Lessons Learned from the 2018 Earthquake Alden Thern Municipal Projects Director Municipality of Anchorage Overview Municipality of Anchorage Overview Pt McKenzie Earthquake Federal Assistance Overview ID: 797974
Download The PPT/PDF document "Municipality of Anchorage" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Municipality of Anchorage
Lessons Learned from the 2018 Earthquake
Alden Thern, Municipal Projects Director
Slide2Municipality of Anchorage Overview
Slide3Municipality of Anchorage Overview
Slide4Pt. McKenzie Earthquake
Slide5Federal Assistance Overview
Individuals
Municipality
Slide6FEMA Public Assistance (PA)
Slide7PA Lessons: Procurement
Frequent
Sources
of Non-Compliance Issues
1.
Time & Materials Contracts
.
T&M contracts can be used for a reasonable amount of time when no other contract type is suitable; and the contract includes a ceiling that the contractor exceeds at its own risk. Non-federal entities must also maintain a high degree of oversight (§ 200.318(j)).
2.
Cost-Plus-Percentage-of-Cost Contracts.
These
are
contracts
where
the
contractor’s
profit is
based on a percentage of the
underlying project costs actually incurred. Such contracts are
explicitly prohibited by the Federal
procurement standards and
ineligible
for
FEMA
grant funding
(§
200.323(d)).
Piggybacking.
Adopting a pre-existing
contract
solicited
and
awarded
by
another
entity
is
referred
to
as
“piggybacking.” Non-state applicants considering piggybacking should closely examine whether use of another jurisdiction’s contract would violate the federal procurement standards, as often these contracts do not contain required assignability clauses, are improper in scope, or were not procured in compliance with the federal procurement standards (§ 200.319).
Geographic Preferences. Non-state applicants must conduct procurements in a manner that prohibits the use of statutorily or administratively imposed state, local, or tribal geographical preferences inthe evaluation of bids or proposals (§ 200.323(b)).Awarding to Contractors that Drafted Solicitation Documents. Non-state applicants must prohibit contractors that develop or draft specifications, requirements, statements of work, invitations for bid or requests for proposal from competing forand being awarded the subsequent contract for that work (§ 200.323(a)). Failure to reach out to small, minority-owned, women’s business enterprises.Suspended or Debarred Contractors.Non-state applicants may not award a contract to a suspended or debarred contractor, nor may any prime contractor award to a suspended or debarred subcontractor. Check the databaseat www.sam.gov prior to awarding the contract (§§ 200.213, 200.318(h)).
Procurement
Under Public Assistance AwardsSeptember 2017
FEMA
Slide8PA Lessons: Procurement
Changed internal municipal practices as a result of our FEMA PA experience:
For any contract that might be turned to in a disaster, we have
eliminated subcontractor and materials markup as a percentage of costIncreased emphasis on soliciting small minority owned businesses (email notices to all potential sources we can find)Minimize Time and Material contracts when possibleIncreased emphasis on getting written documents from contractors in a timely manner
Slide9PA Lessons: Insurance
FEMA requires that applicants obtain and maintain insurance for reimbursable damages.
In Anchorage, earthquake insurance is cost-prohibitive
The municipality is still seeking resolution to this issue
Slide10PA Lessons: Management Structure
Rather than applying as one applicant, the MOA divided into 10 applicants:
The Port, Solid Waste Services, AWWU, ML&P, Parks and Rec, Police, Maintenance & Operations (buildings), Public Works (roads), OECD (facilities with complex lease agreements), and one catch-all applicant for everyone else.
This approach has pros and cons:Pros
Cons
Division of Labor
Less bottle-necking
Keeps work in the most knowledgeable areas
More diffuse responsibility
More challenging to capture central management costs
Communication is difficult when applicants are at different stages
Training more people on Portal usage
Slide11PA Lessons: Reimbursement for PA Admin (Cat Z)
Reimbursement for management costs are available, and capped at 5% of total project reimbursement
Can be used for municipal employees or contractors
The MOA applicants with the most projects (SWS, AWWU) hired contractors for consulting and admin work
Slide12PA Lessons: Backup documentation
Documenting Force Account labor costs is burdensome, and it helps to get started early (FEMA and State may have different requirements)
Benefits Worksheets
Redacted paystubsThe MOA immediately created a cost center to collect all earthquake related costs (Some charged expenditures ultimately may not be reimbursable)
Slide13PA Lessons: Opportunities within the PA Program
Mitigation
ADA compliance
Code ComplianceHazard Mitigation Funding Under Public Assistance, Section 406Section 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5172, and Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations §206.226 provides FEMA with the authority to fund cost-effective mitigation measures under the Public Assistance (PA) program for repairs, restoration, and replacement of eligible damaged facilities. This grant funding is commonly referred as "406 Mitigation" or PA Mitigation.
406 Mitigation work must be cost effective, applied on the parts of the facility that were actually damaged by the disaster, and reduce future damages to the facility. Only FEMA has the discretion to determine eligibility and approve proposed 406 hazard mitigation projects prior to funding.
The following is a guide to determine cost effectiveness:
Mitigation measures may amount to up to 15% of the total eligible cost of the eligible repair work on a particular project.
The mitigation measure does not exceed 100% of the eligible cost of the eligible repair work on the project.
For measures that exceed the above costs, must demonstrate through an acceptable benefit/cost analysis methodology that the measure is cost effective.
Duplication of hazard mitigation funding is not allowed. 406 funding cannot be used to meet the non-federal cost share of the other grant.
406 Mitigation is disaster specific and only applies to disaster applicants for PA. However, there is a separate state administered program, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program - Section 404, that applies to structural and non-structural measures and is not disaster specific.
Slide14Questions?