HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-05 RESOLUTION•
RESOLUTION NO. 96-05 _
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT NOT TO EXCEED
$21,000.00 TO WASHINGTON COUNTY AS THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE'S SHARE OF THE COST OF THE EVALUATION,
STUDY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
hereby authorizes payment not to exceed $21,000.00 to Washington County as
the City of Fayetteville's share of the cost of the evaluation, study and
recommendations for emergency medical services.
PASSED and APPROVED this 17th day of May, 2005.
......TR ..
to. 'A:
;FAYETTEVILLE;
%;96'9:QKANSP�:
A1"IEST: _ J............................
By: (JYL4LA./Mzt^)
SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk
APPROVED:
By:
DAN COODY, Mayor
• •
atMRe
ARKANSAS
The City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
City Council Agenda Memo
City Council Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
5//71a5
y�_o5
10a5i+r4 vn
915 do -sham
To: Mayor Coody and Fayetteville City Council
From: Stephen Davis, FIS Director
Date: April 28, 2005
Subject: Cost -share — Emergency Medical Service Delivery Study with
Washington County
Recommendation:
Staff recommends City Council approve a resolution authorizing the expenditure of
$21,000 to Washington County for the City's cost -share of the evaluation, study and
recommendations for emergency medical services.
Background:
See attached memo and contract between Washington County and Health Care
Visions.
Discussion:
See attached memo and contract between Washington County and Health Care
Visions.
Budget Impact:
The City budgeted $300,000 for emergency medical/ambulance services for 2005. This
appropriation was planned for the annual contract with CEMS, this cost -share and initial
implementation expenses related to the results of the study and evaluation.
113 WEST MOUNT AIN 72701
479-575-8330
479-575-8257 (Fax)
• •
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT NOT TO EXCEED
$21,000.00 TO WASHINGTON COUNTY AS THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE'S SHARE OF THE COST OF THE EVALUATION,
STUDY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EMERGENCY
MEDICAL SERVICES.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
hereby authorizes payment not to exceed $21,000.00 to Washington County as
the City of Fayetteville's share of the cost of the evaluation, study and
recommendations for emergency medical services.
PASSED and APPROVED this 1701 day of May, 2005.
DAN CO*01A, Mayor
•
Date: April 27, 2005
To:
Washington County Quorum Court
County Judge Jerry Hunton
Fayetteville City Council
Mayor Dan Coody
From: Hugh Earnest
•
Subject: Evaluation of Ambulance Service in Washington County
Background
Over the past year, several individuals and groups have expressed concern over the
continued ability of Central Emergency Medical Services (CEMS) to provide quality
service in Fayetteville and most of Washington County. CEMS was formed in 1980 as a
non-profit 501.c3 and operates under a board appointed by the County Judge. There is a
general consensus that the service to date has delivered a high quality product. However,
there is agreement among all parties including the current board managing the system
that an in-depth evaluation of the current system and recommendations on structural
change for the organization coupled with operational improvements is necessary at this
time. It should also be noted that both the city and county significantly increased their
support for this crucially important activity in their 2005 budgets. Both entities also
included monies for the study in their budgets and both entities have agreed to my
employment as a facilitator for this important activity.
Current Situation
Earlier this year, the County Judge appointed a seven -member Washington County EMS
Study Committee (Attachment A) to assist in the employment of a consultant and to
provide advice and support during the study phase and subsequent implementation In
order to accomplish this, a request for proposal was sent out. Responses were received
from 5 excellent firms and the committee after evaluation of the proposals arrived at a
consensus to negotiate with Health Care Visions in Argyle, Texas as the consultant of
record for the study. That negotiation has occurred and a contract for service
(Attachment B) has been approved and signed by Judge Hunton. The total cost for this
effort will not exceed $42,000.
The consultant understands the importance of this study and has been informed that all
parties desire the result by no later than August of this year. The study itself will begin
on Monday May 2nd with requests from the consultant for information and data. He
expects to begin the on -ground evaluation sometime in the first two weeks of May. It is
my intent to provide periodic updates to all groups as we proceed. As always, if you
have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at any time. Phone # 841-
8549 e-mail hugheamest2002@yahoo.com
CC. Washington County EMS Study Committee
Steve Athey
Attachment A
WAS,GTON COUNTY EMS STUDY COMbEE
March 3, 2005
Russ Kelley, Chairman
Central EMS Board
3810 Front Street, Suite 8
Fayetteville, AR 72703
russell. d. kelley dJ..smithbarney. com
Sonny Hudson, Mayor
City of Prairie Grove
P. O. Box 1275
Prairie Grove, AR 72753
sonny hudson(a�swn.com
Doyle Baker, Chairman
Regional Board of Directors
829 McKnight Avenue
West Fork, AR 72774
dhil@msn.com
John Gibson, County Administrator
County Judge's Office
280 N. College Avenue, Suite 500
Fayetteville, AR 72701
jgibson(u)co. washington. ar. us
•,Wyman Morgan, Director
Springdale Ambulance Service
201 Spring Street
Springdale, AR 72764
wmorgan(&springdaleark. orq
Steve Davis, Director
Finance and Internal Services
City of Fayetteville
113 W. Mountain
Fayetteville, AR 72701
sdavis(ocl. fayetteville. ar. us
Elizabeth Mann, Financial Coordinator
Fayetteville Fire Department
303 W. Center
Fayetteville, AR 72701
emann(&ci. fayetteville. ar. us
Ex -Officio:
John Luther, Director
Washington County Department of
Emergency Management
2615 Brink Drive, Suite 104
Fayetteville, AR 72701
1luther(a)co.washington. ar. us
Hugh Earnest, Facilitator
Washington County EMS Study Committee
hughearnest2002(&yahoo. com
0: 718-0861
H: 521-0735
F: 521-4254
C: 283-4184
C: 466- 5387
0: 582-8534
H: 846-3819
F: 846-5649
C: 466-2788
H: 839-2423
F: none
0: 444-1700
F: 444-1889
H: 521-2719
C: 530-0509
0: 750-8114
C: 841-6606
F: 750-8559
0: 575-8330
F: 575-8257
C: 601-3577
0: 575-8365
F: 575-0471
C: 283-3760
0: 444-1722
F: 444-1786
C: 841-8549
•
•
Attachment B
r
cal
P
CONSULTING AGREEMENT
cmc, N r-
nco rn
111
O c)
THIS
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between Washington = O
Health Care Visions (Consultant), County, (Cli�iit) and
0
WHEREAS, it is the desire of Client to engage Consultant to perform certain consulting
services in the field of emergency medical services and related areas on Clients behalf; and,
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Consultant to undertake for Client such services on the
terms and conditions as set forth herein.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained in this agreement
and for other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is
acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. Services
I. Review of the current system(s) in Washington County; CEMS emergency and non-
emergency operations, City of Fayetteville first responder operations, City of .
Springdale emergency operations, rural fire departments first responder operations,
and all non emergency operations (transfers) from other service providers.
II. Develop service area map for CEMS operations showing vehicle locations and
operations from each location.
III. Develop a series of system recommendations for the county to include:
a. Management and Oversight Structure.
b. Operations and Service Delivery Structure.
c. Whether or not a Public utility Model (PUM) or variant of such is in the best
interest of the public.
IV. Provide a first year budget 2006-2007 covering projected revenue and expenditures.
1
CCONTRACT
•
• •
V. Develop with the project facilitator a series of informational meetings across the
service area.
2. Term. The respective duties and obligations of the parties to this agreement shall be for
the remainder of the current calendar year and renewal there after, until the project is
completed.
3. Compensation. For the initial services to be rendered under this agreement the Client
shall pay to Consultant a fee of $37,000.00, This fee will be paid in two equal payments
of, $18,500.00 one payment at the mid point of the services rendered herem and one
payment upon completion of the work identified m number 1. Services. Additional
work will priced by mutual agreement. In addition, Client shall reimburse Consultant
monthly for all reasonable expenses incurred in connection with the performance of the
services to be rendered hereunder. Such expenses shall include, without limitation,
travel, hotel, meals, auto rental, printing and design services, audiovisual rental, video
production/post production, electronic distribution of news releases, clipping services,
advertisement placement and the like. Consultant shall not incur any single expense item
in excess of $500 without the prior approval of Client. There shall be a total cap for said
expenses of $5,000.00.
4. Nondisclosure. Consultant will not disclose any confidential information or trade secrets
of Client, regardless of whether the confidential information or trade secrets have been
conceived or developed, in whole or in part, by the efforts or investment of Client or by
others.
The terms confidential information and trade secrets as used in this Agreement shall
include, without limitation, the whole or any portion of confidential methods and
specialized techniques of the business operations of Client and any other information
concerning the business or affairs of Client, which is of a confidential character and
which has not been published or otherwise become a matter of general public knowledge.
Consultant will not breach this covenant by making any disclosure that is required by
law.
5. Intellectual Property. The Client shall be entitled to the fair use of any intellectual
property rights associated with the rendition of the services but Consultant retains all
other rights and privileges with respect to all intellectual property created in connection
with or arising out of this Agreement and the services to be rehdered hereunder.
6. Arbitration. If any dispute arises between the parties out of or connected with this
Agreement or the rights and duties of the parties as set forth herein or contemplated
2
,
• •
hereby, then the parties agree any such dispute, may be submitted for nonbinding
arbitration on terns agreeable in both parties prior to commencement of litigation.
7. Independent Contractor. Consultant shall be deemed an independent contractor of Client
and nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create an employment, partnership,
or joint venture relationship between the parties.
8. Assignment. Neither party shall have the right to assign any of his rights or obligations
under this Agreement, in whole or in part, with the written consent of the other party.
9. Limitation on Damages. Client agrees that Consultant will not be liable for Clients lost
profits or other consequential damages of any kind in the event of a breach of this
Agreement or other liability arising out of the services to be performed hereunder.
10. Amendment, Waiver, Entire Agreement. No amendment hereof shall be deemed valid
unless set forth in writing signed by both parties. Waiver of any provision of this
Agreement will not have any effect on any part of the remainder of the Agreement nor
will it be construed as a waiver of that or any other provision in the future nor will it be
deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach of a provision of the Agreement.
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes and
cancels all pnor oral or wntten understandings or agreements. Time is of the essence in
this Agreement All amounts due under this Agreement and remaining unpaid for 20
days shall bear interest at the lesser of eighteen percent per annum or the maximum rate
permitted by applicable law.
11. Notices. Any notices from one party to the other party shall be deemed valid and
effective, if and only if it is in writing and is delivered by way of certified mail return
receipt requested, registered mail, or nationally recognized delivery service providing
proof of delivery, and, furthermore, is delivered to the party receiving the notice at the
address of the party set forth below, whether or not the notice is accepted.
12. Addresses of Client/Consultant.
Washington County
Washington County Courthouse
280 North College, Suite 100
Fayetteville, AR 72701
3
Health Care Visions
201 Morning Dove CT
Argyle, TX 76226
r
•
13. Liaison. Client agrees to name an individual who will be the Client liaison with
Consultant with the authority to act on behalf of Client. Until another individual is
designated, the Client liaison is Hugh Earnest.
14. Severabilitv. Each provision of this Agreement is intended to be severable from the
others only to the extent that if any provision or term hereof is determined to be illegal or
invalid for any reason whatsoever (and cannot be modified or interpreted by a court or
arbitrator to be enforceable), such illegality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of
the other provisions and terms hereof:
15. Enforce ability. This Agreement and any amendments hereto shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Arkansas (except for its choice of
law provisions).
16. HIPAA Compliance Health Care Visions shall carry out its obligations under this
Agreement in compliance with the privacy regulations pursuant to Public Law 104-191
of August 21,1996, known as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of
1996, Subtitle F B Administrative Simplification, Sections 261, et seq., as amended
("HIPAA"), to protect the privacy of any personally identifiable protected health
information ("PHI") that is collected, processed or learned as a result of the services
provided to Washington County/CEMS Operations by Health Care Visions.
Executed on AS- 20 OS
CLIENT
Washington County
B
Title:
CONSULTANT
SteVen L. A
By:
Title: P -sident
4
Stephen Davis
Submitted By
City of Fayetteville
Staff Review Form
City Council Agenda Items
or
Contracts
17 -May -05
City Council Meeting Date
FIS Director
Division
Action Required:
•
Finance & Internal Services
Department
Approval of a resolution authorizing the expenditure of $21,000 with Washington County for Fayetteville's cost -share
of the evaluation, study and recommendations for emergency medical services.
$21,000.00
Cost of this request
1010-6600-5705-00
Account Number
Project Number
Budgeted Item
XX
300,000.00
Category/Project Budget
250,000.00
Funds Used to Date
50,000.00
Remaining Balance
Budget Adjustment Attached
Transfer to CEMS
Program Category / Project Name
Miscellaneous
Program / Project Category Name
General Fund
Fund Name
Department Director
City Attorney
Date
,14 in/ 5
Finance and Internal Service Director
Mayor
Date
Date
Previous Ordinance or Resolution #
Original Contract Date:
Original Contract Number:
Received in City Clerk's Office
Comments:
•
•
• •
Date April 27, 2005
To:
Washington County Quorum Court
County Judge Jerry Hunton
Fayetteville City Council
Mayor Dan Coody
From: Hugh Earnest
Subject: Evaluation of Ambulance Service in Washington County
Background
Over the past year, several individuals and groups have expressed concern over the
continued ability of Central Emergency Medical Services (CEMS) to provide quality
service in Fayetteville and most of Washington County. CEMS was formed in 1980 as a
non-profit 501.c3 and operates under a board appointed by the County Judge. There is a
general consensus that the service to date has delivered a high quality product. However,
there is agreement among all parties including the current board managing the system
that an in-depth evaluation of the current system and recommendations on structural
change for the organization coupled with operational improvements is necessary at this
time. It should also be noted that both the city and county significantly increased their
support for this crucially important activity in their 2005 budgets. Both entities also
included monies for the study in their budgets and both entities have agreed to my
employment as a facilitator for this important activity.
Current Situation
Earlier this year, the County Judge appointed a seven -member Washington County EMS
Study Committee (Attachment A) to assist in the employment of a consultant and to
provide advice and support during the study phase and subsequent implementation In
order to accomplish this, a request for proposal was sent out. Responses were received
from 5 excellent firms and the committee after evaluation of the proposals arrived at a
consensus to negotiate with Health Care Visions in Argyle, Texas as the consultant of
record for the study. That negotiation has occurred and a contract for service
(Attachment B) has been approved and signed by Judge Hunton. The total cost for this
effort will not exceed $42,000.
The consultant understands the importance of this study and has been informed that all
parties desire the result by no later than August of this year. The study itself will begin
on Monday May 2nd with requests from the consultant for information and data. He
expects to begin the on -ground evaluation sometime in the first two weeks of May. It is
my intent to provide periodic updates to all groups as we proceed. As always, if you
have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at any time. Phone # 841-
8549 e-mail hughearnest2002@yahoo.com
CC. Washington County EMS Study Committee
Steve Athey
Attachment B
•
CONSULTING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between Washington County
WHEREAS, it is the desire of Client to engage Consultant to perform certain consulting
services in the field of emergency medical services and related areas on Clients behalf; and,
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Consultant to undertake for Client such services on the
terms and conditions as set forth herein.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained in this agreement
and for other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is
acknowledged, the patties agree as follows:
.. m M
L Cr)
J 0
r
�lT�m
s
Health Care Visions (Consultant).
"art
r
rn
v
1. Services.
I. Review of the current system(s) in Washington County; CEMS emergency and non-
emergency operations, City of Fayetteville first responder operations, City of'
Springdale emergency operations, rural fire departments first responder operations,
and all non emergency operations (transfers) from other service providers.
II. Develop service area map for CEMS operations showing vehicle locations and
operations from each location.
III. Develop a series of system recommendations for the county to include:
a. Management and Oversight Structure.
b. Operations and Service Delivery Structure.
c. Whether or not a Public utility Model (PUM) or variant of such is in the best
interest of the public.
IV. Provide a first year budget 2006-2007 covering projected revenue and expenditures.
1
�:on, TRac�
• •
hereby, then the parties agree any such dispute, may be submitted for nonbinding
arbitration on terms agreeable in both parties prior to commencement of litigation.
7. Independent Contractor. Consultant shall be deemed an independent contractor of Client
and nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create an employment, partnership,
or joint venture relationship between the parties.
8. Assignment. Neither party shall have the right to assign any of his rights or obligations
under this Agreement, in whole or m part, with the written consent of the other party.
9. Limitation on Damages. Client agrees that Consultant will not be liable for Clients Lost
profits or other consequential damages of any kind in the event of a breach of this
Agreement or other liability arising out of the services to be performed hereunder.
10. Amendment, Waiver, Entire Agreement. No amendment hereof shall be deemed valid
unless set forth in writing signed by both parties. Waiver of any provision of this
Agreement will not have any effect on any part of the remainder of the Agreement nor
will it be construed as a waiver of that or any other provision in the future nor will it be
deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach of a provision of the Agreement.
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes and
cancels all prior oral or written understandings or agreements. Time is of the essence in
this Agreement. All amounts due under this Agreement and remaining unpaid for 20
days shall bear interest at the lesser of eighteen percent per annum or the maximum rate
permitted by applicable law.
11. Notices. Any notices from one party to the other party shall be deemed valid and
effective, if and only if it is in writing and is delivered by way of certified mail return
receipt requested, registered mail, or nationally recognized delivery service providing
proof of delivery, and, furthermore, is delivered to the party receiving the notice at the
address of the party set forth below, whether or not the notice is accepted.
12. Addresses of Client/Consultant.
Washington County
Washington County Courthouse
280 North College, Suite 100
Fayetteville, AR 72701
3
Health Care Visions
201 Morning Dove CT
Argyle, TX 76226
['Clarice Dearman- Cost -share payment
From: Clarice Pearman
To: Davis, Steve
Subject: Cost -share payment
Steve,
Attached is a copy of the resolution passed by City Council, May 17, 2005 regarding a cost share payment
to Washington County for EMS study.
CC: Deaton, Vicki
Page 1,