Cell Phone RecommendationTO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
SUBJECT: Cell Phone Recommendation
DATE: October 13, 2009
Three responses were received to a Request for Proposal for cellular phone service and
handsets issued August 18, 2009.
In the RFP, the City was looking for a vendor to provide cellular service that:
• Provides high quality wireless phone services;
• Provides a handset and wireless services solution that provides exceptional
call quality, reliability and is easy to use;
• Achieves cost savings over current plans through the centralized purchasing /
management of handsets, accessories and air time billing with a billing plan
that best matches the usage patterns of the City's cell phone users;
• Provides a detailed, accurate, easy to maintain billing with a breakdown by
phone number on both paper and via online account access;
• Provides On-line account access for adds, moves and changes of users,
plans and phones.
• Provides service and support that is consistent, knowledgeable and
responsive for all hardware and wireless services proposed.
After review of the proposals, Information Services Manager Chris Kohlmann and the
RFP Review Committee recommend the selection of US Cellular/ComElec for cellular
handsets and services fora 24 month term.
The Fiscal Year 2009 total for cellular telephone costs was $53,469.42. This proposal
represents a proposed annual savings of $11,347.67 in year 1 and $7,518.42 in year 2.
The savings are attributable to a reduced monthly plan rate that better fits actual usage
patterns of cell phone users in the City.
I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council
approval.
Mic ael C. Van Milligen
MCVM:jh
Attachment
cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney
Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager
Chris Kohlmann, Information Services Manager
TO: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
FROM: Chris Kohlmann, Information Services Manager
SUBJECT: Cell Phone Recommendation
DATE: October 9, 2009
BACKGROUND
In August 2009 a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Cellular Phone Service and handsets was
issued. The City has 148 cellular phones. The City currently divides users between high
volume users (using greater than 355 minutes per month - 68 phones) and low volume
users (using less than 355 minutes per month - 80 phones). Minutes on the high volume
plan are pooled at 700 minutes per user per month charged at $40.00 per month whereas
those on the low volume plan at charged a flat rate of $8.00 per month plus usage at .09 per
minute.
Based on a 3 month sampling of usage the following statistics were gathered:
• average monthly use per user on the high volume plan is 557 minutes;
• average monthly use per user on the low volume plan is 124 minutes ;
• average Mobile to Mobile usage of 16,566 minutes/month for all users;
• average High Volume Peak Minutes was 30,605/month for all users;
• average High Volume Off-Peak Minutes was 7,254/month for all users;
• average Low Volume Peak Minutes was 8,771/month a for all users;
• average Low Volume Off-Peak Minutes was 1,150/month for all users.
In the RFP, the City was looking for a vendor to provide cellular service that:
• Provides high quality wireless phone services;
• Provides a handset and wireless services solution that provides
exceptional call quality, reliability and is easy to use;
• Achieves cost savings over current plans through the centralized
purchasing /management of handsets, accessories and air time billing
with a billing plan that best matches the usage patterns of the City's cell
phone users;
• Provides a detailed, accurate, easy to maintain billing with a breakdown by
phone number on both paper and via online account access;
• Provides On-line account access for adds, moves and changes of users,
plans and phones.
• Provides service and support that is consistent, knowledgeable and
responsive for all hardware and wireless services proposed.
The RFP was issued August 18, 2009 with a due date of September 8, 2009. The team
tasked with the responsibility of creating the RFP and evaluating the proposal
responses were Mike Brekke, Water Distribution; Wayne Dow, Fire; John Klosterman,
Public Works; Jenny Larson, City Manager's Office; Steve Neyens, Building; Kathy
Sturm, Finance; Terry Tobin, Police Chief; Jackie Vanek, Water Plant; and myself.
DISCUSSION
Three vendors responded to the RFP. These were Sprint IPCS of Cedar Rapids, Iowa;
Verizon Wireless of West Des Moines, Iowa and US Cellular/ComElec Services,
Dubuque, IA. All vendors responded by the due date/time and provided a complete
proposal. The contract terms of all of the vendors' proposals were for 24 month terms.
A summary of proposed service plans is shown in the following table:
Plan Number Total Cost Per Total
Vendor Descri tion Minutes Per Line Lines Minutes Line Monthl Annual
Nationwide
Voice Share
Verizon Wireless Callin Plan 100 142 14,200 23.99 3,406.58
Nationwide
Voice Share
Callin Plan 6000 5 30,000 $168.09 840.45
Overage
Rate .25/minute
Total 4,279.82 51,357.84
Nationwide
S rint IPCS Callin Ian 200 148 29,600 29.99 4,438.52
Less 25%
Discount 1,109.63
Total 3,328.89 39,946.68
High Volume
US Plan Business
Community
Cellular/ComElec Wide Area 300 300 56 16,800 29.99 1,679.44
High Volume
Plan Business
Community
Wide Area 300
with free
incomin 300 23 6,900 35.99 827.77
0 pooled minutes
Low Volume
corporate included billed at .09 per
custom minute 69 8,556* 8.00 1,322.04
Overage
Rate 0.39
Total 3,829.25
42,121.75
*"Year 1
45,951.00
Year 2
* Minutes for Low
Volume Users are an
estimate based in
monthly sample
avers es
"'The City of Dubuque
will be provided a
credit equivalent to the
recurring Monthly
charge of the voice
charges. This credit
will be applied on the
2nd Bill cycle after the
Service Agreement is
signed. Therefore Year
1 shows only 11
months.
A summary of proposed handsets appears below:
Vendor Handset Cate o Handset Model Cost
Verizon Good Samsun Trance 0.00
Good Motorola VU20 0.00
Good Samsun Knack 0.00
Better Blitz 39.99
Better LG 8360 49.99
Better Nokia 2605 0.00
Best G'zOne Boulder" 0.00
Best Samsun Alias 29.99
Best LG VX 5500 9.99
Cost
Community
wide 300
plan (High
Volume Cost
Corporate
Custom
(Low
Volume
US
CellularlComElec
Good
MOTOROLA W385
0.00
49.95
Good SAMSUNG R210 0.00 0.00
Good KYOCERA E1100
NEO
19.95
19.95
Good SAMSUNG R470 19.95 19.95
Good SAMSUNG
R311 AXLE
19.95
19.95
Good LG280 29.95 79.95
Good SAMSUNG U440 19.95 19.95
Better MOTOROLA QA30
HINT
69.95
119.95
Better LG265 BANTER 39.95 89.95
Best MOTOROLA VE20 59.95 109.95
Best LG585 $89.95 $139.95
Best LG840 TRITAN $119.95 $169.95
Best KYOCERA KX440 $19.95 $69.95
IPCS/S rint Good Samsun 320 fli 0.00 $0.00
Better San o Pro 200 Fli 0.00 $0.00
Best San o ro 700 Fli 89.99 $89.99
In the evaluation, it was determined that Sprint IPCS could not meet the coverage
requirements that were outlined and shown in Appendix B of the RFP. Sprint IPCS
therefore did not receive further consideration due to this issue.
In the group's evaluation, the service, support and network coverage were determined to be
equal between Verizon Wireless and US Cellular/ComElec. The US Cellular/ComElec
proposal offered the benefit of a plan offering "free" incoming calls (incoming calls are not
counted against your total pool of minutes) for $35.99 per line for 23 users that showed a
significant amount of inbound calls when compared to others on their plan. These users are
typically personnel that work in the field and have their desk phones transferred to the cell
phones.
US Cellular/ComElec offered a more cost competitive proposal than Verizon Wireless with a
difference of $9,236 in Year 1 costs and $5,407 in Year 2 annual costs. (The difference in
annual savings results from US Cellular/ComElec also offering a free month of service in
Year 1.)
I have not factored handset pricing into the analysis as makes and models were
comparable between vendors with US Cellular/ComElec offering the most choices. The
Dubuque Police Department indicated that they favored the KYOCERA KX440 as their
choice for best ruggedized unit from ComElec. Departments are typically given the
choice of a handset based on the offerings proposed.
ComElec is a locally owned and operated business and has provided the City with good cell
phone service and support through US Cellular in the past years. US Cellular has provided
outstanding network coverage and reliability. The billing format is straightforward and
accurate.
RECOMMENDATION
I would recommend the City enter into contract with US Cellular/ComElec for cellular
handsets and services fora 24 month term. The plan will include 3 plan groups.
Group 1 -High Volume Users with free mobile to mobile: 56 phones @ $29.99 per
month with 300 pooled minutes per phone. Calls made from US Cellular to US Cellar phone
are not charged against pooled minutes.
Group 2 -High Volume Users with free mobile to mobile and free inbound minutes:
23 phones at $35.99 per month with 300 pooled minutes per phone. No inbound calls are
charged against pooled minutes nor are calls made from US Cellular to US Cellar phone
Group 3 -Low Volume Users: 69 phones at 8.00 per month plus .09 per minute actual
usage.
Total pooled monthly minutes will be 23,700 which should sufficiently cover the needs of the
79 phones on the high volume usage plans.
I would recommend "high volume users" now be classified as having an anticipated monthly
usage of 200 or greater minutes per month and "low volume users" be classified as having
less than 200 minutes per month. If high volume users are anticipated to have a greater than
50% of total call volume from inbound calls then consideration should be given to put them
on the high volume with free inbound calls plan.
The analysis of the current plan usage resulted in moving 8 users from the high volume plan
to the low volume plan; 20 users from the low volume plan to the high volume plan and
creating a new plan for 23 users that show a high number of inbound calls compared to their
total call volume. I will work with departments to communicate which plan their employees
are classified.
BUDGET IMPACT
The FY 2009 total for cellular telephone costs was $53,469.42. This proposal
represents a proposed annual savings of $11,347.67 in year 1 and $7,518.42 in year 2.
The savings are attributable to a reduced monthly plan rate that better fits actual usage
patterns of cell phone users in the City.
ACTION STEP
I would ask that you review the information provided and let me know if you have any
questions. I would respectfully ask that if you are comfortable with the recommendation
that you approve it so that we can proceed to contracts for new service plans and
purchase of new handsets. Thank-you.
Cc: Members of the Cell Phone Service RFP Task Force