Loading...
SR-080610-1E~-+ Supplemental sanfta nion.es City Council Report City Council Meeting: June 10, 2008 Agenda Item: ~_~ To: Mayor and City Council From: Donald Patterson, Assistant to the City Manager, Management Services Subject: Non-Smoking Ordinance Outreach Campaign Executive Summary At its May 27, 2008 meeting, Council requested additional information regarding the selection process used that resulted. in the committee's recommendation that selected Southard Communication as the best proposer. Consistent with numerous other consultant solicitations by the City, the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the non- smoking outreach campaign was developed in a manner and issued. to allow many firms to present their approaches and qualifications to meet the needs of the City. The City's RFP process is deliberately designed to provide some. flexibility in determining the best overall proposer based on the factors outlined in Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 2.24.073.. The RFP process is also intentionally designed to spread the widest reasonable reach so that.the City obtains the benefit of receiving as many potentially qualified proposals as possible. While after initial review clearly unqualified proposers are culled from further consideration, there is ample room at the beginning of the evaluation process to consider firms whose initial proposals meet every possible qualification as well as City, discretion to consider those from firms whose proposals substantially meet all criteria and whose proposals appear to present only minor deviations. As an example, if all the criteria, including the 5:00 p.m. deadline were stringently applied to the proposers, all of the finalist would have been eliminated. It is therefore believed that all respondents were treated fairly and equitably and that we best responded to the intent of the competitive process to solicit proposals. The City can and will review its practices and make any recommended changes as appropriate. For this RFP, recognizing the importance of developing a campaign that was supported by and developed with diverse stakeholders, the selection committee was broadened to include representatives from all affected City departments including the City Manager's Office, the City Attorney's Office; the Big Blue Bus and Community and Cultural Services, as well as representatives from affected stakeholder groups, such as the Convention and Visitors Bureau, the Pier Restoration Corporation and. the Bayside District. Each stakeholder separately evaluated each proposal and all of the scores were tabulated. The factors and qualifications outlined in the RFP disqualified plainly non-qualified firms but in keeping with the desire to maintain as broadly competitive pool as possible, all firms whose proposals met all or virtually all of the initial criteria and who received high overall scores from the stakeholders were requested to provide additional information. In the end, the final scores reflected strengths and weaknesses in the 1 various factors from all companies and the selection committee's recommendation for the best overall proposal is consistent with the competitive RFP process. Background The City frequently utilizes a RFP process to select firms that are ultimately contracted with to provide professional services. The RFP process is used to ensure a fair, competitive selection process and to provide all interested parties the opportunity to present their ideas to accomplish the goals of the project. RFPs typically are designed to provide enough flexibility for interested parties to propose approaches and methods thaf can meet the needs of the City. RFPs are also designed to solicit the best ideas from a company and are meant to be flexible enough to allow firms to demonstrate their abilities in a variety of creative ways. Scopes of work and minimum qualifications are designed to be broad enough to ensure that firms have experience in the given field and know the areas of expertise that should be focused on in the submitted proposal. These qualifications are used to screen out proposers that do not demonstrate basic ability to provide the service. However, if a firm demonstrates overall ability and qualifications required to deliver the project but does not specifically address one aspect of the scope or qualifications, they are routinely continued in the selection process to be evaluated against all proposers in order to determine the overall best proposer. Following initial screening, RFPs are reviewed by a selection committee of Staff and sometimes non- staff stakeholders. The selection committee's role is to review all proposals against the outlined scope, goals and qualifications and determine rankings utilizing the criteria set forth in the RFP and the municipal code. Following the initial screening process, top- ranked firms based on review and scoring of all criteria are invited to an interview which is used. to ask specific questions about the firm and it also provides the opportunity for the proposers to provide additional information. The committee makes its recommendation based on review of .all criteria and material provided in the written proposal, the interview and any additional materials provided. Discussion In February 2008, an RFP was issued to develop and implement the public outreach campaign. The primary goal of this campaign will be to increase awareness of the 2 Santa .Monica smoking ordinances and reduce smoking in restricted public areas and be effective among several target audiences, including residents, domestic and foreign tourists, and regional visitors. The RFP defined the primary goal of the project as to increase awareness of the Santa Mohica smoking ordinance among all target audiences and reduce smoking in restricted public areas. In order to accomplish this, the firm was expected to-work closely-with the-City and-otherstakeholders to-create-a program that .will be effective in several target audiences, composed of residents, tourists (domestic and foreign) and regional visitors who take day trips to Santa Monica to work, shop and/or recreate. The RFP specified minimum qualifications exactly as follows: All applicants should have demonstrable qualifications in the following areas: • Experience designing and implementing social marketing campaigns and programs. • Experience Creating campaigns that are effective across diverse cultures and cultures and backgrounds. • Ability fo translate, literally and culturally, into other languages including Spanish and Japanese: • Experience working with public agencies. Staff reviewed proposals. against the criteria outlined above and found that Southard Communications complied with the terms of the RFP: Specifically related to the ability to translate into other languages, staff found that Southard provided demonstrated experience in reaching diverse audiences through their work with U.S. Military Academy at West Point where they outlined an outreach effort targeting the Spanish speaking community. Additionally, throughout their proposal, staff felt that Southard demonstrated the ability to develop programs that targeted diverse groups; such as families, kids, businesses and other targeted diverse stakeholder groups. As the RFP was intended to outline the goals of the program and to be broad enough to allow the selection committee to consider all relative factors, the lack of a specific example in Japanese 3 was determined to be a minor irregularity and not an initial disqualifying factor and that the RFP would be further evaluated by the entire committee and ranked with other proposals received based on all information provided. In other words in the initial screening of proposals, the phrase "including Spanish and Japanese" was considered to be illustrative of the need of each proposer to demonstrate wide ranging language skills.. It was not intended to be limited exclusively or even primarily to just these languages. In order to ensure a broad representation of stakeholders in the evaluatioh process for the non-smoking outreach campaign, staff sought representatives from all affected departments and major stakeholder groups.- This resulted in a large- evaluation committee that had representatives from 'the following departments and stakeholder groups: City City Manager's Office City Attorney's Office Big Blue Bus Community and Cultural Services Stakeholder Groups Convention and Visitors Bureau Pier Restoration Corporation Bayside District Each evaluator was asked to review the proposals independently and to provide a score based on the structure and experience of the firm, the proposed program capabilities, program logistics and documentation. The specifics under each section were developed to be consistent with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 2.24.073, "Professional Services Contracts." Following the independent evaluation of all factors, average scores were calculated.. The top three firms, Southard, Pathways Communication and Healthier Solutions were 4 invited to interviews: During the interview process firms were provided the opportunity to present additional information and were asked questions to verify or expand on their proposal and qualifications. The evaluation committee .discussed the results of the interview and considered additional information received with that provided in the written response. The committee unanimously agreed that Southard Communication presented the best overall proposal. Specifically, Southard: • Demonstrated experience designing and implementing social marketing campaigns and programs through their work with Hooked on Phonics and PBS and a campaign aimed at helping people quit smoking entitled "Smokebusters." • Demonstrated ability to create campaigns that. are effective across diverse cultures and backgrounds and their experience working with various non-profit and private companies. The. campaign approach presented by Southard was comprehensive and innovative. They proposed a research-based approach to effectively target diverse audiences that was based on developing a baseline measurement of awareness of the non-smoking regulations and awareness/recognition of the existing "Fresh Air Santa Monica" campaign. Examples of campaign ideas include development of a toolkit for businesses, targeted media and business outreach, targeted stakeholder and smoker outreach, developing partnerships with various affected groups to design a comprehensive campaign that quickly gains support from the various affected stakeholders and groups and logo and. brand development. With respect to language, during the review process Southard demonstrated to the satisfaction of the evaluation committee that it had broad language skills, including Japanese. Specially, Southard presented information on the individual who would provide the services to translate the program into Japanese. Prepared by: Donald Patterson, Assistant to the City Manager roved: Donald Patterson v amont Ewell Assistant to the City Manager ity Manager Mariagement Services Forwarded to Council: 5 ~~ ~;tYOf City Council Report Santa Monica City Council Meeting: May 27, 2008 Agenda Item: l -K-°' To: Mayor and City Council From: Donald Patterson, Assistant to the City Manager, Management Services Subject: Non-Smoking Ordinance Outreach Campaign Recommended Action Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Southard Communications in an amount not to exceed $150,000 to design and implement a comprehensive branding and public education program for Santa Monica's non-smoking ordinances. Executive Summary The City of Santa Monica has passed a series of ordinances that prohibit smoking at the beach, parks, most of the pier, outdoor dining and bar areas, Third Street Promenade, waiting areas, farmer's markets and within 20 feet of any door or window of a building open to the public. Each ordinance was followed by a specific public education campaign targeted to the new regulations. Mr. Butts was used for the beach campaign and Fresh Air Santa Monica was used for the most recent campaign. Signage and messaging continues to be location specific. During the midyear budget, Council allocated $150,000 to create a branding program and educational outreach campaign that will inform the public of where people can and can. nofsmoke. Background The City of Santa Monica hasenacted a number of ordinances to expand smoke-free areas in Santa Monica. At the April 8, 2003 meeting, Council adopted an ordinance adding section 4.44.040 to the Santa Monica municipal code, which prohibited smoking in city parks. The code was amended by Council in 2004 to prohibit smoking on Santa Monica beaches and the Pier, except in designated areas. On October 24, 2006, the municipal code was further expanded to ban smoking. in all outdoor dining and service areas, areas within 20 feet of entrances, exits or opeh windows of buildings open to the public, the Third Street Promenade, and Farmers Markets. 1 Each time the municipal code was updated, a campaign was developed to implement signage and inform the public of the new restrictions: It is clear that a unified approach to signage and public information is preferred to avoid confusion among residents and day visitors and tourists. Discussion During the mid-year budget report this fiscal year, Council allocated $150,000 to create a public education and signage campaign that will unite all of the smoking ordinances into one cohesive brand and provide assistance to public areas (such as the Promenade, Pier and parks) and private businesses in enforcing new ahd existing smoking ordinances. In February 2008, an RFP was issued to develop and implement the public outreach campaign. The primary goal of this campaign will be to increase awareness of the Santa Monica smoking ordinances and reduce smoking. in restricted public areas and be effective among several target audiences, including residents, domestic and foreign tourists, grid regional visitors. The Request for Proposals was advertised online, and proposals were solicited from individuals and organizations that had previously worked with the city on social marketing campaigns (including smoking and panhandling). Eight proposals were Yeceived that met the requirements outlined in the RFP. A reviewteam comprised of representatives from the Big Blue Bus, Convention and Visitors Bureau, Community and Cultural Services, Pier Restoration Corporation, Bayside District, City Attorney's Office and City Manager's Office individually reviewed and scored each written proposal. The top three candidates were invited to give a presentation for the review team: Selection was based on elements of the written proposal, the quality of the presentation and the candidates' responses to the review team's inquiries regarding the proposal. After viewing the three presentations, the review team unanimously .chose Southard Communications. 2 The RFP review team unanimously recommends Southard Communications as the vendor for this project based on their experience designing and- implementing social marketing campaigns and programs; demonstrated ability to create campaigns that are effective across diverse cultures and backgrounds and their experience working with various non-profit and private companies. The. campaign approach presented by Southard- was comprehensive and innovative. They proposed a research-based approach to effectively target diverse audiences. Examples of campaign ideas include development of a toolkit for businesses., media and business outreach, developing partnerships with various affected groups and logo and brand development: Financial Impacts & Budget Actions Funds in the amount of $150,000 are available at account Prepared by: Rachel Waugh, Publications Manager Approved: Forwarded to Council: Donald Patterson P amont Ew II Assistant to the City Manager ity Manager Management Services 3 Reference Contract No. 8932 (CCS).