HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10242000 - SD2 TC': BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ,.:��='�y �-.,.
Contra
FROM: FINANCE COMMITTEE Costa
GATE: October 24, 2000 County
c-vK"�';
SUBJECT: Review of the Health Services Department's Funding Formula for
Contractor COLA
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
Recommendation:
1. ACKNOWLEDGE the Health Services Department's effort to create an equitable and consistent
funding formula for Contractor COLA by adjusting and updating the formula that has been used in
the past.
2. ACKNOWLEDGE the concerns raised by the Contractor's Alliance to be provided with consistent
and equitable forecasts on COLA that can be included in their budget forecasts.
3. APPROVE the funding formula for Contractor COLA presented by the Health Services
Department, which is based on actual employee and administrative costs established in claims,
and recent audits or time studies for fixed —fee contracts.
4. ACKNOWLEDGE that application of this formula will result in authorization of a $331,218 COLA
increase for the Contractor's Alliance in FY 00-01.
5. DIRECT staff to research Request-For-Proposal processes to ensure equal access to contracts
and report to the Finance Committee on findings within six months.
BACKGROUND:
On October 16, 2000, the Finance Committee of the Board Of Supervisors approved a report from
Stephan Betz, County Administrator's Office on a formula for Contractor COLA and findings of a
survey of seven larger urban counties on applying COLA to contracts. The Finance Committee
received input from Gloria Sandoval, Chair of the Contractors Alliance on factors that would
contribute to consistency of applying this formula, including applying COLA to contractor expenses
exceeding their payment limit.
The findings of the survey revealed that four of seven counties do not apply COLA to contracts. The
remaining three counties including Contra Costa apply COLA percentages to contracts consistent
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: j L-.-
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S): MARK DE SAULNIER JOE CANCIAMILLA
ACTION OF BOARD ON 0=obax-94, 2000 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED .,t OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT
COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON MINUTES OF
X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
AYES: NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Contact: Stephan Betz,335-1036
Cc: CAO ATTESTED October
Health Services Department PHIL EYITf HELOR,C E OF THE BOARD OFSUPERVISORS
Contractor's Alliance
BY: ti
,DEPUTY
with COLA percentages for County Employees. COLA is applied to contract Salaries and Benefits
only"(San Francisco), to Salaries and Benefits plus Administrative Costs (Contra Costa County), or to
the contract payment limit (Alameda). Alameda County is currently reviewing its COLA for
contractors for consistency with other counties' practices (See attached survey results).
The formula for Contractor Alliance COLA proposed by the Health Services Department is based on
the COLA percentage awarded from time to time to the County Employees by the Board of
Supervisors, applied to the Salaries, Benefits and Administrative portions of the contract, with an
effective date that coincides with the effective date for County Employee COLA's. This formula is
proposed to be applied over the next coming years.
COLA will be awarded to contracts with established payment limits based on the monthly claims
submitted to the Health Services Department, and to contracts with fixed fee reimbursement based
on a recent audit not older than six months or on a staff time study during the current year.
Gloria Sandoval, Chair of the Contractor's Alliance, raised the issue that this formula does not
address the Contractor's Alliance request for a Cost-Of-Doing-Business-Adjustment (CODBA). In
light of the current severe financing shortage for Health Services, the Finance Committee does not
recommend a CODBA at this time.
In addition, the Finance Committee directed CAO and Health Services staff to research various
Request-For-Proposal processes to ensure equal access to contracts, and the option to build
performance incentive clauses into COLA awards for contracts.
'CA,Counties' Cost-of-Living-Adjustment (COLA) Formulas
A survey by the Contra Costa County Administrator's office
Issues:
1 What formulas are used?
2 What cost centers receive COLA?
I Did your County provide a COLA to County employees in FY 99-00?
Yes Alameda Percentage 3% No
Contra Costa Percentage 5%
Los Angeles Percentage 2.1%
San Bemadino Percentage 1.5%
San Francisco Percentage 2%
San Joaquin Percentage 3%
Ventura Percentage 3% average
Did vour County provide a COLA to Coun em io ees in FY 00-017
Yes Alameda Percentage 4% No
Contra Costa Percentage 3%
Los Angeles Percentage 2.0%
San Bemadino Percentage 2.5%
San Francisco Percentage 3%
San Joaquin Percentage 3%
Ventura Percentage 3% average
2 Did Community- Based-Organizations contracting with the County receive a COLA in FY 99-00?
Yes Alameda Percentage 3% No Los Angeles
Contra Costa Percentage 5% San Joaquin
San Francisco Percentage 2% San Bernardino
Ventura
Do Community-Based-Organizations contracting with the County receive a COLA in FY 00-01?
Yes Alameda Percentage 3% No Los Angeles
Contra Costa Percentage 3% San Joaquin
San Francisco Percentage 3% San Bernardino
San Joaquin Percentage 16.7%(*l Ventura
M First COLA increase to County contribution since FY 94/95
3 To which cost center is the COLA applied? Effective date
To the total contract. Alameda Sept
To Salaries and Benefits: San Francisco N/A
To Salaries and Benefits plus Administrative Cost: Contra Costa Oct
This Is negotiated on a case-!n-case basis: San Joaquin Jul