A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER PURSUANT TO INVITATION TO NEGOTIATE (ITN) NO. 2018-003-JC, FOR INSURANCE CERTIFICATE TRACKING SYSTEM AND RELATED SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING THE ADMINISTRATION TO ENTER INTO SIMULTANEOUS NEGOTIATIONS, WITH EXIGIS, LLC, AS THE TOP RANKED PROPOSER, AND COMPLIANCE HUB, AS THE SECOND HIGHEST RANKED PROPOSER; FURTHER, AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SELECT THE FINAL PROPOSER DEEMED BY THE CITY MANAGER TO OFFER THE BEST OVERALL TERMS AND SERVICE TO THE CITY; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE FINAL SELECTED PROPOSER, UPON CONCLUSION OF SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATIONS BY THE ADMINISTRATION.

Adopt the Resolution.

It is standard operating procedures to require vendors, contractors and others conducting business with the City to provide insurance coverage with limits, terms and conditions that reduce the City’s exposure to financial loss and sometimes costly litigation for work performed.  The process of tracking certificates of insurance for compliance with contract requirements is a cumbersome, time consuming, but necessary task that ultimately transfers risk away from the City. 

The City has over 1500 agreements (contracts, purchase orders, permits, and leases), most having insurance requirements that are applicable to the type of goods and services provided through the agreement.  The Procurement Department works closely with Risk Management in a continuing effort to maintain vendor/contractor compliance on existing contracts.  The Administration is seeking the most efficient and effective methodology to perform certificate of insurance tracking. Rather than add additional staffing to perform this necessary work, as many agencies do, the Administration believes greater efficiencies can be gained by contracting these services to industry experts in the field of insurance compliance.

Currently the City had been utilizing a piggybacked contract, awarded by Palm Beach County (Contract 13-100-MW), to Insurance Tracking Services, Inc. (“ITSI”). However, ITSI has defaulted on its contractual obligations (See Attachment A). As a result, the Administration is seeking to expeditiously secure a replacement agreement, pursuant to the ITN, in order to continue providing these critical services to the City.

ITN PROCESS

On December 13, 2017, the City Commission approved the issuance of Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) No. 2018-003-JC, for Insurance Certificate Tracking System and Related Services. On December 18, 2017, the ITN was issued. A mandatory pre-proposal conference to provide information to the proposers submitting a response was held on January 10, 2018. ITN responses were due and received on February 9, 2018. The City received a total of five (5) proposals. The City received proposals from the following proposers: American Management Control Systems, Compliance Hub, Exigis, LLC, Insurance Tracking Services, Inc, and JDI Data Corporation. During the course of Procurement’s responsiveness assessment, it was determined that the following three (3) proposers, American Management Control Systems, JDI Data Corporation, and Insurance Tracking Services, Inc, failed to meet either the ITN’s minimum requirements or neglected to submit a fully executed proposal as required. 

The Evaluation Committee appointed by the City Manager, pursuant to LTC# 067-2018, convened on February 28, 2018 to consider the two (2) responsive proposals received from Compliance Hub and Exigis, LLC. The Committee was comprised of Andrew Bejel, Risk & Benefits Analyst, Risk Management, City of Miami Beach; Georgette Daniels, Financial Analyst III, Emergency Management, City of Miami Beach; and, Alian Gonzalez, Contracts Compliance Officer, Procurement, City of Miami Beach.

The Committee was provided an overview of the project, information relative to the City’s Cone of Silence Ordinance and the Government in the Sunshine Law. The Committee was also provided with general information on the scope of services and a copy of each proposal. The Committee was instructed to score and rank each proposal pursuant to the evaluation criteria established in the ITN. The ITN required that the Committee score and rank proposers in the following areas: 1) experience and qualifications 2) scope of services and 3) approach and methodology.

Scores for Qualifications and Approach. The following table indicates the results of the Committee’s scoring of 1) experience and qualifications 2) scope of services and 3) approach and methodology.

Compliance Hub

According to their proposal, Compliance Hub has been providing insurance certificate tracking certificate management services for public and private agencies since 2010. Compliance Hub designed a cloud-based tracking solution, going live in 2011 to support the Pasadena Unified School District (PUSD). Since that time, Compliance Hub has continued to support private and public agencies in their certificate compliance efforts included the following clients, City of South Gate, San Jose Water Company, County of Kern, California, and Southern California Gas Company.

Exigis, LLC

According to their proposal, Exigis, LLC, combines over 15 years’ experience providing enterprise solutions to over 120 public and private sector agencies and organizations. Exigis has developed a risk management automation system, called RiskWorks. This full-service certificate management system leverages proprietary, web-based automation to fulfill the needs of ITSI diverse clientele. Exigis provides certificate management services to large and small public and private sector clients, including the following, City and County of San Francisco (CCSF), CSAC Excess Insurance Authority, IBM, Pfizer, MARS, San Bernardino County, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and Miami-Dade Public Schools.

As previously noted, the City requires that most contractors, firms or individuals doing business with the City carry the appropriate levels of insurance as determined by the Risk Management Office, including (but not limited to) all contractors performing work for the City, those leasing City properties, beach concessionaires, valet parking firms, business tax receipt (BTR) applicants, and those utilizing City facilities for events. Requiring and monitoring compliance with insurance requirements mitigates risk and reduces the City’s exposure in all operational areas of the City. An online insurance tracking and compliance system expedites compliance with insurance requirements and provides efficiencies in the monitoring process. The City, until very recently, had contracted Insurance Tracking Services, Inc. (“ITSI”) for the online tracking services. Unfortunately, ITSI has defaulted on its contractual obligations, which subsequently resulted in its contract having to be terminated (See Attachment A). Therefore, it is imperative that a replacement contract be awarded as quickly as possible to mitigate risks.

I have reviewed all submissions and the results of the evaluation process. In doing so, I note that the Evaluation Committee has unanimously ranked Exigis, LLC as the top-ranked proposer, followed by the unanimous ranking of the Compliance Hub as the second-ranked proposer. In considering the qualifications of both firms, I find that each the required experience to perform the services. Additionally, each firm has experience with public sector clients with needs similar to the City’s. Therefore, I find that it is in the City’s best interest to negotiate with both firms to arrive at the agreement that provides the City with the best combination of quick implementation and cost effectiveness.

Therefore, I recommend that the Mayor and City Commission approve the resolution authorizing the Administration to enter into simultaneous negotiations with Exigis, LLC, as the top ranked proposer, and Compliance Hub, as the second highest ranked proposer. Additionally, given the time sensitivities of these services, I recommend that the Mayor and City Commission authorize the City Manager to select and execute an agreement, upon review and approval of the City Attorney, with the firm deemed by the City Manager to be in the best interest of the City. Further, I find that, pursuant to Section 2-371(h) of the City Code, the award must be made without delay in order to protect the substantial interests of the city.