RFP No. 22-003R_IM_1_5-6-2022.pdf

AMENDMENT No. 1

DATED: May 6, 2022

Palm Beach County Purchasing Department

50 South Military Trail, Suite 110, West Palm Beach, FL 33415

RFP No. 22-003R/IM

Title: Uniformed Security Guard Services, Judicial and General Facilities

REVISED Request for Proposal Due Date: May 19, 2022

This Amendment is issued to provide additional information, and clarification to the RFP document:

A. Proposers are advised of the following changes to the RFP:

1. The Deadline for receipt of proposals has been changed from May 12, 2022, to

May 19, 2022. The time remains 4:00 p.m. local time.

2. SECTION 1.7 TIMETABLE is revised as follows:

The anticipated schedule and deadline for the RFP and Contract approval are as follows:

Activity Date Time Location

Deadline for receipt 5/19/2022 4:00 p.m. Purchasing Department of proposals 50 S. Military Trail, Ste. 110

W. P. B., FL 33415

Selection Committee 6/08/2022 9:00 a.m. Purchasing Department Meeting 50 S. Military Trail

Room 1N-142 North/South

W.P.B., FL 33415

Oral Presentations/ 6/27/2022 9:00 a.m. Purchasing Department

Selection Committee 50 S. Military Trail Meeting (if conducted) Room 1N-142 North/South

W.P.B., FL 33415

Posting Date of Notice 7/05/2022 Purchasing Department of Intent to Award 50 S. Military Trail, Ste. 110

W.P.B., FL 33415

www.pbcgov.com/purchasing http://www.pbcgov.com/purchasing

AMENDMENT NO. 1 to

BCC Award Date 9/13/2022 Governmental Center 301 N. Olive Avenue, 6th Floor

W.P.B., FL 33401

Contract Start Date 9/13/2022

3. Section 4. SCOPE OF WORK/SERVICES, ATTACHMENT D, MINIMUM

REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL UNIFORMED SECURITY GUARDS AND

SUPERVISORS, is revised as follows:

a. Section 3. PHYSICAL EXAMINATION, item B. is revised as follows:

"B. Uniformed Security Guards shall be physically capable of performing all essential job duties, with or without reasonable accommodation.”

b. Section 3. PHYSICAL EXAMINATION, item F. is revised as follows:

"F. Uniformed Security Guards shall be capable of hearing ordinary conversation at fifteen (15) feet with either ear with or without benefit of a hearing aid. Uniformed Security Guards must be able to hear and respond to spoken voice, audible alarms, and telephone calls in an operational setting."

c. Section 3. PHYSICAL EXAMINATION, item H. is revised as follows:

"H. Physical Condition: Uniformed Security Guards shall be able to stand unassisted for a minimum of two (2) hours consecutively and shall be able to sit, stand, lift, and/or bend throughout a shift.

Positions shall not be filled with “light duty” personnel."

d. Section 4. REQUIRED BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION, Subsection A., Item 6. is revised as follows:

"6. Credit check where permitted by law; and”

4. The sign-in sheet from the Pre-Proposal Conference held on April 25, 2022, is provided in this Amendment as Attachment No. 1.

B. Questions received from Allied Universal Security Services and the Facilities

Development & Operations Department’s responses:

Q.1. Section 2.25 on page 18 of the RFP requires the successful proposer to furnish a

20% Performance and Payment Bond. Does the County require the 20%

Performance Bond to be issued for the two year term or can it be issued and renewed on an annual basis?

A.1. The Bond can be renewed annually.

Q.2. We note that the wages specified are not consistent (in some cases) with the current labor market conditions. Should vendors provide the wages used in pricing for those positions?

A.2. The minimum wages provided in the RFP in Attachment D to the Scope of

Work/Services for the contractual minimum hourly-wage for each type of guard are just the minimum that the Contractor is required to pay; the Contractor can always pay more if necessary to meet the staffing requirements of the contract.

Q.3. We note, per Section 1.5 on page 2 of the RFP, that the initial 2-year contract term will be followed by up to three (3) renewal options of one (1) year each. Are renewals subject to mutual agreement of the parties, or are renewals the unilateral option of the County?

A.3. Renewal options are exercised at the sole discretion of the County.

Q.4. We note that the Price Proposal Pages at pages 95-99 of the RFP require bidders to quote pricing for each year of the maximum 5-year contract term. Will the County also allow additional rate adjustments as needed from time to time to permit the Contractor to increase rates with automatic effect in order to recoup increases in the following costs that are outside the Contractor’s control: Federal, state or local taxes, levies, or required withholdings; costs under collective bargaining agreements; minimum wage rates and other statutory requirements, such as legally mandated sick leave costs; and medical and other benefit costs?

A.4. No, the Contract does not allow rate adjustments.

Q.5. We note the instruction in Section 1.8 on page 4 of the RFP for the Price Proposal Pages at Appendix A of the RFP to be signed by “an officer of the company.” Section 2.24 on page 18 of the RFP instructs that “all offers and the Contract must be made by an officer of the company.” The officers of our company are not local to Palm Beach County or Florida. Is it acceptable for proposal documents to be signed by a local representative provided a signed and certified copy of a company resolution confirming the local representative’s signing authority is also submitted with the proposal?

A.5. Yes, provided a signed certified copy of a corporate resolution is provided that indicates that the local representative is legally authorized to sign on behalf of and bind the company.

Q.6. We assume that the fitness standards Attachment D, Section 3 on pages 52-53 of the RFP are intended to be in accordance with applicable law, including the Americans with Disabilities Act. Can the provisions cited below be revised as follows to achieve compliance with applicable law?

Replace Section 3.B with the following:

“Uniformed Security Guards shall be physically capable of performing all essential job duties, with or without reasonable accommodation.”

In Section 3.F, insert the phrase “with or” before the word “without” on line 2.

In Section 3.H, delete the phrase “shall be in good physical conditions and” from lines 1-2.

A.6. Regarding Sections 3.B, 3.F. and 3.H; the recommended changes are acceptable. See Section A, item 3. a., b., and c. above.

Q.7. We note that Section 4.A.6 on page 53 of the RFP requires security guards to undergo credit checks. Numerous jurisdictions limit or prohibit an employer’s ability to perform a credit check. Can the cited specification be replaced with the following?

“Credit check where permitted by law.”

A.7. Yes, the recommended change is acceptable. See Section A, item 3. d.

above.

Q.8. When our company agrees to most favored customer provisions, it is important to us that the contract specify all of the relevant criteria that define the type of customer to be used as a basis for comparison so that we can effectively monitor our contractual obligation. Can Article 7 of the Sample Standard Contract on pages 72-73 of the RFP be revised as follows:

o At the end of the first paragraph at the bottom of page 72, please replace the phrase “for the same or substantially similar service” with the phrase

“as defined below.”

o Please replace the last paragraph with the following:

“Furthermore, the Contractor warrants that the price(s) shall not exceed the Contractor’s price(s) extended to its most favored customer, or the current market price, whichever is lower. In the event the Contractor offers more favorable pricing to its most favored customer, the Contractor shall extend to the County the same pricing or the then current market price, whichever is lower.

As used in this Article 7, the term “most favored customer” means a government customer in the same regional market, requiring the same or substantially similar officer qualifications, service and training, in like or smaller quantities, over a substantially comparable time period and under the same or substantially similar terms and conditions.”

A.8. Proposers should propose any exceptions to the Sample Standard Contract (Attachment 1) in their proposal. The County, however, is not inclined to accept any such exceptions since these are the County’s standard contract terms and conditions.

Q.9. Can Article 8.A of the Sample Standard Contract on page 73 of the RFP be revised to give the Contractor the reciprocal right to terminate the Contract without cause on 120 days’ prior written notice to the County?

A.9. See Section B, A.8. above.

Q.10. Our company routinely adds clients as additional insureds on our insurance policies, so long as our obligations are aligned with our indemnification obligations. The blanket additional insured endorsements to all of our policies automatically cover any party we are required by written contract to cover as an additional insured, to the extent set forth in such contract, without the necessity of expressly naming such party. Can Article 15.B of the Sample Standard Contract on page 79 of the RFP be revised as follows to reflect those parameters?

Insert the following at the beginning of Article 15.B:

o “Except as to Business Auto, Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s

Liability (and Professional Liability, when applicable), Palm Beach

County and the Sheriff are included as additional insureds, to the extent of the Contractor’s obligations under Article 16 below, on Contractor’s insurance policies. Coverage may be provided by a blanket endorsement that covers additional insureds where required by written contract.”

Insert the phrase “where required by written contract” at the end of the first paragraph.

In the second paragraph, replace the phrase “must also be listed as additional insured” on lines 4-5 with the phrase “are included as additional insured where required by written contract.”

A.10. See Section B, A.8. above.

Q.11. Our company stands behind our security services and regularly accepts the obligation to indemnify clients for the comparative portion of any losses, costs or damages that are caused by the negligent acts or omissions of our personnel in the performance of security services under client agreements. Can Article 16 of the Sample Standard Contract on pages 80-81 of the RFP be revised as follows to reflect that standard?

Delete the remainder of the first paragraph after the word “otherwise” on line 4 and replace it with the following:

o “…to the extent caused by Contractor’s negligent performance of the terms of this Contract or other negligent acts or omissions of Contractor.”

In the second paragraph, delete the phrase “which may arise from” on line 4 and replace it with the following:

o “except to the extent caused by the Sheriff’s gross negligence or willful misconduct, or to the extent any such claim, liability, loss or cause of action is caused by…”

A.11 See Section B, A.8. above.

Q.12. We note the County’s request in the last paragraph of Article 20 of the Sample Standard Contract on page 82 of the RFP for “first priority” service upon the occurrence of any of the disasters identified therein. This raises multiple serious concerns for our company and, I’m sure, other bidders. Our company has existing service commitments to numerous government and private sector clients with regard to emergency services throughout the State of Florida and other southern states pursuant to binding contracts with those clients. The provision proposed by the County would prevent us from providing an equitable allocation of resources with all affected clients in the event of a disaster that impacts multiple clients. Moreover, due to the exigent circumstances under which disaster services are performed, we could not perform those services at the standard bill rates applicable to standard services which are quoted in response to this solicitation. Furthermore, the disaster bill rates would not cover additional out of pocket expenses incurred for such items as lodging, transportation, vehicles, equipment, etc. which would need to be direct billed based on actual usage. May bidders reserve the right to engage in further discussions with the County regarding these and other issues raised by the County’s request for “first priority” service in the event of a disaster?

A.12. See Section B, A.8. above.

C. Questions received from American Guard Services, Inc., and the Facilities

Development & Operations Department’s responses:

Q.1 Who is the incumbent?

A.1. The current incumbent is Universal Protection Services, LP, dba Allied

Universal Security Services.

Q.2. When was the current incumbent awarded the contract?

A.2. The current contract was awarded on July 5, 2017.

Q.3 Could you please provide us a copy of the current contract?

A.3. A copy of the current agreement can be received through a Public Records Request to Angela Sims at ASims1@pbcgov.org.

Q.4. Are there any subcontractors being used for the current contract?

A.4. Yes, the contract has a subcontractor.

Q.5. What was the initial term length of the current contract? (for example, 1 year plus

4 year options, etc.)

A.5. The initial term was twenty-four (24) months, with three (3) twelve (12) month renewals.

Q.6. What was the start date of the initial contract?

A.6. The start date of the current contract was July 12, 2017.

Q.7. What was the amount spent in the last 12 months?

A.7. The total amount for the current twelve (12) month term of the contract is

$8,444,702.00. The current contract includes all locations. This RFP does not include federally funded locations, which are the subject of a separate solicitation.

Q.8. What was the total spent in the last billed month?

A.8. The total spent in the last billed month was $646,020.05.

Q.9. Are there any other rates billed separately? (such as equipment, vehicles, etc.)

A.9 No, all rates are billed concurrently.

Q.10. Are there any significant modifications from the previous contract to the new one?

For instance, an increase in hours, a change in guard type (eg. Armed vs unarmed), a need for additional resources?

A.10. As noted above in Section C, A.7., the current contract includes all locations;

this RFP does not include the federally funded locations, which are the subject of a separate solicitation. No additional resources are needed.

Q.11. What was the amount spent on this contract last year?

A.11. See Section C, A.7. above.

Q.12. What is the estimated total number of annual hours for this contract?

mailto:ASims1@pbcgov.org

A.12. Refer to RFP, Attachments B and C to the Scope of Work/Services and Appendix A.

Q.13. What is the current bill rate for each position?

A.13. The following are the current hourly rates for Uniform Security Guard

Services:

a. Guard 1 (Unarmed) $17.23

b. Guard II (Unarmed) $18.72

c. Guard V (Armed) $20.15

d. Guard VI (Lead Worker) $19.87

e. Guard III (PBIA) $18.87

f. Guard IV (Armed) $19.70

g. Site Supervisor (General Location) $20.83

h. Site Supervisor (Judicial location) $22.74

Q.14. Are there any additional services that may be need that are not listed in the RFP?

For instance, the need of additional sites, seasonal required security, etc.

A.14. See Section 4.2, Attachments B and C to the Scope of Work/Services, and

Appendix A of the RFP; the County reserves its right to add or delete locations and/or services.

Q.15. Beyond the state and federal minimum wage, is there a prevailing wage, living wage ordinance, local mandated wage, or contract-specific wage?

A.15. See Attachment D to the Scope of Work/Services for the contractual minimum hourly wage for each type of guard.

Q.16. Is a bid bond required? If yes, how much?

A.16. No, a bid bond is not required.

Q.17. Is the current contract using vehicles? If yes, how many?

A.17. Yes, four (4) golf carts.

Q.18. Will your agency hold a public opening? If yes, can you provide with the date, time, and location?

A.18. This is an RFP and the proposal opening is not a public opening; however, the Selection Committee will meet in a public meeting on June 8, 2022, to discuss the responsive proposals. The Committee will decide to award the contract or short list for Oral Presentations. See Section A, item 2., Revised Timetable, above for time and location.

Q.19. Was there a liquidation penalty on the previous contract?

A.19. Yes, there was a liquidated damages provision on the previous contract.

All changes addressed in this Amendment No. 1 shall be incorporated into RFP No. 22- 003R/IM and the final contract. All other terms and conditions of the RFP remain the same and unchanged.

NOTE: Please acknowledge receipt of this Amendment No. 1 by signing below and returning this page with your Proposal Response. Each Amendment to the RFP shall be signed by an authorized agent and submitted with the proposal or the proposal shall be deemed non-responsive.

>nna Pagel, Pur^asing~M§mager

ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

SIGNATURECOMPANY NAME

DATE

REGISTRATION*

NON MANDATORY PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

RFP No. 22-003R/IM

TITLE: UNIFORM SECURITY GUARD SERVICES,

JUDICIAL AND GENERAL FACILITIES

DO NOT REMOVE THIS REGISTER*

IF AVAILABLE PLEASE LEAVE A BUSINESS CARD

IF YOU ARE REPRESENTING A COMPANY OR COMPANIES

PLEASE PROVIDE THE NAME OR NAMES OF THE

COMPANY/COMPANIES ON THE REGISTER

***************PLEASE PRINT***************

1.) Company: ALU&£ Uti > \fS/26 r̂L

Address: LAWS (please,no P.O.box numbers) fy (t;Ad

Contact Person: fly -A) -EMU#** Phone#:(&n Cell#:(&0 e-mail:^) /1 / cl.Tnj @ !K^ . CQN\P« LM St^z FL ^L(A \

ArUACD 0 >/ \v <e Contact Person:2.) Company:.

Address - t •+£ OK̂ 8^ HP Z- Z <~~j, (please, no P.O. box numbers)

5 v/erg 6.0° Cell#:( ) e-mail: ^ t r b&»•)-. looney (> CV.U/J'cŷ v.

b .̂\ V \ e_ a Contact Person: K\ (VX.'VJ^ C!5L (VS Phone#:(^cA XlS Q % S~~ * CelI#:( ffe)

(^Â totOq^QT ODKOUCO>v\

3.) Company:

Address:.

(please, no P.O. box numbers) e-mail:.

Attachment No. 1 to Amendment No.1 to