2. identifies all contracts categorized as:

(a) Consulting Services

(b) Professional Services

(d) Amendments

3. identifies the reason for outsourcing in accordance with the definitions discussed below.

DISCUSSION

Document 1

The contracts approved for the period of July 1, 2011 to September 30, 2011, are listed in Document 1.

Where appropriate, staff used the following definitions as outlined in the Purchasing By-law to identify the contract category, the outsourcing reason and the non-competitive exception.

Professional Services

Professional Services means services requiring the skills of professionals for a defined service requirement or for a specific project related deliverable including but not limited to the areas of engineering, architecture, design, planning, information technology, financial auditing and fairness commissioners.

Consulting Services

Consulting Services means assistance to management, including but not limited to the areas of strategic analysis, organizational design, change management, policy development, feasibility studies and other services intended to assist decision making within the organization.

Amendment

An amendment is an increase in the scope of an approved contract, which is unanticipated. Those amendments that are both greater than $50,000 and 50% of the original contract will be identified in the quarterly report.

Follow-on Contract & Extensions

A follow-on contract differs from an amendment in that the original contract or bid solicitation document recognizes the fact that it is likely that the initial defined contract scope may be expanded to include a number of related phases that are either included in the tender document, or are customary in relation to the work assignment. Rates charged for the follow-on contract are reviewed by the Supply Branch, and must be based on those rates proposed by the service provider in the original competitive “bid”.

An extension to a contract is not categorized as an amendment or a follow-on contract. An extension is a contract term allowing the City to continue purchasing the good or service for an extended period of time where the option to extend the contract was outlined in the bid document, or is deemed to be in the best interest of the City.

Reason for Outsourcing the Work

The reason Consulting and Professional Service contracts are let is identified as follows:

(a) workload related or lack of internal resources by a “W”;

(b) need for specialized expertise by an “E”;

(d) regulatory requirement by an “R”;

(e) proprietary service or unique market position by a “P”; and

(f) business model required outsourcing by an “O”.

The following table summarizes the total number and value of the contracts as well as the different categories under which the applicable contracts fall.

	Total # of Contracts	Total $ Value	# Prof. Services	# Consulting Services	Workload related "W"	Specialized expertise "E"	Independent third party oversight "I"	Regulatory Requirement "R"	Proprietary Service "P"	Business model outsourcing "O"
AG	4	$257,660.64	4	-	-	4	-	-	-	-
CM	48	$3,067,111.08	31	-	-	17	-	-	-	14
CO[1]	414	$92,687,035.15	105	1	-	88	-	-	-	18
ISCS[2]	467	$227,346,593.03	184	3	-	35	1	-	1	150
Total	933	$323,358,399.90	324	4	-	144	1	-	1	182

Non-Competitive Purchases

22(1) The requirement for competitive bid solicitation for goods, services and construction may be waived under joint authority of the appropriate Director/General Manager and the Supply Branch and replaced with negotiations under the following circumstances:

a. where competition is precluded due to the application of any Act or legislation or because of the existence of patent rights, copyrights, technical secrets or controls of raw material,

b. where due to abnormal market conditions, the goods, services or construction required are in short supply,

c. where only one source of supply would be acceptable and cost effective,

d. where there is an absence of competition for technical or other reasons and the goods, services or construction can only be supplied by a particular supplier and no alternative exists,

e. where the nature of the requirement is such that it would not be in the public interest to solicit competitive bids as in the case of security or confidentiality matters,

f. where in the event of a "Special Circumstance" as defined by this By-law, a requirement exists,

g. where the possibility of a follow-on contract was identified in the original bid solicitation,

h. where the total estimated project cost for professional services does not exceed $50,000, or

i. where the requirement is for a utility for which there exists a monopoly.

22(7) Any non-competitive contract that does not satisfy the provisions of Subsection 22(1) is subject to the City Manager’s approval.

Document 1 identifies all non-competitive purchases as well as references the appropriate subsection 22(1) and 22(7).

The Supply Branch certifies that all the contracts awarded under Delegation of Authority for the period of July 1, 2011 to September 30, 2011, are in compliance with the Purchasing By-law.

Highlights and Summary of Q3 Purchasing 2011

Purchases Breakdown

2011 Q3	Total Contracts	% of Total Contracts	Total Amount	% of Total Amount
$10K - $25K	314	33.7%	$5,044,757.36	1.6%
$25K - $50K	204	21.9%	$7,368,873.28	2.3%
$50K - $100K	144	15.4%	$9,896,268.73	3.0%
≥$100K	271	29.0%	$301,048,500.53	93.1%
Total	933	100%	$323,358,399.90	100%

2011 Q3 Purchases by Type

Type	# of Contracts	Contract Value
Goods, Fleet & Equipment[3]	160	$67,302,582.16
Construction[4]	270	$211,334,359.00
Professional & Technical Services[5]	349	$32,028,376.59
IT & Special Projects[6]	154	$12,693,082.15
Total	933	$323,358,399.90

Professional and Consulting Services Contracts > $10,000

2011 Q3	Total Contracts	Total Value
Professional Services	324	$28,453,457.18
Consulting Services	4	$358,754.88
Total	328	$28,812,212.06

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no rural implications.

CONSULTATION

The preparation of this report is required by the Purchasing By-law and as such no public consultation is required.

COMMENTS BY WARD COUNCILLOR(S)

N/A

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no legal impediments to implementing the recommendation in this report as the information is required to be disclosed pursuant to the Purchasing By-law.

RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

N/A

CITY STRATEGIC PLAN

N/A

TECHNICAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Prior to a contract approval, Supply Branch staff confirms that the appropriate funds are available in the budget, based on receipt of a funded requisition in SAP. The availability of funds is a condition of approval under the Purchasing By-Law.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 - List of Contracts with a value of $10K or more, awarded under delegated authority for the period July 1, 2011 to September 30, 2011 (issued separately and held on file with the City Clerk)

DISPOSITION

Report forwarded for information pursuant to the Purchasing By-law.

[1] Excludes purchases made by the Ottawa Public Health Department. These are now reported to the Board of Health on a quarterly basis.

[2] Excludes purchases made by the Transit Services Department. These are now reported to the Transit Commission on a quarterly basis.

[3] Includes:

· Five year agreement for the supply of Municipal Fleet parts and an inventory management program - $40.4M

· Supply and delivery of Coarse Crushed Rock Salt - $10.1M

[4]Includes:

· Hunt Club Road extension Phase 1, Part B - $37.7M

· Construction of Kanata North Recreation Complex - $33.9M

[5] Includes:

· Tree Pruning Services City-Wide - $2.5M

[6] Includes:

· Phase 1 of the Enterprise Asset Management Project - $1.1M

SUBJECT:	DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY – CONTRACTS AWARDED FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 2011 TO SEPTEMBER 30, 2011

OBJET :	DÉLÉGATION DE POUVOIR – CONTRATS ACCORDÉS POUR LA PÉRIODE DU 1^er JUILLET AU 30 SEPTEMBRE 2011

Report to/Rapport au :

SUBJECT:

OBJET :

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

BACKGROUND