVER San Diego somewhat somewhat yes, good somewhat in in
this $1,000
o
COMPANY clear responsive inexperience
of
work.
quite $7,000 to $9,000
A
THE EPLER COMPANY San Diego somewhat mostly yes ex trienced $7,000
20%
clear responsive
not specific misses point not not specified $95 - $160 per hour
WILLIAM M. MERCER- Orange P
MEIDINGER, INC. California and missed oflconsultant addressed
yes ood $5,400 maximum
WARREN, McVEIGH Newport Beach mostly mostly ysive y 9
& GRIFFIN, INC. California clear
mostl y somewhat good good $10,000 maximum
THE WYATT COMPANY San Diego clear responsive
Page 3, Item 12
Meeting Date 2/18/86
The subcommittee chose four of the six firms to continue in the process and
receive a personal interview. This decision was based primarily on the fact
that two firms, William Mercer and the Wyatt Company, appeared to miss the
point of the RFP. It was felt that if they were unresponsive early in the
process it would be difficult to work with them successfully in the difficult
task of evaluating and selecting a medical insurance carrier.
INTERVIEWS OF CONSULTANTS
A subcommittee was established to interview the consultants: Employee
representatives to the commission were:
Sol Allen, representing CVEA
Christopher Ashcraft, representing IAFF
Ambrosio "Dal" Daluraya, Storekeeper, President CVEA
Mike Miller, Police Agent
Management representatives to the committee were:
Gene Asmus, Assistant City Manager
Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance
Jim Thomson, Director of Management Services
Signe Ann Thorsen, Director of Personnel
The four firms that were invited were asked to make a 15 to 20 minute
presentation, after which the employee committee and staff could ask questions.
EVALUATION OF INTERVIEWS WITH CONSULTANTS
After completion of the four interviews, the committee discussed the firms and
individual consultants that had participated. The criteria used in the
discussion were:
- ability to communicate with the committee
- credibility established through a demonstrated knowledge of the field
(inspiring confidence in their knowledge and ability)
- a sensitivity to the needs of the City
- professional demeanor of the consultants and quality of the
presentation
- later reference checks
- cost
A summary of the evaluations made by the committee of the firms are as follows:
1 . ARMTECH - Too detail oriented; did not relate well to the employee
committee and staff as a whole. Made statements that were extremely
"pro-management." Presentation was somewhat disjointed and did not
inspire professional confidence.
Page 4, Item 12
Meeting Date 2/18/86
2. ROBERT DRIVER & COMPANY - The presentation made by the two
representatives was somewhat disorganized and did not inspire much
professional confidence. The representatives stated that their
primary concern was to do the consultant assignment, but to later be
chosen Broker of Record for the City' s health insurance coverage.
This would make the exceedingly low bid figure realistic as
commissions were received at a later date. The representatives stated
that Robert Driver & Company is the largest broker for the Travelers
Insurance Company in San Diego. The committee felt that this could
result in some pressure or the perception that this firm would not
have a level of objectivity equal to the other firms.
3. THE EPLER COMPANY - The representative made a very detailed
presentation dealing primarily with funding mechanisms for the City's
coverage. Overall the presentation was good, but the Police and Fire
representatives found this firm unacceptable due to previous working
relationships.
4. WARREN, MCVEIGH & GRIFFIN, INC. - The two representatives from
Warren, McVeigh & Griffin made the most organized and professional
presentation. Their knowledge of the field appeared excellent, they
inspired confidence and they were able to communicate well with the
employee committee and staff.
After the interviews, it was the unanimous opinion of the employee committee
and staff that Warren, McVeigh & Griffin was the best qualified firm to
evaluate our health insurance bids.
Reference checks were conducted by contacting other cities and agencies where
Warren, McVeigh & Griffin Inc. and the two individuals that would be assigned
from the firm to prepare the analysis of the bids had worked. Both the firm
and the individuals come highly recommended for their professional integrity
and knowledge in the type of work required. The City of Chula Vista
previously contracted with this firm (although not the specific individuals to
be used in the assignment) approximately eight years ago when a comprehensive
study was conducted of the City' s risk management operation. As a result of
that study, the City's present risk management program evolved. Their
performance at that time was entirely satisfactory.
The employee committee and staff felt all of the four firms considered were
qualified to provide the service required, but that Warren, McVeigh and
Griffin, Inc. ranked highest in terms of the evaluation criteria.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of this consulting service will not exceed $5,400
plus an additional $200-$300 out-of-pocket expenses. Funds for this purpose
are provided within the City Manager's budget under contractual services.
WPC 0481K
the Ci k' r; of
L Chula Vi � :, i ifornia
ted ___4_,ZOilif6
Warren, McVeigh & Griffin, Inc.
Risk Management Consultants
March 3, 1986
Ms. Jennie M. Fulasz, CMC
City Clerk
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 92010
WARREN, MeVEIGH & GRIFFIN, INC.
EMPLOYEE BENEFIT CONSULTING SERVICES TO EVALUATE BIDS FOR
HOSPITALIZATION AND MEDICAL INSURANCE
Dear Ms. Fulasz:
We are returning the original and two copies of the executed document Resolution No.
12382. This document executes an agreement between the City of Chula Vista and
Warren, McVeigh & Griffin, Inc. to perform specific employee benefit consulting services
as they pertain to the evaluation of hospital and medical insurance competitive bids, as
detailed in our proposal of September 10, 1985 and subsequent letter to Ms. Signe Ann
Thorsen, Director of Personnel, on December 2, 1985.
Our proposal of September 10, 1985 indicated that if the City desires a meeting to
discuss our report, we will assess an additional charge of $800, plus out-of-pocket
expenses for travel. Since this resolution does not mention this point, we will assume
that a meeting to present our report will not be required. However, if it is determined
at a later date that such a meeting is required, we will assess the charge as mentioned
above.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City. We are prepared to begin
this assignment immediately. We will contact Ms. Thorsen within the next few days for
instructions.
Sincerely,
vv , /G.
Timothy D. Beck
Senior Employee Benefits Consultant
cc: Ms. Signe Ann Thorsen, Director of Personnel
1420 Bristol Street North, Newport Beach, California 92660 • (714) 752-1058
Form No. F-229
12/73
CERTIFICATE OF CITY/DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
Certification of Unappropriated Balance
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the money required for the
appropriation of funds for the purpose set forth in the attached
resolution is available in the Treasury, or is anticipated to
come into the Treasury, and is otherwise unappropriated.
Amount $ Fund
Purpose
Bidder
Director of Finance
The City of Chula Vista
Date By
Certification of Unencumbered Balance
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the indebtedness and obligation
to be incurred by the contract or agreement authorized by the
attached resolution can be incurred without the violation of any
of the provisions of the Charter of the City of Chula Vista, or
the Constitution or the laws of the State of California, that
sufficient monies have been appropriated for the purpose of said
contract, that sufficient monies to meet the obligations of the
contract are actually in the Treasury, or are anticipated to come
into the Treasury to the credit of the appropriation from which
the same are to be drawn, and that said monies now actually in
the Treasury, together with the monies anticipated to come into
the Treasury, to the credit of said appropriation are otherwise
unencumbered.
Amount Not to Exceed $ 5,400.00
� l
Director of inance
The City of Chula Vista
Date 2/18/86 By Personnel
Fund 100 Dept./Activity 0210-5201
Purpose Consulting Services for evaluating health insurance bids
Bidder Warren, McVeigh and Griffin, Inc.
'-;7-8b g Ems' Certificate No. 37
j