Will County Ad-Hoc Cares Funding Committee met June 11.
Here is the minutes provided by the committee:
In Accordance With Executive Order 2020-18 Issued By Governor Pritzker, This Meeting Will Be Held Via Videoconference/Telephonically Through The Webex Events Platform. Will County Board Members Will Be Attending The Meeting Remotely And The General Public Is Strongly Encouraged To Do The Same.
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Kenneth E. Harris | Chair | Present | |
| Mike Fricilone | District 7 (R - Homer Glen) | Present | |
| Amanda Koch | District 2 (D - Frankfort) | Present | |
| Jim Moustis | District 2 (R - Frankfort) | Present | |
| Sherry Newquist | District 1 (D - Steger) | Present |
I. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Chair Kenneth E. Harris called the meeting to order at 1:20 PM
Present from State's Attorney's Office: M. Tatroe.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
IV. OLD BUSINESS
V. NEW BUSINESS
1. Interviews of CARES Act Funding Consultants
(Interviews)
1:00 PM Guidehouse
Mr. Raveen Rao and Mr. Rob Reid reviewed the attached PowerPoint Presentation.
A brief question and answer period took place.
Guidehouse Presentation
(Presentation)
2:00 PM RSM
Mr. Steve Mermelstein, Mr. John George, Mr. Gary Broils, Mr. Michael Nafzinger and Jill reviewed the attached PowerPoint Presentation.
A brief question and answer period took place.
RSM Presentation
(Presentation)
3:00 PM Bronner Group
Ms. Gila Bronner, Mr. Don Davis and Mr. Dan Hughes reviewed the attached
PowerPoint presentation.
A brief question and answer period took place.
Bronner Group Presentation
(Presentation)
VI. OTHER NEW BUSINESS
After the interviews the Committee ranked the vendors as follows: Bronner Group, RSM and Guidehouse.
Mr. Fricilone stated Guidehouse has every service known to man. They almost have too much. I feel there is too much for what we are trying to accomplish, plus they are doing Lake and Cook Counties. The other two are fairly even. It believe we will get a little more personal service with Bronner. They would focus more on us and what we are asking for, rather than going off in different directions trying to sell us every other thing they could sell us. It seems we will get a bigger team if we use Bronner.
Ms. Koch stated based on my notes about the criteria, phases and how we want to roll this out, Bronner seemed to be on the same page. I think we would have a very personalized approach with them and they seemed to be speaking right to me.
Mr. Moustis stated I think Bronner gave a nice, personal presentation. I have concerns about their technical abilities, overall resources and ability to help us in the future. I think RSM is the better fit for us. I like the resources RSM has, including the ability to help within the audits.
Ms. Newquist stated in terms of how we want to roll things out, I definitely felt Bronner was on the same page. However, they were not offering any type of technology solutions. In the beginning I thought RSM was lackluster, but as their presentation went on they were more detailed. I thought it was a plus Guidehouse was doing Lake and Cook Counties because they would be very well versed in the CARES Act. During the presentations, it became clear we need a full time point person on our side working on this; a project manager. Do we have a person as a resource? This will be a lot of coordination. If we went with Bronner we would have to figure out a technology solution in terms of how we are going to handle the applications.
Mr. Harris stated I like RSM’s technology piece and being able to integrate with the systems we have in place. They were all good. I just like Bronner’s staffing being able to personalize it to what we need. Since the Executive’s Office and Finance staff will be working closely with the vendor, do they have any comments?
Ms. Hennessy stated Ms. Novak, Mr. Harris and I met yesterday. The real estate system she uses has a portal we could use for this process. The fact that Bronner does not have that developed and they want to use existing, I think moves us quicker. Going into the interviews, I thought Guidehouse would have been my choice. After the presentations Bronner seems very personal. They put everything in their presentation I wanted to hear; developing an application, targeting it to the groups we want to reach. They seemed to have a lot of experience in the social service area, reaching individuals and groups that could have suffered more harm; local governments are easy. I would rank them Bronner, RSM and Guidehouse.
Ms. Howard stated my top choice was Bronner. I thought they had a more personal touch and feel. The question posed to most of the firms was how much time would be expected for County personnel to put in. We need to make sure we have a point person to handle the project because it will be a lot of work. From what they presented they have the staff and can provide the manpower to get what we need done. My second choice was RSM. Even though Bronner did not offer the technology solutions, we do have some key in-house solutions we could utilize.
Ms. Winfrey stated I ranked them Bronner, RSM and Guidehouse. Going in I thought I would have chosen Guidehouse, but my first choice is Bronner for many of the same reasons mentioned about the personality, person ability. I also heard names I recognize and know personally which means there is a faith based tie. That puts us into some of the communities we want to reach, if they are using that person. That will help us go where we want to go in terms of getting it out to where the money is most needed and where people may not have the means to connect as readily as some other areas.
Mr. Blackburn stated we have in-house technology and they said we can take advantage what is there. If the portal is there, it makes sense to not reconfigure anything. Regarding the publishing, reporting and transparency, Ms. Howard has gone through all of this and we can use some of the tools we purchased through the ERP system. We can put something on the web. I think the personal care and touch I heard from Bronner would be the more valuable piece. It depends on what they would offer. They will take our payments. If you want them at ever committee meeting, I am sure they will bill you for the hours and walk us through.
Mr. Fricilone stated no matter who we pick, we have to determine how people will charge us. The one we like the most may be so outrageous it doesn’t make sense. Ms. Hennessy and Ms. Howard should start looking now for someone you could dedicate from your department, full time, to deal with this and then backfill that person with someone on a temporary basis. The person would be considered COVID related because it deals with the CARES Act. That is something you could think about right now. Does anyone in your office like to be involved in this full time. The second we select someone we will need the interface.
Ms. Newquist stated if you are confident we can handle the process from a technology standpoint, then Bronner would be my first choice. Do we have a cost proposal from these vendors? Would that depend on the package of services we are looking to buy?
Mr. Moustis stated I believe we set the tone for that. We have developed a scope, but not a full scope of services we are looking for, depending on the complexity of our program. I think there are other steps that need to take place. This is for professional services and we negotiate that separately. The next step is to work on a full scope, more detailed scope to show the type of assistance they are going to have to give us. As far as our current staff, my guess is we may have to hire additional staff to come in and help if selecting Bronner. You can say you have portals, but it has to be interfaced with our IT Department. What will our IT Department need to do this? You are going to have to develop the scope of how will we tailor our program. How much in-house support will Bronner need and what is the cost for that? It has to be added to the cost, especially if you have to hire additional personnel. I did not feel we would have to hire additional personnel with RSM. I think there is more complexity to the selection of Bronner, because you have to calculate the additional costs you will have and how much of the program are you going to have them administer? I think there are issues.
Mr. Fricilone stated I think we will need some personnel no matter who we pick. Ms. Hennessy and Mr. Howard have their full time jobs; they can’t work half a day on this and the other half of their regular job. No matter who we choose we will need some inside people. That money is a pittance related to the $120 million and we will be able to take money from there to pay for that person. I don’t think paying for someone is an issue.
Ms. Dunn asked the first two were very comprehensive and I loved the way Bronner was. The only thing I heard that was concerning when they talked about the application process as far as the portal. It felt like they were saying to us that the point person would be handling a lot of the application process and procedure.
Ms. Newquist agreed she heard that.
Mr. Fricilone stated he did not hear it that way.
Ms. Winfrey stated obviously, that is something we need to clarify.
Mr. Moustis stated I think I heard the same thing. My other concern is and why I feel more comfortable with RSM is the compliance part of this and making sure we are in compliance with the federal guidelines. Certainly, all three had some, but some had more experience. Bronner has more to do with public housing, which is a subset. RSM and Guidehouse had considerable experience handling federal programs, specifically disaster funding and being in compliance because they have done a lot of FEMA work. We need to make sure the firm is keeping us in complete compliance and keeping us out of trouble. Which firm is most willing to tell us we are really stretching it if we do this or I would advise you not to this? I am not looking for someone to be nice and tell me what I want to hear. You have to look at the ability to perform the compliance end of this. This is where technology comes in place because they are set up and continue to do this work.
Mr. Blackburn stated you will have all this cash and everyone will have a process. You will be disbursing the funds and checking the boxes for controls and fraud, waste and abuse and you will have all the documentation. Don’t lose sight it is the community engagement, the customer service and reputational risk you have with the constituents and the community that you have to put your focus on. I believe all three will get you to the compliance end, but I think the real end is the community satisfaction with the program.
Mr. Moustis stated I thought RSM gave a better answer for community outreach. They talked about different aspects including reaching out to the minority communities and other special communities. I thought their presentation was the best one I heard for outreach. They had the ability to do call centers, work with other they have relationships with, the ability to put things on-line and still doing a program where people without internet access would be addressed. If you are going to look at that, by far RSM gave the best proposal for outreach and they will hit the ground running. They said upfront, somethings they could start immediately and some they would have to develop. I think RSM had the best program for outreach.
Ms. Johannsen stated I wanted to do my ranking because it came out differently than what I thought. I ranked them Bronner, RSM and Guidehouse. We rank these because when we have the Executive’s Office do the negotiations with the first ranked group it could fall through. Then it would be necessary to go to the second or third ranked vendor. Negotiations have fallen through the crack and we have moved to the next candidate at times.
VII. PUBLIC COMMENT
VIII. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT / ANNOUNCEMENTS
IX. EXECUTIVE SESSION
X. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to Adjourn at 5:14 PM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jim Moustis, District 2 (R - Frankfort)
SECONDER: Mike Fricilone, District 7 (R - Homer Glen)
AYES: Harris, Fricilone, Koch, Moustis, Newquist
http://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=15&ID=3783&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up