City of Cleveland Frank G. Jackson, Mayor

Transcription

1 City of Cleveland Frank G. Jackson, Mayor Civil Service Commission May 10, Lakeside Avenue, Room 119 Cleveland, Ohio / Fax: 216/ ADDENDUM NO.2 RFP File No: City of Cleveland Civil Service Commission, Pre-Employment Behavioral and Psychological Evaluation Services. ATTENTION PROPOSERS: This addendum for the above-referenced is being issued to all intended proposers. The purpose of this addendum is to provide the responses to written questions received: Written Questions were received from a few potential Proposers, and those questions with their answers are being made available to all potential Proposers. Questions have been grouped together based on their subject, and are restated here with the response. Q: Will the answers to the other prospective proposers questions be shared with all, and if so how and when? A: The answers to all questions received will be sent to those prospective Proposers who have indicated an intention to submit a proposal, as well as posted on the City s website. Q: Who is currently providing the pre-employment psychological exams and related services as outlined in the RFP? A: Those services are currently being provided by Faust Psychological Services, a Cleveland area provider. Q: What does the City of Cleveland currently pay for the services outlined in the RFP?

2 Q: What is the hourly rate you currently pay for the psychologists work and how many hours is attributable to each evaluation (interview, report writing)? A: The current evaluation process is sourced on an hourly fee basis. The current hourly rate paid is $ per hour. The total time for individual evaluations varies depending upon the information relating to that individual such as their background information, the content of their personal history statement, and the interview with the candidate. Q: What is the rate of reimbursement for testimony? Q: How often is testimony required? A: Testimony services would be compensated at the same hourly rate. Testimony has rarely been required. The City of Cleveland has not been involved in any litigation relating to pre-academy psychological assessments in the past 5 years. (The five year timeframe was arbitrarily selected for convenient reference.)

3 Q: What tests are currently utilized for the psychological examinations? Q: What form of the MMPI do you give now? MMPI-2, MMPI-RF (restructured format)? Other? Q: Is the testing currently performed online or on paper? Does the department have a preference of online or paper testing? Q: Does the Civil Service Commission seek to stop doing the MMPI s as part of this new contract? Are there burdens and costs it wishes to pass on to the vendor partner? (We like that you are administering them, but willing and able to take that on if desired). A: The current process utilizes the MMPI-2, which is administered on paper. That assessment tool is currently administered by City of Cleveland Civil Service Commission staff, typically, but not exclusively, in a group setting. Those assessments are then processed using Pearson s software, and the report of each assessment is delivered to the current provider. No preference has been expressed for any particular assessment tool or process. Each Proposer should structure and describe the evaluation steps and tools which it believes is best and most appropriate to accomplish the objectives identified in the RFP. No Proposer should assume that Civil Service staff will continue to administer evaluations unless that is clearly identified as an assumption in their proposal. All assumptions related to the delivery of services should be clearly identified as an assumption in the Proposal. Options and alternatives in the delivery of proposed services, including related cost impact, should be clearly indicated. Q: And what report do you currently generate Revised Personnel (3 rd Edition Interpretive), Police Candidate Interpretive Report (MMPI-RF), or other (e.g. raw data only)? A: The report currently generated and given to the current provider is the Law Enforcement Adjustment Rating Report. Q: MMPI test publisher, Pearson, is able to provide historical data to clients. We would like to have that to run Cleveland-specific norms (averages) for those who passed and those who did not. (And perhaps even data on those who have failed on the job thereafter). This is good science building on historical data, behavior and precedent. Would the Civil Service Commission be willing to make that database request of Pearson in service to this, if asked by the next psychologist team chosen? A: The City of Cleveland is willing to consider making that database request of Pearson, if requested by the provider selected from this RFP process. Again, each Proposer should structure and describe the evaluation steps and tools which it believes is best and most

4 appropriate to accomplish the objectives identified in the RFP. All assumptions related to the delivery of services should be clearly identified as an assumption in their proposal. Options and alternatives in the delivery of proposed services, including related cost impact, should also be clearly indicated.

5 Q: The current turn-around time of an evaluation is how long? (Either from time MMPI info is shared with the psychologist and/or from the time the names of the individuals are made available for the interview). A: Currently, completed evaluation reports are provided within seven (7) calendar days or less from the completion of the interview. Q: How many candidates are tested at a time? Is the entire academy class tested together? Q: How often are academy classes held? Is there a projected schedule of classes? A: The MMPI-2 assessment tool is currently administered by City of Cleveland Civil Service Commission staff, typically, but not exclusively, in a group setting. Candidates for an academy class are typically processed in groups of as many as 75-80; if two concurrent academies are planned that number could be as large as 130. The City of Cleveland is currently looking to hire a minimum of 250 police officers over the next months. There will be five (5) academy classes which begin in 2018; there are currently three (3) proposed for In general, the grouping of candidates processed for academy consideration will occur no more frequently than every few months. Specifics of scheduling requirements and academy planning will be discussed with the Provider selected from this RFP process as part of the coordination of services thereunder. Q: We have done evaluation work over web-based conferencing tools for nearly 20 years telemedicine as it were. Is it acceptable to you that our diagnostic interviews occur remotely, with the post-offer candidate being expected to provision a computer on their end to do so? We have very high confidence in our work and outcomes in this manner and could save time, money and logistical efforts to do so. Should these be required to be conducted physically in person, we are prepared to arrange facilities to do so and travel in to conduct them. A: No preference has been expressed for any particular assessment tool or process. Again, each Proposer should structure and describe the evaluation steps and tools which it believes is best and most appropriate to accomplish the objectives identified in the RFP. All assumptions related to the delivery of services should be clearly identified as an assumption in the Proposal. Options and alternatives in the delivery of proposed services, including related cost impact, should also be clearly indicated. Q: How current is the job description of a police officer for the City of Cleveland? May we see a copy before submitting the proposal? (Cannot find online) A: The job description for Patrol Officer was most recently revised in A copy is appended hereto.

6 Q: Page 6 requests us to Provide a cost break-down for each assessment tool if applicable and Page 12 states: Provide a detailed estimated budget for the project. Explain your process for monitoring budget (include this information in the Fee Proposal; NOT in the Technical Proposal);. Please clarify what budgetary process we would be responsible to monitor and what you would like the estimated budget to include? In addition, please clarify which assessment tools you are referring to on page 6, is this to mean the tests utilized? A: The Fee Proposal submitted as part of the Proposal should clearly identify all costs for delivering the services identified in the Proposal, including any Options or alternatives, and will be made part of the contract awarded. The estimated budget should reflect the structure of the Proposal; i.e., if a fixed rate per assessment is proposed versus a different fee structure for services. No maximum or not-to-exceed budget is required to be provided. The monitoring process should be sufficient to ensure that costs for services provided are within the terms of the contract, such that the costs of services do not exceed what is stated in the Fee Proposal. The reference to the assessment tool is a reference to all services and products, including computer software, which the Proposer intends to utilize to perform and deliver evaluations pursuant to the RFP. Q: We having a hard time locating the set of required blank forms for the abovereferenced RFP We cannot seem to find them on your website. Through research, We did find other names for these forms as listed below, but still could not find the forms on your website. Would you be kind enough to please the four required forms? It is our understanding that these forms are required with RFP submission as stated on Page 13 of the RFP. The requested forms are: Schedule 1 = PROJECT CONTACT INFORMATION FORM Schedule 2 = SCHEDULE OF SUBCONTRACTOR PARTICIPATION Schedule 3 = STATEMENT OF INTENT TO PERFORM AS A SUBCONTRACTOR Schedule 4 = CSB/MBE/FBE/UNAVAILABILITY/IMPRACTICALITY CERTIFICATION A: Those forms are appended hereto.

7