Agenda 06/14/2011 Item #16A25
.
.
.
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to waive formal competition, approve and authorize the
Chairman to sign Change Order #2 to Contract #08.5009 with Sire Technologies,
Inc. in the amount of $129,150, and authorize a budget amendment from the
Development Services Building Permit Fund 113 reserves for $112,000, with the
"remaining balance of $17,150 to be expended from current Fund 113 operating
expens.es, for the purpose of extending the County's Electronic Content
'Management (ECM) system for the implementation of ActiveReview, an Electronic
P.lan Submittal and Review system (EPSR) designed for land use and building
: Permit applications, and for enterprise management of capital project plans.
GBJECT1VE: Dramatically improve the land use and building permit application
processes as well as improve enterprise management of capital project plans by
~xtending the County's Electronic Content Management (ECM) platform via
implementation of Electronic Plan Submittal and Review (EPSR).
CONSIDERATIONS: The purpose of this implementation is to offer an internet
accessible, easier, and more efficient plan submittal process (24/7) as has been long-
demanded by our customer base. This is an approved element of the County
Manager's Work Plan.
On July 22, 2008, Agenda Item 16E4, the Board approved the acquisition of an ECM
system from Sire Technologies, Inc. for $232,727.00 which covered software licensing
and implementation services. This software was selected to be the enterprise platform
for all electronic content in the agency, much like SAP is our enterprise platform for all
financial transactions and record keeping. The contract anticipated that additional
services would be added as provided in Section 21. ADDITIONAL ITEMS/SERVICES
"Additional items and/or services may be added to this contract upon satisfactory
negotiation of price by the Contract Manager and Consultant." Additionally, Section
15C of the Purchasing Policy grants the Board broad discretion within the limits of the
law to approve changes to contracts "without requiring further competition".
During staff review for this item it was noted the originating RFP that preceded the
contract did not clearly state that Collier County reserved the right to add additional
applications to the software platform, though with the purchase of the ECM platform,
that was the intent. In light of this, the Office of the County Attorney is recommending
that the Board formally waive competition pursuant to the approval of this change order
under Purchasing Policy Section V.A.4. It is staffs position that this in the best interests
of the County to do so.
The Sire ActiveReview module is a specialized ECM application that leverages the
underlying ECM platform technology for the purpose of electronic plan submittal.
Change Order #2 is consistent with the contract provisions and covers the cost of
software licenses for the ActiveReview modules as well as professional services for
implementation.
PacketPage-1252-
.
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
The purchase of ActiveReview is recommended and in the best interest of the County
for the following reasons:
. Sire ActiveReview meets all business, technical and customer requirements
. Implementing Sire ActiveReview builds upon the enterprise platform selected by
the Board in 2008. The agency already has committed technical and business
level staff resources familiar with Sire's technologies which reduces additional
staff workload and future labor costs
. Sire has been an exemplary vendor providing excellent responsive and
trustworthy support
. If we select another vendor we would have to build/maintain interfaces to our
enterprise Sire document management system which would incur additional up-
front and long-term cost and effort. Working with existing infrastructure and an
existing vendor significantly reduces risk, time and effort and increases the
chance for a timely and efficient implementation (as compared with selecting a
new vendor/partner).
This recommendation follows the outcome and recommendation of a joint team of
industry representatives and Collier staff that studied the need and available systems
for electronic plan review. The attached report titled "Rationale for Recommending Sire
ActiveReview" outlines the actions and recommendations of the team.
.
Below are the benefits anticipated from this purchase and software implementation.
Key Benefits From Customer < . From Staff Perspective
.'__ Perspective. '- ' . .'
"'; ': :J~ffJclency/ Access
Efficiency
. Efflciency/$
Efficiency
.
Quality/Efficiency
Secure remote application
submission and 24/7
Access
View status changes on
website
Paperless and better
version control
Clearer comments (visual)
Parallel reviews and
potential for shorter review
c cles
Easier retrieval of
approved plans
Collaboration
opportunities improve
Packet Page -1253-
Simpler intake process
Version control/easy to see changes
No more paper (eliminates routing,
storage, scanning); auto status
updates; supports telecommuting
option; central repository including
capital project plans
Mark up where comment relates
Parallel reviews, and potential for
shorter review cycles and easily view
all comments
Easier retrieval of approved plans and
seamless integration with existing
ECM system
Simpler collaboration and improved
customer service
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Capacity
Less staff time in handling
paper = more staff time in
reviews or service
Provides for less staff time on paper
handling, ability to work remotely,
ability to utilize contract employees as
the need may arise
IT CONSIDERATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS: The IT Department recommends this
software product because it represents the lowest technical risk, the lowest impact to
staff support resources, and will enable IT to provide the highest level of service at the
lowest cost.
ActiveReview builds on our existing investments in the Sire ECM platform. A platform is
an underlying computer system (hardware / software / database) upon which application
programs can run. Limiting the number of technology platforms in a company I agency
is an IT industry best practice for cost savings. All computer systems require some
amount of maintenance which includes but is not limited to planned upgrades, security
patching, bug fixes, monitoring, access control, etc. Once the underlying platform is in
place and supported, the second, third and fourth applications on that platform leverage
a good portion of the support resources already dedicated to the platform. This makes
the cost of incremental applications on a given platform lower. With more users on any
platform, the quality of service and availability of the platform is likely to be higher
because downtime will have a higher impact on the organization.
. The BeC uses several systems which meet the definition of a technology platform:
SAP, GIS, SharePoint, and Sire. We know that no other platform that we own supports
the functionality of Sire ActiveReview as an off the shelf product. If we chose a new
vendor, we would need to establish new servers, new databases, new support
contracts, new vendor relationships and would have to train staff on the new
technologies. New servers and new databases require license costs, and additional
behind the scenes processing (monitoring, technical support resources, etc.). While it is
hard to quantify the cost differential, it is evident that as long as Sire ActiveReview's
features and functions meet GMD's requirements, it is the choice that will give us the
lowest acquisition cost, the lowest life cycle costs, and the most affordable way to
achieve high service levels. Sire has been an exemplary vendor providing excellent
responsive and trustworthy support. Selecting an application that is supported by an
existing technology platform complies with agency policies and procedures for software
selection. - Barry Axelrod, IT Director
FISCAL IMPACT:
.
Imolementatlon Costs - Fund 113
Vendor (Sire) **
Software and Licenses
Professional Services
79,800.00
25,650.00
PacketPage-1254-
.
.
.
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Professional Travel (est.) (in compliance with Ch. 112, Fla.
Stat.) 5,600.00
Training 8,100.00
Allowance for other implementation services 10,000.00 129,150.00
AnticiDated Infrastructure and Hardware Costs*
Hardware and Storage 24,650.00
Monitors/Desktop Hardware 20,000.00 44,650.00
Total Implementation Costs (estimated FY 11 & FY 12) $173,800.00
Operatin~ Costs (Estimated)*
Annual Software Maintenance $16,800.00
*professionallT Staff Hours/Storage/IT Support/Server Maintenance shall be budgeted separately within
the County Manager's Agency.
**Matches proposal/quote
Funds sufficient to execute this change order will be made available from Fund 113
reserves in the amount of $112,000, with the remaining balance of $17,150 to be
expended from current Fund 113 operating expense. A budget amendment transferring
$112,000 from reserves to the appropriate expense code is necessary.
Although the benefits of this implementation are shared throughout the enterprise, for
the reason that the building and land use industries will be the major user of this
application, GMD/P&R has agreed to fund implementation as the initial and primary
benefactor. On..going use of the system by other departments throughout the Agency
will be on a "he who benefits pays" approach that will be defined once use begins, with
internal funds transfer collected to offset initial and recurring costs associated with the
use and operation of this application.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact
associated with this Executive Summary.
LEGAL CON!)IDERA TIONS: Pursuant to the Purchasing Policy, Section V(A)4, the
Board of County Commissioners has the discretion to waive the competitive threshold
when it is in the best interest of the County to do so. The original contract was
competitively solicited in compliance with the Purchasing Policy, however this specific
application was not. The Board may find that staff has provided sufficient evidence to
prove that this purchase is in the best interest of the County. This item is legally
sufficient for Board action and requires majority vote - CMG
~E:<::OMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1) Waive formal
competition, 2) Approve and authorize the Chairman to sign Change Order #2 to
Packet Page -1255-
.
.
.
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Contract #08-5009 with Sire Technologies in the amount of $129,150, using Fund 113
funds for the purpose of extending the County's Electronic Content Management (ECM)
system for the implementation of an Electronic Submittal and Review application for
land use and building permit applications as well as capital project plans, named
ActiveReview, and 3) Authorize the necessary budget amendment.
Prepared by: Kim Grant, Manager Corporate Planning and Performance Improvement
(Project Manager) on behalf of Leo Ochs, Jr. County Manager (Project Sponsor) and
Nick Casalanguida (System and Process Owner)
Attachments: Rationale for Recommending Sire ActiveReview
Software Acquisition Flowchart
Packet Page -1256-
.
.
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 16.A.25.
Item Summary: Recommendation to waive formal competition, approve and authorize
the Chairman to sign Change Order #2 to Contract #08-5009 with Sire Technologies, Inc. in the
amount of $129,150, and authorize a budget amendment from the Development Services
Building Permit Fund 113 reserves for $112,000, with the remaining balance of $17,150 to be
expended from current Fund 113 operating expenses, for the purpose of extending the
County's Electronic Content Management (ECM) system for the implementation of
ActiveReview, an Electronic Plan Submittal and Review system (EPSR) designed for land use and
building permit applications, and for enterprise management of capital project plans.
Meeting Date: 6/14/2011
Prepared By
Name: GrantKimberley
Title: Manager-Corp.Planning and Perf Improv,Office of Management & Budget -
6/2/2011 3:26:27 PM
Approved By
Name: GrantKimberley
Title: Manager-Corp.Planning and Perf Improv,Office of Management & Budget
Date: 6/3/2011 1 :22:46 PM
Name: AxelrodBarry
Title: Director -Information Technology,Information Technology
Date: 6/3/2011 1 :54:35 PM
Name: FrenchJames
Title: Manager - CDES Operations,Operations & Regulatory Management
Date: 6/3/2011 4:15:21 PM
Name: WoodLyn
Title: Contracts Specialist,Purchasing & General Services
Date: 6/6/2011 1 :03:23 PM
. Name: Carnell Steve
Packet Page -1257-
.
.
.
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Title: Director - Purchasing/General Services,Purchasing
Date: 6/6/2011 1:09:28 PM
Name: GreeneColleen
Title: Assistant County Attorney,County Attorney
Date: 6/6/2011 2: 1 0:59 PM
Name: MarcellaJeanne
Title: Executive Secretary,Transportation Planning
Date: 6/6/2011 2:50:59 PM
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Title: County Attorney,
Date: 6/7/2011 9:07:54 AM
Name: Isackson11ark
Title: Director-Corp Financial and Mgmt Svs,CMO
Date: 6/7/2011 11 :24:28 AM
}Jame: IsacksonMark
Title: Director-Corp Financial and Mgmt Svs,CMO
Date: 6/7/2011 1 :56:11 PM
Packet Page -1258-
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
.
Rationale for Recommending Sire ActiveReview as the
Electronic Plan Submittal and Review (EPSR) Application for
Building Department Permits, Land Use Planning Applications and Capital Project Plans
Brief History (prior to Summer 2010)
For several years staff at the former Community Development and Environmental
Services (CDES) Division [now called Growth Management Division/Planning and Regulatory
(GMD/P&R)] have been learning about and considering an electronic review and permitting
system. This has been largely in response to customer demands, but also from a desire to
improve productivity and become more efficient in delivering their critical services.
In 2008, the Board of County Commissioners approved purchase of the County's
Electronic Content Management System, which was a competitively procured product. The
intent was that this would become the Agency platform for electronic content management,
much like SAP is our financial platform. Consistent with that approach, a second module from
Sire, Technologies was purchased in 2009 and is now our Agenda Central system. A module for
electronic plan submission and review is also available from Sire Technologies.
.
With the implementation of the CityView system, the GMD/P&R division has not been
able to seriously pursue EPSR due to limited human and financial resources. As the end of that
project began to be seen on the horizon, the administration decided to more seriously pursue
the plan to shift to electronic plan submission and review.
In preparation for this eventuality, the GMD/P&R division had conducted two rapid
process improvement events in order to develop streamlined processes that could be readily
adapted to this technology, and has even piloted a "poor man's version" of electronic plan
submission and review in the building department using email and .pdf files in order to simulate
life in an lIelectronic world".
On January 8,2010, several business and IT staff from Collier travelled to Cape Coral to
learn about their implementation of EPRS. Also, in January, 2010 Commissioner Coletta
arranged for a team of staff and industry representatives to visit with the Miami-Dade Building
Department to learn of their electronic submission and review processes. The team spent a day
there and learned a tremendous amount about the tools and methods employed.
These visits eventually led to the creation of a study team in the Summer of 2010 to
. more fully evaluate alternatives.
1
Packet Page -1259-
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
.
Preparing for the Software Review
n the summer of 2010 a team was assembled to more carefully look at available
systems and options for EPRS in order to be ready to take action once the CityView
imp,emlentation was primarily concluded and resources could be applied to this endeavor. The
focus Ot this team was on the building review and permitting functions, and included staff from
the bus:rness areas and IT as well as interested members of the industry. The objective of this
team 1as to evaluate current business processes and needs against available software for
electrotc plans submittal.
Jlt is important to point out that the Agency has adopted a strategy for evaluating
softwa'le suitability by whether it could be an addition to an existing platform or,a new
Platforr/system. The attached flow charts illustrate that essentially we will evaluate
capabilIties of any additional system components that are on existing platforms as a fast track
solutiO~, unless there is a compelling reason to select another platform/system (Le. specialized,
cost, implementation costs and timing, etc.). There are several reasons for this strategic
approa~h:
I.
I
I.
Implementing additional components of an enterprise platform capitalizes on the
technical and business level resources that have been applied to learning the
platform which streamlines all future implementations.
Working with existing infrastructure and an existing vendor significantly reduces risk,
time and effort and increases the chance for a timely and efficient implementation
(as compared with selecting a new vendor/partner).
The ability to develop expertise over time reduces future costs for consulting and
other similar engagements.
.
.
I
Study Team Activities
I
IThe team created the following high level set of business and technical requirements to
use as r basis for evaluating any available options.
I '
Security/Access / I Application .
Tech ical Ent!"YL$
Create profile Complete On-line
Application'
I Workflow/Storage of
electronic files
Route for initial Sufficiency
review
Review
Ca abilities
Track review status
.
2
Packet Page -1260-
.
.
.
Web front end
Upload and
download digital
.pdf's
View
status/com ments
Security by sign-in
or pin
Must be on
Microsoft SQL
Server framework/
Cannot be on
Oracle (IT will not
support)
Attach-.pdf of
Plans
Accept other
attachments per
checklist
requirements .pdf
Calculate or
display fees.
Accept credit card
payment
. Assign reviewers (auto or
manual)
Track review status
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Track review -
comments
Version control by -
page/layer
Use layers for
markup
Allow digital seals
Allow digital plan
sign-off
Compare prior to
current version for
differences
Sophisticated and
easy to use mark-up
tools
The team decided to query Florida jurisdictions for what, if any, electronic systems were
in use in the State of Florida. To do so, two industry forums were queried: the Florida Local
Government Information Systems Association via FLGSIAnet, and the building officials in the
State of Florida. In addition to these queries, we considered the systems being used at Cape
Coral and the City of Miami-Dade based on our site visits. Based on prior work that led to the
selection of CityView we were also aware that Accela, a large government software provider,
asserts an electronic review system. The team looked into each ofthese potential systems and
the results are summarized in the chart below. From the review, only two systems met the
requirements - ProjectDox and Sire ActiveReview.
Version control of documents
and mark-up layers
Approved plans stored
separately from in-process
plans
Final record copy available for
use by public
Submitand initial
system sufficiency
check
Route for final review or any
other non-parallel step
required
Manage plans in revisions
process with all capabilities
Allow printing of final copy or
translate to digital .pdf
format for electronic
transmission
3
PacketPage-1261-
6/14/2011 Item 1
System I Meet Meet Software IT$ Hard Comments
business Technical and Impl. ware
reQmnts? Reqmnts? Hard Cost Costs
AutoVne Some N I
I
(Cimm6trvl .. ...
ProjectDox Y Y $142,000 + TBD TBD
I IT
I Hardware
Activefeview Y Y . $114,000 TBD TBD Already have licenses for 350
; concurrent users and
(Sire) +IT experience with this product;
I
I Hardware is ECM Jor document
I management for Collier
County
Accelal I Some N I I
BlueRevu Some N/A
Miami+Dade Y N 3-5 Unkno 5 integrated systems
proprirtary FTE including their own
wn mainframe to make this work
Set of + additional system for e-
Syst;nls permitting small permits
Oldsmar I N N/A
(prop~ietary 1 :
Sumter N I N/A I I
I
CountY
6.A.25.
.
.
I
I
fince Sire ActiveReview was the lowest cost alternative reviewed, met all requirements,
and war a module that could be added to the existing ECM platform selected by the Board in
2008, tr team recommended pursuit of ActiveReview.
Activitiis since the Study Team Recommendation in August 2010
I
Iln November 2010, the results ofthe study were presented to the Information
Technology Executive Committee, a technology governing body in the County Managers
Agencyl and they approved the recommendation to further pursue Sire ActiveReview as an
enterp1ise system for any plans being submitted (building, land use/planning and capital
projects).
I
In FY 11, the County has also gone "Iive" with an additional module of the Sire system
called Agenda Plus (we call it Agenda Central). The project has been a tremendous success. It
met all defined business requirements, and came in on budget. The team managing the
imple entation reports exemplary experience with this vendor, and remains committed to the
chosen ECM platform. This experience provided additional encouragement for suggesting
purcha e of an additional module for the EPSR system.
.
4
Packet Page -1262-
.
.
.
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Sire was invited to do a proof of concept demonstration at Collier County on April 15,
2011. In attendance were staff members and management from the building department,
planning/zoning department, fire department, public utilities project management department
and information technology. The goal was for all affected departments to see a demonstration
and ask any and all questions about the product as it related to their use of EPSR. Everyone in
attendance was satisfied with the proof of concept.
Existing contract terms and purchasing policy were reviewed extensively to assure
recommending a change order was allowed. The contract does allow for the change order, and
following normal purchasing policy, the board has discretion to accept such a change order, or
require the initiative to go out for bid.
The approach has been discussed with members of the industry on May 26, 2011 and
they are in support of the system recommendation.
Benefits of the Project Action
Efficiency
Secure remote application
submission and 24/7
Access
View status changes on
website
Paperless and better
version control
No more paper (eliminates routing,
storage, scanning); auto status
updates; supports telecommuting
option; central repository including
capital project plans
Mark up where comment relates
Parallel reviews, and potential for
shorter review cycles and easily view
all comments
Easier retrieval of approved plans and
seamless integration with existing
ECM system
Simpler collaboration and improved
customer service
Provides for less staff time on paper
handling, ability to work remotely,
Version control/easy to see changes
Efficiency/$
Quality/Efficiency
Efficiency
Clearer comments (visual)
Parallel reviews and
potential for shorter review
cycles
Easier retrieval of
approved plans
Efficiency
Quality/Efficiency
Collaboration
opportunities improve
Less staff time in handling
paper = more staff time in
Capacity
5
Packet Page -1263-
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
reviews or service
ability to utilize contract employees as
the need may arise
.
Why tt recommendation is the best value solution
fhe study team recommends implementation of the Sire ActiveReview system for
Electro~~.c Plan Submittal and Review for the following reasons:
. eets business requirements (including those of the applicants)
. eets technical requirements
. IExpands on the existing selected ECM platform
. Fast was the lowest ofthe two viable options located based on a search for systems
being used in the state of Florida
. IFollows our IT decision process and realizes these benefits:
o Implementing additional components of an enterprise platform capitalizes on
the technical and business level resources that have been applied to learning the
platform which streamlines all future implementations.
o Working with existing infrastructure and an existing vendor significantly reduces .
risk, time and effort and increases the chance for a timely and efficient
implementation (as compared with selecting a new vendor/partner).
o The ability to develop expertise over time reduces future costs for consulting and
I other similar engagements
. IFollows existing Purchasing policy
I
. ISire has been an exemplary partner
. !System will be used enterprise wide and seamlessly integrated with the existing ECM
Isystem for all document storage and retrieval
Attach ents: Software Acquisition Flowchart
.
6
Packet Page -1264-
Customer>, .
(End User Group)
Develop
Functional.
Requirement.
Customer Sign Off
on Functional. ..-
. Requirements
Buy
+
IT.oCustomefr<
. - '. -_._ '.-_- .c., '-"';'."<_-- . .?,.~~j..._.,..__,_
Relati()nshfp~ Mg~.
Develop Technical
Recommendations
. an~ wo Study
Yes,
V
Standard Platform
Fast-Track .- /.
Page2~ I
....
IT Mgmt Charter
Approval._..
Build
Packet Page -1265-
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
IT Deyelopn1e~t
;-- ,::-: .;.~.:::.~{{:~:tti~~~-\::i.~~i~-,;!l--;.\,~' '.'i:-) _'j
~oftwim~.D~v~loP!T1ent.
· .~: ..,programPlan .
- _.-,
1
SoftWare
DeveI6jm;ent
. .. Process'
I
j.
Standard Platf9rm Fast-Track
i ..
I
Custol11~r.
(End User Grqup )
. . ,
fI
LL
I
I
t..
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
IT. Customer
R~lationstilp Mgf
ITEC.
.
I
Yes
...
Technical Arc:.hitectuni~
. ,ReVie~~,:;;,~:r:~,
..
.
Packet Page -1266-
..../<;/..6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Competitive Acquisition Process - Standard vs. Non-Standard platform
. " ',_.;' .. '._'_'", .. .. ',,'_,: .,"":..,..>;:,,' ..:_._;.~'.., ~.:_,_'.. _""":.:','~'.,,':'_',, ,,0',
Customer ..
nd User Group)
IT Cy~tqmec;
Relationship Mgr
Yes
No
I
"'"
x~i;r;,.iclf~)c%;J~f~~WI8~ft~~~~~~;Rii~. -
,
'If
No
<l
NJ
No
ITEC-
~~:,
Contract #:08-
5009
~roject #: N/A
I
I
I
I
I
clt i
~~
M I ~ iil~\l8 SefYibes [lvision .
~-+
X d~ntract Change Request
1
I Mod#: 2
I
I
I Project Manager: Kim
I Grant
I
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Purchasing Department
Change Modification Form
o Work Order Modification
POlWork Order #:
Project Name: Active Review
Department: County
Mana er
ContractorlFirm Name: SIRE
Technolo ies
Origi~al ContracWIork Order Amount
Current BCC Apprdlved Amount
I
Current Contracf!".'f.ork Order Amount
Dollar Amount of t~is Change
Revised New ContractIWork Order Total
Cumulative Chan !3s
I
Original BCC Approval Date; Agenda Item #
Last BCC Approval Date; Agenda Item #
Change from Current BCC Approved Amount
Original notice to proceed date:
NYi+
Number of days a~ded (if
extension, must a#ach current
insurance certifiCC\te(s) from SAP
or obtain from vendor :
X Add new task(sf Change task(s) Delete task(s) Other (specify):
1. Provide a de~i1ed and specific explanation of the requested change(s) to the task(s): Purchase and install an
additional module of the Enterprise Content Management (ECM) system for purposes of electronic plan submittal and
review. I
2. Provide deta~led rationale for the requested change: Customers have been demanding increased service in the
areas of plans review and permitting functions of the County. This is also an element of the County Manager's approved
work plan. 1;lplementing the Sire ActiveReview module radically transforms the process of plan submission and
approval by e iminating the paper; thus allowing for submission, review, mark-up and revision of permits, land use plans,
and capital p ~ect plans all electronically. This eliminates trips to the County to drop off plans, enhances communication
between appl,cants and reviewers. provides for better version control of related documents, and is expected to have the
affect of decreasing review times. More information about the business case is provided in the executive summary for
this change rruest. _
3. Provide explanation why change was not anticipated in original scope of work: Technically, the answer to this is
N/A, as this i~ a new project However, .in fact, adding this module to our existing Enterprise Content Management
system has always been viewed as a potential change per our electronic content management strategy.
4. Describe the impact if this change is not processed: The bottom line is that this implementation is a low cost
approach to dramatically increasing service and quality in our plans review processes, while also decreasing effort to
complete reVIews. We can continue doing business the way we have been doing it via paper. However, this system
enables a tremendous amount of flexibility in terms of customer interactions (24n), ability for employees or contracted
employees td work remotely, etc. It also dramatically reduces time, effort and cost to deal with routing and storing paper
associated wrh these processes; allowing us to be much more efficient in general.
I
I
Packet Page -1268-
I 04. Correction of error(s)
ID 5. Value added'
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
LD 6. Schedule adjUstment I
'~:ft'-!o...,,:..
Approved by {Name and Titl .
Date:
3 ( LI
Date:
.
.
Revised: 1/1212011
2
Packet Page -1269-
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
CHAN1E ORDER NO.
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
CHANGE ORDER
2 CONTRACf NO._08-5009_
BCC Date: _7/22/08
Agenda Item: _1684
TO: SIRE Technolosries. [nc.
! 3676 W. California Avenue. Unit B 100
I Salt Lake City. UT 84104
I
DATE Mav 27. 20Il
PROJECT NAME:
Active Review - Electronic Plan Submittal and Review Svstem
Under our AGREEMENT dated
July 22
.2008_.
You hereby are authorized and directed to make the following change(s) in accordance with terms and
condit ons of the Agreement: See attached Exhibit A
FOR lHE Additive Sum of: _One hundred twenty-nine thousand one hundred fifty
($]29,150.00).
j .
OrIginal Agreement Amount $ 232.727.00
Sur of Previous Changes S ]89.575.00
This Change Order adds S 129.150.00
pr~1 nt Agreement Amount $ 551.452.00
Your ccptance of this Change Order shaIl constitute a modification to our Agreement and will be performed
subje t to all the same tenns and conditions as contained in our Agreement indicated above, as fully as if the
same were repeated in this acceptance. The adjustment, if any, to the Agreement shall constitute a full and final
settle ent of any and all claims of the Contractor arising out of or related to the change set forth herein,
including claims for impact and delay costs.
I
Accefkd: ,2011-.
CON~RACTOR:
SlRE1 Te::hnologies, Inc.
I~~ ~..h~
By: I
David Reeder
I
I
OWNER;
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
~
Klm G , ... .oct........, ·
~T2
By "Z- /t.....
Ni asalanguida
Packet Page -1270-
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
.
. CONT~1ALIST ) ~
By: . )Yl a/ n-Jl
Lyn M. d
Date:
ArrEST:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
Dwight E. Brock, Cleric.
BY:
BY:
Fred W. Coyle, Chairman
Approved As To Form
and Legal Sufficiency:
Print Name:
Assistant County Attorney
!
i
.
.
08-5009 - Enterprise Content Management
Software Solution - Change Order #2
2
Packet Page -1271-
I
I
I
I
S'RE-
I
TECHNOLOGIES
Document Managemelt & Agenda Automation
for State & Local GOV1mment
I
I
Kimberler Grant
Collier C~unty FL
3301 Ta~iami Trail, East
Naples F arid a 34112
239-25-6287
To:
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Quote
ACTIVE REVIEW
Date:
Expiration Date:
Account Manager:
May'll, 2011
August 27, 2011
David Reeder
I
tm' DESCRIPTION . llNITPRlCE . EcrENDED=?RICE ll1A1NTENANCE 'PART #
,
EDFTWARE
SllB:r.oTALSOFTWARE ,S :B4,DDD.110 $ 1fi,BDD.llD
EERVlCES
SUS:roTAL5ERVlCES : oS 35,1350.1l0
o
SIRE SERVER CORE ...' .
Enterprise siRE SelVer Core - This is a one ti~ cost for any size customer that
provides the1pDF, FTR and other needed capabilities. This is required for all
clients. ThiSlis a required component for EDMS and/or Agenda Plus. Includes
the followingl modules: SIRE Administrator, SIRE FileCenter I WebCenter, SIRE
OCR I FTR, SIRE Retention Manager, SIRE Office Add-in Module, SIRE
Reports (Re~uires MS SOL), SIRE Web Pubnshing, and SIRE Worldlow.SelVer
Cores are n+ inluded on Hosting and Active Review only Proposals. Is included
on EDMS ar Agenda Proposals.
SIRE Act REVIEW LICENSES
Active Re . I Workgroup
Active Revi~ Enterprise: (Includes selVer software for active review, workflow,
forms, 10 E~MS licenses, Active Review web portal) (Portal and unlimited
number ofi1temal users)
Active Revi~ Client (1-25 Concurrent Users)
Active ReviJw Client (26-50 Concurrent Users)
Active ReviJw Client (51-100 Concurrent Users)
Active Revi'w Client (101-150 Concurrentusers)
Active ReI Client (151-200 Concurrent Users)
Active Re . I w Client Enterprise
34,000.00
50003
6,800.00 50004
50005
50006
50007
50008
10,500.00 County already purchased
40050
o
25,000.00 $
50001
50,000.00 $
50,000.00
10,000.00 50002
700.00 $
680.00 $
660.00 $
640.00 $
620.00 $
130,000.00 $
o
50
o
o
o
o
7
4
8
1
Project Ma~agement (Per Day Cost)
Inslallation,llmplemenlation, & Testing days (Per Day Cost)
1
Workflow Drfinition and Configuration (Per Day Cost)
A1lowancel for other implementation services
120063
120051
120053
1,350.00 $
1,350.00 $
1,350.00 $
10,000.00 $
9,450.00
5,400.00
10,800.00
10,000.00
Packet Page -1272-
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
SIRE Active Review Administrator Training - Cost per day.
SIRE Active Review End User Training - Cost per day.
130059
13L1B:rDTAL IRAINING 5 11,1DD.DD
4
16
EXPENSES ..
600.00 $
200.00 $
Travel: Airfare (per trip)
Per Diem: Daily expense for Lodging, Car, meals (per day)
2,400.00 Billed as Incurred
3,200.00 Billed as Incurred
SlJB:rDTALJ:XP.ENSES :s 3juOO.no
r;oST DVERVIEW
T alai Cost for Software $ 84,000.00
Tot3l Cost for SeNices $ 35,650.00
"~." Total CoSt for Training .
$ 8,100.00
T ot3ICostfor Expenses $ 5,600.00
GRAND TOTAL $ 133,350.00
PURCHASE INCENTIVE. $ 4,200.00
'.-.";.-':-"~<'
..
. TOTAL SYSTEM COST $ 129,150.00
ANNUAL SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE $ 16,800.00
.
cxt!~
~
Quotation prepared by:
This is a quotation on SIRE Technologies software, subject to the conditions noted below:
SIRE T ecl1nologies Standard Payment Terms: 100% of Software Fees due at signing, Professional SeNice Fees due upon
mutually determined Milestones and Maintenance due at final project acceptance.
Proposal is valid for 00 days from Proposal Date unless otherwise specified in writing,
'Travel Expenses will be bir.ed as incurred.
To accept this quotation. sign here and return:
Thank you for your businessl
2211 West 2300 South, West Valley Cit)", iJT 84 i 19 - 30"1.977.0608 Phcne 801.977.8875 Fax inic@siretechnoicgies.ccm
Packet Page -1273-
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
Attachment A
SIRE Technologies, Inc. Active Review
Payment Schedule
I
Mileston~
I
Execute qhange order - purchase 25 licenses
Travel I
Develop~ent Services
I.
I
Purchaseladditionallicenses, if need is determined
Training I
Allowance for other implementation services
I
Payment amount
$39,900 (25 licenses less purchase incentive)
As billed per contract terms
$12,825 (or 50%) when Collier Project Manager
agrees 50% has been completed; remaining
$12,825 upon completion of User Acceptance
Testing
$39,900 (25 licenses less purchase incentive)
$8,100 once training is completed
Up to $10,000 (only as agreed to in writing and
upon written sign off of the Collier project
manager that services have been provided).
Packet Page -1274-
.
.
Date:
A TIEST:
Dwight Eo Brock, Clerk
BY:
Approved As To Fonn
@,::~d~~
Assistant County Attorney
08-5009 - Enterprise Content Management
Software Solution - Change Order #2 2
6/14/2011 Item 16.A.25.
. C~PECIAL1ST ) ~
By: )Yl a/ frk/
Lyn M od
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
BY:
Fred W. Coyle, Chairman
Packet Page -1275-