Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Contract Security Guard Services

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Contract Security Guard Services"— Presentation transcript:

1 Contract Security Guard Services
Presented to the Board of County Commissioners March 8, 2011 As a result of some information obtained by Commissioner Edwards and Commissioner Brummer, regarding a State contract for Security Guard Services, we took a look at our current contract with G4S Secure Solutions USA (formerly Wackenhut Security) to see if we could obtain some savings in our security budget based on the State’s contract rates.

2 Security Guard Services
Outline Historical perspective Current contract review State Contract Negotiations with G4S Recommendations Here is the outline of my presentation.

3 Security Guard Services
Outline Historical perspective Current contract review State Contract Negotiations with G4S Recommendations

4 Security Guard Services
Guard Services since 1985 Services instituted following Courthouse shootings Original services for Courthouse sites only Contract has grown with County needs Security guard services were instituted in 1985 following the deadly shootings at the Orange County Courthouse in 1984. Originally these services were for our courthouses only. But after the attacks of 9/11, the contract grew to provide increased protection for other facilities such as this building, our utility plants, the Juvenile Assessment Center, and others.

5 Security Guard Services
Prior Contract Providers Wells Fargo / 1990 Securex / 1994 Argenbright / 2002 G4S Secure Solutions USA* – 2002 / Present * Formerly Wackenhut We have had several providers over the years as shown here.

6 Security Guard Services
Reasons for change Lack of consistency/reliability Low wages High turnover rate Serious management issues Unsettling to Courthouse occupants The reasons we changed providers in the past was because we couldn’t get consistency and reliability of service. At courthouse screening stations it was nearly impossible to know who would be showing up for work that day. With the low wages that were being paid, security guards would leave with little or no notice to take a job with Disney or some other local employer who was paying above minimum wage. This created some serious issues for us and the Sheriff’s office and was very unsettling to the judiciary and other occupants of the courthouse.

7 Security Guard Services
Major Contract Revision in 2002 Require minimum guard pay levels Improve retention and quality of guard Enhance Training for screening Improve security at Courthouses & other sites in response to 9/11 Improve Supervisory requirements So, in 2002, we made some major contract revisions. We instituted minimum guard pay levels to improve retention and the quality of the guards. In response to 9/11, we required enhanced training to improve the security at the courthouses and other sites. And we made sure that the requirements for the Supervisory personnel were improved.

8 Security Guard Services
Public/Private Joint Effort at Courthouses Contractor provides building security and performs scanning role Sheriff’s Office oversees Court security measures When we talk about security at the courthouses, I want to make it clear that this is a joint effort between our contracted security provider and the Sheriff’s office. Our contractor provides the building security and performs the scanning function. They work hand in hand with the Sheriff’s Office and have provided high quality people to perform these functions. The security in the courtrooms is handled completely by the Sheriff’s Court Deputies. (185 Court Deputy positions – 16 now vacant) 45 Judges in main Courthouse

9 Security Guard Services
Outline Historical perspective Current contract review State Contract Negotiations with G4S Recommendations

10 Security Guard Services
Contract with G4S In 2002 G4S was selected through RFP In 2007 G4S was again selected through an RFP 3-Year contract started March 1, 2007 2 One Year Renewals Began Year 5 on March 1, 2011 Negotiations for final year began in Dec. 2010 Contract expires February 28, 2012 Current Annual Usage: $5.5 Million In 2002, G4S was selected through an RFP to provide security guard services to Orange County. They performed extremely well and in 2007 were again selected through the RFP process based on past performance and competitive pricing. The current contract with G4S started on March 1, It was a 3 year contract with 2 one year renewals. We are now in the last year of the contract which expires on February 28, In order to assure the continuity of service, we begin the renewal process at least 90 days prior to the expiration date of a contract to assure that we have enough time to issue an RFP should the contract not be renewed. Under the current terms of the contract the annual usage is approximately $5.5 Million.

11 Security Guard Services
FY 2011 Reduction in Manning Hours/Costs - $956,000 Annually Courts – 5,096 Hours/$117,309 County Admin – 10,634 Hours/$184,500 Utilities – 17,472 Hours/$254,916 Public Works – 12,922 Hours/$188,532 Fire Rescue – 8,736 Hours/$127,458 Other – 5,772 Hours/$84,324 The $5.5 million that is in this years budget is a reduction over last years budget by nearly $1,000,000. As you can see on this slide we reduced security guard services throughout Orange County in all areas – from the courts to our office buildings without jeopardizing our employees or citizens safety.

12 Security Guard Services
Offices 13% Courthouses 41% Utilities 14% Currently our security guard services are divided as show here with 41% in the courthouses 32% in our Corrections and Juvenile Assessment Center 14% serving our Utilities Department 13% securing our other facilities Corrections/Juvenile Assessment 32 %

13 Security Guard Services
Courthouses - 41% Orange County Courthouse Juvenile Justice Center Winter Park Civil Court Apopka/Ocoee Civil Court The 41% for courthouses includes the main Courthouse on Orange Avenue, the Juvenile Justice Center, the Winter Park Traffic Court, and the courts at the Ocoee and Apopka Service Centers

14 Security Guard Services
Corrections & Juvenile Assessment - 32% Corrections Administration Booking and Release Center Perimeter Posts Video Visitation Juvenile Assessment Center The 32% for Corrections includes the Administration Building, the Booking and Release Center where the courtrooms are located, various perimeter posts, Video Visitation, and the Juvenile Assessment Center.

15 Security Guard Services
Utilities Sites - 14% Administration Landfill Presidents Drive Water Reclamation Regional Water Supply Utilities, which manages their own portion of the contract, has security guard services at their Administration Center, the Landfill, their Presidents Drive facility, the water reclamation sites and the regional water supply sites as well as roving patrols at the various water tower facilities they have.

16 Security Guard Services
Offices - 13% Administration Center IOC I Regional History Center Barnett Park Medical Clinic 13% of the security guard contract is for services at this building, IOC I (where Human Resources is located), the Regional History Center, Barnett Park, the Mabel Butler Building, and the Medical Clinic.

17 Security Guard Services
Topics Historical perspective Current contract review State Contract Negotiations with G4S Recommendations

18 Security Guard Services
State Contract for Security Guard Services Basic Security Services Minimal qualifications contained in RFP Three Vendors Allegiance Allied Barton G4S Secure Solutions USA The State of Florida put out an RFP for Security Guard Services. That RFP and the subsequent contract contains minimal specifications in several areas – which I will elaborate on in just a moment. The three vendors selected – with varying price levels – were: Allegiance Allied Barton G4S Secure Solutions USA (our vendor)

19 Security Guard Services
State Contract Concerns Minimal Specifications Inconsistent or unidentified guard levels between vendors No training requirements No site specific training identified No screening training No Minimum pay levels set Necessary to improve retention and consistent performance We have numerous concerns with the State contract as it relates to the qualifications of the various levels of security guards. For example, what constitutes a level 3 guard in one vendor’s proposal may be different than in another vendor’s proposal in terms of experience, training, education, etc. There is no requirement for screening training in the State contract. There is in ours. Back in 2002 the Board decided we needed minimum pay levels to provide for improved retention and consistency of the workforce. The State’s contract does not provide for minimum pay standards and we believe, based on our experience, that this leads to high turnover and inconsistent performance.

20 Security Guard Services
Use of the State Contract Specifications do not support County Operational requirements State does not manage Courthouses Contract does not address screening requirements Just to recap: The State contract does not support our operational requirements. The State does not manage courthouses. The State contract does not address the screening requirements that we have throughout the County not only in our courthouses, but also in our Correctional facilities, and Administration Center.

21 Security Guard Services
Topics Historical perspective Current contract review State Contract Negotiations with G4S Recommendations

22 Security Guard Services
Negotiate reduction in Hourly rates with G4S For last year of contract Use State Contract Pricing as basis Different requirements Negotiated an Estimated Savings of $496,276 for last year of contract Once we were made aware of the State contract, we contacted G4S and began a negotiation with them for reduced rates. While we used the State contract as a basis for the negotiations, we clearly understood that the differences in the requirements of the two contracts, which I just explained to you, would make it extremely difficult for them to match the price they gave the State. We were able to negotiate a $496,000 or a 9% reduction from the current pricing.

23 Security Guard Services
Anticipated Usage Net Savings Current Contract $5,528,296 $0.00 State Contract (G4S) $4,902,783 $625,513 Proposed Rate Reduction $5,032,020 $496,276 If we compare the State rates to the negotiated rates you will see that if we went strictly by the State rates we would realize a $625,000 annual saving or approximately $129,000 more than the negotiated rates. However, as I just said, the State rates are not based on the same criteria that we used for our contract and consequently we will pay more to assure that we are getting the higher quality services we feel are necessary to adequately address our needs.

24 Security Guard Services
Outline Historical perspective Current contract review State Contract Negotiations with G4S Recommendations

25 Security Guard Services
Recommendations for RFP Refinements Security Guard Services divided into 4 Lots #1 – Courthouses & Admin Center #2 – Corrections & Juvenile Assessment Center #3 – Utilities #4 – Other Buildings Allows for award to multiple vendors Tailors guard requirements to building requirements Maximize potential savings while maintaining the appropriate level of security We have some recommendations when we do go out for a new contract: 4 lots Allows for multiple vendors Tailors guard requirements to building requirements. Maximizes the potential savings while maintaining the appropriate level of security.

26 Security Guard Services
Recommendations Accept negotiated hourly rates with G4S Modify Requirement in the RFP Issue RFP in October 2011 Select firm in December 2011 Transition in February 2012 Recommendations: READ Why not do this now? As I indicated earlier, low turnover and consistent performance are key to providing good security services. We learned this the hard way back in the late 1990’s. We believe that keeping the schedule shown on your screen is the best way to maintain that consistency and reduce turnover while still saving the county approximately $500,000 over our current contract and allowing us to transition in a systematic manner.

27 Contract Security Guard Services
Presented to the Board of County Commissioners March 8, 2011

28 Security Guard Services
State Contract Minimal Specifications Inconsistent guard levels No screening training No Minimum pay levels County Contract Detailed Specifications Three guard levels Screening training & Site Specific training Minimum pay levels

Download ppt "Contract Security Guard Services"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google