Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />City of Redwood City, California <br />Response to Request for Proposal For <br />Overhead Cost Allocation Plan <br /> <br />reports, review of documents, and submittal of preliminary results. This proactive <br />communication ensures assumptions are correct, decisions are sound, and final results <br />are solid. <br /> <br />The second measure is undertaken between the project consultant and the project <br />manager. Similar to the first quality assurance measure, the project consultant maintains <br />a high level of communication with the project manager. Assumptions are tested, issues <br />discussed, and methods agreed to before and during the project, not following <br />completion. <br /> <br />The third measure is a series of comparisons completed by the project consultant and <br />project manager. Utilizing the MGT proprietary software, the project consultant and <br />manager will compare cost allocation plans between years, and between multiple years, <br />if appropriate. Variances are identified, researched, understood, and explained to <br />relevant individuals. The comparison and variance analysis between years, which is <br />available to City personnel, raises the accuracy of project results. <br /> <br />The fourth and most formal measure is a comprehensive review of the draft cost <br />allocation plan by the project director. This experienced consultant has a fresher <br />perspective of the project than do the project manager and project consultant. This <br />perspective incorporates knowledge from dozens of similar projects. <br /> <br />This perspective and review forces the project manager and project consultant to <br />defend project decisions. As a result, the cost allocation plan is strengthened, and a <br />greater audit strategy is prepared in advance of final submittal to the City. <br /> <br />Additionally, the MGT proprietary cost allocation software automatically generates self- <br />auditing schedule that reconciles the sum of all central service department expenditures <br />to the sum of all allocated costs. <br /> <br />I I. Provide draft cost allocation plan. <br /> <br />Meet in Redwood City with City personnel if requested or provide electronic printed <br />and electronic copies of the draft results of the cost allocation plan to City personnel. <br />This step is an opportunity to review preliminary results, address questions or concerns, <br />and make changes as necessary. Task I I will ensure City officials review quality draft <br />results and are not forced to spend hours editing and correcting substandard work. <br /> <br />12. Process final cost allocation plan. <br /> <br />Process the final cost allocation plan after addressing issues or concerns raised in <br />Task II. The final cost allocation plan will be professionally formatted and displayed. <br /> <br />The final cost allocation plan will include the following two detailed sections. <br /> <br />I. <br /> <br />Each allocating department will include descriptive narratives of the cost <br />allocation methodologies for primary categories of allocated costs (aka functions <br />or service categories). <br /> <br />MGT <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />Of AMEHiCA, INC <br />