City of Los Angeles Living Wage RFB Response Scoring Document SCORE

Transcription

1 City of Los Angeles Living Wage RFB Response Scoring Document EVALUATION CRITERIA SCORE COMMENTS 1. Quality, Responsiveness and Technical Solution (40 points). Proposal addresses the following: Discusses how to establish a minimum wage in the City of $13.25 by 2017, and then increase the minimum wage to $15.25 an hour by 2019, to be followed by annual increases; provides comment on other timeline implementation options. Provides full analysis of economic impact of the subject minimum wage proposal including the positive and negative effects on the City. Provides an analysis of the minimum wage proposal's effects on the local economy, including the number of people who would benefit from and increased wage and the potential for additional tax revenues. Provides an analysis of unintended consequences, including the reduction of workers benefits and hours. Provides an analysis on job creation and job/business retention. Identifies specific industries, including non-profits and small businesses, that could experience negative impacts from the proposal; evaluates pros and cons of categorical exemptions or other solutions to reduce potential negative impacts; provides clear definitions of the industries identified. Provides an analysis for an option to establish a base and ceiling on automatic wage increases. Provides a review of options for the enforcement of a minimum wage ordinance. Provides a comparison of cost of living, demographics and median wage in the City versus other metropolitan areas. 32 Covers all categories. Relies on census data, anecdotal interviews, academic research, IRS data, and PUMS data. Tries to consider variables. Since most of these questions have not been formally answered in any other lengthy studies it appears that their research will be somewhat anecdotal and the sources are not localized. 2. Comparable Firm Experience (25 points). Although firm has experience in sector analysis and projectimpact studies, their specific work experience related to 15 living wage proposals for projects that would be off-set by Proposer has demonstrated experience in performing subsidies. They do have interesting study methodologies similar analyses. that get beyond reviewing existing core data.

2 Perceived quality of experience performing similar economic and fiscal impact analysis. 3. Evaluation of Key Personnel (25 points). Degree to which specific staff proposed to be assigned to the project have demonstrated analytical experience relative to the requested study. Organizational structure for the project is provided with personnel functions and responsibilities identified. 17 Primary staff demonstrated experience in real estate and regional planning economic analysis - not a great deal of specific emphasis on wage analysis. Specialist brought on with experience in similar analysis of minimum wage for Ventura. 4. Fee for Services (10 Points). Does the proposal clearly identify the fee, and is the fee $100,000 or less as stated in the RFP? Consider this proposal compared to the other proposals; is the proposed level and quality of analysis higher or lower for a comparable cost? 8 Reasonable hourly rates and a fixed cost. Odd hourly rate proposed for production costs (assume this is admin staff?). $88K with split between $69K for report and $19K for presentations/meetings. TOTAL (Maximum Score = 1 00): 72 General Comments: Economic Analysis Firm's Name: Applied Economics Date: 12/19/14 Reviewer's Name: (for internal use only)

3 EVALUATION CRITERIA City of Los Angeles Living Wage RFB Response Scoring Document SCORE COMMENTS 1. Quality, Responsiveness and Technical Solution (40 points). Proposal addresses the following: Discusses how to establish a minimum wage in the City of $13.25 by 2017, and then increase the minimum wage to $15.25 an hour by 2019, to be followed by annual increases; provides comment on other timeline implementation options. Provides full analysis of economic impact of the subject minimum wage proposal including the positive and negative effects on the City. Provides an analysis of the minimum wage proposal's effects on the local economy, including the number of people who would benefit from and increased wage and the potential for additional tax revenues. Provides an analysis of unintended consequences, including the reduction of workers benefits and hours. Provides an analysis on job creation and job/business retention. Identifies specific industries, including non-profits and small businesses, that could experience negative impacts from the proposal; evaluates pros and cons of categorical exemptions or other solutions to reduce potential negative impacts; provides clear definitions of the industries identified. Provides an analysis for an option to establish a base and ceiling on automatic wage increases. Provides a review of options for the enforcement of a minimum wage ordinance. Provides a comparison of cost of living, demographics and median wage in the City versus othe_r metropolitan areas. 2. Comparable Firm Experience (25 points). 37 Will utilize ACS PUMS data, CPS, and OES, QCEW as primary data sources. Will also do research on studies conducted by research institutions and individuals as well as studies of Cities that have enacted or contemplated similar ordinances. Proposal drills down to a level beyond request and intends to provide a good level of detail on individuals and businesses impacted. Proposal asked good questions and presumes to be able to answer them. Firm has significant experience in subject matter and related fields. Proposer has demonstrated experience in performing 1 22 similar analyses. Perceived quality of experience performing similar economic and fiscal impact analysis.

4 3. Evaluation of Key Personnel (25 points). Degree to which specific staff proposed to be assigned to the project have demonstrated analytical experience relative to the requested study. Organizational structure for the project is provided with personnel functions and responsibilities identified. 22 Personnel are skilled and experienced in the subject matter and related fields. Have a wide variety of staff expertise and technical skills within the firm to accomplish the various aspects of the report. Very focused on California and Los Angeles work which is helpful but may not be able to offer as much experience in contrasting cities or environments. 4. Fee for Services (10 Points). Does the proposal clearly identify the fee, and is the fee $100,000 or less as stated in the RFP? Consider this proposal compared to the other proposals; is the proposed level and quality of analysis higher or lower for a comparable cost? 9 $42,925 total cost. Reasonably priced but did not include time for presentations and meetings in the cost. Assuming they add for that, price would still be lower than all other proposers. Hourly rates are reasonable. TOTAL (Maximum Score= 100): 90 General Comments: Economic Analysis Firm's Name: Beacon Economics Date: 12/19/14 Reviewer's Name: (for internal use only)

5 EVALUATION CRITERIA City of Los Angeles Living Wage RFB Response Scoring Document SCORE COMMENTS 1. Quality, Responsiveness and Technical Solution (40 points). Proposal addresses the following : Discusses how to establish a minimum wage in the City of $13.25 by 2017, and then increase the minimum wage to $15.25 an hour by 2019, to be followed by annual increases; provides comment on other timeline implementation options. Provides full analysis of economic impact of the subject minimum wage proposal including the positive and negative effects on the City. Provides an analysis of the minimum wage proposal's effects on the local economy, including the number of people who would benefit from and increased wage and the potential for additional tax revenues. Provides an analysis of unintended consequences, including the reduction of workers benefits and hours. Provides an analysis on job creation and job/business retention. Identifies specific industries, including non-profits and small businesses, that could experience negative impacts from the proposal; evaluates pros and cons of categorical exemptions or other solutions to reduce potential negative impacts; provides clear definitions of the industries identified. Provides an analysis for an option to establish a base and ceiling on automatic wage increases. Provides a review of options for the enforcement of a minimum wage ordinance. Provides a comparison of cost of living, demographics and median wage in the City versus other metropolitan areas. 2. Comparable Firm Experience (25 points). Proposer has demonstrated experience in performing similar analyses. Perceived quality of experience performing similar economic and fiscal impact analysis Data analysis will be based on use of ACS, regional multiplier analysis, IMPLAN, review of academic research and reliance on work they already conducted in prior studies for the City. May draw on international examples since there are not enough national examples of citywide minimum wage increase efforts. Discussion of methodology references other reports not included in the submitted proposal. Focus emphasizes academic approach. Proposal did not address timeline but assume they will meet proposed schedule? Major work nationally around minimum wage issues and recent work for City of Seattle, LA, Oakland, SF and San Diego. Research center publishes regular journal and focuses on labor issues.

6 3. Evaluation of Key Personnel (25 points). Degree to which specific staff proposed to be assigned to the project have demonstrated analytical experience relative to the requested study. Organizational structure for the project is provided with personnel functions and responsibilities identified. 22 Principal Michael Reich with sub-contract to Manuel Pastor at USC. Proposing to utilized other research specialists in the IRLE unit to conduct research. Combination of experience in economics, sociology, public policy and planning. Not clear in proposal if Manuel will be engaged to do the local study or not because it says "if time permits." 4. Fee for Services (1 0 Points). Does the proposal clearly identify the fee, and is the fee $100,000 or less as stated in the RFP? Consider this proposal compared to the other proposals; is the proposed level and quality of analysis higher or lower for a comparable cost? 6 Total cost is $84,375. Hourly rates are a little higher than other proposers. Does break out costs for report ($68K) and presentations ($16,875). Proposal states that they will rely on work already conducted and presented so cost seems somewhat high if they are just re-deploying existing analysis. TOTAL (Maximum Score= 100): 83 General Comments: Economic Analysis Firm's Name: UC Berkeley (IRLE) Date: December 19, 2014 Reviewer's Name: (for internal use only)

7 City of Los Angeles Living Wage RFB Response Scoring Document EVALUATION CRITERIA I SCORE COMMENTS 1. Quality, Responsiveness and Technical Solution (40 points). Proposal addresses the following: Discusses how to establish a minimum wage in the City of $13.25 by 2017, and then increase the minimum wage to $15.25 an hour by 2019, to be followed by annual increases; provides comment on other timeline implementation options. Provides full analysis of economic impact of the subject minimum wage proposal including the positive and negative effects on the City. Provides an analysis of the minimum wage proposal's effects on the local economy, including the number of people who would benefit from and increased wage and the potential for additional tax revenues. Provides an analysis of unintended consequences, including the reduction of workers benefits and hours. Provides an analysis on job creation and job/business retention. Identifies specific industries, including non-profits and small businesses, that could experience negative impacts from the proposal; evaluates pros and cons of categorical exemptions or other solutions to reduce potential negative impacts; provides clear definitions of the industries identified. Provides an analysis for an option to establish a base and ceiling on automatic wage increases. Provides a review of options for the enforcement of a minimum wage ordinance. Provides a comparison of cost of living, demographics and median wage in the City versus other metropolitan areas. 2. Comparable Firm Experience (25 points). Proposer has demonstrated experience in performing 1 20 similar analyses. Perceived quality of experience performing similar economic and fiscal impact analysis. 18 Proposal already incorporates potential conclusions reached. Research proposed includes review of other major cities where minimum wage ordinances have been enacted. Discusses addressing enforcement issues which is outside of the scope but is a secondary question. Proposal does not provide any information on methodology or data sources. Not clear aside from comparison to other cities, what research will be done to draw conclusions. Firm has produced a variety of reports on the topic and other related fields. Unclear how these reports and studies were conducted and what methodologies were utilized.

8 3. Evaluation of Key Personnel (25 points). Degree to which specific staff proposed to be assigned to the project have demonstrated analytical experience relative to the requested study. Organizational structure for the project is provided with personnel functions and responsibilities identified. 20 Two of the personnel have educational background in economics. Other staff are focused on sociology and urban planning. Proposal does not clearly state what each staff person will be working on and whether any outside staff or consultants will be relied on. 4. Fee for Services (10 Points). Does the proposal clearly identify the fee, and is the fee $100,000 or less as stated in the RFP? Consider this proposal compared to the other proposals; is the proposed level and quality of analysis higher or lower for a comparable cost? 5 Although hourly rate is reasonable, total cost is highest of all proposals. Not clear which staff person will be working on each task (cannot discern who will do what). Requires 8 weeks to complete (which is longer than time requested under RFP). TOTAL (Maximum Score= 100): 63 General Comments: Economic Analysis Firm's Name: Economic Roundtable Date: December Reviewer's Name: (for internal use only)