20020108_m_11.doc

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder

DATE:

December 31, 2001

BOARD MEETING DATE:

January 8, 2002

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

Warren Slocum, Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder

SUBJECT:

Agreement with ImageMax, Inc. for Microfilm Regeneration Services

Recommendation

Adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of an agreement with ImageMax, Inc. (hereinafter ImageMax) for microfilm regeneration services in an amount not to exceed $200,000, for the period commencing on or about January 9, 2002 through August 31, 2002.

Background

The County Clerk-Recorder is responsible for preserving the historical archive of public documents. Filed paper documents have been routinely microfilmed or, more recently, digitally scanned to produce a duplicate image for archival storage. The resulting microfilm archive is undergoing normal and inevitable age-related deterioration. Periodic regeneration is vital to meeting our duty as guardian of the public record.

The regeneration process will entail transferring the archival film stock from its current, secure storage facility in Tracy, California, to a restoration facility where the film will be cleaned, duplicated, repackaged, and returned to secure storage in Tracy. Professional, high-quality handling and processing services are essential to the success of this effort.

A Request for Proposal was issued on May 25, 2001 and ImageMax was the successful proposer, among two contenders, as detailed in Exhibit 1.

Discussion

Some 2300 rolls of 16mm film and 1750 rolls of 35mm film will be regenerated. These films capture the official land records of San Mateo County dating back to the late 1800s.

Under the agreed work plan, once a week an ImageMax courier will take possession of a portion of the original film stock and transport it to the conversion facility in West Sacramento. Each 35mm film will be optically reduced to 16mm silver masters, and each 16mm film master will be reproduced in three copies in two different media formats. Once regenerated, each roll will be loaded into a cartridge and repackaged in a special, preservative container, labeled, and be returned to the County Clerk-Recorder. The entire project will be completed in not more than eight months.

The cost of the proposed services is estimated at $119,000 to $200,000, in recognition of the Clerk-Recorder's current uncertainty concerning the exact number of film rolls to be regenerated. The exact count will be determined by a simultaneous inventory to be performed by the Clerk-Recorder as the work progresses. The $200,000 cap provides a generous margin of error; actual costs are more likely in the range of $119,000-$150,000.

This project has been planned and authorized since 1999, but has been deferred pending development of applicable standards by the Information Services Department and by the disruptions related to our relocation to 555 County Center. Earmarked funds were rolled over to succeeding fiscal year budgets.

ImageMax earned winner status in the RFP process by virtue of its proven competence and competitive pricing. ImageMax has successfully performed imaging and microfilming contracts with this department since 1992, as a result of which it is very familiar with our operations and has developed effective, collaborative relationships with our personnel. Comparable microfilm regeneration contracts are currently in successful progress with the Stanislaus County Recorder and the California State Controller, and both agencies provided positive feedback in response to our inquiries. Finally, the performance schedule proposed by ImageMax meets our needs.

Fiscal Impact

There is no Net County Cost. Full funding currently exists in the Contract Special Program Services account of the Business Operations budget unit.

Exhibit A

SUMMARY OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS

1.

General Description of RFP

Microfilm regeneration

2.

List key evaluation criteria

(a) Completeness of proposal (required information)
(b) Scope of work (e.g., calendar, project plan, etc.)
(c) Cost analysis (by job and as a whole)
(d) Presence of inconsistencies
(e) Feedback from references

3.

Where advertised

"San Mateo Times," June 4, 2001

4.

In addition to any advertisement, list others to whom RFP was sent

(a) ImageMax, Inc., Hayward, CA
(b) BMI Imaging, Sunnyvale, CA
(c) Applied Microfilm, Sunnyvale, CA
(d) Mohr Microfilm, South San Francisco, CA
(e) America West Systems, Cupertino, CA

5.

Total number sent to prospective proposers

5

6.

Number of proposals received

2

7.

Who evaluated the proposals

Theresa Rabe, Deputy Clerk-Recorder
Paula Cuneo, Deputy Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder
Kaylene Keller, Office Services Manager

8.

In alphabetical order, names of proposers (or finalists, if applicable) and location

(a) BMI Imaging, Sunnyvale, CA
(b) ImageMax, Inc., Hayward, CA



COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence
Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder

DATE:				December 31, 2001
BOARD MEETING DATE:				January 8, 2002

TO:		Honorable Board of Supervisors
FROM:		Warren Slocum, Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder
SUBJECT:		Agreement with ImageMax, Inc. for Microfilm Regeneration Services

Recommendation
Adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of an agreement with ImageMax, Inc. (hereinafter ImageMax) for microfilm regeneration services in an amount not to exceed $200,000, for the period commencing on or about January 9, 2002 through August 31, 2002.

Background
The County Clerk-Recorder is responsible for preserving the historical archive of public documents. Filed paper documents have been routinely microfilmed or, more recently, digitally scanned to produce a duplicate image for archival storage. The resulting microfilm archive is undergoing normal and inevitable age-related deterioration. Periodic regeneration is vital to meeting our duty as guardian of the public record.

The regeneration process will entail transferring the archival film stock from its current, secure storage facility in Tracy, California, to a restoration facility where the film will be cleaned, duplicated, repackaged, and returned to secure storage in Tracy. Professional, high-quality handling and processing services are essential to the success of this effort.

A Request for Proposal was issued on May 25, 2001 and ImageMax was the successful proposer, among two contenders, as detailed in Exhibit 1.

Discussion
Some 2300 rolls of 16mm film and 1750 rolls of 35mm film will be regenerated. These films capture the official land records of San Mateo County dating back to the late 1800s.

Under the agreed work plan, once a week an ImageMax courier will take possession of a portion of the original film stock and transport it to the conversion facility in West Sacramento. Each 35mm film will be optically reduced to 16mm silver masters, and each 16mm film master will be reproduced in three copies in two different media formats. Once regenerated, each roll will be loaded into a cartridge and repackaged in a special, preservative container, labeled, and be returned to the County Clerk-Recorder. The entire project will be completed in not more than eight months.

The cost of the proposed services is estimated at $119,000 to $200,000, in recognition of the Clerk-Recorder's current uncertainty concerning the exact number of film rolls to be regenerated. The exact count will be determined by a simultaneous inventory to be performed by the Clerk-Recorder as the work progresses. The $200,000 cap provides a generous margin of error; actual costs are more likely in the range of $119,000-$150,000.

This project has been planned and authorized since 1999, but has been deferred pending development of applicable standards by the Information Services Department and by the disruptions related to our relocation to 555 County Center. Earmarked funds were rolled over to succeeding fiscal year budgets.

ImageMax earned winner status in the RFP process by virtue of its proven competence and competitive pricing. ImageMax has successfully performed imaging and microfilming contracts with this department since 1992, as a result of which it is very familiar with our operations and has developed effective, collaborative relationships with our personnel. Comparable microfilm regeneration contracts are currently in successful progress with the Stanislaus County Recorder and the California State Controller, and both agencies provided positive feedback in response to our inquiries. Finally, the performance schedule proposed by ImageMax meets our needs.

Fiscal Impact
There is no Net County Cost. Full funding currently exists in the Contract Special Program Services account of the Business Operations budget unit.

Exhibit A

SUMMARY OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS

1.	General Description of RFP		Microfilm regeneration
2.	List key evaluation criteria		(a) Completeness of proposal (required information) (b) Scope of work (e.g., calendar, project plan, etc.) (c) Cost analysis (by job and as a whole) (d) Presence of inconsistencies (e) Feedback from references
3.	Where advertised		"San Mateo Times," June 4, 2001
4.	In addition to any advertisement, list others to whom RFP was sent		(a) ImageMax, Inc., Hayward, CA (b) BMI Imaging, Sunnyvale, CA (c) Applied Microfilm, Sunnyvale, CA (d) Mohr Microfilm, South San Francisco, CA (e) America West Systems, Cupertino, CA
5.	Total number sent to prospective proposers		5
6.	Number of proposals received		2
7.	Who evaluated the proposals		Theresa Rabe, Deputy Clerk-Recorder Paula Cuneo, Deputy Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder Kaylene Keller, Office Services Manager
8.	In alphabetical order, names of proposers (or finalists, if applicable) and location		(a) BMI Imaging, Sunnyvale, CA (b) ImageMax, Inc., Hayward, CA