Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGREEMENT BETWEEN AUGUSTA GA AND SELECTION WORKS LLCSTATE OF GEORGIA RICHMOND COUNTY ,2 = 2 3 f CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN AUGUSTA, GEORGIA (AUGUSTA) AND SELECTION WORKS, LLC (CONSULTANT) This Agreement is made and entered into this Pi day of J )15 , 2012 by and between AUGUSTA, Georgia, a political subdivision of the State of Georgia, hereinafter called the "AUGUSTA" and SELECTION WORKS, LLC, a Corporation authorized to do business in Georgia, hereinafter called the "CONSULTANT." WHEREAS, AUGUSTA desires to engage a qualified and experienced consulting firm to furnish professional services to develop and administer promotional assessments; WHEREAS, AUGUSTA had an RFP to retain a firm to provide the Promotional Assessment for the Augusta, Georgia Fire Department; WHERAS, the CONSULTANT responded to the RFP and was chosen to be the most qualified respondent based on their proposal submitted. WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT has represented to AUGUSTA that it is experienced and qualified to provide the services contained herein and AUGUSTA has relied upon such representation. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenant herein contained, it is agreed by and between AUGUSTA and the CONSULTANT that: 2 OF 26 GENERAL PROVISIONS CONSULTANT has agreed, in this Agreement with AUGUSTA to provide professional services to develop and administer Promotional Assessments for the Project in accordance with the requirements as outlined in and attached as Attachment A - Scope of Services and other relevant data defining the Project. CONSULTANT COORDINATION The CONSULTANT shall cooperate fully with all municipalities, local government officials, utility companies, and other consultants as directed by the AUGUSTA. CONSULTANT and all relevant parties agree to work together on the basis of trust, good faith and fair dealing, and shall take actions reasonably necessary to enable each other to perform this Agreement in a timely, efficient and economical manner. CONSULTANT will re- perform any services not meeting this standard without additional compensation. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OR DELAY OF PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT To the extent that it does not alter the scope of this agreement, Augusta, GA may unilaterally order a temporary stopping of the work, or delaying of the work to be performed by CONSULTANT under this agreement. AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENT Every amendment to the Scope of Services shall become and is hereby made a part of this Agreement. Amendments must be fully executed by both the CONSULTANT and AUGUSTA to be valid. REDUCTION IN REQUIRED SERVICES If reductions in the required services are ordered by AUGUSTA, the credits shall be the amounts for such services as described in subsequently executed Amendments to this Agreement, and no claim for damages for anticipated profits shall accrue to the CONSULTANT. DATE CHANGES If in this Agreement specific periods of time for rendering services are set forth or specific dates by which services are to be completed are provided and if such periods of time or dates are changed through no fault of CONSULTANT, the rates and amounts of compensation provided for herein shall be subject to equitable adjustment. AGREEMENT MODIFICATIONS This Agreement shall not be modified except by a duly executed Amendment hereto in writing under the hands and seals of both parties hereto. 3 OF 26 TIME OF COMPLETION The time of completion shall be as described in the schedule attached hereto as Attachment D - Schedule. This Agreement shall terminate immediately and absolutely at such time as appropriated and otherwise obligated funds are no longer available to satisfy the obligations of the CONSULTANT on behalf of AUGUSTA under this Agreement. However, CONSULTANT will be compensated for all work prior to termination of contract even if AUGUSTA has obligated the funds to other projects. PROJECT PROGRESS CONSULTANT'S services and compensation under this Agreement have been agreed to in anticipation of the orderly and continuous progress of the Project through completion. LITIGATION Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as obligating the CONSULTANT to appear, support, prepare, document, bring, defend or assist in litigation either undertaken or defended in behalf of AUGUSTA except in consideration of compensation. All such services required or requested of CONSULTANT by AUGUSTA except suits or claims between the parties to this Agreement may be reimbursed as additional services. BINDINGS It is further agreed that AUGUSTA and CONSULTANT each binds itself and themselves, its or their successors, executors, administrators and assigns to the other party to this Agreement and to its or their successors, executors and assigns in respect to all covenants of this Agreement. Except as above, neither AUGUSTA nor the CONSULTANT shall assign, sublet or transfer its or their interest in this Agreement without prior written consent of the other party hereto. EXTENT OF THE AGREEMENT This Agreement represents the entire agreement between AUGUSTA and CONSULTANT and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations and agreements, either written or oral. LOCAL SMALL BUSINESS: In accordance with Chapter 10B of the Augusta, GA. Code, Contractor expressly agrees to collect and maintain all records necessary to for Augusta, Georgia to evaluate the effectiveness of its Local Small Business Opportunity Program and to make such records available to Augusta, Georgia. The requirements of the Local Small Business Opportunity Program can be found at www.augustaga.gov. In accordance with Augusta, GA. Code § 1- 10- 129(d)(7), for all contracts where a local small business goal has been established, the contractor is required to provide local small business utilization reports. Contractor shall report to Augusta, Georgia the total dollars paid to each local small business on each contract, and shall provide such payment affidavits, regarding payment to subcontractors as may be requested by Augusta, Georgia. Such documents shall be in the format specified by the Director of minority and small business opportunities, and shall be 4 OF 26 submitted at such times as required by Augusta, Georgia. Failure to provide such reports within the time period specified by Augusta, Georgia shall entitle Augusta, Georgia to exercise any of the remedies set forth, including but not limited to, withholding payment from the contractor and /or collecting liquidated damages. 5 OF 26 DEFINITIONS Wherever used in this Agreement, whether in the singular or in the plural, the following terms shall have the following meanings: Agreement Execution - means the date on which CONSULTANT executes and enters into an Agreement with AUGUSTA to perform the Work. Agreement Price - means the total monies, adjusted in accordance with any provision herein, payable to the CONSULTANT under this Agreement. AUGUSTA -means a legal entity AUGUSTA, Georgia, a political subdivision of the State of Georgia. CONSULTANT - means the party or parties contracting directly with AUGUSTA to perform Work pursuant to this Agreement. Contract - means the Agreement Documents specifically identified and incorporated herein by reference. Contract Time - means the period of time stated in this Agreement for the completion of the Work. Subcontractor - means any person, firm, partnership, joint venture, company, corporation, or entity having a contractual agreement with CONSULTANT or with any of its subcontractors at any tier to provide a part of the Work called for by this Agreement. Supplemental Agreement - means a written order to CONSULTANT signed by AUGUSTA and accepted by CONSULTANT, effecting an addition, deletion or revision in the Work, or an adjustment in the Agreement Price or the Contract Time, issued after execution of this Agreement. Task Order - means a written order specifying a Scope of Services, time of completion and compensation limit for services being provided by CONSULTANT. Task Orders shall be incorporated by reference as part of the Supplemental Conditions of this Agreement. Work - means any and all obligations, duties and responsibilities , including furnishing data, reports, workmanship, labor and any other services or things necessary to the successful completion of the Project, assigned to or undertaken by CONSULTANT under this Agreement. 6 OF 26 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS List of Documents The Agreement, the General Conditions, the Attachments, and any Supplemental Agreements, including Task Orders shall constitute the Agreement Documents (the "Agreement "). Conflict and Precedence The Agreement Documents are complementary, and what is called for by one is as binding as if called for by all. In the event there are any conflicting provisions or requirements in the component parts of this Agreement, the several Agreement Documents shall take precedence in the following order: 1. Agreement - Including Attachments 2. General Conditions 3. Supplemental Conditions - Including Task Orders 7 OF 26 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. COMMENCEMENT OF WORK The performance of services as defined in the Prime Agreement between CONSULTANT and the AUGUSTA, and herein described in this Agreement as Attachment A shall be commenced upon receipt by the CONSULTANT of a written Notice To Proceed. The effective date of services shall be defined in the Notice To Proceed. 2. PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS The standard of care for all services performed or furnished by CONSULTANT under this Agreement will be the level of care and that is ordinarily used by members of CONSULTANT'S profession practicing under similar conditions. CONSULTANT shall adhere to the professional guidelines established by: • Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (SLOP Principles), Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4 Edition, 2003 • Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (Uniform Guidelines), U.S. Dept. of Labor version (41 CFR Part 60 -3), 1978 3. CHANGES AND EXTRA WORK AUGUSTA may, at any time, request changes in the work to be performed hereunder. All such changes, including any increase or decrease in the amount of the CONSULTANT's compensation, which are mutually agreed upon by and between AUGUSTA and the CONSULTANT, shall be incorporated in written Supplemental Agreements to the Agreement. Changes that involve an increase in the compensation shall be considered major, and require the approval of AUGUSTA. 4. PERSONNEL The CONSULTANT represents that it has secured or will secure, at its own expense, all personnel necessary to complete this Agreement; none of whom shall be employees of, or have any contractual relationship with, AUGUSTA. All of the services required hereunder will be performed by the CONSULTANT under its supervision, and all personnel engaged in the work shall be qualified and shall be authorized or permitted under law to perform such services. All key professional personnel, including subcontractors, engaged in performing services for the CONSULTANT under this agreement are indicated in a personnel listing attached hereto as Attachment C - Listing of Key Personnel and incorporate herein by reference. No changes or substitution shall be permitted in the CONSULTANT's Key Personnel without the prior written approval of AUGUSTA or its designee. 8 OF 26 6. CONFIDENTIALITY The CONSULTANT shall employ only persons duly registered in the appropriate category in responsible charge of supervision and completion of the work. The CONSULTANT shall endorse all reports, data, and information. 5. ACCURACY OF WORK The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for the accuracy of the work and shall promptly correct errors and omissions in its data, assessments, and /or reports without additional compensation. The CONSULTANT shall give immediate attention to these changes so there will be a minimum of delay to others. Acceptance of the work by AUGUSTA will not relieve the CONSULTANT of the responsibility for subsequent correction of any errors and the clarification of any ambiguities. The CONSULTANT agrees that its conclusions and any reports are for the confidential use and information of AUGUSTA and that it will not disclose its conclusions in whole or in part to any persons whatsoever, other than to submit its written documentation to AUGUSTA, and will only discuss the same with it or its authorized representatives. Upon completion of this Agreement term, all documents, reports, assessments, information, data, and studies prepared by the CONSULTANT pursuant thereto shall become the property of AUGUSTA and be delivered thereto. Articles, papers, bulletins, reports, or other materials reporting the plans, progress, analyses, or results and findings of the work conducted under this Agreement shall not be presented publicly or published without prior approval in writing of AUGUSTA. It is further agreed that if any information concerning the PROJECT, should be released by the CONSULTANT without prior approval from AUGUSTA, the release of same shall constitute grounds for termination of this Agreement without indemnity to the CONSULTANT, but should any such information be released by AUGUSTA or by the CONSULTANT with such prior approval, the same shall be regarded as public information and no longer subject to the restrictions of this Agreement. 7. OPEN RECORDS CONSULTANT acknowledge that all records relating to this Agreement and the services to be provided under the contract may be a public record subject to Georgia's Open Records Act (O.C.G.A. § 50- 18 -70, et seq.). CONSULTANT shall cooperate fully in responding to such request and making all records, not exempt, available for inspection and copying as provided by law. 8. JURISDICTION The law of the State of Georgia shall govern the CONTRACT between AUGUSTA and CONSULTANT with regard to its interpretation and performance, and any other claims related to this agreement. 9 OF 26 All claims, disputes and other matters in question between AUGUSTA and CONSULTANT arising out of or relating to the Agreement, or the breach thereof, shall be decided in the Superior Court of Richmond County, Georgia. The CONSULTANT, by executing this Agreement, specifically consents to jurisdiction and venue in Richmond County and waives any right to contest the jurisdiction and venue in the Superior Court of Richmond County, Georgia. 9. SPECIFIED EXCUSES FOR DELAY OR NON - PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT is not responsible for delay in performance caused by hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and other severe and unexpected acts of nature. In any such event, the contract price and schedule shall be equitably adjusted. 10. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT FOR CAUSE If through any cause, the CONSULTANT shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligations under this Agreement, or if the CONSULTANT shall violate any of the covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, CONSULTANT will be given the opportunity to commence correction of obligation within 5 days of written notice and diligently complete the correction thereafter. Failure to maintain the scheduled level of effort as proposed and prescribed, or deviation from the aforesaid schedule without prior approval of AUGUSTA, shall constitute cause for termination. AUGUSTA shall thereupon have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the CONSULTANT of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In such event, all finished or unfinished documents, maps, data, studies, work papers and reports prepared by the CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall become the property of AUGUSTA, and the CONSULTANT shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents, as mutually agreed by AUGUSTA and CONSULTANT. 11. TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT FOR DEFAULT Failure of the CONSULTANT, which has not been remedied or waived, to perform or otherwise comply with a material condition of the Agreement shall constitute default. AUGUSTA may terminate this contract is part or in whole upon written notice to the CONSULTANT pursuant to this term. 12. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE OF AUGUSTA AUGUSTA may terminate this contract in part or in whole upon written notice to the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall be paid for any validated services under this Contract up to the time of termination. 13. COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES The CONSULTANT warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Agreement upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by CONSULTANT for the purpose of securing business 10 OF 26 and that the CONSULTANT has not received any non- AUGUSTA fee related to this Agreement without the prior written consent of AUGUSTA. For breach or violation of this warranty, AUGUSTA shall have the right to annul this Agreement without liability or at its discretion to deduct from the Agreement Price of consideration the full amount of such commission, percentage, brokerage or contingent fee. 14. RESPONSIBILITY FOR CLAIMS AND LIABILITY The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for any and all damages to properties or persons caused by its employees, subcontractors, or agents, and shall hold harmless AUGUSTA, its officers, agents and employees from all suits, claims, actions or damages of any nature whatsoever to the extent found to be resulting from the CONSULTANT, its subcontracts, or agent in the negligent performance or non - performance of work under this Agreement. These indemnities shall not be limited by reason of the listing of any insurance coverage. 15. INSURANCE The CONSULTANT shall, at all times that this Agreement is in effect, cause to be maintained in force and effect an insurance policy(s) that will ensure and indemnify AUGUSTA against liability or financial loss resulting from injuries occurring to persons or property or occurring as a result of any negligent error, act, or omission of the CONSULTANT in performance of the work during the term of this Agreement. The CONSULTANT shall provide, at all times that this agreement is in effect, Worker's Compensation insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of Georgia. The CONSULTANT shall provide, at all times that this Agreement is in effect, Insurance with limits of not less than: A. Workmen's Compensation Insurance - in accordance with the laws of the State of Georgia. B. Public Liability Insurance - in an amount of not less that One Million ($1,000,000) Dollars for injuries, including those resulting in death to any one person, and in an amount of not less than One Million ($1,000,000) Dollars on account of any one occurrence. C. Property Damage Insurance - in an amount of not less than One Million ($1,000,000) Dollars from damages on account of an occurrence, with an aggregate limit of One Million ($1,000,000) Dollars. D. Valuable Papers Insurance - in an amount sufficient to assure the restoration of any plans, drawings, field notes, or other similar data relating to the work covered by the Project. E. Professional Liability Insurance - in an amount of not less than One Million ($1,000,000) Dollars or an amount that correlates to the aggregate fee on the project should it exceed $1,000,000. AUGUSTA will be named as an additional insured with respect to CONSULTANT's liabilities hereunder in insurance coverage's identified in items (b) and (c). 11 0F26 The policies shall be written by a responsible company(s), to be approved by AUGUSTA, and shall be noncancellable except on thirty -(30) days' written notice to AUGUSTA. Such policies shall name AUGUSTA as co- insured, except for worker's compensation and professional liability policies, and a copy of such policy or a certificate of insurance shall be filed with the Director at the time of the execution of this Agreement. 16. PROHIBIT'ED INTERESTS 16.1 Conflict of Interest: The CONSULTANT agrees that it presently has no interest and shall acquire no interest, direct or indirect, that would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of its services hereunder. The CONSULTANT further agrees that, in the performance of the Agreement, no person having such interest shall be employed. 16.2 Interest of Public Officials. No member, officer, or employee of AUGUSTA during his tenure or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof. 16.3 Employment of AUGUSTA's Personnel: The CONSULTANT shall not employ any person or persons in the employ of AUGUSTA for any work required by the terms of the Agreement, without the written permission of AUGUSTA except as may otherwise be provided for herein. 17. SUBCONTRACTING The CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any part of the work covered by this Agreement or permit subcontracted work to be further subcontracted without the AUGUSTA 's prior written approval of the subcontractor. All subcontracts in the amount of $5,000 or more shall include, where possible, the provisions set forth in this Agreement. 18. ASSIGNABILITY The CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer whether by an assignment or novation, any of its rights, obligations, benefits, liabilities or other interest under this Agreement without the written consent of AUGUSTA. 19. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY During the performance of this Agreement, the CONSULTANT agrees as follows: (1) the CONSULTANT will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, sex or national origin; (2) the CONSULTANT will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by qualified applicants, receive consideration for employment without regard to race, creed, color, sex or national origin; (3) the CONSULTANT will cause the foregoing provisions to be inserted in all subcontracts for any work covered by the Agreement so that such provision will be binding upon each subcontractor, provided that the foregoing provision shall not apply to contracts or subcontracts for standard commercial supplies of raw materials. 12 OF 26 20. DRUG FREE WORK PLACE CONSULTANT shall be responsible for insuring that its employees shall not be involved in any manner with the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, sale or use of a controlled substance in the workplace. For purposes of the policy, "workplace" is defined as AUGUSTA owned or leased property, vehicles, and project or client site. Any violation of the prohibitions may result in discipline and /or immediate discharge. CONSULTANT shall notify the appropriate federal agencies of an employee who has a criminal drug statute conviction for workplace violation. CONSULTANT may require drug or alcohol testing of employees when contractually or legally obligated, or when good business practices would dictate. 21. ANTI - KICKBACK CLAUSE Salaries of architects, drafters, engineer's, and technicians performing work under this Agreement shall be paid unconditionally and not less often than once a month without deduction or rebate on any account except only such payroll deductions as are mandatory by law. The CONSULTANT hereby promises to comply with all applicable "Anti- kickback" laws, and shall insert appropriate provisions in all subcontracts covering work under this Agreement. 22. AUDITS AND INSPECTORS At any time during normal business hours and as often as AUGUSTA may deem necessary, the CONSULTANT shall make available to AUGUSTA and /or audit representatives of AUGUSTA for examination all of its records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. It shall also permit AUGUSTA and /or representatives of the audit, examine and make copies, excerpts or transcripts from such records of personnel, conditions of employment and other data relating to all matters covered by this Agreement. The CONSULTANT shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred on the Project and used in support of its proposal and shall make such material available at all reasonable times during the period of the Agreement, and for three years from the date of final payment under the Agreement, for inspection by AUGUSTA or any reviewing agencies, and copies thereof shall be furnished upon request at cost plus 10 %. The CONSULTANT agrees that the provisions of this Article shall be included in any Agreements it may make with any subcontractor, assignee, or transferee. 23. OWNERSHIP, PUBLICATION, REPRODUCTION AND USE All data, drawings, charts, documents, materials, etc. prepared as an instrument of service pursuant to this Agreement are the property of AUGUSTA. AUGUSTA shall have the unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute, and otherwise use, in whole or in part, any reports, data, maps, or other materials prepared under this Agreement without according credit of authorship. AUGUSTA shall hold harmless the CONSULTANT against all claims arising out of such use of documents and materials without the CONSULTANT's knowledge and written consent. 13 OF 26 24. VERBAL AGREEMENT OR CONVERSATION No verbal agreement or conversation with any officer, agent, or employee of AUGUSTA, either before, during, or after the execution of this Agreement, shall affect or modify any of the terms or obligations herein contained, nor shall such verbal agreement or conversation entitle the CONSULTANT to any additional payment whatsoever under the terms for this Agreement. All changes to this Agreement shall be in writing and appended hereto as prescribed in Article 3 above. 25. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR The CONSULTANT shall perform the services under this Agreement as an independent contractor and nothing contained herein shall be construed to be inconsistent with this relationship or status. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed to constitute the CONSULTANT or any of its agents or employees to be the agent, employee, or representative of AUGUSTA. 26. NOTICES All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices shall be addressed as follows: AUGUSTA: ADMINISTRATOR AUGUSTA, GEORGIA 530 Greene Street. Augusta, GA 30911 Copy to: FIFE, 1 E DeQ1V5 Vtl f Augusta, GA 27. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS "Consultant acknowledges that this contract and any changes to it by amendment, modification, change order or other similar document may have required or may require the legislative authorization of the Board of Commissioners and approval of the Mayor. Under Georgia law, Consultant is deemed to possess knowledge concerning Augusta, Georgia's ability to assume contractual obligations and the consequences of Consultant 's provision of goods or services to Augusta, Georgia under an unauthorized contract, amendment, modification, change order or other similar document, including the possibility that the Consultant may be precluded from recovering payment for such unauthorized goods or services. Accordingly, Consultant agrees that if it provides goods or services to Augusta, Georgia under a contract that has not received proper legislative authorization or if the Consultant provides goods or services to Augusta, Georgia in excess of the any contractually authorized goods or services, as required by Augusta, Georgia's Charter and Code, Augusta, Georgia may withhold payment for any unauthorized goods or 14 OF 26 CONSULTANT: �? j e �. / 4 /5 - c) ed : P /CS, Aaz. Sur/C //O JL / > 0,7/ services provided by Consultant. Consultant assumes all risk of non - payment for the provision of any unauthorized goods or services to Augusta, Georgia, and it waives all claims to payment or to other remedies for the provision of any unauthorized goods or services to Augusta, Georgia, however characterized, including, without limitation, all remedies at law or equity." This acknowledgement shall be a mandatory provision in all Augusta, Georgia contracts for goods and services, except revenue producing contracts All contractors and subcontractors entering into contracts with Augusta, Georgia for the physical performance of services shall be required to execute an Affidavit verifying its compliance with O.C.G.A. § 13- 10 -91, stating affirmatively that the individual, firm, or corporation which is contracting with Augusta, Georgia has registered with and is participating in a federal work authorization program. All contractors and subcontractors must provide their E -Verify number and must be in compliance with the electronic verification of work authorized programs operated by the United States Department of Homeland Security or any equivalent federal work authorization program operated by the United States Department of Homeland Security to verify information of newly hired employees, pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), P.L. 99 -603, in accordance with the applicability provisions and deadlines established in O.C.G.A. § 13- 10-91 and shall continue to use the federal authorization program throughout the contract term. All contractors shall further agree that, should it employ or contract with any subcontractor(s) in connection with the physical performance of services pursuant to its contract with Augusta, Georgia the contractor will secure from such subcontractor(s) each subcontractor's E- Verify number as evidence of verification of compliance with O.C.G.A. § 13 -10 -91 on the subcontractor affidavit provided in Rule 300- 10- 01 -.08 or a substantially similar form. All contractors shall further agree to maintain records of such compliance and provide a copy of each such verification to Augusta, Georgia at the time the subcontractor(s) is retained to perform such physical services 15 OF 26 [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said parties have hereunto set their seals the day and year written below: AUGUSTA: AUGUSTA, GEORGIA BY: PRINTED NAME: 1°4`'3'2 S. "to"' 144 AS ITS: MAYOR ATTEST CLERK: PRINTED IMAM AS ITS: DATE: i copy To: FIRE DEPART 3111 g-OaNS Augusta, GA 2 qt 16 OF 26 CONSULTANT: SELECTION WORKS, ■ BY: PRINTED NAME AS ITS: r'c c + ATTEST: LC C1\c,.cl C - I it . '_ PRI+■ ED NAME � I F k ) 1 I I,64']" AS ITS: RV i(,lfri r DATE: ` 24 IL CONSULTANT'S RESPONSIBILITIES CONSULTANT , in order to determine the requirements of the Project, shall review the information in Attachment A - Scope of Services. CONSULTANT shall review its understanding of the Project requirements with AUGUSTA and shall advise AUGUSTA of additional data or services which are not a part of CONSULTANT's services, if any, necessary for work to begin. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING Upon request from the CONSULTANT, AUGUSTA may provide all criteria and full information as to AUGUSTA 's and CONSULTANT'S requirements for this part of the project, including objectives and constraints, space, capacity and performance requirements, flexibility and expendability, and any budgetary limitations. CONSULTANT may request from AUGUSTA to furnish data, reports, assessment, and other materials that may be relied upon in performing CONSULTANT'S services. REVIEW OF WORK Authorized representatives of AUGUSTA may at all reasonable times review and inspect the project activities and data collected under the Agreement and amendments thereto. All reports, studies, specifications, estimates, data and computation prepared by or for AUGUSTA in association with this Agreement shall be subject to review. AUGUSTA may at any time request progress reports, prints or copies of any work performed under this Agreement. Refusal by the CONSULTANT to submit progress reports and /or assessments shall be cause to withhold payment to the CONSULTANT until the CONSULTANT complies with AUGUSTA's request in the regard. Augusta, Georgia may, at reasonable times, inspect the part of the plant, place of business, or work site of CONSULTANT or any subcontractor of CONSULTANT or subunit thereof which is pertinent to the performance of any contract awarded or to be awarded by Augusta, Georgia. AUGUSTA's review recommendations shall be incorporated into the plans by the CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT'S INSURANCE CONSULTANT will maintain throughout this AGREEMENT the following insurance limits as specified in General Condition 14 - Insurance. 17 OF 26 AUGUSTA'S RESPONSIBILITES AUGUSTA - FURNISHED DATA AUGUSTA will provide to CONSULTANT all data in AUGUSTA 's possession relating to CONSULTANT's services on the PROJECT. CONSULTANT will reasonably rely upon the accuracy, timeliness, and completeness of the information provided by AUGUSTA. RIGHT TO ENTER The CONSULTANT will notify all property owners or occupants of the intent to enter properties for the purpose of accomplishing work in accordance with the practices of the AUGUSTA. The CONSULTANT shall discuss with and receive approval from AUGUSTA prior to sending notices of intent to enter private property. Upon request by the CONSULTANT, AUGUSTA will provide the necessary documents identifying the CONSULTANT as being in the employ AUGUSTA for the purpose described in the Agreement. TIMELY REVIEW AUGUSTA will examine CONSULTANT's studies, reports, proposals, and other documents; obtain advice of an attorney, insurance counselor, accountant, auditor, bond and financial advisors, and other consultants as AUGUSTA deems appropriate; and render in writing decisions required by AUGUSTA in a timely manner. PROMPT NOTICE AUGUSTA will give prompt written notice to CONSULTANT whenever AUGUSTA observes or becomes aware of any development that affects the scope or timing of CONSULTANT's Services, or of any defect in the work of CONSULTANT or CONSULTANT's subcontractors. AUGUSTA 'S INSURANCE AUGUSTA will maintain property insurance on all pre - existing physical facilities associated in any way with the PROJECT. LITIGATION ASSISTANCE The Scope of Services does not include costs of CONSULTANT for required or requested assistance to support, prepare, document, bring, defend, or assist in litigation undertaken or defended by AUGUSTA. All such Services required or requested of CONSULTANT by AUGUSTA, except for suits or claims between the parties to this AGREEMENT, will be reimbursed as additional services. Except as otherwise provided in this agreement, CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless Augusta, GA, and its employees and agents from and against all liabilities, claims, suits, demands, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from the performance of its Work. 18 OF 26 Assessment Center Component Timeframe Job Analysis Weeks 1 -3 Exam Plan Development Week 4 Candidate Orientation Week 6 Review of Written Exam and Assessment Center Content Week 10 Administration of Written Exams Week 11 Administration of Assessment Centers Weeks 12 -14 Provision of Test Results and Candidate feedback Week 14 -15 ATTACHMENT A - SCOPE OF SERVICES PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To • Conduct job analyses for the target ranks in order to establish content validity evidence for the assessment processes • Develop written job knowledge examinations that can be used to identify qualified candidates to proceed to the assessment center based on the Department's SOPs and appropriate IFSTA and NFPA (Jones & Barlett) texts • Develop assessment centers for the Battalion Chief, Captain and Lieutenant ranks consisting of a personnel role -play, tactical (hot seat), and training presentation (pursuant to discussions with subject matter experts) • Develop a driving and pumping assessment for Sergeant candidates • Provide a candidate orientation session for candidates in each rank to familiarize them with the assessment process and reasonable preparation strategies • Recruit and train a diverse group of assessors who will come from at least 150 miles away from Augusta • Administer the assessments in a manner that suits the needs of the fire department (supervisory ranks during one timeframe and the sergeant rank during a separate timeframe) • Produce assessment results and candidate feedback • Identify an acceptable strategy for promotion (we recommend either rank -order or the establishment of performance bands — both options will be presented to the department at the onset of the project in order that the department can select the most advantageous system) — Selection Works will draft a policy that can be adopted by the department for promotional selection decision- making • Develop a summary technical report to detail the validation and outcomes of the processes 19 OF 26 OBJECTIVES (as agreed upon by Consultant): • Job Analysis: We will conduct a thorough job analysis for each rank. This is necessary in order to establish content validity evidence and to ensure the defensibility of the promotional processes. • Written Exams: We will develop written job knowledge examinations that can be used to identify qualified candidates to proceed to the assessment center based on the Department's SOPs and appropriate IFSTA and NFPA (Jones & Barlett) texts. We will work with the department to select the most relevant topics from these sources. • Assessment Centers: We will develop assessment centers for the Battalion Chief, Captain and Lieutenant ranks based on the input of internal subject matter experts as to the skills that the department is interested in evaluating. We expect to conduct a brief meeting with the Fire Chief to learn about his goals and objectives for this assessment process. • Sergeant /Engineer Assessment: We will design customized driving and pumping evolutions that are unique and require a valid demonstration of driving and pumping skills. • Candidate Orientation: Multiple orientation presentations will be provided prior to the administration of the assessments to familiarize candidates with the assessment process and reasonable preparation strategies. • Assessor Recruitment and Training: We will secure 10 assessors for the supervisory ranks and approximately 8 assessors for the Sergeant rank from agencies at least 150 miles away from Augusta. We will recruit a gender and racially diverse group and provide in -depth training at the start of the process. • Assessment Administration: In order to ease logistical burdens and shore up security concerns, we recommend that each rank's assessment be administered in a single day, and that the supervisory and Sergeant processes be separated. These can be conducted one to three weeks apart from each other. • Feedback: We will provide accurate results to the agency and detailed individual feedback reports will be produced for each candidate. • Decision Making: We will identify an acceptable strategy for promotion (we recommend either rank -order or the establishment of performance bands — both options will be presented to the department at the onset of the project in order that the department can select the most advantageous system) — Selection Works will draft a policy that can be adopted by the department for promotional selection decision - making. • Reporting: A summary technical report will be produced to detail the validation and outcomes of the processes. 20 OF 26 ATTACHMENT B - COMPENSATION AUGUSTA shall compensate the CONSULTANT for services, which have been authorized by AUGUSTA under the terms of this Agreement. 1. For payment due for basic services the Contractor shall submit invoices at the end of each monthly billing period. Invoice amounts shall be based on the Contractor's services as rendered. 2. The Contractor shall provide an invoice which provides detailed billing for services provided no later than ninety (90) calendar days after the date of services have been rendered. Invoices received after this time has elapsed may be considered null and void. The invoice shall reference the purchase order number assigned to this agreement. 3. The invoice shall be addressed as follows: Augusta Fire Department Fire Administration 3117 Dean's Bridge Road Augusta, GA 30906 4. Payments shall be paid to Contractor within thirty (30) days contingent upon the following: • From date of receipt by the Fire Department of properly documented invoices for payment as determined by the agreed upon terms of this contract. • On the condition that the Contractor has accomplished the Services to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. 5. As provided for in the Bid documents and accepted by AUGUSTA, the total compensation for this Agreement, shall not exceed Ninety Two Thousand, Four Hundred and Twenty Dollars, ($92,420.00). The CONSULTANT may submit to AUGUSTA a monthly invoice, in a form acceptable to AUGUSTA and accompanied by all support documentation requested by AUGUSTA, for payment for the services, which were completed during the billing period. AUGUSTA shall review for approval said invoices. AUGUSTA shall have the right to reject payment of any invoice or part thereof if not properly supported, or if the costs requested or a part thereof, as determined solely by AUGUSTA, are unreasonably in excess of the actual phase of completion of each phase. AUGUSTA shall pay each such invoice or portion thereof as approved, provided that the approval or payment of any such invoice shall not considered to be evidence of performance by the CONSULTANT to the point indicted by such invoice, or of receipt of acceptance by AUGUSTA of the service covered by such invoice. AUGUSTA shall pay any undisputed items contained in such invoices. Each invoice shall be accompanied by a letter progress report describing the total work accomplished for each phase and any problems, which have been encountered, which may inhibit 21 0F 28 execution of the work. The CONSULTANT shall also submit an accurate updated schedule, and an itemized description of the percentage of total work completed for each phase during the billing period. Compensation for services shall be invoiced based on the sum of all actual costs incurred in the performance of the work, including all direct, payroll, overall and profit cost in an amount not -to- exceed the compensation set forth in the terms of this Agreement or any authorized Task Order. All invoices submitted by the CONSULTANT shall be detailed to reflect incurred expenses, labor hours and costs by authorized Task. Overtime may be performed at the discretion of the CONSULTANT, but the premium time portion of the overtime will not be billed to AUGUSTA unless the CONSULTANT has requested acceleration of the scheduled work in writing. To the extent that the pricing provided by CONSULTANT is erroneous and defective, the parties may, by agreement, correct pricing errors to reflect the intent of the parties. The terms of this agreement supersede any and all provisions of the Georgia Prompt Pay Act. 22 OF 26 NAME TITLE -e j l 11 Q 6i L. , d �.( E rr t lI / (4-, lrt(t(1 ,. 4 ivi " ( p, aiz$L. /ferret J 12,,, /LJ ; f 6 # a /7644 /, i (S b g.fi (1 a t a S - „ i m h- t?Ica,/ f lee (ViG44 )11.- e ,te ATTACHMENT C - LISTING OF KEY PERSONNEL CONSULTANT shall provide qualified personnel to perform its work. The list of key personnel below, including a designated Program Manager will not change or be reassigned without the written approval of AUGUSTA. Those personnel committed for this work are as follows: 23 OF 26 ATTACHMENT D - SCHEDULE FOR PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT SERVICES As a part of this Agreement the CONSULTANT agrees to furnish the following checked items (CONSULTANT to initial in the space provided acknowledging responsibility to furnish said item). Prior to Authorization To Proceed: Q Detailed Scope of Services based upon Schedule A of this Agreement to be submitted with Cost Proposal clearly defining the CONSULTANT'S understanding of the project limits, objectives and CONSULTANT'S services to be provided. Cost Proposal that will include cost of assessment plan, design, preparation of promotional assessment plans and specifications, and other services requested in the AUGUSTA's Request for Proposal. Throughout project: Q Prepare printed responses to comments received from AUGUSTA following reviews. AUGU TA FIRE DEPARTMENT BY: PRINTED NAME: C L f ;f-r ;f 12kt C, 1i t c5 TITLE: CHIEF TITLE: DATE: l pl q / °Z U 1 DATE: 25 OF 26 CONSULTANT ■ BY: PRINTED NAME: 0.All L j ` ADDITIONAL SERVICES: 1. Revisions to the plans /contract documents to extend the limits of the project after this AGREEMENT has been executed by AUGUSTA. 2. Out -of -town meetings or conferences required of the CONSULTANT by AUGUSTA. 3. Other not described above, as approved by AUGUSTA. NOTE: It is the responsibility of the CONSULTANT as contracted by the AUGUSTA to provide professional surveying and engineering services. It is expected that such professionals will operate in a manner which assures the interests of the common welfare, rather than in a manner which promotes their own financial gain. It is expected that such professionals will act as a faithful agent for the AUGUSTA as a client. It is the duty of the CONSULTANT to protect the safety, health and welfare of the public in the performance of their professional duties. 26 OF 26 he Science of Public Safety Se Proposal for the Development and Validation of Fire Department Promotional Assessments SELECTION WORKS Presented to Augusta, Geor November 15, 2011 Project Title: Promotional Assessment (Fire Department) RFP Number: 11 -158 We are honored to present this proposal to the City of Augusta. This proposal will describe Selection Works' plan to provide the specific services discussed in your RFP. We have taken great care in preparing this proposal such that it meets your particular needs. As such, we would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to further discuss our proposal should you have any questions. Selection Works agrees to the terms and conditions of RFP 11 -158. Chad Legel will manage all aspects of this project. We have included a Project Solution, Project Team, and References section to describe our resources and capabilities. A cost proposal is contained under separate cover and will discuss hourly allocations. We have limited our response to 20 pages per the RFP requirements. Selection Works, LLC is an Illinois -based company in good- standing. Our Federal Employer Identification Number is 45- 3608744. Selection Works was established as an Illinois LLC in 2011. We are registered to conduct business in the state of Georgia. This proposal contains confidential, proprietary information that Selection Works considers trade secret. We request that you contact Selection Works prior to disclosing or sharing the contents of this document with any party, pursuant to a Freedom of Information law request or otherwise. Selection Works prepared this proposal independently and without collusion and the undersigned principal certifies that this offer is valid. I certify that this offer is made without prior understanding, agreement, or connection with any corporation, firm, or person submitting an offer for the same supplies or professional consulting services, and is in all respects fair and without collusion or fraud. I understand collusive bidding is a violation of local, state and federal law and can result in fines, prison sentences, and civil damages awards. I agree to abide by all conditions of this solicitation and offer and certify that I am authorized to sign for this offerer. Please contact us with any questions or requests for clarification. We truly look forward to the opportunity to serve your agency. Designated Project Contact: Chad C. Legel, M.S., President & C.E.O. Selection Works, LLC 451 Lowell Avenue, Suite B Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 630.390.5687 (direct), 855.557.7100 (toll free), 855.557.7100 (fax) clegel@ selectionworks.com Best Regards, Chad C. Legel, M.S. Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. ble of Content Section Page Executive Summary and Introduction 1 Project Solution and Methodology 2 Project Team 15 Project References and Experience 19 Appendices: A. Attachment B, Exhibit 11, Exceptions Sheet and SAVE Program B. Additional Project Team Resumes /Bios Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. ii J Execut ve Summary Introdu Selection WorksTM is pleased to have the opportunity to bid on this important project. The City of Augusta is interested in contracting with a qualified consulting firm to develop and administer promotional assessments for the rank of battalion chief, captain, lieutenant and sergeant in the fire department. Currently, the City expects that there may be up to 17 battalion chief, 48 captain, 50 lieutenant and 50 sergeant candidates. We plan to provide the following services to accomplish the city's goals: • Conduct job analyses for the target ranks in order to establish content validity evidence for the assessment processes • Develop written job knowledge examinations that can be used to identify qualified candidates to proceed to the assessment center based on the Department's SOPs and appropriate IFSTA and NFPA (Jones & Barlett) texts • Develop assessment centers for the Battalion Chief, Captain and Lieutenant ranks consisting of a personnel role -play, tactical (hot seat), and training presentation (pursuant to discussions with subject matter experts) • Develop a driving and pumping assessment for Sergeant candidates • Provide a candidate orientation session for candidates in each rank to familiarize them with the assessment process and reasonable preparation strategies • Recruit and train a diverse group of assessors who will come from at least 150 miles away from Augusta • Administer the assessments in a manner that suits the needs of the fire department (supervisory ranks during one timeframe and the sergeant rank during a separate timeframe) • Produce assessment results and candidate feedback • Identify an acceptable strategy for promotion (we recommend either rank -order or the establishment of performance bands — both options will be presented to the department at the onset of the project in order that the department can select the most advantageous system) — Selection Works will draft a policy that can be adopted by the department for promotional selection decision - making • Develop a summary technical report to detail the validation and outcomes of the processes Selection WorksTM is the right choice for this project because of the quality and expertise of our project team, the soundness of our methods, and our ample experience designing public safety selection processes. Of note, the consulting team at Selection WorksTM has conducted a number of high - profile projects of similar scope including a Battalion Chief written exam and assessment center for Austin TX Fire, numerous exams and assessment centers (including Engineer pumping evolutions) for Gwinnett County Fire and many others. The project leader for this project, Chad Legel, also led the most recent fire promotional process for Augusta and worked directly with Chief James. Currently, this Selection Works team is engaged in a project of similar scope to develop a promotional process for the Illinois State Police. The project leader for your project, Chad Legel, M.S., has over 12 years of experience designing and deploying entry -level and promotional testing solutions in some of the most challenging and litigious climates. One of Mr. Legel's notable achievements was the development of a testing process that withstood the scrutiny of the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark Civil Rights Act law suit Ricci v. DeStefano. Mr. Legel developed a promotional testing process for the New Haven, CT Fire Department, which the City's Civil Service Commission opted not to use. Candidates filed suit under protections afforded by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the testing process was valid and met the rigorous professional standards associated with test development. The High Court required that New Haven implement the results of the testing process. Mr. Legel was instrumental in providing evidence to defend the validity of the testing process. Selection Works' goal in designing tests /assessments is to ensure that an agency hires or promotes the best candidates and that the decisions that are made based on our selection tools are defensible. We believe that if you select the best individuals, your agency will function like a well -oiled machine. Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 1 PCQje Solution hodology Project Overview Since the proposed project manager for this project, Chad Legel, managed the promotional testing process for Augusta in 2008, we are intimately familiar with the process and needs of the fire department. Our goal is to use a similar process as was used in 2008, but to improve in certain areas. Specifically, we plan to make the following enhancements to the last process: • Orientation: Candidates will be afforded an opportunity to participate in an orientation presentation. This will enable each candidate to learn about the process, which will ensure a fair and informed situation for all candidates. Candidates will also be able to ask questions prior to the assessment. We expect to conduct three to four distinct presentations to allow all candidates an opportunity to participate. • Assessment Centers: We will develop a full scale assessment center for the Battalion Chief, Captain and Lieutenant ranks. For each of these ranks we expect to use a dynamic tactical hot seat exercise (using Fire Studio — Digital Combustion software), a one -on -one role -play with a subordinate to simulate a personnel management problem, and a presentation exercise. In order to ensure that each assessment is job - related and unique, we will work with subject matter experts to define the theme of each assessment center exercise. • Assessment Center Administration: We expect to recruit a group of ten assessors (three panels of three plus one back -up) for the Batt. Chf., Capt. and Lt. assessment centers. We expect to train the assessors on Day One and then conduct the assessment centers for these three target ranks in three consecutive days. This will ensure that each rank's candidates complete the process in a single day, thereby minimizing the risk of a security breach. We will work with the department to ensure that manageable numbers move from the written exam to the assessment center. • Sergeant Pumping /Driving Practical Exercise: We will work with agency subject matter experts to design a standardized driving course (usually related to the standard IFSTA course) and a pumping exercise. We plan to sequester candidates and to process all candidates in a single day. This will ensure that security is not compromised. We will work closely with the agency to ensure that sufficient apparatus and resources exist to process multiple candidate during a single timeframe. • Feedback: Selection Works will produce feedback reports for each candidate to document their strengths and developmental needs as noted by assessors. • Promotional selection policy development: We will work with the department from the start of this project to outline a promotional testing policy that outlines rules associated with cut -off scores, those who move on to the assessment center phase, the weights of test components in the final scoring, and the manner in which final selection decisions are made. While we desire to assist the agency in recommending best practices, we acknowledge that the agency must weigh in heavily on these points. Following is a summary description of the major project components that will be described in detail in the implementation plan that follows. • Job Analysis: We will conduct a thorough job analysis for each rank. This is necessary in order to establish content validity evidence and to ensure the defensibility of the promotional processes. • Written Exams: We will develop written job knowledge examinations that can be used to identify qualified candidates to proceed to the assessment center based on the Department's SOPs and appropriate IFSTA and NFPA (Jones & Barlett) texts. We will work with the department to select the most relevant topics from these sources. • Assessment Centers: We will develop assessment centers for the Battalion Chief, Captain and Lieutenant ranks based on the input of internal subject matter experts as to the skills that the department is interested Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 2 in evaluating. We expect to conduct a brief meeting with the Fire Chief to learn about his goals and objectives for this assessment process. • Sergeant /Engineer Assessment: We will design customized driving and pumping evolutions that are unique and require a valid demonstration of driving and pumping skills. • Candidate Orientation: Multiple orientation presentations will be provided prior to the administration of the assessments to familiarize candidates with the assessment process and reasonable preparation strategies. • Assessor Recruitment and Training: We will secure 10 assessors for the supervisory ranks and approximately 8 assessors for the Sergeant rank from agencies at least 150 miles away from Augusta. We will recruit a gender and racially diverse group and provide in -depth training at the start of the process. • Assessment Administration: In order to ease logistical burdens and shore up security concerns, we recommend that each rank's assessment be administered in a single day, and that the supervisory and Sergeant processes be separated. These can be conducted one to three weeks apart from each other. • Feedback: We will provide accurate results to the agency and detailed individual feedback reports will be produced for each candidate. • Decision Making: We will identify an acceptable strategy for promotion (we recommend either rank -order or the establishment of performance bands — both options will be presented to the department at the onset of the project in order that the department can select the most advantageous system) — Selection Works will draft a policy that can be adopted by the department for promotional selection decision- making. • Reporting: A summary technical report will be produced to detail the validation and outcomes of the processes. The entire assessment process will be carried out in a 120 day timeframe. Selection Works is absolutely committed to meeting this goal. In order for this to happen, we will need to complete job analysis work very quickly and move immediately to the development of reference lists for the written examination (to allow for sufficient study /preparation time for candidates). While this proposal offers a general timeline for the project, we expect to compose a very detailed timeline following the project kick -off meeting. Professional Guidelines Selection Works (herein referred to as SW) is committed to developing sound and defensible tests and assessments. In order to accomplish this end, it is necessary to comply with the professional guidelines that govern our science. Our methods and practice adhere to the guidelines established by the two major guideposts for selection and assessment practices: • Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (STOP Principles), Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4 Edition, 2003 • Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (Uniform Guidelines), U.S. Dept. of Labor version (41 CFR Part 60 -3), 1978 In addition to adhering closely to professional guidelines, we take all reasonable steps to mitigate disparate impact outcomes in the design of testing procedures. During the project commencement meeting, we will discuss a number of strategies for mitigating /reducing disparate impact levels and will make numerous suggestions for maximizing both the validity and fairness of the testing process. Some firms will claim that disparate impact can be completely eradicated but this is an impossible promise. It is incumbent on the test developer to intelligently and carefully design the selection process to control disparate impact (while maximizing validity). This is why experience and thoughtful planning are the keys to success. We will focus on strategies such as test component weights, hurdle construction, reference material selections, test length, and thoughtful assessment exercise selection to control disparity levels. Copyright() 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 3 Project Commencement Meeting The kick -off meeting is an important part of our project plan. We are highly flexible and accommodating in our approach to accomplishing your objectives, as long as the integrity of the process can be maintained. That said, it is necessary for us to understand you and your agency so that we can ensure we are meeting your goals, and so that we can educate you on the challenges and expectations of the project. The initial meeting will ideally be held face -to -face; however, we are open to a telephone or video conference if a face -to -face meeting is cost - prohibitive or cannot be easily coordinated. Our goal is to cover the following important topics: • Listen to your expectations and objectives • Discuss roles and the flow of information between parties • Share expectations regarding challenges and critical steps associated with the project • Get acquainted with the agency structure, testing history, litigation history, and internal challenges • Review the project steps and associated timeline Job Analysis Job analysis is the process of defining the essential elements of a job. It is foundational to the development of any sound testing process, but it is also a critical element associated with the defensibility of a testing process. Almost all promotional testing processes for public safety positions are supported through the use of content validity evidence. As content validity is largely dependent on a thorough job analysis, this process is a necessary part of ensuring the validity and usefulness of your testing process. The job analysis requires a series of steps including: 1) job observations and interviews with incumbents, 2) development and administration of a job analysis questionnaire, 3) linkage of essential job tasks to essential job knowledge areas, skills and abilities (KSAs), and 4) documentation in the form of essential task and KSA lists as well as a technical report. It is not necessary that this process be performed each time a testing process is designed. A job analysis that is five to eight years old could be acceptable if it is sufficiently thorough and still accurately reflects the content of the job. Before SW conducts a job analysis, we will review the existing job analysis to determine its adequacy and to familiarize ourselves with the content of the target job. Based on our evaluation of the thoroughness of the job analysis and the client's interest in conducting a review and update of the existing job analysis, SW may recommend a revision process as opposed to a full job analysis study. In this case, SW will assemble a panel of six to eight incumbents from the target position to review the job analysis results. Their task will be to identify any instances in which the job has changed or revisions to the existing task and KSA descriptions that would make the job analysis results more accurate. Any revisions or modifications that result from this meeting will be documented and provided to the agency as an update to the job analysis. Should SW and /or the agency decide that a full scale job analysis is more appropriate, SW will begin this process by scheduling a series of interviews and job observations with incumbents in the target ranks. SW consultants will travel to Augusta to meet with incumbents to discuss the target position and conduct ride - alongs and observations to document the content of the job. SW will review the size and demographics of the incumbent work force in the target rank. SW will create a sampling plan that identifies the quantity of incumbents that should be interviewed along with targets for female and racial minority participation. We will also provide parameters related to tenure, assignment and geographical location. Our goal will be to interview and observe a representative and diverse sample of incumbents. We may also interview a small number of supervisors for the target position. Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 4 These interviews and observations will provide necessary insight into the specific tasks and knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) that are required to successfully perform the target job. These data will be used to develop a tailored job analysis questionnaire (JAQ). The JAQ is a comprehensive list of all job tasks, knowledge areas, skills, abilities, characteristics, physical abilities, environmental conditions, tools and other work factors related to the target job. Incumbents are asked to rate each task and KSA by indicating the importance of successful performance of the task /KSA and the frequency with which the task /KSA is performed /exhibited. The JAQ must be administered to a representative sample of incumbents. Generally, it is advisable to sample from 25 to 50 percent of the incumbents in the target rank, depending on the size of the organization. SW will again devise a sampling plan that seeks a sufficiently large and representative sample, without interfering with the reasonable operations of the department. Once the JAQ is developed, SW will request that a small number of agency subject matter experts to review the document. This review will ensure that SW captured the terminology, rank structure and nuances of the target job. This is also a valuable opportunity to ensure that no major job functions are missing from the JAQ. Any suggestions made by SMEs will be integrated into a final JAQ and the questionnaire will be prepared for administration. Whereas many JAQs require three to four hours to complete, our JAQ will require approximately 90 minutes. This commitment should be more manageable for incumbents, yield more reliable data and still be comprehensive enough to accomplish the required purpose. SW will work with the agency to set up parameters for the administration of the JAQ including timeframe, delivery and return, paper vs. web -based administration, etc. Once the JAQ is administered and the required data is collected, SW will analyze the results of the JAQ. Incumbent ratings of task /KSA importance and frequency will be combined into composite values to determine the essentiality of each component of the job. Both importance and frequency play a role in determining if a task or KSA is a critical or essential part of the job. Those job components that are deemed critical /essential will define the scope of the job. When incumbents complete the JAQ, they will also complete a brief exercise that links each grouping of job tasks to job activities that define the scope of skills and abilities that are required to perform the job. Our model for linking tasks to job activities is directly related to the US Department of Labor's (O *NET) skills and abilities model. This ensures that the evidence of content validity that is established is rooted in a well - accepted standard. This linkage process will demonstrate when and where specific skills and abilities are used on the job. This information will be helpful when designing examination plans and developing assessment exercises. Upon completion of the job analysis method, SW will prepare a job analysis report to document the methods and outcomes of the analysis. This report will serve a comprehensive definition of the job and will demonstrate the method's compliance with professional guidelines. This report will serve as a major component of any content validity evidence that is later established to support the validity of tests and assessments. The job analysis phase requires approximately eight weeks to produce results that enable the development of exam and assessment plans. This timeframe can be shortened to approximately six weeks if the lead time to schedule meetings with incumbents and local SMEs is shortened. Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 5 Written Job Knowledge Examination Development and Validation A multiple choice job knowledge examination is an excellent tool for assessing raw job knowledge. In order to be effective and well- accepted, a job knowledge test must be drafted from relevant sources and contain questions that are directly related to essential functions of the job. The process of designing and deploying a successful written examination includes a number of steps: • Examination plan development • Source selection • Question development • Question review • Cut -off score determination • Test finalization • Scoring and challenge /appeal management Exam Plan Development and Source Selection A job knowledge examination is supported by content validity evidence, which means that the content of the test much match the content of the job. Specifically, the test should assess those knowledge areas that are essential and directly job - relevant. Essential knowledge areas are determined based on the job analysis. A group of subject matter experts (SMEs) will be convened to review the essential knowledge areas that are identified in the job analysis results and will make a determination as to those knowledge areas that can reasonably be assessed using a written job knowledge test. Once a collection of knowledge areas is determined, SMEs will rate the relative importance of each of these knowledge areas. Areas that are rated as more important will be allotted more questions in the exam, therefore the coverage of those knowledge areas will be broader and deeper. Once the exam plan is constructed, SW will guide SMEs in the selection of source, or reference, materials. These will be the internal and external manuals and texts from which the questions will be drafted. For each essential knowledge area identified in the exam plan, SMEs will identify the source(s) that impart that knowledge. Internal sources such as rules and regulations, policies, procedures, memoranda, union agreements, employee handbooks, etc. often serve as important source materials. External texts are also helpful. Management and supervision, incident management, tactical, customer service and various leadership sources are often a necessary compliment to internal knowledge sources. SW will assist SMEs in selecting a comprehensive and sound collection of source materials. If the agency already has a reference list in place, SW will work with SMEs to link each reference to essential job tasks as outlined by the exam plan. Another critical element of source selection is identifying the chapters and sections of each source that most appropriately cover the knowledge area of interest. SW will work with SMEs to narrow each source down to the specific sections from which questions should be drawn. By engaging this process, we will achieve a test that covers the most relevant and important content. Question Development and Review Based on the comprehensive examination plan, SW's technical writers will develop test questions. Each question will be developed to assess an important knowledge area for the target rank. All items will be reviewed by the project team to ensure that they assess the most essential knowledge areas, are free from bias, are job - related based on the job analysis, are accurately drawn from the source material and are structurally sound. All items will be multiple choice containing one clearly correct option and three incorrect distractor options. Each item will be directly drawn from the referenced source material such that challenges to the accuracy of the items will be easily defended. We will specifically avoid item flaws such as negatively worded question stems or distractors, multiple option answers (e.g., "a" and "c "), or all /none of the above Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 6 answer options. We will also avoid questions that assess minutia or insignificant concepts. Attention in these areas will ensure that the test is more valid and that it is better accepted as a legitimate assessment by candidates. SW will develop approximately 125 questions for the target rank. These questions will then be reviewed by a panel of local subject matter experts. According to best practice, local SMEs review each question to accomplish three important test development goals: 1) monitor the accuracy and clarity of the question, 2) assign a rating of the relevance of the item in measuring the target knowledge area, and 3) assign a rating of the difficulty of the question. SW will guide the SMEs in providing feedback and suggesting necessary revisions or deletions to ensure a quality pool of test questions. SMEs will provide Content Validity Ratio (CVR) ratings that will be used to assess the validity and relevance of each test question and will ultimately be collected to establish the content validity of the exam based on Lawshe's Content Validity Ratio. Finally, SMEs will provide a difficulty rating by assigning Angoff ratings for each question. An Angoff rating is a method of assessing item difficulty based on the likelihood of minimally qualified incumbents answering the question correctly. When Angoff ratings are compiled for an entire exam, it allows for a cut -off score to be determined that is consistent with minimally qualified performance. All data collected from the item review process will be used to select and compile the final examination. Exam Finalization The exam will be arranged by grouping questions together from the same source. Headings will be inserted into the test to instruct candidates concerning the source material from which each group of questions is selected. This strategy will assist with recall and will minimize candidate confusion. The final 100 - question test will be professionally designed and meticulously proof -read to ensure accuracy. If the agency wishes to set the cut -off at a point that ensures that all minimally qualified candidates proceed to the next stage of selection, the Angoff results will be used to facilitate this decision. The agency may also choose to set a cut -off score that is consistent with the Agency's desire to process only the top performers (for example, the top 20 scores) to the next stage of selection. SW will prepare the necessary quantity of test booklets along with scannable answer sheets. SW will also oversee the administration of the written examination. We will provide sufficient proctors to deliver test instructions, monitor candidates and collect and secure test materials. SW will also provide necessary materials such as pencils, scratch paper, timers, etc. Scoring SW will score the examinations following their administration. We will collect all test answer sheets and bring them to our offices in Chicago, IL. All answer sheets will be scanned by optical mark read (OMR) scanners to accurately compile candidate responses. Data will then be 'cleaned' by visually inspecting any data points that the scanner was unable to read. Our test scoring specialist will confirm the intended marking of the candidate and manually correct any missing data. Finally, a scoring program will be run on the data to accurately grade the candidate's collection of exam responses. This scoring program will generate a final score for each candidate. This entire process will be performed twice to ensure the accuracy of data capture and scoring procedures. Once we confirm that scores generated through the duplicate processes are identical, a final register of scores will be produced. This process generally is completed within two business days once answer sheets arrive in Chicago. Scores will be professionally formatted in an MS ExcelTM format and electronically delivered to the client in a secure manner. It is also possible to provide onsite scoring services. Challenge /Appeal Process It is customary to conduct a review process that affords candidates the opportunity to file appeals /challenges to the content of the written examination. The purpose of this process is to empower candidates to critically Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 7 evaluate the content of the written examination to ensure its accuracy and job - relatedness. While the test development process is designed to produce accurate and job - related test content, the candidates' ability to review and question test content ensures candidate buy -in and a fair end result. SW recommends that the appeal /challenge process be conducted immediately following the administration of the written examination by allowing candidates to self -score their exams (using a copy of their answer sheet and an answer key) at the conclusion of the test administration. If the candidate wishes to challenge any of the test items, they will be afforded a limited period of time during this session to file a written challenge. These challenges will then be collected by SW and a written response to each challenge will be generated and submitted to the client for review. It is also possible to conduct the appeal /challenge process in the days following the exam administration. If this is preferable, SW will work with the client to design a manageable challenge procedure. Assessment Center Development, Validation and Administration Assessment centers are excellent promotional evaluation tools because they place candidates in high - fidelity simulations of the job to determine how the candidate will react to challenging and stressful job tasks. In order to be highly valuable, the assessment center must have high - fidelity simulations of critical job activities and must induce stress on the candidate in realistic and appropriate ways. When these factors are in place, the assessment center will be both valid (capable of identifying the best suited candidates) and reliable (yield accurate scores for each candidate). Assessment centers are effective because they assess candidate skills in a realistic environment. Assessment centers are less susceptible to faking than other types of less rigorous assessments. When candidates are not capable of easily faking, or acting in unnatural manners, the reliability of the assessment is increased. The way to accomplish this is to ensure that the assessment is sufficiently (and realistically) complex and stressful. The complexity combined with natural stressors will inhibit the candidates from being able to spend cognitive resources determining a socially desirable response and will, instead, force the candidate to behave in a natural manner. This allows assessors to see the candidate as he /she truly is and rate him /her accordingly. Assessment Plan Development and Exercise Selection The first step in the development of an assessment center is to design an assessment plan. This consists of a list of the skills and abilities that will be assessed, along with the specific exercise that will be used to assess those skills and abilities. Selection Works' consultants will meet with local subject matter experts to review job analytic information and identify essential skills and abilities that should be assessed for the target rank — we will guide subject matter experts to make sure that the most essential skills are included in the assessment plan. Selection Works has developed a comprehensive model of skills and abilities for public safety assessment. We seek to ensure that your agency's job analytic information supports this model. Following is an overview of the skill and ability model we use to design assessment content. Dimension Sub- Dimensions Definition Management and Leadership Skills Supervisory Skill Motivation Skill Goal- Setting Skill The management of subordinate performance by identifying personal strengths and weaknesses, enacting plans to develop weaknesses, monitoring and documenting performance, and providing counseling and direction as necessary. Encouraging others to develop strategies to achieve goals and to work diligently toward the attainment of those goals. Identifying an incremental plan that enables one to achieve an end result that is currently outside his /her grasp. Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 8 Once the target skills are identified, the consultant and subject matter experts will identify job activities for the target rank(s) where these skills are typically used /expected. The end result of this exercise will be an assessment matrix, or plan that identifies the skills that each selected exercise will seek to assess. The consultant will work with subject matter experts to identify a job - related scenario that will be 'fleshed out' by 9 Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. Presence Skill at managing one's presentation and conducting oneself in a manner that engenders confidence and trust from others by exercising self - assuredness and confidence during challenging times. Vision Identifying a goal or purpose that unifies others and motivates others to work together for a common purpose. Incident Command Skill Exercising tactical knowledge with sound judgment in processing numerous strains of information during a rapidly evolving sequence of events. Stress Tolerance/ Composure Maintaining a calm and rational thought process and demeanor amid chaos or heightened levels of stress. Initiative Propelling oneself to pursue objectives and accomplish goals based on an internal drive to succeed. Administrative Skills Planning Outlining a step -by -step method for addressing challenges of various degrees of complexity. Managing one's time to accomplish items of highest priority while leaving sufficient time to address other less critical items. Organizing Maintaining order and clear systems and structures that facilitate the efficient completion of tasks. Budgeting Allocating financial resources to various line items based on organizational value. Making decisions regarding the allocation of limited resources and managing that allocation to ensure that budgets are not exceeded. Interpersonal Skills Relationship Building Interacting with others in a pleasant and comfortable manner so as to build trust and rapport. Public Relations Understanding the manner in which the organization needs to be presented to the community at large and making necessary efforts to work with the public while protecting the integrity of the organization. Customer Service Identifying the needs and concerns of others and making a concerted effort to deliver services that address those needs and concerns. Conflict Resolution Working with individuals to identify problems, identify solutions and negotiate mutually acceptable outcomes. Also, working with opposing sides to make good faith efforts to pursue solutions and honor agreements. Teamwork /Team Building Effectively working with others to accomplish mutual goals. The ability to encourage collaboration and put the right people together to create the most productive teams. Critical Thinking Skills Problem Solving The ability to identify a problem and use available information and resources to solve problems. Often, information is gathered through critical thinking and investigation. Judgment /Decision Making Processing contextual information and known objectives while weighing various options and their respective outcomes, in order to arrive at a solution that yields the greatest benefit with the least risk. Communication Verbal Communication Using spoken language, as well as non - verbal styles (appearance, posture, gestures, cadence) to communicate clear thoughts. Presentation Skill Using language and non - verbals effectively to engage a group and clearly communicate a message in a formal or semi - formal presentation setting. Written Communication Using written language (word choice, punctuation, grammar and syntax) to communicate clear thoughts. Position - Specific Skills Tactical Skill Using acquired tactical knowledge to select proper tactical procedures and deploy them effectively to control a scene /scenario. Pumping/Driving (Fire Engineers) Maneuvering the apparatus and effectively controlling its capabilities (aerial ladder deployment or pumping). Once the target skills are identified, the consultant and subject matter experts will identify job activities for the target rank(s) where these skills are typically used /expected. The end result of this exercise will be an assessment matrix, or plan that identifies the skills that each selected exercise will seek to assess. The consultant will work with subject matter experts to identify a job - related scenario that will be 'fleshed out' by 9 Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. Exercise Type One -on -One Role Play Description The candidate takes on the role of the rank for which he /she is competing. The candidate is tasked with meeting with an individual to address a specific problem. A carefully trained role - player interacts with the candidate. This exercise can take place with a subordinate (usually a performance management problem), citizen (usually a citizen complaint), union representative (usually a union relations challenge), supervisor (usually a meeting to address a critical issue), or other key individual. The candidate is usually given background and preparatory information and allowed approximately 10 to 20 minutes to prepare for the exercise. The candidate is then ushered into the meeting room and generally has 12 to 20 minutes to address the challenge. Presentation Exercise The candidate assumes the role of the rank for which he /she is competing and is tasked with delivering a formal or semi - formal presentation to a group of people. The assessors usually act as the audience with one additional role - player. These individuals will ask questions and engage the candidate in a realistic manner. The candidate is given preparatory information and allotted 10 to 20 minutes to prepare for the presentation. The presentation can take numerous forms including: a press conference, a presentation before city council to address a specific topic, a command staff management meeting, a COMPSTAT meeting, a meeting with community members /leaders, etc. The presentation and interaction with the audience usually lasts for 15 to 20 minutes. Training Exercise The candidate is allowed a preparation period to develop a training presentation from pre - prepared source materials. After the preparation period, the candidate must deliver training to a group of subordinates (played by the assessors and possibly additional role - players.). The role - players will interact with the candidate during the presentation. This exercise typically lasts for 12 to 15 minutes. Tactical Simulation The candidate will be allowed a brief preparation period during which he /she will review dispatch logs, fire pre - planning information /reports, geographic diagrams, staging information, etc. The candidate will be provided with a specific goal and objective (e.g., assume command, make tactical decisions to best control the incident, end by transferring command to the in -bound Battalion Chief). The candidate will then enter the assessment room and will be confronted with a fire image on a digital projector. SW typically uses Fire Studio software to design evolving, dynamic simulations that allow candidates to view multiple building angles, see changing fire and smoke conditions, view interior structures, conduct walk- around evaluations, etc. The candidate will interact with role - players who will play the roles of engine, ladder, and rescue crews as well as dispatch, utilities, etc. The candidates will operate in this dynamic environment for a fixed period of time. It is possible to use more or less dynamic role - plays. This will be tailored based on the needs of the agency. Biographical Presentation The candidate will be afforded an opportunity to prepare a brief biographic resume of assignments and professional achievements. This will be used to make a presentation of personal qualifications before the assessor panel. While an exercise of this nature is beneficial for assessing past performance, it is necessary to engage local SMEs to 'fact- check' the content of the written resumes to ensure accuracy and truthfulness. In- Basket The candidate will be given a number of position- appropriate in- basket items ranging from emails, letters and phone messages, to supervisory directives, community correspondence, and departmental data. The candidate will be challenged with prioritizing items, responding to selected items and explaining decisions that are made. The candidates will either compile their responses in a written format or deliver a presentation to address the in- basket items and the chosen courses of action. Written Problem Solving The candidate will be presented with a personnel, supervisory or incident management problem and asked to provide a written analysis and response to the problem. This exercise is excellent for assessing written communication skill or to assess broader planning and organizational analysis skills (e.g., creating a leadership report to discuss present challenges and future goals of the organization). the consultant to create a detailed assessment center exercise. We target the development of three to four exercises for each rank based on time constraints, candidate numbers and skill breadth. Following is detail regarding typical assessment center exercise types. These types of exercises are used as a starting point to help foster the development of realistic job- scenarios that can be converted in complex assessment center exercises. Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 10 Scenario -based Interview The candidate will respond to three to five management scenarios in a structured oral interview setting. Questions will be posed by assessors and the candidate will have a fixed period of time to respond to each question. This format allows for a broad coverage of topic areas in a relative short time - frame. Standardization is one of the most important elements of the assessment center process. Great care is taken in designing exercises, instructions, role - player scripts and rating criteria that ensure that each candidate is afforded the same experience and is treated in that same manner. Assessment centers are by their nature dynamic exchanges, so candidates do affect the nature of the interaction; however, our goal is to ensure that if two candidates respond the same way, they are reacted to and scored the same. It is important to note that as candidate numbers increase, the complexity and dynamism of the assessment must be limited in order to preserve the security and reliability of the assessment process. For example, if numerous candidates must be processed through the same exercise at the same time, meaning that multiple role - players must be used to play the same part, it is not reasonable to script a dynamic role -play because the role - players would inevitably not act exactly the same. This condition seriously undermines the reliability and defensibility of the assessment process. Exercise Development and Review Using the ideas generated during the SME assessment plan development meeting, the consultant will draft exercises that simulate the target job scenarios while assessing the skills that were deemed essential for each exercise. The consultant will create the exercise background and preparation materials, candidate instructions and objectives, assessor rating criteria, role - player scripts and instructions, and all necessary handouts and rating forms. Once created, another subject matter expert meeting will be convened to review and revise the exercises as necessary. The goal of this meeting will be to ensure that each exercise is a) an accurate and high - fidelity simulation of a component of the job, b) is clear, comprehensive and understandable, and c) properly defines superior performance via comprehensive rating criteria. Any suggestions or revisions offered by subject matter experts will be integrated into the final exercises. Subject matter experts will then review the assessment plan /matrix in consideration of the final exercises to ensure that all skills are adequately assessed. Subject matter experts will offer a rating of the fidelity, comprehensiveness and relative importance of each of the exercises. These data will be used to support the content validity of the assessment center as well as to assist the consultant in defining the relative weight of each exercise in the assessment center. Assessor Recruitment Selection Works will recruit assessors to rate candidates during the assessment center process. Assessors are a critical part of the assessment process because they provide the actual performance ratings. In order for the assessment process to be of high quality, the assessors must be of high quality. These individuals will be recruited from agencies that are similar in size and function to your agency. The consultant will develop a recruitment plan that specifies the qualifications and quantity of assessors that will be secured. The consultant will meet with the agency to discuss the parameters that will guide assessor recruitment to enable the agency to control a number of important variables. Generally, Selection Works imposes the following standards: 1) the assessor must be at but preferably one level above the rank for which the assessment center is being conducted, 2) have no less than one full year of experience in their present rank, 3) perform at a high level within their own agency, 4) the assessor panels should be racially and gender diverse (ideally each panel would contain one female and represent the racial classifications that are most dominant in the agency /local community, and 5) if possible, assessors will have participated in at least one prior assessment center. The consultant will work with the local agency to define geographic boundaries from where assessors can be recruited, parameters regarding agency size and type, and any other restrictions of interest. Selection Works will reach out to other agencies and recruit the necessary individuals based on the parameters of the Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 11 recruitment plan. Recruitment will generally begin two to three months prior to the assessment center to ensure that assessors are afforded sufficient time to request leave. Assessment Administration /Assessor Training Selection Works will work with the local agency to determine the manner in which the assessment center will be administered. Depending on the number of eligible candidates, there are generally two methods by which candidates can be scheduled. Option 1 requires that all candidates be processed in a single day. This method is ideal if security is of great concern; however, this method requires more physical space, more assessors and will generally create a large scheduling burden for the agency. Generally, candidates are sequestered using this model, which means that the first wave of candidates completes the process and then is quarantined until the second wave checks in. In this manner, the security of the process cannot be compromised. Option 2 allows for candidates to be processed over multiple days — each candidate only participates for a single day. This process is usually more manageable for the agency because it minimally interferes with departmental operations; however, when protracted over multiple days, the risk of candidates divulging assessment content increases. Of course, Selection Works will require candidates to sign confidentiality and non - disclosure agreements, but these covenants do not control security leaks as much as provide for clear consequences if candidates are to violate the agreement. There are variants of these two scheduling models but, generally, there is always a trade -off between security and convenience when candidate numbers exceed 15. Selection Works will create an assessment plan based on the schedule that is most palatable to the agency. The schedule will be supplied to the agency so that candidates can be assigned report times. As a general rule of thumb, 12 to 16 candidates can be processed in a single day using three panels of three assessors each. The agency can opt to have the assessment center video - recorded. Assessors can rate from video following the assessment or the video can be saved as a record of the assessment process. Unless otherwise specified, the agency will be responsible for supplying a suitable facility at which the assessment center can be administered. Selection Works will provide a room plan that details the amount of space and the necessary furniture set -up for each room required to accommodate the assessment schedule. Selection Works' consultants will administer the assessment center and supply all printed materials and other supplies (stop watches, timers, writing utensils, note pads, etc.) necessary to conduct the assessment. Generally, assessors will convene onsite and the first day will be devoted to assessor training. Assessors will be thoroughly trained in individual assessment techniques as well as the specifics of the assessment exercises that will be used. The following curriculum will guide the training: • Purpose of individual assessment • Development of the assessment center exercises • Reliability of ratings and validity of the process • Observation and note - taking • Inference vs. observation • Individual and group discussion of observed behaviors • Using rating scales • Consensus scoring rules • Proper documentation • Rating errors and bias • Legal defensibility • Rules for professional conduct • Panel assessments Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 12 Assessment Center Component Timeframe Job Analysis Weeks 1 -3 Exam Plan Development Week 4 Candidate Orientation Week 6 Review of Written Exam and Assessment Center Content Week 10 Administration of Written Exams Week 11 Administration of Assessment Centers Weeks 12 -14 Provision of Test Results and Candidate Feedback Week 14 -15 • Agency organization, job description, acronyms, etc. • Exercise and rating criteria review • Rating practice • Exercise mock -ups • Schedules, breaks, etc. • Meals and other logistics Selection Works will also train the actors /role - players during this time. Actors will be provided detailed scripts to ensure that their performance is strictly standardized. Selection Works prefers to recruit actors from local acting guides as this increases the standardization of the performance and ultimately increases reliability. We take great care to impart essential knowledge to actors because we believe that the reliability that is afforded by a professional actor is more important than using a subject matter expert who likely lacks the acting skill necessary to be both consistent and realistic. Selection Works will supply the necessary personnel to usher candidates through the process, monitor the security of the process and efficiently orchestrate all functions of the assessment center process. Assessment Scoring and Feedback All assessment rating and administration documents will be collected and secured by Selection Works personnel. All materials will be transported back to our headquarters in Chicago. Non - essential materials will be destroyed after all assessment rating documents are carefully inventoried. Scores will be entered into a database and combined according to a predetermined weighting formula. This process will be conducted a second time by a second party to ensure the accuracy of all score computations. Final scores will be supplied to the client in a format of their choosing. Developmental feedback is an important element of the assessment center process. For this reason, we will produce detailed feedback reports for candidates that detail their performance on each assessment exercise. Feedback will include scores for each dimension assessed within each exercise, overall scores for each exercise, comparisons against the average performance of the larger group of candidates, a description of the scales used and the respective anchors, a recap of the details of the assessment exercises, and assessor - documented strengths and developmental needs for each exercise. Project Timeframe The following timeline accomplishes the City's request to complete the testing process within 120 days. This is a preliminary timeline that can be refined based on the needs of the department. Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 13 Technical /Validation Reporting Selection Works' consultant will compose a validation report to document the development and validation of the assessment process. Promotional assessment processes are supported by content validity evidence and, as such, require a report to clearly outline the job analytic information that was used to develop job - related assessment content and the use of subject matter experts to review and evaluate the appropriateness of assessment content. The report will cover all phases of test development including job analysis, written exam, assessment center, scoring and analysis of final results. The technical report will be designed to comply with the reporting requirements imposed by the Uniform Guidelines and STOP Principles. The technical report will generally be completed within six weeks of the conclusion of the assessment process. Candidate Orientation The goal of an assessment process is to reliably measure the peak capabilities of a group of individuals and to construct a system that allows those with the greatest capabilities to be selected first. Because it is desirable to assess each candidate at his /her peak performance level, it is ideal to conduct a candidate orientation session to familiarize each candidate with the selection process and to remove any misconceptions or obstacles that may inhibit a candidate from putting his /her best foot forward. Selection Works will deliver a candidate preparation presentation. This presentation can be conducted prior to both the written examination and the assessment center or prior to only the assessment center. While conducting the orientation prior to the written examination is helpful, it is really the assessment center that requires a thorough orientation. At the orientation, candidates will be instructed as to the nature and structure of the assessment process and will be afforded an opportunity to ask questions. The specific topics areas that will be covered include: • Examination plan development and the specific reference materials that should be studied • Question development process • Developing a study plan • Exam rules • Challenge /appeal process • Assessment center exercise development process • Types of assessment center exercises • Range of dimensions (skills) that will be assessed • Common misconceptions and errors made by candidates • Assessing one's strengths, role - playing and preparation strategies Use of Subject Matter Experts Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) are individuals within your agency that have an expert knowledge of the requirements and conduct of the target job. SMEs are fundamentally important to the process of developing and validating written examinations and assessment centers. The opinions of SMEs are considered critical in the process of designing assessments and the involvement of SMEs contributes significantly to the defensibility of the testing process. Selection Works will seek to minimize the degree to which SMEs are required to expend time and effort helping to design the assessment process; however, we do plan to use SMEs as necessary to ensure the testing process is maximally valid and reliable. Copyright © 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 14 Project Team Member Chad Legel, M.S. President and CEO Role Project Leader, Senior Consultant Areas of Expertise Assessment center design, entry -level assessment, physical ability testing, job and organizational analysis, psychometric theory Public Safety Testing Experience 13 years Mark Tawney, M.S., ABD Director of Research & Development Senior Consultant Psychometric theory, entry -level assessment, job and organizational analysis, research design, performance appraisal 7 years Chris Litcher, Ph.D. Senior Consultant Assessment center design, job and organizational analysis, psychometric theory, organizational development 10 years Art Zern, M.S. Technical Advisor and Subject Matter Expert Fire Science technical advisory and subject matter expert. Leads the design of fire incident command simulation exercises. 31 years fire service, 3 years assessment design Jamie Willett *This project team is supported support from a well - respected Technical Writer by additional employment Language arts, job analysis administrative staff and job analysts. We also litigation firm due to the litigious nature of nublic 5 years rely on legal safety selection. The project team that will execute the proposed project plan consists of some of the most talented and respected consultants in the industry. Furthermore, you will work directly with our senior staff members, who will be onsite conducting the work. Chad Legel, the project leader, worked with Augusta in the most recent fire promotional testing process and will be able to build and improve on the last process. Mr. Legel will be onsite at all meetings to lead the development and implementation of these processes. Our team is also well versed in methodologies to reduce disparate impact against protected classes (adverse impact). Our consultants provide training on this topic and weave these methods into every project we perform. All consultants hold advanced degrees in Industrial /Organizational Psychology and have developed numerous entry-level and promotional assessment processes for law enforcement, fire service and emergency medical services agencies across the nation. The following table introduces our accomplished project team. A professional profile and background statement for Mr. Legel follows and detailed bios for all other members are contained in Appendix B. Project Team Overview Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 0 Chad C. Legel, M.S., President & CEO, Lead Consultant Mr. Legel is the founder and principal member of Selection Works (SW). Mr. Legel has 13 years of experience in the highly - specialized field of public safety testing and assessment. He specializes in developing, validating, deploying and defending public safety testing systems such as assessment centers, promotional job knowledge examinations, physical ability tests, entry-level examinations and oral interviews. Prior to founding SW, he led the operations and consulting practice of I/O Solutions, one of the most successful public safety consulting firms in the nation. Mr. Legel holds a Master's degree in Industrial /Organizational Psychology from the 15 Client Project Title Timeframe Austin, TX Validation of an entry-level firefighter examination process 2011 Baltimore, MD Development of a promotional examination and assessment for police lieutenant 2011 Bridgeport, CT Validation of a selection process for firefighter 2011 Cook County, IL Validation of entry -level corrections officer examination 2011 CSX Transportation Consultation regarding the design of a police officer recruitment and selection process 2011 Omaha, NE Job analysis for police and fire ranks and development of a police lieutenant assessment process 2011 Pittsburgh, PA Validation of a written examination for firefighter 2011 Tulsa, OK Development and administration of police department promotional exams and assessment centers 2011 Austin, TX Development and administration of a written examination and assessment center for fire battalion chief 2010 Baltimore, MD Development of a promotional examination and assessment for police sergeant 2010 Bridgeport, CT Validation of a selection process for police officer 2010 Dell, Inc. Translation and validation of a global sales force assessment 2010 Sidney, OH Development of a selection process for the fire chief position 2010 Baltimore, MD Development of a promotional examination and assessment for police lieutenant 2009 Chicago, IL Validation of a dispatcher exam and development of a test of verbal fluency 2009 Joplin, MO Development of a firefighter physical ability test 2009 Lincoln, NE Development of a firefighter physical ability test 2009 Minneapolis, MN Development of an assessment center process for Deputy Chief 2009 San Antonio, TX Review of firefighter hiring process for compliance with professional and legal requirements and best practices 2009 Sidney, OH Development of a selection process for the police chief position 2009 Woodridge, IL Development of a police officer interview process 2009 Augusta, GA Development of exams and assessment centers for the engineer, lieutenant, captain and battalion chief ranks 2008 Baltimore, MD Development of a promotional testing process for police sergeant 2008 Cobb County, GA Development of exams and assessment centers for the sergeant and lieutenant ranks in the Sheriff's Department 2008 Gwinnett County, GA Development of a fire engineer exam and pumping assessment 2008 Wisconsin Department of Health, EMS Board Development of an Intermediate EMT recertification examination 2008 Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago IL (2000) and has completed coursework toward a Ph.D. in the same field. He holds a Bachelor's degree in Psychology from Cornell College. Mr. Legel has established himself as a prominent and respected authority in state -of- the -art assessment techniques within public safety agencies. He has provided training for a majority of the professional personnel and human resources management associations and has provided consulting services for the largest police and fire agencies in the nation. One of Mr. Legel's notable achievements was the development of a testing process that withstood the scrutiny of the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark Civil Rights Act law suit Ricci v. DeStefano (129 S. Ct. 2658, 2671, 174 L. Ed. 2d 490 (2009)). Mr. Legel developed a promotional testing process for the New Haven, CT Fire Department, and in response to the racial identification of those individuals that scored highest on the testing process, the city decided not to use the results of the test. The high scoring candidates filed suit under protections afforded by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the testing process was valid and met the rigorous professional standards associated with test development. The High Court required that the City of New Haven implement the results of the testing process. Mr. Legel was instrumental in providing evidence to defend the validity of the testing process and has gained prominence as an authority on the design and validation of public safety promotional testing processes. Mr. Legel has a wealth of experience providing selection consulting services to a diverse listing of state, municipal and county public safety agencies. Following is a partial list of the jobs that Mr. Legel has managed in the past eleven years: Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 16 Woodridge, IL Development of a police sergeant interview process 2008 Austin, TX Development and administration of a police chief assessment process 2007 Cook County, IL Development of police, corrections and court services promotional examinations 2007 Dallas, TX Oversight and consultation related to fire promotional testing 2007 Jacksonville, FL Development of promotional testing processes for police sergeant and lieutenant 2007 Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles Review, analysis and update of motor vehicle and motorcycle certification examinations 2007 Waukesha County, WI Development of a sheriff deputy physical ability test 2007 Arlington Heights, IL Development of a police sergeant interview process 2006 Chicago, IL Validation of a firefighter examination 2006 Cobb County, GA Development and administration of police sergeant and lieutenant promotional testing processes 2006 Dallas, TX Oversight and consultation related to fire promotional testing 2006 Hartford, WI Development and administration of a police chief assessment process 2006 Kansas Board of Emergency Medical Services Development of first responder, basic EMT and intermediate EMT certification examinations 2006 Crystal Lake, IL Development of a firefighter physical ability test 2005 Denver, CO Development of a police captain assessment center 2005 Massachusetts Port Authority Development of promotional testing processes for fire lieutenant, captain and assistant chief 2005 Reading, MA Development of a police chief assessment process 2005 Arlington Heights, IL Development of a police officer interview process 2004 Florida Department of Law Enforcement Development of a basic abilities test for academy entrance 2003 Naperville, IL Development of a police officer physical ability test 2003 New Haven, CT Development of promotional testing processes for fire lieutenant and captain 2003 Richton Park, IL Development of a police sergeant interview process 2003 Tulsa, OK Development of entry-level examinations and physical ability tests for police officer and firefighter 2003 Westmont, IL Development of a police officer physical ability test 2003 Arlington Heights, IL Development of a firefighter physical ability test 2002 Arlington Heights, IL Development of a firefighter interview process 2002 Frankfort, KY Development of fire department promotional assessments 2002 Gwinnett, GA Development of an engineer pumping practice assessment 2002 Gwinnett, GA Development of a fire captain assessment process 2002 Massachusetts State Police Development of a video -based situational judgment test for state troopers 2002 Revenue Storm, Inc. Development of a sales person skill and personality assessment tool 2002 METRA Police Department Development of promotional processes for police sergeant and lieutenant 2001 Minneapolis, MN Development of a police sergeant assessment process 2001 Naperville, IL Development of a police officer interview process 2001 Norridge, IL Police staffing and organizational structure study 2001 Orange County, FL Development of a firefighter physical ability test 2001 Warwick, RI Delivery of a candidate examination preparation and training session 2001 Gwinnett County, GA Development of a police corporal promotional assessment process 2000 Gwinnett County, GA Development of a sheriff sergeant promotional assessment process 2000 Little Rock, AR Development of a firefighter interview process 2000 Naperville, IL Development of a firefighter physical ability test 2000 Naperville, IL Development of a firefighter interview process 2000 Savannah, GA Transportability of the CPAT 2000 Upper Arlington, IL Development of an entry -level firefighter examination 2000 Upper Arlington, OH Development of an entry-level police officer examination 2000 In addition to these numerous projects, Mr. Legel has accomplished the following: • Led the development of emergency medical technician certification examination processes for the states of Kansas, Wisconsin, Oregon and Illinois • Provided testing /assessment best practices training to the City of Austin TX and the Austin Firefighters Association during collective bargaining negotiations Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 17 • Evaluated firefighter testing practices for the City of San Antonio • Evaluated and monitored the police and fire promotional testing practices for the City of Dallas, TX • Founded The Police and Fire Testing Summit, an annual meeting, currently in its sixth year, of police and fire executives and human resources directors to provide training on personnel selection topics. • Redesigned the State of Virginia motor vehicle written certification examination process to improve test validity and reliability Mr. Legel also has conducted a great deal of training related to public safety assessments. Following is a sampling of the training presentations that have been designed and delivered by Mr. Legel. • "Achieving Racial Diversity in Public Safety Testing," Washington State Civil Service Meeting, Ellensburg, WA, September 2011 • "Best Practices and Considerations in Response to the Illinois Firefighter Hiring Act (Public Act 97- 0251)," Illinois Public Employer Labor Relations Association (IPELRA), Hoffman Estates, IL, September 2011 • "Improving Firefighter Selection Practices: Diversity, Recruiting, Oral Interviews and Assessment Centers," Wisconsin Fire Chiefs Education Association Annual Meeting, Green Bay, WI, September 2011 • "Understanding Metrics of Fairness: Adverse Impact, Standardized Mean Differences, and Significance Testing," International Personnel Assessment Council (IPAC), Washington DC, July 2011 • "Testing and Assessment Concepts and Best Practices," Connecticut Consortium of Municipalities, Wallingford, CT, June 2011 • "Using Integrity Tests to Improve Efficiency and Mitigate Disparate Impact ", Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police Annual Training Conference, Newark OH, April 2011 • "Considering Disparate Impact Beyond Impact Ratios," Presented at the 2011 International Personnel Assessment Council Conference, Washington D.C., Legel, C. C., O'Sullivan, B. J. & Tawney, M. W. (2011). • "Test Developer's Perspective on Ricci v. DeStefano ", International Personnel Management Association, Human Resources Central Region Conference, June 2010 • "The Ricci Decision and Its Impact on Hiring and Promotions ", Connecticut Conference of Municipalities Annual Conference, Hartford CT, October 2009 • "Firefighter Entry -level and Promotional Testing Best Practices," Austin Labor Relationship and Collective Bargaining Negotiation Session, Austin, TX, September 2009 • "Test Validity ", Littler Mendelson P.C. Class Action Strategy Conference, Phoenix AZ, April 2009 • "Selecting and Retaining Generation Y Candidates for Public Safety Agencies," Police and Fire Testing Summit, Oak Brook IL, January 2006 • "Development of Reliable Structured Oral Interviews ", CALEA, Burlington VT, November 2000 Following is a brief overview of the major litigation in which Mr. Legel has been involved as an expert witness: • City of Clarksville Police Department - Promotional process challenge - 2002 • City of New Haven Fire Department - Promotional process challenge — 2004 — 2009, (Ricci v. DeStefano, 129 S. Ct. 2658, 2671, 174 L. Ed. 2d 490 (2009)) • City of Austin Fire Department - Entry -level firefighter selection arbitration - 2011 Mr. Legel is a member of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychologists (STOP) and the International Personnel Assessment Council (IPAC). Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 18 Agency Austin TX Fire Department Contact Brian Tanzola Barry Cook Division Chief Civil Service Administrator Support Services Division Human Resources Department Austin Fire Department 512- 974 -3312 (512) 974 -0148 Barry.cook @austintexas.gov brian.tanzolaPaustintexas.gov Project Description Developed and administered a written examination and assessment center for the rank of Battalion Chief, consisting of job analysis, candidate orientation, assessor recruitment, training, and candidate feedback reports. Designed and validated an entry -level firefighter testing process consisting of a written cognitive /behavioral exam, integrity test and a structured oral interview. Advised the fire department management team through a union grievance process and engineered a testing system that was mutually agreeable to both parties. Timeframe 2010, Battalion Chief process 2010 -2011, Entry -level firefighter process Agency Illinois State Police Contact Ron Cooley, Executive Director Illinois State Police Merit Board 531 Sangamon Avenue East Springfield, Illinois 62702 217 - 786 -6245 rcooley @ispmeritboard.org Project Description Designed entry -level selection process for troopers and developed and administered promotional selection processes for Sergeant, Master Sergeant, Lieutenant and Captain. Timeframe 2009 -2011 Agency Gwinnett County, GA Police, Fire and Sheriff's Departments Contact Erica Queen, MBA, PHR HR Associate erica.queen( gwinnettcountv.com 770 - 822 -7949 Project Description Developed and validated promotional exams and assessment centers for police, sheriff and corrections corporal, sergeant and lieutenant ranks, and fire service engineer, lieutenant and captain ranks. Also conducted job analysis and provided entry -level testing solutions for police and fire selection processes. Timeframe 2001 -2011 The consultants at Selection Works have worked with some of the nation's largest public safety agencies. Below we have listed a selection of the clients for whom your project team leader, Chad Legel, has developed promotional and entry -level selection processes. The references listed below are intimately familiar with Mr. Legel's project management style and capabilities and are capable of comparing Mr. Legel's work with that of other competing consulting firms. We encourage you to contact our references and learn firsthand about the capabilities of our consulting team. Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 19 Agency City of Baltimore Police Department Contact Patricia Mulligan, M.S. Human Resources Specialist Department of Human Resources, Test Development Division 201 East Baltimore Street — Room 475 Baltimore, MD 21202 (410) 396 -5180 (phone); (410) 396 -3857 (fax) Pat.mulligan @baltimorecity.org Project Description Developed and validated police sergeant and lieutenant written examinations and assessments. Administered these assessments to approximately 400 Sergeant candidates and 250 lieutenant candidates during each testing cycle. Timeframe 2008 -2011 Agency City of Bridgeport Contact David Dunn, Personnel Director Lisa Kollman, Personnel Examiner 45 Lyon Terrace Bridgeport, CT 06604 203.576.7109; 203.576.7102 lisa.kollman pbridgeportct.gov Project Description Designed an entry -level police officer selection process consisting of a basic skills assessment, integrity test, and structured oral interview. Conducted a police officer job analysis and validated the testing process using a criterion - related validation strategy. Timeframe 2009 -2011 Agency Cook County Sheriffs Merit Board, Cook County Sheriff Contact John Koch, Deputy Director 312.603.0166 john.koch @cookcountyil.gov Project Description Conducted promotional written examinations for Sheriff's Police, Court Services and Corrections sergeant, lieutenant and captain ranks. Validated entry -level examination for corrections officers and delivered entry -level candidate preparation seminars. Timeframe 2007 - 2011 Agency Kansas Board of Emergency Medical Services Contact Steve Sutton, Executive Director (785) 296 -7296 Steve.sutton@enns.ks.gov Project Description Developed EMS certification examinations for statewide First Responder, EMT - Basic, and EMT - Intermediate certification levels. Adapted these tests to a web -based administration system and managed the administration and scoring of testing. Timeframe 2008 -2010 Agency City of Minneapolis Contact Bryan Seboe Bryan.Seboe @minneapolismn.gov Project Description Developed a police sergeant assessment center (2006), a police lieutenant assessment center (2008) and a police captain assessment center (2009). Timeframe 2006 -2011 Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 20 Required Documents: Attachment B, Exhibit II, Exceptions Sheet and SAVE Program Copyright © 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 21 Additional information about Selection Works and the project team is provided below: Selection WorksTM serves public safety agencies by providing a full range of human resources and pei selection services. The consultants at Selection Works are trained in the field of Industrial /Organizi Psychology and are experts in personnel selection (testing and assessment methods) and psychometrics (the science of psychological measurement). Our consultants have decades of experience building and perfecting entry -level and promotional assessments for public safety agencies, delivering best - practices training, evaluating testing systems, and providing human resources solutions. Mr. Legel also spends a great deal of time educating public safety agencies as to methods for achieving greater diversity in entry -level and promotional testing outcomes. If you're looking for products and services that meet the highest technical standards, delivered with exceptional customer service, then Selection WorksTM is your firm. Selection Works' goal in designing tests /assessments is to ensure that an agency hires or promotes the best candidates and that the decisions that are made based on our selection tools are defensible. We believe that if you select the best individuals, your agency will function like a well -oiled machine. Selection Works" was founded on the premise that public safety selection processes can be improved. Our experience has taught us that many consulting firms providing public safety testing services do not apply the rigor and expertise needed to properly validate selection tools and ensure their success. Selection WorksTM is committed to improving the state of public safety selection through a commitment to the science of selection and through education. Selection Works is a value- driven organization. We are guided by four core values: a commitment to ensuring that our tests and assessments reflect best - practices in the science of selection, a commitment to providing our clients with successful testing solutions and a remarkable consultant - client experience, a commitment to educating our clients as to what we are doing and why, and a commitment to putting the nation's best consulting team at your disposal. These values will be evident to you every step of the way. 0 Commitment to the Science of Selection The development, validation and use of tests and assessments are based on the science of personnel selection and psychometric theory. The science of test design and validation ensures that the test can identify qualified candidates and can withstand the rigors of legal scrutiny should the use of the test ever be challenged. Individuals that develop and implement tests and assessments need to be thoroughly trained in Personnel Selection and Psychometric Theory and have a firm grasp of the field of Industrial Psychology. Too often, testing tools are not constructed in a manner that ensures their validity or defensibility. Not only is this risky, but it doesn't provide any assurance that the client is finding the most qualified individuals to hire and promote. In short, when you ignore the science of testing, you risk not identifying those individuals that are going to best contribute to the success of your organization. Selection WorksTM offers a team of highly qualified and experienced Industrial Psychologists who specialize in designing, validating and implementing testing and assessment processes for public safety organizations. Commitment to the Service of Selection Tests and assessments provide a clear service — they help you make better decisions about who to hire and promote. Testing and assessment choices need to be made in the context of local conditions and values. Collective bargaining agreements, budgets, initiatives to diversify the workforce, and other critical factors Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 22 greatly affect which tests and assessments you select. We realize that in order to best serve our clients interests, we have to understand their condition and needs. We are committed to learning about our clients and working with them to design the most advantageous selection system. A necessary element of this principle is that we be flexible and responsive to our clients. Customer service is a common claim but it is rarely delivered to the proper degree. The founding members of Selection WorksTM have been successful in the testing and assessment industry by putting our customers first. We deliver on our promises and we will work vigorously to ensure that our client's interests are well - served. 0 Commitment to Educating our Clients The field of testing and assessment is complicated and constantly evolving. This reality, combined with the fact that many testing conventions do not align with best practice, requires that test users are properly educated about the value and capability of various testing methods and the relative validities and usefulness of these methods. We feel strongly that we must both provide state -of- the -art testing tools and educate our clients about how to best design and deploy their selection processes. We are committed to objectively and professionally working with test user's to educate them about the strengths and weakness of testing methods and to impart proper expectations about the value and utility of the tools from which they can choose. The founding members of Selection WorksTM are responsible for establishing an annual forum to train test users concerning best practices and routinely provide pro bono training seminars for organizations such as the International Personnel Management Association (IPMA), the Commission on the Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA), the International Personnel Assessment Council (IPAC), the Illinois Public Employer Labor Relations Association (IPELRA), and numerous state police and fire chiefs associations. 0 Commitment to our Employees In order to provide the best products and deliver the highest quality service, you have to employ the best people in your industry. Our employees are the brightest and most capable. You, the client, deserve to feel like you have the most dynamic people and sharpest minds working for you. This will be evident from the first time you meet them until the time they deliver the end product. We aim to foster a working environment that demands excellence, values personal development, and rewards dedication and achievement. By doing this, we know that we will best serve our clients and ensure long and successful working relationships. This proposal will detail our approach to managing your project. While we offer what we believe is the appropriate plan to accomplish your objective, we look forward to meeting with you and discussing the project in order to tailor our approach to best serve your interests. We look forward to the opportunity to work with you. Chad Legel's credentials as project leader were presented early in the proposal. Following is information on the balance of the project team: Mark W. Tawney, M.S., ABD, Vice President and Director of Research & Development, Senior Consultant Mr. Tawney is the cofounder and a principal member of Selection Works (SW). Mr. Tawney has seven years of experience in public safety testing and assessment and prior to founding SW, he led the test publication and research and development of a major national public safety testing firm. Mr. Tawney is a gifted psychometrician and test validation expert. He holds a Master's degree in Industrial /Organizational Psychology from Illinois Institute of Technology (2007), a Master's degree in Experimental Psychology from Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 23 Client Project Description Timeframe Dell Computers • Developed globally administered sales talent assessment tool used by Dell to aid in a larger organization change initiative. • Managed the IT infrastructure development of a web administration application to allow for global deployment of the assessment tool. • Managed and evaluated assessment tool's translation into 6 languages by means of structural equation modeling. 2009 -2011 Austin TX Fire Department • Served as technical expert and legal support for the development, validation, and implementation of entry -level selection process. 2010 -2011 San Antonio • Developed custom entry -level police and fire selection tools. 2009 -2011 Florida Department of Law Enforcement • Developed, validated and implemented statewide assessment program for entry -level criminal justice officers and managed statewide client service for this program 2006 -2011 Seattle Fire Department • Designed a testing process and customized scoring solution for firefighters. 2011 Cook County Merit Board • Developed and presented county -wide candidate orientation and test preparation program for the County's entry -level criminal justice officer positions. 2009 -2011 Bridgeport CT Police Department • Served as technical expert for the development, validation, and implementation of entry -level selection process. 2010 Missouri State Highway Patrol • Validation of entry -level trooper examination process. • Conducted longitudinal study to validate integrity exam for entry -level troopers. 2007 -2010 NY State Police • Served as technical expert for the development, validation, and implementation of entry -level selection process. 2009 Milwaukee Fire Department • Developed transportability study and served as technical expert for the development and implementation of the entry -level selection process. 2008 Wisconsin Emergency Medical Service Board • Served as technical expert for the development of EMT — Intermediate Technician exam. • Developed, implemented and supported state wide web - application system for the delivery of EMT — I -Tech exam program. 2008 DePaul University in Chicago IL (2005), and is ABD in a Ph.D. program for Industrial /Organizational Psychology at Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago IL. Mr. Tawney's major area of research and contribution to the field of I/O psychology deals with investigating alternative methodologies to enhance non - cognitive selection tools. His research aims to enhance the predictive quality of these assessment tools such that they can be used in conjunction with more traditional cognitive assessments. In doing so, Mr. Tawney's research is largely focused on methods to maximize the validity of assessment batteries, while minimizing disparate impact of those batteries. In addition to Mr. Tawney's previous work, leading a test publication and research and development di a major national public safety firm, Mr. Tawney also managed many consulting projects. The following provides a small sampling of Mr. Tawney's projects over the past few years. Mr. Tawney has delivered numerous presentations and has authored many scholarly articles, including: Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 24 • Choplin, J. M. & Tawney, M. W. (August, 2005). Comparison - Induced Anchoring Effects, Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Stresa, Italy. • Legel, C. C., O'Sullivan, B. J. & Tawney, M. W. (2011). Considering Disparate Impact Beyond Impac Presented at the 2011 International Personnel Assessment Council Conference, Washington D.C. • Tawney, M. W. (2006). Implicit attitudes, racial bias, and LMX: The impact of latent racism on lea■ member exchange relationships. Presented at the 27th Annual Industrial Organizational and Orga Behavior (1OOB) Conference, Fairfax, VA. • Tawney, M. W. (2008). Integrity Testing...the Selection Tool of the Future. Law & Order Magazine, 34 -38. • Tawney, M. W. and Choplin J. (2004) Comparison- induced anchoring effects. Presented at the Midwest Psychology Association, Chicago, IL • Tawney, M. W., and Deprez -Sims, A -S. (2010). Integrity Testing for Public Safety Selection. Presented at the 118th American Psychological Association (APA) conference, San Diego, CA. • Tawney, M. W., Ishaya, N. and Ayman, R. (2007). Effect of Ratings sources and Leader's Gender on Performance Appraisal. Presented at the 28th Annual Industrial Organizational and Organizational Behavior (IOOB) Conference, Indianapolis, IN. • Tawney, M. W., and Lehn, D. (2003). Individual difference in sensory threshold for self - relevant stimuli as a function of self - consciousness. Presented at Midwest Psychology Association, Chicago, IL. • Tawney, M. W., Mead, A., & Solberg, E. (April, 2008). Empirical keying of personality- oriented data: Development and comparison of methods. Symposium Presented at the 23rd Annual Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology Conference, San Francisco, CA. • Towler, A. & Tawney, M. W. (March, 2008). Charismatic leadership emergence: Role of work values. Presented at the 20th Annual Association for Psychological Science Conference, Chicago, IL. Mr. Tawney has developed and researched numerous nationally published examinations and has worked with the US Department of Justice to facilitate the review and approval of these examinations. Mr. Tawney has also presented several educational seminar to public safety agencies regarding the best practices and methods of personnel selection. In addition to his work in the public safety industry, Mr. Tawney has taught Advanced Statistics and Advanced Cognitive Psychology at the Illinois Institute of Technology and DePaul University. Mr. Tawney is a member of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychologists (STOP) and the International Personnel Assessment Council (IPAC). 0 , Chris Litcher, Ph.D., Senior Consultant Dr. Litcher specializes in the development and validation and public safety promotional examinations and assessment centers. He has ten years of experience in selection and assessment design. Dr. Litcher has developed, validated and administered selection processes for the following agencies: • Aurora CO Fire: Lieutenant Assessment Center • Aurora CO Police: Sgt. and Lt. Exams and Assessment Centers • Bedford MA Police: Lieutenant Assessment Center • Dallas Police: Lieutenant Assessment Center Review • Florida Department of Law Enforcement: Validation of a Statewide Basic Abilities Test • Gwinnett County Police: Corporal, Sergeant and Lieutenant Exams and Assessment Centers • Jacksonville FL Sheriff: Sergeant and Lieutenant Exams and Assessment Centers • Kansas Board of EMS: Licensure exams for First Responder, EMT -Basic and EMT - Intermediate levels Copyright 0 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. 25 • Lexington KY Fire: Job analysis and written exam development for Lt., Capt. and Batt. Chf. ranks • Los Alamos NM Fire: Engineer written exam and pumping /driving assessment • Missouri Highway Patrol: Trooper job analysis and entry -level test validation • New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police: Development of hiring standards for crossir • Orange County FL Fire Rescue: Lt. and Batt. Chf. written exams and assessment centers • Portland ME Fire: Lt. and Capt. written exams • Portland ME Police: Sgt. and Lt. written exams • Providence RI Police: Lt. written examination • Redmond WA Police: Entry -level structured oral interview for police officer • Shelby County TN Fire: Written exams and assessment centers for Lt., Capt. and Batt. Chf. • Southern NV EMS District: Licensure exams for EMT - Basic, EMT - Intermediate and Paramedic levels • Springfield MO Police: Sgt. and Lt. written exams and assessment centers • St. Lucie County FL Fire: Lt., Capt., and Batt. Chf. exams and assessment centers • Tacoma WA Police: Detective, Sgt., Lt., and Capt. examinations • Vermont Dept. of Public Safety: Statewide Officer Retention and Turnover Study • Wisconsin Department of EMS: Development of EMT -Basic recertification examination Dr. Litcher holds his Master's Degree and Ph.D. in Industrial /Organizational Psychology from DePaul University in Chicago. Dr. Litcher also has a background in organizational development initiatives and is a key team member for projects containing organizational analysis, climate assessment, surveys, etc. 0 Art Zern, Battalion Chief, Technical Advisor Chief Zern serves as a technical advisor to assist in the design of high - fidelity tactical /incident scene command simulation exercises. SW feels strongly that a complex, realistic "hot seat" or "simulation" exercise is a critical part of selecting a qualified fire supervisor. We take great care in designing these exercises using the latest technology, such as Fire Studio V software, to create realistic, dynamic fire ground role - plays. Chief Zern works closely with agency SMEs to design exercises that are consistent with agency policies and procedure and that are rank - appropriate. Chief Zern has designed assessment exercises for agencies such as Austin TX Fire Department (battalion chief assessment center), Aurora CO Fire Department (lieutenant assessment center), Arlington TX Fire Department (lieutenant and captain assessment centers), Moline IL Fire Department (battalion chief assessment center), and the Downers Grove IL Fire Department (lieutenant assessment center), to name a few. Chief Zern has been a member of the fire service community in Illinois for 31 years. He has functioned at all levels of the fire department and at all ranks including a time as Acting Fire Chief. He holds a Bachelor of Science Degree from Southern Illinois University in Fire Service Management and a Master's Degree in Management and Organizational Behavior from Benedictine University. Chief Zern has an extensive background in training, officer education and development and training program development. He has been a Field Staff Instructor for several years and with several agencies and is currently a Field Staff Instructor with the Illinois Fire Chiefs Education and Research Foundation, the Illinois Fire Service Institute and the Northern Illinois Public Safety Training Academy. He has instructed, developed curriculum and assisted with writing courses in the Illinois certified Fire Officer I and II programs, Officer Development programs and Acting Officer, Company Officer and Incident Commander boot - camps. Additionally, Chief Zern is a Fire Academy instructor for both the Southwest United Fire Districts and the Northeastern Illinois Public Safety Training Academy. Chief Zern works with the Chicago Fire Department in the development and delivery of a four week classroom and hands -on training program for all newly promoted Lieutenants, Captains and Battalion Chiefs. Copyright O 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved. In September 2005, Chief Zern was asked by MABAS Illinois to fly to New Orleans and begin advance work with the leadership of the New Orleans Fire Department (NOFD) in anticipation of the arrival of 600 firefighters and apparatus from Illinois requested to assist the NOFD during the Katrina aftermath. Thereafter, for more than two weeks, as the Planning and Operations Section Chief for the Illinois Incident Management Team, Chief Zern worked with the staffs of the New Orleans Fire Department, the New York City Fire Department and the Montgomery County Maryland Fire and Rescue Department Incident Management Teams. Their common goal was to plan for, organize, and support the operations of a diverse group of 1,200 firefighters from Illinois, New Orleans, New York and Maryland involved in emergency response and relief efforts in New Orleans and the surrounding area. Currently, Chief Zern also serves as the Operations Section Chief for the Illinois Type III Incident Management Team's Chicago Metro Team. This team has the primary responsibility to manage incidents and assist with planning and managing planned events in Chicago and the eight collar counties. Jamie Willett, Technical Writer Jamie Willett has been working in the public safety selection industry since 2007. Ms. Willett is a gifted technical writer and is responsible for developing examination content. In addition, Ms. Willett has managed recruitment and selection processes for over 40 public safety agencies. Ms. Willett has a degree in education and majored in foreign language studies. Copyright © 2011, Selection Works, LLC. All rights reserved.