SF ED Proposal

8/7/2019 SF ED Proposal

1/16

Ci t y o f San Franc isc o

Mayor s Of f ic e o f Ec onomic

and Work forc e Development

San Franc isc o

Ec onom ic Development Plan

Proposal

September 30, 2005

05-068


2/16

05-068

Ci t y o f San Franc isc o

Mayor s Of f ic e o f Ec onomic

and Work forc e Development

San Franc isc o

Ec onom ic Development Plan

ProposalSeptember 30, 2005

Prepared for:

Mayors Office of Economic and Workforce Development

Attn: Jennifer Entine Matz

1 Dr. Carlton Goodlett Place

City Hall, Room 448San Francisco, CA 94102-4653

(415) 554-6969

Prepared by:

Ted Egan, Ph.D.

ICF Consulting

60 Broadway

San Francisco, CA 94111(415) 677-7165


3/16

ICF Consulting i San Francisco Mayors Office of Economic & Workforce Development05-068 September 30, 2005

Table o f Cont ent s

1. General Approach for the Plan........................................................................................................... 2

2. Outline of Proposed Scope of Work.................................................................................................... 3

Task 1: Outreach and Mobilization........................................................................................................ 3Task 2: Economic Performance Review ................................................................................................5Task 3: Industry Impact and Competitiveness Analysis ........................................................................6Task 4: Policy and Strategy Development .............................................................................................9

3. Estimated Budget ............................................................................................................................... 11

4. Estimated Schedule ............................................................................................................................ 13


4/16

Let ter o f In t roduct ion

September 30, 2005

Mayors Office of Economic and Workforce Development

Attn: Jennifer Entine Matz

1 Dr. Carlton Goodlett Place

City Hall, Room 448

San Francisco, CA 94102-4653

Dear Ms. Matz:

On behalf of our partners, Economic & Planning Systems, Seifel Consulting Inc., and Marie Jones

Consulting, ICF Consulting is pleased to submit its proposal for San Franciscos economic developmentplan.

We are confident that our proposed statement of work will assist the City meet its requirements under

Proposition I, and lay the foundation for a sustainable, prosperous City economy.

If you have any questions on our proposal, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. We wish

you success on this important endeavor on behalf of the City.

Regards

Edmund A. Egan

Director of Analysis


5/16

ICF Consulting 2 San Francisco Mayors Office of Economic & Workforce Development05-068 September 30, 2005

1. Genera l Approach for t he PlanSan Francisco is launching its economic development plan at an important time in its history. After

experiencing one of the greatest inflows of capital in American history during the dot-com boom of the

late 1990s, the City subsequently experienced the greatest drop in population of any major city in the

country since 2000. Both the boom and the bust have left the City at the mercy of forces beyond itscontrol, and hindered progress on its economic and social goals. The time is now right for San Francisco

to forge a new economic future that can ensure sustainable prosperity for its residents, and this plan can

be an instrumental part of that process.

The ICF Consulting teams approach to San Franciscos economic development plan is drawn from the

dozens of similar projects we have conducted around the world. Fundamentally, it is based on the newreality facing global cities in a knowledge-based economy. The new economy of these cities is driven by

clusters of creative and innovative companies, not older sources of competitive advantage such as

geographic location, transportation and industrial infrastructure, and low taxes.

Creating a high performance economy today requires strength and responsiveness across a range of

economic foundations that help San Franciscos companies to innovate. These foundations include a

highly skilled workforce, commercial research and technology, a desirable quality of life, financing forsmall and start-up enterprises, appropriate industrial governance, and specialized infrastructure and

facilities.

Critically, MOEWD and other City departments do not have the primary responsibility for these

economic foundations. They are produced an array of public, private, and non-profit institutions, and in

many cases economic development may not be their only or primary mission. Nevertheless, the privatesector and the entire City relies on them to sustain competitiveness, and ultimately to create jobs and

wealth.

Hence effective collaboration between innovative clusters and economic foundations is the decisive

feature of high performance urban economies. ICF Consulting has specialized in conducting bottom-up,

collaborative strategies, built around industry working groups consisting of businesses and the economic

foundations that support him. In effect, the clusters themselves become responsible for directing their ownstrategy, and in many cases self-sustaining cluster organizations are formed through the process, which

give cities an effective capacity for continual innovation in economic development. We would

recommend San Francisco ultimately pursue this approach, but we do not believe the scope and resources

of this project are ideally suited for a fully-fledged collaborative strategy at this stage.

Our perspective on this project, therefore, is to lay the foundation for a broader collaborative strategy bycreating an analysis and a policy momentum that others can build upon, and by positioning MOEWD as

the facilitator and thought leader of a truly City-wide collaborative economic development strategy after

this project concludes. Our proposed work plan, outlined on the following pages, is geared to respond to

the legislative requirements of the economic development plan, while setting the stage for something

larger.


6/16

San Francisc o Economic Development P lan Proposal


2. Out l ine of Proposed Scope of WorkOur work plan consists of four tasks that have a simple logical flow.

The first and most important task, Outreach and Mobilization, plans and organizes all of the externalrelationships the ICF team will need to manage during the full course of the project.

The second task, Economic Performance Review, will tell us what the Citys economic development

priorities should be, based on a review of its past performance and current challenges, and in light of the

values expressed in Proposition I.

The third task, Industry Impact and Competitiveness Analysis, will tell us how the City should try to

shape the economy to address the priorities identified in Task 2, by identifying target industries, and

understanding their competitiveness challenges and barriers to growth. The mandated Survey of Barriers

to Employment Retention and Attraction will form part of the research in this task. This task will

conclude with a statement of strategic priorities of the economic development plan.

The final task, Policy and Strategy Development, will tell us which policies the City needs to adopt toaccomplish its strategic priorities, based on an audit of existing policies and capacity, and a review of

economic development best practices in competing cities.

These tasks, and their sub-tasks, are detailed below.

Task 1: Outreach and Mobilization

Effective outreach and mobilization is the most critical success factor in any economic development

strategy. It will serve to plan and construct all of the on-going external relationships the project will need

to have to be effective, politically viable, and implementation-ready.

This task will not incorporate all of the public interviews, surveys, or meetings in the project; these willoccur throughout the project as described in subsequent tasks. Our goals in this task are three-fold:

Build the advisory and stewards organizations we will need to ensure the plan is approvable andimplementation-ready;

Partner with business organizations to secure their cooperation in conducting the research in latertasks;

Organizing and conducting the external messaging with city leaders, the media, and the general public.

We will accomplish these goals in the following five sub-tasks:

Task 1.1 Kickoff meeting

The project kick-off meeting will include all of the principles on the ICF Consulting Team, and

representatives from MOEWD and other relevant departments and agencies. The agenda for the kick-off

meeting will be to review this proposed statement of work, and agree on any modifications, discuss roles

and responsibilities, and hear any additional concerns for the project.


7/16



Task 1.2 Plan Outreach and Mobilization

We believe that the project will need to two types of contact or advisory groups to guide the consulting

team. One, drawn from relevant City agencies, will be called a Stewards Group and will be responsible

for focusing the consulting team on implementation issues, so that the final recommendations are

implementation-ready.

The second contact group will be called an Advisory Group, and will consist of prominent citizens who

have broad knowledge of the issues. The purpose of this group is to expose the consulting team to the

range of concerns and issues that they are likely to hear from Board members and the community as a

whole. We would recommend that this group be politically connected to the Mayors Office and the

Board in some way, either by formal appointment or some other means.

In this task, MOEWD and ICF project management will meet to identify appropriate strategies and

candidates for these groups, and to identify other important groups we will need to partner with during the

project, including business and community associations, and key media outlets. In addition, basic project

messaging for these groups should be agreed at this meeting, so that project communication materials can

be created in the next sub-task.

Task 1.3 Prepare Project Communication Materials

In this sub-task, the ICF team will prepare an explanatory PowerPoint presentation, media fact sheets, and

website content describing the project, reflecting the messaging agreed in the previous task. These

materials would be usable by the consulting team in its subsequent outreach engagement, and of course

could be used by MOEWD and other City staff as appropriate.

We would recommend that MOEWD prepare a web page for the plan, which would be used to explain the

projects purpose, announce public meetings, provide the public with interim deliverables over the course

of the project, and host web-based surveys (as discussed in Task 3). ICF would provide the content for the

site in this sub-task.

Task 1.4 Conduct Outreach and Mobilization Briefings

In this sub-task, the ICF team will conduct briefings with the Stewards Group, organize and hold an initial

Advisory Group meeting, conduct media briefings, and hold 1:1 interviews with our business and

community association partners.

The Stewards meeting will be used to seek input on the Survey of Business Barriers (per Attachment 1 of

the RFP, assuming the listed organizations form part of the Stewards Group), understand each

organizations implementation role and capacity, and provide information about the ICF teams work plan

and overall project scope. The Advisory group meeting will be used to communicate the work plan, and

hear community concerns and important areas of interest. Interviews with business associations will

similarly explain the goals and objectives of the project, and also secure the associations commitment topartner with the ICF team in implementing web-based surveys (essentially, notifying their members of the

survey).

Task 1.4b (Optional): Additional Community Mobilization

As an optional task, Marie Jones Consulting and others in the ICF Team to engage the community in

thorough yet focused community participation. This task, while optional, will significantly expand the

reach and involvement of the Team with the Community in defining vision, setting economic


8/16



development priorities and reviewing and vetting the final strategy. The ICF team will next reach out to

the neighborhoods by meetings with 5-8 neighborhood associations to hear about neighborhood concerns,

needs, trends, goals. These meetings work best if the consultant is an agenda item on the neighborhood

associations regular agenda. Possible neighborhoods include: Mission District, SOMA, Bayview,

Hunters Point, Richmond, Castro, North Beach, China Town, etc. The ICF team MJC will also meet with

five major community associations to gain their input into the Economic Development Plan.

Task 2: Economic Performance Review

The purpose of this task is to identify the priority needs for the economic development plan. Proposition I

is clear that the plan needs to target specific industries, and an assessment of the skills required to obtain

jobs in these industries.

In our view, the industrial targeting needs to be based on a thorough review of San Franciscos current

workforce characteristics: the educational attainment and occupational background of its unemployed,

under-employed and at-risk workforces. These residents can and should be the most direct beneficiaries

of the economic development plan, so it is important to thoroughly understand the numbers and skillprofiles of each group.

At the same time, to meet Proposition Is requirement that the plan devise goals to protect and expand

small and neighborhood-serving businesses, another important consideration is how the targeted

industries can provide growth for these industries, both directly and indirectly. We will devote a specific

sub-task to profiling the citys small and neighborhood-serving businesses, in terms of the number of

companies, their total employees, their industrial composition, and economic importance to the City.

Finally, the citys economic performance review also needs to focus on recent aggregate trends in the

citys economy, including the unemployment rate, wage trends, cost of living, and level of inequality in

the city.

The ICF team will examine these issues in the following five sub-tasks:

Task 2.1 Economic Overview

In this sub-task, the ICF team will prepare an overview of San Franciscos economic performance over

the past twenty years. The review will focus on aggregate indicators of economic prosperity, including

employment and unemployment levels, wages and income, entrepreneurship and business development,

income inequality and livability. The purpose of this sub-task is to highly big picture trends and issues.

Task 2.2 Workforce Analysis

Utilizing information from the California Employment Development Department, and the federal Bureau

of Labor Statistics and Census Bureau, the ICF team will conduct an analysis of San Franciscos

workforce supply and demand. The aim of this analysis will be to quantify and assess the

educational/work experience/occupational background of San Franciscos unemployed, under-employed,

and at-risk workers. In addition, this section will also profile the Citys disabled and vulnerable workingpopulation, as directed by Proposition I.


9/16



Task 2.3. Industrial and Commercial Market analysis

In this sub-task, the ICF team (EPS), will gather information regarding current and past real estate

indicators for office and industrial development in San Francisco, including property lease rates,

vacancies, absorption, and new construction over a period of at least three years. EPS will compare this

real estate information to data regarding changes in the economy of San Francisco, including employmentgrowth and shifts among industries. This information will be used to characterize San Franciscos real

estate market over the past several years, and will serve as benchmarking data to enable the Mayors

Office to track the relationship between real estate performance and industry growth or decline.

Task 2.4. Profile of Small and Neighborhood Businesses

In this sub-task, the ICF team will conduct an analysis of the size, composition, growth drivers, and

economic impact of the small business and neighborhood-serving businesses in San Francisco.

Proposition I requires the plan to develop goals and strategies to preserve and expand these businesses,

and this task will help us state specific goals and priorities by highlighting the linkageor lack of

linkagebetween these industries and the export-oriented business sector.

Task 2.5 Review and Report

After completing the four analytical subtasks, the ICF team will convene a meeting of the Advisory

Group, distribute preliminary findings to the Stewards Group, and hold a public meeting to receive

feedback from residents on the conclusions and priority needs highlighted by the analysis. This task will

conclude with a report of priority economic development needs, based on the analysis and the feedback

received by the Advisory Group and the public meeting.

Task 3: Industry Impact and Competitiveness Analysis

The purpose of this task will be to assess how the Citys economy can best be grown to create the job and

business opportunities highlighted as priority needs in the previous task. Concretely, this means

identifying industries, or clusters of industries that have the potential to both grow in the city, and grow in

a way that will address those priority needs.

Fundamentally this requires doing two things:

Assessing the ability of each industry to meet the priority needs

Assessing the citys ability to add jobs in these various industries

Performing both of these analytical tasks will be critical. If the city was equally capable of growing jobs

in every industry, then selecting target industries would simply be a matter of matching the skills of

workers who need new or better jobs, and the products and services of small businesses, to the industries

that require them. However, the evidence suggests that different industries in the City have grown at verydifferent rates, and the economic development plan needs to consider the likelihood of future growth in

different industries, and the ease in stimulating that growth.

Other industries, which serve a national or global market, do not have this limitation. The factor limiting

their growth is San Franciscos competitiveness, relative to other cities within and beyond the Bay Area.

If San Francisco improves its competitiveness in software development, for example, it could potentially

experience growth in that sector that far outstrips the average growth rate of the city. The question in that


10/16



case will be: to what extent the jobs directly and indirectly created by software address the citys priority

needs for jobs, business opportunities, and overall prosperity?

Once industries, or clusters of related industries, have been selected using this logic, the next requirement

is a competitiveness analysis of these industries, to determine what inhibits and what could stimulate their

growth in the city. Although there are many canned approaches to competitiveness analysis, such asMichael Porters diamond methodology, in our experience there is no substitute to 1:1 interviews with

companies to understand how they compete globally, and confirming those findings with broader

surveying in the same industry. And as we said in the introductory section, innovation-driven clusters rely

upon strong and responsive economic foundations, so the public and non-profit institutions that provide

these foundations need to be part of the competitiveness analysis and interviewing as well.

On the basis of this industrial targeting and competitiveness analysis, the task will conclude with a

statement of strategic goals for the target industries, which will accomplish the priority needs identified in

the previous task. As in Task 2, this task will conclude with review and comment by the Advisory Group,

the Stewards, and the public.

Task 3.1 Analyze Direct and Indirect Industry Occupational DemandThe analysis in task 2 will have characterized the number and skill base of San Franciscans who are

unemployed, under-employed, or employed in at-risk industries. In order to properly target industries toprovide better employment opportunities for this workforce (and others), industries must be assessed by

their ability to generate jobs that match their skills and educational attainment.

In this sub-task, the ICF team will use occupation-by-industry matrices (from the Bureau of Labor

Statistics) to identify the precise occupational profiles of major industry categories (3 digit NAICS) in

San Francisco. We will then assess the degree of overlap between the occupational demand of each

industry, and the skill base of the workers with priority employment needs, and characterize industries as

High, Medium, or Low Overlap.

The patterns of indirect labor demand generated by industries, through multiplier effects, may differ fromthe direct impacts. Therefore the ICF team, using the IMPLAN economic impact software that contains

local inter-industry multipliers, will also characterize the total occupational impact of each industrys

growth as having High, Medium, or Low overlap.

Task 3.1b (Optional) Analyze Industry Linkages With LocalBusinesses

Another potential criteria for selecting industries is their ability to generate new business opportunities for

small and neighborhood-serving businesses. In this optional task, the ICF team will conduct in-person

interviews and web-based surveys to assess the degree of linkage between small and neighborhood-

serving businesses, and other companies in the export-oriented sector. This surveying will be in addition

to the Survey of Business Barriers, which is not optional and will be conducted in Task 3.5.

Task 3.2 Analyze Industry Growth Patterns and Cluster CompetitivePerformance

Once each industry has been evaluated based on its ability to generate needed jobs and business

opportunities, its past growth patterns in the city must be examined in order to determine if it is a high

probability growth target for the City. The ICF team will review historical employment by industry


11/16



statistics, and third-party projections, to assign a likelihood of High, Medium, and Low for expected

growth rates in the future. In addition, the ICF team will benchmark cluster competitive performance

against competing/similar cities, such as Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, San Diego, Boston, and Chicago.

Task 3.3 Analyze Industry Tax ImpactsIn order to assess each industrys potential to contribute additional tax revenue to the City, the ICF team

(EPS) will create tax-generation models for potential employers in various industry sectors. Examples ofrevenues to be projected include (without limitation) taxes on: secured and unsecured property; sales and

purchases; business licenses; utilities; payroll; etc. This information can be used to compare the

prospective tax benefits of various industry sectors in San Francisco, and may also be used to characterize

the potential tax benefits of various overall economic development strategies.

Task 3.3b (Optional) Fiscal Impact Assessment

As an optional task, the ICF team (EPS) can conduct full fiscal impact projections for various industry

sectors. Whereas Task 3.3, above, focuses solely on the tax generation from prospective employers, this

optional analysis can address municipal revenues and costs associated with prospective employment.EPS would work with San Francisco departments to establish assumptions regarding the impacts of

employment growth on various budget segments, including public safety, parks and recreation, public

works, general administration, etc. EPS will include assumptions determined to be specific to particular

industry segments (e.g., those using heavy trucks or handling hazardous materials) or property types (e.g.,

high-rises demanding special fire equipment). While this information will necessarily be illustrative, it

can be used to compare the prospective net fiscal benefits of various industry sectors, and economic

development strategies in San Francisco.

Task 3.4 Select Target Industry Clusters

On the basis of the findings of the previous sub-tasks, the ICF team will select a number of industry

clusters for focused competitiveness analysis, based on their expected ability to both add jobs in the City,and to meet the Citys priority needs developed in Task 2. The ICF team will make its recommendations,

and share its findings with the Stewards and Advisory Group.

Task 3.5 Competitiveness Analysis and Survey of Business Barriers

This very important task will involve understanding the competitiveness drivers of the selected industry

clusters, and understanding barriers to growth and expansion among all businesses in the City. The sub-

task will begin with interviews of company executives in the target clusters, to understand how their

competitive advantage relates to the presence of other competencies in the Citys cluster, and to economic

foundations the City can shape. These 1:1 interviews will also focus on direct locational factors such as

real estate requirements, operating conditions, and the perceived adequacy of San Francisco as a long-

term location.

The challenges highlighted by the cluster interviews, and the input provided by Stewards and business

associations during the outreach meetings (Task 1.4), will feed into the design of the Survey of Business

Barriers. Seifel Consulting will have primary responsibility for holding those meetings, and designing,

pre-testing, and administering the survey.

The Barriers survey will be hosted on the projects website using the SurveyMonkey web-based survey

technology. We will rely on media briefings to market the survey, and we would also look to our business


12/16



association partners (also mobilized in Task 1.4) to distribute the survey URL directly to their members

via e-mail, and also assist with follow-ups. It has been our experience that this approach provides the

most effective way to put the survey in as many hands as possible.

The Barriers survey will be targeted to all businesses in the city, of every size, in every industry. The

SurveyMonkey technology will allow us to separately analyze the results of respondents by cluster, andalso allows logical branching of the survey to permit asking cluster-specific questions for companies

that indicate they are in a particular cluster. Thus it makes sense to combine our cluster competitiveness

anlaysis, and the Barriers survey, in a single task.

Task 3.5b (Optional) Residents and Workers Survey

As an optional task, the ICF team would conduct a similar web-based survey for residents and workers in

San Francisco, administered through the projects website. We would also conduct media briefings and

other outreach to market the survey to City residents and workers. The added value of this strategy would

be to seek to understand why people choose to live in work in San Francisco, what they value in its

environment, and what kinds of economic development would they most approve of.

Task 3.6 Analysis of economic foundations

The analysis of the economic foundations of the targeted clusters is as critical as understanding the drivers

of cluster competitiveness, since economic foundations are ultimately the tools the City has to affect

business performance. The foundation analysis will consist of three activities: indictor benchmarking of

San Francisco to comparable cities along the major foundation categories; a real estate supply/demand

assessment for each cluster, and a series of 1:1 interviews with foundation institutions to assess their

levels of support and collaboration within the cluster.

Task 3.7 Advisory Group and Stewards Review and Report

This task will conclude with another Advisory Group meeting and Stewards review, followed by anotherpublic meeting. The final report for this task will incorporate those comments, establishing strategic

objectives for the growth of the target industry clusters, and the remediation of business barriers.

Task 4: Policy and Strategy Development

Task 4 will pick up the strategic objectives developed in the last task, and translate them into policy. This

task will be completed in four sub-tasks:

Task 4.1 Audit of Existing Policies

To review and evaluate the Citys current and past economic development effectiveness, the ICF Team

(led by MJC) will hold confidential interviews with twenty (20) key City staff and external economicdevelopment partners (from the business community, institutions, non-profits, developers, etc.). Through

the interviews and a review of relevant documents, MJC will identify:

Economic development strategies and practices that have proved most successful in the past;

Strategies and practices that could be improved and specific improvements to achieve success;

Strategies or practices that are missing from the Citys current economic development efforts; and


13/16



How to better include/involve/leverage economic development partners (the business community,institutions, non-profits, other agencies, etc) in the Citys economic development efforts.

Based on these interviews and our experience and knowledge, MJC will synthesize and develop a brief

10-15 page summary of current economic development practice within San Francisco and recommend

action steps for improvement.

Task 4.2 Best Practices Review

For this task, MJC will identify best economic development practices from competitive cities. Based on

the priority strategic objectives developed in the previous task, MJC will evaluate best practice economic

development strategies, tactics, projects and programs that relate to the economic foundations of the City,

and those that provide specific assistance to small and start-up businesses. Examples of potential areas of

review include the following:

Workforce development, including but not limited to: cluster-specific training and placementprograms; youth mentoring and internship programs; self-employment and entrepreneurship programs;

cluster-specific work-based training; dual work/degree programs; etc.

Quality of life issues, including but not limited to: environmental policies and programs, arts, cultureand recreation projects and programs;

Technology understanding and use, including community technology facilities, telecommunicationsinfrastructure.

Business climate including but not limited to: business tax policy; building permitting process andfees; attraction and retention policies

Land-use policies for cluster-based strategies and other best practices in land use policy; etc.

Strategies to support small and start-up businesses, including marketing and export promotion,technology and capital equipment procurement assistance, Cluster networking activities, small

business loan programs, access to and development of venture capital funding, angel networks, etc.,and general business and technical assistance

MJC will evaluate each best practice with an eye to how to best apply it to San Franciscos unique

political and economic environment, including: potential obstacles to adoption, potential for a successful

application in San Francisco, and cost/difficulty of implementation.

Task 4.3 Strategy Development

Based on the analysis completed to date, the ICF team will assemble a draft strategy, focusing on the

priority needs of the city, the strategic objectives for the economy to meet those needs, and the practicalpolicy steps required to make that a reality.

Task 4.4 Advisory Group and Public Meetings, and Final Report

This project will conclude with a final Advisory Group meeting and Stewards review, followed by a final

public meeting. The final report will incorporate all comments, providing an implementation-ready guide

for San Franciscos future sustainable prosperity.


14/16



3. Est im ated BudgetA detailed project budget, by task, sub-task, and team member, is provided below. Totals for each task are

shown in the right-most column of the following page.

IndividualJames O.

GollubCarole Norris

Edmund

EganEgon Terplan TBD TBD TBD

William

Lester

Elizabeth

Johnston

Other Direct

Costs

Sub-Contractor

G&A (4.1%)

TitleSenior Vice

President

Vice

PresidentDirector

Senior

Associate

Production

Specialist

Contract

Admin.

Research

Assistant

Senior

AssociateAnalyst

Hourly Rate $235 $187 $162 $122 $94 $90 $59 $57 $38Core Tasks

Task 1.1 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 -$ 121$

Task 1.2 4 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 -$ 27$

Task 1.3 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 -$ -$

Task 1.4 0 0 32 32 0 0 0 0 0 50$ 115$

Task 2.1 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 40 0 -$ -$

Task 2.2 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 40 0 -$ -$

Task 2.3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ 150$

Task 2.4 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 20 20 -$ -$Task 2.5 0 0 16 0 4 0 0 16 0 100$ 72$

Task 3.1 0 0 8 0 0 0 20 40 0 -$ -$

Task 3.2 0 0 8 0 0 0 20 0 20 -$ -$

Task 3.3 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ 249$

Task 3.4 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ -$

Task 3.5 0 0 32 32 0 0 0 0 0 500$ 946$

Task 3.6 0 0 32 32 0 0 30 0 10 100$ 610$

Task 3.7 0 0 24 24 4 2 0 0 0 100$ 68$

Task 4.1 0 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ 166$

Task 4.2 0 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ 443$

Task 4.3 4 0 16 8 0 0 0 0 0 -$ 238$

Task 4.4 0 0 24 8 8 2 32 0 0 100$ 99$

Sub-Total Budget 1,880$ 4,488$ 45,684$ 18,544$ 1,504$ 720$ 6,018$ 8,892$ 1,900$ 950$ 3,304$

Optional Tasks Task 1.4b 16 0 8 16 0 0 0 0 0 100$ 609$

Task 3.1b 0 0 24 40 0 0 40 40 40 -$ -$

Task 3.3b 0 0 24 24 0 0 24 0 0 -$ 464$

Task 3.5b 0 0 16 0 0 0 16 16 0 -$ 513$

Sub-Total Budget $3,760 $0 $11,664 $9,760 $0 $0 $4,720 $3,192 $1,520 $100 $1,586

Grand Total Budget $5,640 $4,488 $57,348 $28,304 $1,504 $720 $10,738 $12,084 $3,420 $1,050 $4,890


15/16



James

MusbachDarin Smith TBD TBD TBD

Other Direct

Costs

Stephen

WalhstromLibby Seifel

Megan Hor l TBD Mar ie Jones

Managing

PrincipalManager Associate

Research

Analyst

Production

Staff

Managing

Principal PresidentConsultant

Production

StaffPrincipal

$250 $165 $105 $85 $60 $150 $200 $110 $70 $135 Hours Budget

4 4 0 0 0 150$ 4 0 0 0 4 24 $4,079

0 4 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 24 $3,899

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 16 $2,272

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 12 5 0 0 0 81 $12,053

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 56 $4,872

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 56 $4,872

2 8 8 8 1 250$ 0 0 0 0 0 29 $4,124

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 56 $4,492

4 2 4 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 46 $5,802

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 68 $4,756

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 48 $3,236

4 12 16 16 1 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 53 $6,977

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 8 $1,296

6 12 16 8 1 50$ 36 0 90 26 0 259 $33,604

18 20 40 32 2 50$ 0 0 0 0 0 216 $26,838

4 4 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 62 $9,2000 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 30 46 $7,108

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 80 96 $14,135

4 2 4 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 30 68 $10,546

4 2 4 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 5 89 $10,308

12,500$ 11,550$ 9,660$ 5,440$ 300$ 500$ 7,800$ 1,000$ 9,900$ 1,820$ 20,115$ 1,401 $174,469

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 110 150 $22,567

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 0 0 0 0 0 184 $14,928

0 0 0 0 0 -$ 32 5 40 16 0 165 $20,016

8 16 40 40 2 150$ 0 0 0 0 0 154 $17,471

$2,000 $2,640 $4,200 $3,400 $120 $150 $4,800 $1,000 $4,400 $1,120 $14,850 653 $74,982

$14,500 $14,190 $13,860 $8,840 $420 $650 $12,600 $2,000 $14,300 $2,940 $34,965 2,054 $249,451

EPS SEIFEL CONSULTING


16/16


ICFConsulting 13 SanFranciscoMayorsOfficeof Economic&WorkforceDevelopment

4. Est im at ed Sc heduleThe following schedule details, by month and task, the planned progress of the project. Red dots indicate

an important meeting, deliverable, or public meeting.

11/05 12/05 1/06 2/06 3/06 4/06 5/06 6/06 7/06 8/06 9/06 10/06

Task 1: Outreach and Mobilization

Task 1.1: Kick-off Meeting

Task 1.2: Plan Outreach and Mobilization

Task 1.3: Prepare Project Messaging Materials

Task 1.4: Conduct Mobilization Briefings

Task 1.4b (Optional) Additional community

mobilization

Task 2: Economic performance Review

Task 2.1. Economic overview

Task 2.2. W orkforce Analysis

Task 2.3. Industrial & Commercial Market Analysis

Task 2.4. Profile of Small & Neighborhood BusinessTask 2.5 Advisory Group, Public Meetings, Stewards,

Report

Task 3: Industry Growth & Competitiveness

Analysis

Task 3.1 Analyze Industry Occupational Needs

Task 3.1b (Optional) Analyze Small Business

Linkages

Task 3.2 Analyze Industry Growth Patterns

Task 3.3 Analyze Industry Tax Impacts

Task 3.3b (Optional) Fiscal Impact Assessment

Task 3.4 Select Industry Targets

Task 3.5 Competitiveness Analysis & Barriers Survey

Task 3.5b (Optional) Residents and Workers Survey

Task 3.6 Analysis of Economic Foundations

Task 3.7 Advisory Group, Stewards, Public Meetings,

Report

Task 4: Policy and Strategy Development

Task 4.1 Audit of Existing Policies

Task 4.2 Best Practice Review

Task 4.3 Strategy Development and Stewards Review

Task 4.4 Advisory Group, Public Meetings, & Final

Report

Date post:	08-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	elizabeth-libby-seifel
View:	227 times
Download:	0 times

SF ED Proposal

Documents