Laserfiche WebLink
<br />t to ' .' I <br /> <br /> <br />City of Redwood City, California <br />Response to Request for Proposal For <br />Overhead Cost Allocation Plan <br /> <br />Mr. Ballard is a cost allocation plan development specialist, and has recently prepared plans for <br />the cities of Modesto and Lincoln. These plans were prepared on time and were technically <br />accurate, having no audit exceptions. <br /> <br />Mr. Dick Hazeltine, Technical Advisor, Quality Control & Audit Defense <br /> <br />Due to the requirements and magnitude of the Redwood City engagement, MGT will devote <br />another senior level staff member to Redwood City's cost allocation plan project as a Technical <br />Advisor. Dick Hazeltine, one of the nation's most widely recognized cost accounting experts <br />will perform quality control for this project, and will be available to the City for audit defense if <br />that service ever becomes necessary. Mr. Hazeltine will also design a quality control process <br />specifically for this Redwood City engagement which will minimally include the following steps: <br /> <br />The project manager will undertake the first measure. This consultant will maintain a high level <br />of communication with City personnel. Examples of communication include monthly status <br />reports, review of documents, and submittal of preliminary results. This proactive <br />communication ensures assumptions are correct, decisions are sound, and final results are solid. <br />The second measure is undertaken between the project manager and the project director. <br />Similar to the first quality assurance measure, the project manager maintains a high level of <br />communication with the project director. Assumptions are tested, issues discussed, and <br />methods agreed to before and during the project, not following completion. <br /> <br />The third measure is comparative analysis between current output and previous years output. <br />Variances are identified, researched, understood, and explained to relevant individuals. The <br />comparison and variance analysis between years, which is available to City personnel, raises the <br />accuracy of project results. The fourth and most formal measure is a comprehensive review of <br />the draft ICRPs and state mandate cost claims by the partner-in-charge and/or the director of <br />quality control. These experienced consultants have a fresher perspective of the project than <br />does the project manager and project consultant. This perspective incorporates knowledge from <br />dozens of similar projects. This perspective and review forces the project director and project <br />consultants to defend project decisions of the final submittal. These four quality control actions <br />directly translate in the most reliable product(s) possible. <br /> <br />No subcontractors will be used on this project. <br /> <br />Resumes for the project consultants are found in Appendix A. <br /> <br />7. <br /> <br />of Work <br /> <br />Most of our costing services consultants began their consulting careers with David M. Griffith & <br />Associates (DMG). DMG was the preeminent provider of cost allocation plans to local <br />governments before being sold to a large corporate consulting firm. The ethics and c1ient- <br />focused orientation of DMG is now part of the approach applied to every project by our costing <br />services consultants. <br /> <br />This approach is to treat each project as a unique consulting engagement for a unique client. <br />While every cost allocation consulting firm, including MGT, applies standardized processes and <br /> <br />MGT <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />Of A.MERiCA, INC <br />