INFORMATION SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS INC.
135 WEST
rwooodbos@yahoo.com
MONTGOMERT
ST .,
BALTIMORE,
MD
21230
4 1 0 -5 2 8 -1 1 1 2
September 24, 2009
Peralta Community College District
333 East 8th Street
Oakland, CA 94606
Attn: Evelyn Lord
Dear Readers:
I am sincerely pleased to respond to your inquiry about consulting services to assist the
Peralta Community College District in the procurement of an integrated, multi-user, multi-function
library system to replace its SirsiDynix Horizon system, a system that no longer has enhancement
releases issued for it.
The Peralta Community College District provides a wide range of programs to approximately
25,000 students on four campuses: Berkeley City College, College of Alameda, Laney College, and
Merritt College. The current district-wide integrated library system has been in place for
approximately ten years. The libraries would like to replace the system with one that has broad
functionality that is well supported and regularly enhanced.
Presumably, you want to have the system support all of the modules included in the Horizon
system: acquisitions, cataloging, circulation, and online patron access catalog. You may wish to
consider additional functionality--for example, serials control, collection agency interface, content
enhancement, e-commerce support, portal technology, etc.
I have set forth my qualifications, a tentative work plan, and my fees in the following
paragraphs.
Qualifications
I have been a full-time information technology consultant since 1978. I have assisted over
1,000 institutions in the selection and implementation of integrated library systems and other
information technologies. My work has encompassed the full range of library types, sizes and
organizational groupings from individual libraries, through consortia of libraries of different types
and sizes, to planning activities on behalf of organizations with state or province-wide
responsibilities for guiding library development. I have also assisted bodies with a national focus,
1
such as the Council on Library Resources, the Library of Congress' Network Advisory Committee,
and the National Library of Australia.
With regard to integrated library systems, I have ascertained automation needs, prepared
specifications and RFPs, evaluated responses, negotiated contracts, and prepared implementation
plans for the installation of stand-alone and shared integrated library systems. In the past three years,
I have undertaken more than 120 such engagements.
I have published widely in the library automation field. Representative publications include:
Information Technologies and Space Planning; Library Manager's Guide to Automation (3
editions); The Library Administrator's Automation Handbook; and Automating Library Acquisitions:
Issues and Outlook. I have prepared several monograph-length studies for Library Technology
Reports. Topics covered include serials control, technical services automation, the integrating and
interfacing of automated library systems, client/server technologies for libraries, a model RFP,
security products for libraries, information technology standards, and imaging.
I edited Library Systems Newsletter, a publication of the American Library Association, for
more than two decades; and Information Systems Report, a bi-monthly online newsletter, for five
years. I am also the author of 35 recent TechNotes on the Public Library Association’s Web site.
I am a professional librarian (University of Washington, MALS, 1962) with 16 years of
library administrative experience. I began my professional career as the Acquisitions Librarian
at the University of Utah in 1962 and subsequently served as Associate Director of Libraries for
Technical Services until 1970. From 1970-1975, I served as the Director of Libraries at the
University of Tennessee, and from 1975-1978, as University Librarian of Princeton University.
I will undertake all of the work myself, and will write all reports and other deliverables.
Please see the appendix for a partial list of clients. I will be happy to provide contact
information for the institutions that you consider most comparable to your own.
Work Plan
The following specific tasks are proposed, but I will be happy to modify the approach:
Component A---Needs Assessment
Task 1.
Review available documentation on the libraries, including the strategic plan, annual
reports, current integrated library system contract, current system configuration, an
inventory of remote peripherals, and any planning documents that may have been
prepared.
Task 2.
Prepare and submit a questionnaire to gather additional data on the nature and
volume of current activities, policies and procedures, priorities for future automation,
and any other information not available in the documents reviewed.
2
Task 3.
Undertake a telephone conference call with representatives of the libraries to discuss
issues that may affect the procurement. [If you wish, this task can be replaced with email].
Component B---Written Needs Assessment Report
Task 4.
Prepare and submit brief written needs assessment report which discusses all of the
issues identified, including breadth of functionality, system sizing, viable vendors,
implementation timetable, migration of records, and approximate costs. The report
will discuss functionality not included in the current system that the libraries may
wish to consider.
Component C---RFP Preparation
Task 5.
Using the information gathered in the needs assessment, prepare a draft RFP. The
components of the RFP will include instructions to bidders, general system
requirements, detailed functional specifications, minimum hardware requirements,
vendor support requirements, and acceptance test and ongoing reliability criteria.
The RPP will include detailed system performance requirements that must be met for
the system to be accepted, and which must continue to be met for as long as the
system is under vendor maintenance.
As requested, the RFP will spell out in detail the successful vendor’s responsibility
for migrating records output from the existing system to the new system.
While the order in which the sections appear and what they are called may vary, I
strongly recommend that all of the foregoing sections be included because the RFP
and the vendor's proposal can be incorporated into the contract between the parties,
therefore, providing the libraries substantial legal protection.
Task 6.
Submit the draft RFP and solicit questions and comments.
Task 7.
Discuss selected items in the draft RFP in a conference telephone call.
Task 8.
Revise the RFP and submit one electronic copy.
Task 9.
Provide a list of names and addresses of vendors able to meet at least 97 percent of
the requirements in the RFP.
Component D---Proposal Evaluation
I recommend that the evaluation of vendor proposals occur before demonstrations are
undertaken. This not only makes it possible to limit the demonstrations to vendors that have
submitted acceptable proposals, but also makes it possible to focus demonstration questions on areas
of possible weakness.
3
Task 10.
Prepare and submit a written evaluation of three responses to the RFP within two
weeks of receipt of the proposals at my office. My evaluations address compliance
with the functional requirements with general release software which is installed in
comparable libraries, software design, suitability of the hardware configuration,
conformity to standards, delivery and implementation schedule, vendor viability and
past performance, five-year costs of owning and operating the system, and other
factors particularly relevant to the client.
[In most situations, it is possible for a client's staff to eliminate vendor responses in
excess of three. In the event that evaluation of more than three responses by the
consultant is required, additional evaluations incur an additional fee].
Task 11.
Discuss the evaluation report in a conference telephone call with representatives of
the libraries to resolve any questions regarding the evaluation.
Task 12.
Revise the proposal evaluation report as needed.
Component E---Contract Negotiation
I perform this service more often than any other. Each year more than a score of libraries and
consortia retain me to negotiate a contract after selecting a vendor. I have negotiated with each of
the major vendors dozens of times, therefore, I know the negotiating priorities and strategies of each.
Task 13.
After the libraries have decided which vendor to invite for negotiation, prepare and
submit recommended negotiating points. The points will be identified by comparing
the RFP and the vendor’s proposal to identify areas in which the gap between the two
needs to be closed. I will also solicit recommendations for negotiating points from
the libraries. The recommended negotiating points will be submitted within two
weeks of authorization to proceed.
Task 14.
Discuss the recommended negotiating points in a conference telephone call with
representatives of the libraries.
Task 15.
Revise the negotiating points as needed.
Task 16.
Send a copy to the vendor invited to negotiate a contract with a request that
it indicate which are acceptable without negotiation.
Task 17.
Undertake a two-hour negotiation by telephone conference. More than 95 percent
of negotiations can be completed within two hours. [Should a second conference
call be required, there is an additional charge].
Task 18.
Prepare and submit a written summary of the negotiation.
4
Component F---Contract Review
Task 19.
Review the draft contract to see that it includes all of the substantive agreements
reached in negotiation, and submit requirements for changes in writing.
[Most clients have this task performed by their legal counsel as s/he has to review it
for conformity to local statutes].
Component G---Implementation Assistance
Task 20.
I will be available for implementation assistance by telephone and e-mail for up to
four hours within the proposed fees. This assistance typically consists of answering
questions and resolving conflicts with the vendor. [Hours in excess of four are
available at additional cost, but fewer than one out of a hundred clients have required
more than four hours].
Project Schedule
I will submit each deliverable within two weeks from authorization to proceed. In most cases
it is possible to do the work in less time, but two weeks is budgeted to avoid unexpected conflicts
with obligations to other clients. Revisions almost never require more than one week from receipt of
questions and comments.
The time from my retention to the issuance of the RFP typically is eight to ten weeks, but the
time depends very much on how promptly the client responds to the drafts submitted to it. Vendors
usually require eight weeks to respond. Evaluation and contract negotiation consume another eight
weeks. Contract preparation, revisions and signing take at least four weeks. Installation and system
start-up vary a great deal from vendor to vendor, but usually is completed within 12 to 20 weeks of
signing. The total elapsed time typically is 40 to 50 weeks. The time it takes to become fully
operational depends more on a library than the vendor. It can range from one to 12 weeks.
If you wish, I will be happy to work with you to shorten the schedule.
Fees
It is my practice to quote a fixed professional fee for all work. The professional fee is based
on a rate of $150 per hour, a rate that includes all indirect costs (overhead). In addition, I seek to
recover reimbursable expenses (direct costs), including word processing, photocopying,
telephone/facsimile transmission charges, etc. These are billed at cost. When a client prefers it, I
quote a fixed fee that includes both professional fees and all expenses.
The fixed professional fee for Components A-B, Tasks 1-4 (Needs Assessment) as set forth
herein is $750. Reimbursable expenses are estimated at $140, most of it for word processing and
long distance telephone charges.
The fixed professional fee for Component C, Tasks 5-9 (RFP Preparation) is $1,350.
Reimbursable expenses--primarily word processing--are estimated at $380.
5
The fixed professional fee for optional Component D, Tasks 10-12 (Response Evaluation) is
$2,500 for three proposals. Reimbursable expenses are estimated at $100. [In the unlikely event that
additional evaluations are required, each additional one incurs a professional fee of $800].
The fixed professional fee for optional Component E, Tasks 13-18 (Contract Negotiation) is
$1,400. Reimbursable expenses are estimated at $50.
The fixed professional fee for optional Component F, Task 19 (Contract Review) is $600.
Reimbursable expenses are estimated at $40.
There is no fee for Component G, Task 20 (Implementation Assistance) unless more than
four hours of time is requested. In that event, the rate is $150 per hour, plus reimbursable expenses.
Additional work will be billed at $150 per hour, plus reimbursable expenses. A written
proposal will be submitted for any work requested beyond that set forth herein.
I invoice on completion of each component. Interest of 1.5 percent per month is charged on
invoices that remain outstanding for more than 45 days.
Except as modified by mutual agreement, this proposal is binding on me through September
30, 2010.
Cordially,
Richard W. Boss
Richard W. Boss
Senior Consultant
RWB/ma
6
Appendix
Representative Clients
Alaska Courts (AK)
Alexandrian Public Library (IN)
Alabama Library Association (AL)
Allegheny Community College (MD)
American Library Association (IL)
Angola Carnegie Public Library (IN)
Anne Arundel Community College (MD)
Atlantic City Free Public Library (NJ)
Blue Ridge Regional Library (VA)
Board of Education (NY)
Boston Public Library (MA)
Bowman Gray School of Medicine (NC)
Brooklyn Public Library (NY)
California Institute of Technology (CA)
California Judicial Center Library (CA)
CAPCON (DC)
Central Mississippi Regional Library System (MS)
Central Rappahannock Regional Library System (VA)
Cherry Hill Free Public Library (NJ)
City of Falls Church Public Library (VA)
College of San Mateo (CA)
College of Wooster (OH)
7
Columbus Public Library (NE)
Concord Public Library (CT)
Council of State University Libraries of Illinois
Cromaine Public Library (MI)
Cuesta College (CA)
Dallas Public Library (TX)
Dauphin County Library System (PA)
Drake University (IA)
Fayette County Library (IN)
Five Colleges Libraries (MA)
Ford Foundation (NY)
Gilchrist & Crowe Architects, P.A. (FL)
Goshen Public Library (IN)
Graduate Theological Union (CA)
Greenville County Library (SC)
Grinnell College (IA)
Hancock County Library System (MS)
Hartnell College (CA)
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Hong Kong)
Huron Valley Library System (MI)
Information Control Systems Inc. (MD)
International Finance Corporation (DC)
Judge George W. Armstrong Library (MS)
LEAP (CT)
Lackawanna County Library System (PA)
Los Rios Community College District (CA)
Loudoun County Public Library (VA)
Lowndes County Library System (MS)
Maitland Public Library (FL)
Marcellus Wright, Cox, and Smith, Architects (VA)
Massachusetts General Hospital Health Sciences Library (MA)
Medical Library Center (NY)
Michigan Council of Library Directors (MI)
Michigan Library Association (MI)
Millburn Free Public Library (NJ)
Mills College Library (CA)
Mississippi Library Commission (MS)
Mobil Oil R&D Library
Mobile Public Library (AL)
Monmouth College (NJ)
Montgomery County-Norristown Public Library (PA)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Nebraska Library Commission (NE)
New York City Schools Library System (NY)
New York Public Library (NY)
Newark Public Library (NJ)
North Bay Cooperative Library System (CA)
Omaha Public Library (NE)
8
Palm Beach County Public Library (FL)
Phillipsburg Free Public Library (NJ)
Plum Creek Library System (MN)
Plymouth District Library (MI)
Public Library of Charlotte & Mecklenburg County (NC)
Saline District Library (MI)
San Diego Community College District (CA)
San Diego Public Law Library (CA)
San Joaquin Valley Library System (CA)
Santa Rosa Junior College Library (CA)
Social Law Library (MA)
Sonoma County Library (CA)
Sonoma State University (CA)
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (KY)
St. Anselm College (NH)
Stottler Stagg & Associates (FL)
Supreme Court of the United States (DC)
Suwannee River Regional Library (FL)
The Library Corporation (WV)
The Peddie School (NJ)
Union County Library (NJ)
Union Carbide Corporation (WV)
United Nations Management Advisory Services (NY)
U.S. Courts (for the full Twelve Circuits)
U.S. Geological Survey (VA)
Universal Technology Corporation (OH)
University Club of New York (NY)
University of Alaska (AK)
University of Bridgeport (CT)
University of Massachusetts (MA)
University of Michigan Law Library (MI)
University of Richmond (VA)
Victoria Public Library (TX)
Virginia Historical Society (VA)
Virginia Military Institute (VA)
VOA Architects (FL)
Wartburg College Library (IA)
Washington College (MD)
Washington County Library (MN)
Wayne Public Library (NJ)
Western New York Learning Resources Center (NY)
Wilmington College (DE)
Wilmington Institute Library (DE)
9