14015-CONTRACT.DOCX

SERIAL 14015-RFP CONSULTANT FOR MELENDRES COURT ORDERED INTERNAL
ASSESSMENT
DATE OF LAST REVISION: May 20, 2015 CONTRACT END DATE: May 31, 2016
CONTRACT PERIOD THROUGH MAY 31, 2015 2016
TO: All Departments
FROM: Office of Procurement Services
SUBJECT: Contract for CONSULTANT FOR MELENDRES COURT ORDERED INTERNAL
ASSESSMENT
Attached to this letter is published an effective purchasing contract for products and/or services to be supplied to
Maricopa County activities as awarded by Maricopa County on May 07, 2014.
All purchases of products and/or services listed on the attached pages of this letter are to be obtained from the
vendor holding the contract. Individuals are responsible to the vendor for purchases made outside of contracts.
The contract period is indicated above.
Wes Baysinger, Chief Procurement Officer
Office of Procurement Services
NP/at
Attach
Copy to: Office of Procurement Services
LeeAnn Bohn, MCSO
Amie Bristol, MCSO

CONTRACT PURSUANT TO RFP
SERIAL 14015 -RFP
This Contract is entered into this 7th day of May, 2014 by and between Maricopa County (“County”), a political
subdivision of the State of Arizona, and Vigilant Resources International, a New York corporation (“Contractor”)
for the purchase of consulting services.
1.0 CONTRACT TERM:
1.1 This Contract is for a term of one (1) year, beginning on the 7th day of May, 2014 and ending the
31st day of May, 2015 2016.
1.2 The County may, at its option and with the agreement of the Contractor, renew the term of this
Contract for additional terms up to a maximum of four (4) years, (or at the County’s sole
discretion, extend the contract on a month-to-month bases for a maximum of six (6) months after
expiration). The County shall notify the Contractor in writing of its intent to extend the Contract
term at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the expiration of the original contract term, or any
additional term thereafter.
2.0 FEE ADJUSTMENTS:
Any request for a fee adjustment must be submitted sixty (60) days prior to the current Contract expiration.
Requests for adjustment in cost of labor and/or materials must be supported by appropriate documentation.
If County agrees to the adjusted fee, County shall issue written approval of the change. The reasonableness
of the request will be determined by comparing the request with the (Consumer Price Index) or by
performing a market survey.
3.0 PAYMENTS:
3.1 As consideration for performance of the duties described herein, County shall pay Contractor the
sum(s) stated in Exhibit “A.”
3.2 Payment shall be made upon the County’s receipt of a properly completed invoice.
3.3 INVOICES:
3.3.1 The Contractor shall submit one (1) legible copy of their detailed invoice before
payment(s) can be made. At a minimum, the invoice must provide the following
information:
 Company name, address and contact
 County bill-to name and contact information
 Contract serial number
 County purchase order number
 Invoice number and date
 Payment terms
 Date of service or delivery
 Quantity
 Contract Item number(s)

SERIAL 14015-RFP
 Description of service provided
 Pricing per unit of service
 Freight (if applicable)
 Extended price
 Mileage w/rate (if applicable)
 Total Amount Due
3.3.2 Problems regarding billing or invoicing shall be directed to the County as listed on the
Purchase Order.
3.3.3 Payment shall be made to the Contractor by Accounts Payable through the Maricopa
County Vendor Express Payment Program. This is an Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT)
process. After Contract Award the Contractor shall complete the Vendor Registration
Form located on the County Department of Finance Vendor Registration Web Site
(http://www.maricopa.gov/Finance/Vendors.aspx).
3.3.4 EFT payments to the routing and account numbers designated by the Contractor will
include the details on the specific invoices that the payment covers. The Contractor is
required to discuss remittance delivery capabilities with their designated financial
institution for access to those details.
4.0 AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS:
4.1 The provisions of this Contract relating to payment for services shall become effective when funds
assigned for the purpose of compensating the Contractor as herein provided are actually available
to County for disbursement. The County shall be the sole judge and authority in determining the
availability of funds under this Contract. County shall keep the Contractor fully informed as to the
availability of funds.
4.2 If any action is taken by any state agency, Federal department or any other agency or
instrumentality to suspend, decrease, or terminate its fiscal obligations under, or in connection
with, this Contract, County may amend, suspend, decrease, or terminate its obligations under, or in
connection with, this Contract. In the event of termination, County shall be liable for payment
only for services rendered prior to the effective date of the termination, provided that such services
are performed in accordance with the provisions of this Contract. County shall give written notice
of the effective date of any suspension, amendment, or termination under this Section, at least ten
(10) days in advance.
5.0 DUTIES:
5.1 The Contractor shall perform all duties stated in Exhibit “B”, or as otherwise directed in writing
by the Procurement Officer.
5.2 During the Contract term, County shall provide Contractor’s personnel with adequate workspace
for consultants and such other related facilities as may be required by Contractor to carry out its
contractual obligations.
6.0 TERMS and CONDITIONS:
6.1 INDEMNIFICATION:
6.1.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless County, its agents, representatives, officers, directors, officials, and employees
from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including, but not limited to,
attorney fees, court costs, expert witness fees, and the cost of appellate proceedings,
relating to, arising out of, or alleged to have resulted from the negligent acts, errors,
omissions, mistakes or malfeasance relating to the performance of this Contract.
Contractor’s duty to defend, indemnify and hold harmless County, its agents,
representatives, officers, directors, officials, and employees shall arise in connection with

SERIAL 14015-RFP
any claim, damage, loss or expense that is caused by any negligent acts, errors, omissions
or mistakes in the performance of this Contract by the Contractor, as well as any person
or entity for whose acts, errors, omissions, mistakes or malfeasance Contractor may be
legally liable.
6.1.2 The amount and type of insurance coverage requirements set forth herein will in no way
be construed as limiting the scope of the indemnity in this paragraph.
The scope of this indemnification does not extend to the sole negligence of County
6.2 INSURANCE:
6.2.1 Contractor, at Contractor’s own expense, shall purchase and maintain the herein
stipulated minimum insurance from a company or companies duly licensed by the State
of Arizona and possessing a current A.M. Best, Inc. rating of B++. In lieu of State of
Arizona licensing, the stipulated insurance may be purchased from a company or
companies, which are authorized to do business in the State of Arizona, provided that
said insurance companies meet the approval of County. The form of any insurance
policies and forms must be acceptable to County.
6.2.2 All insurance required herein shall be maintained in full force and effect until all work or
service required to be performed under the terms of the Contract is satisfactorily
completed and formally accepted. Failure to do so may, at the sole discretion of County,
constitute a material breach of this Contract.
6.2.3 Contractor’s insurance shall be primary insurance as respects County, and any insurance
or self-insurance maintained by County shall not contribute to it.
6.2.4 Any failure to comply with the claim reporting provisions of the insurance policies or any
breach of an insurance policy warranty shall not affect the County’s right to coverage
afforded under the insurance policies.
6.2.5 The insurance policies may provide coverage that contains deductibles or self-insured
retentions. Such deductible and/or self-insured retentions shall not be applicable with
respect to the coverage provided to County under such policies. Contractor shall be
solely responsible for the deductible and/or self-insured retention and County, at its
option, may require Contractor to secure payment of such deductibles or self-insured
retentions by a surety bond or an irrevocable and unconditional letter of credit.
6.2.6 County reserves the right to request and to receive, within 10 working days, certified
copies of any or all of the herein required insurance certificates. County shall not be
obligated to review policies and/or endorsements or to advise Contractor of any
deficiencies in such policies and endorsements, and such receipt shall not relieve
Contractor from, or be deemed a waiver of County’s right to insist on strict fulfillment of
Contractor’s obligations under this Contract.
6.2.7 The insurance policies required by this Contract, except Workers’ Compensation, shall
name County, its agents, representatives, officers, directors, officials and employees as
Additional Insureds.
6.2.8 The policies required hereunder, except Workers’ Compensation, shall contain a waiver
of transfer of rights of recovery (subrogation) against County, its agents, representatives,
officers, directors, officials and employees for any claims arising out of Contractor’s
work or service.
6.2.9 Commercial General Liability:
Commercial General Liability insurance and, if necessary, Commercial Umbrella
insurance with a limit of not less than $2,000,000 for each occurrence, $2,000,000

SERIAL 14015-RFP
Products/Completed Operations Aggregate, and $4,000,000 General Aggregate Limit.
The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage,
personal injury, products and completed operations and blanket contractual coverage, and
shall not contain any provision which would serve to limit third party action over claims.
There shall be no endorsement or modification of the CGL limiting the scope of coverage
for liability arising from explosion, collapse, or underground property damage.
6.2.10 Automobile Liability:
Commercial/Business Automobile Liability insurance and, if necessary, Commercial
Umbrella insurance with a combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage
of not less than $2,000,000 each occurrence with respect to any of the Contractor’s
owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the
Contractor’s work or services under this Contract.
6.2.11 Workers’ Compensation:
6.2.11.1 Workers’ Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by federal
and state statutes having jurisdiction of Contractor’s employees engaged in the
performance of the work or services under this Contract; and Employer’s
Liability insurance of not less than $1,000,000 for each accident, $1,000,000
disease for each employee, and $1,000,000 disease policy limit.
6.2.11.2 Contractor waives all rights against County and its agents, officers, directors
and employees for recovery of damages to the extent these damages are
covered by the Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability or
commercial umbrella liability insurance obtained by Contractor pursuant to
this Contract.
6.2.12 Certificates of Insurance.
6.2.12.1 Prior to commencing work or services under this Contract, Contractor shall
have insurance in effect as required by the Contract in the form provided by
the County, issued by Contractor’s insurer(s), as evidence that policies
providing the required coverage, conditions and limits required by this
Contract are in full force and effect. Such certificates shall be made available
to the County upon ten (10) business days. BY SIGNING THE
AGREEMENT PAGE THE CONTRACTOR AGREES TO THIS
REQUIREMENT AND FAILURE TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT
WILL RESULT IN CANCELLATION OF CONTRACT.
6.2.12.2 In the event any insurance policy (ies) required by this contract is (are) written
on a “claims made” basis, coverage shall extend for two years past completion
and acceptance of Contractor’s work or services and as evidenced by annual
Certificates of Insurance.
6.2.12.3 If a policy does expire during the life of the Contract, a renewal certificate
must be sent to County fifteen (15) days prior to the expiration date.
6.2.13 Cancellation and Expiration Notice.
Insurance required herein shall not be permitted to expire, be canceled, or materially
changed without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the County.
6.3 WARRANTY OF SERVICES:
6.3.1 The Contractor warrants that all services provided hereunder will conform to the
requirements of the Contract, including all descriptions, specifications and attachments

SERIAL 14015-RFP
made a part of this Contract. County’s acceptance of services or goods provided by the
Contractor shall not relieve the Contractor from its obligations under this warranty.
6.3.2 In addition to its other remedies, County may, at the Contractor's expense, require prompt
correction of any services failing to meet the Contractor's warranty herein. Services
corrected by the Contractor shall be subject to all the provisions of this Contract in the
manner and to the same extent as services originally furnished hereunder.
6.4 INSPECTION OF SERVICES:
6.4.1 The Contractor shall provide and maintain an inspection system acceptable to County
covering the services under this Contract. Complete records of all inspection work
performed by the Contractor shall be maintained and made available to County during
contract performance and for as long afterwards as the Contract requires.
6.4.2 County has the right to inspect and test all services called for by the Contract, to the
extent practicable at all times and places during the term of the Contract. County shall
perform inspections and tests in a manner that will not unduly delay the work.
6.4.3 If any of the services do not conform with Contract requirements, County may require the
Contractor to perform the services again in conformity with Contract requirements, at no
increase in Contract amount. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-
performance, County may:
6.4.3.1 Require the Contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future
performance conforms to Contract requirements; and
6.4.3.2 Reduce the Contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed.
6.4.4 If the Contractor fails to promptly perform the services again or to take the necessary
action to ensure future performance in conformity with Contract requirements, County
may:
6.4.4.1 By Contract or otherwise, perform the services and charge to the Contractor any
cost incurred by County that is directly related to the performance of such
service; or
6.4.4.2 Terminate the Contract for default.
6.5 NOTICES:
All notices given pursuant to the terms of this Contract shall be addressed to:
For County:
Maricopa County
Office of Procurement Services
ATTN: Contract Administration
320 West Lincoln Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85003-2494
For Contractor:
Adam Safir
Vigilant Resources International
45 Rockefeller Plaza – 20th Floor
New York, NY 10111
6.6 REQUIREMENTS CONTRACT:

SERIAL 14015-RFP
6.6.1 Contractor signifies its understanding and agreement by signing this document that this
Contract is a requirements contract. This Contract does not guarantee any purchases will
be made (minimum or maximum). Orders will only be placed when County identifies a
need and issues a purchase order or a written notice to proceed.
6.6.2 County reserves the right to cancel purchase orders or notice to proceed within a
reasonable period of time after issuance. Should a purchase order or notice to proceed be
canceled, the County agrees to reimburse the Contractor for actual and documented costs
incurred by the Contractor. The County will not reimburse the Contractor for any
avoidable costs incurred after receipt of cancellation, or for lost profits, or shipment of
product or performance of services prior to issuance of a purchase order or notice to
proceed.
6.6.3 Purchase orders will be cancelled in writing.
6.7 TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE:
The County reserves the right to terminate the Contract, in whole or in part at any time, when in
the best interests of the County without penalty or recourse. Upon receipt of the written notice,
the Contractor shall immediately stop all work, as directed in the notice, notify all subcontractors
of the effective date of the termination and minimize all further costs to the County. In the event
of termination under this paragraph, all documents, data and reports prepared by the Contractor
under the Contract shall become the property of and be delivered to the County upon demand.
The Contractor shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for work in progress,
work completed and materials accepted before the effective date of the termination.
6.8 TERMINATION FOR DEFAULT:
6.8.1 In addition to the rights reserved in the Contract, the County may terminate the Contract
in whole or in part due to the failure of the Contractor to comply with any term or
condition of the Contract, to acquire and maintain all required insurance policies, bonds,
licenses and permits, or to make satisfactory progress in performing the Contract. The
Procurement Officer shall provide written notice of the termination and the reasons for it
to the Contractor.
6.8.2 Upon termination under this paragraph, all goods, materials, documents, data and reports
prepared by the Contractor under the Contract shall become the property of and be
delivered to the County on demand.
6.8.3 The County may, upon termination of this Contract, procure, on terms and in the manner
that it deems appropriate, materials or services to replace those under this Contract. The
Contractor shall be liable to the County for any excess costs incurred by the County in
procuring materials or services in substitution for those due from the Contractor.
6.8.4 The Contractor shall continue to perform, in accordance with the requirements of the
Contract, up to the date of termination, as directed in the termination notice.
6.9 TERMINATION BY THE COUNTY:
If the Contractor should be adjudged bankrupt or should make a general assignment for the benefit
of its creditors, or if a receiver should be appointed on account of its insolvency, the County may
terminate the Contract. If the Contractor should persistently or repeatedly refuse or should fail,
except in cases for which extension of time is provided, to provide enough properly skilled
workers or proper materials, or persistently disregard laws and ordinances, or not proceed with
work or otherwise be guilty of a substantial violation of any provision of this Contract, then the
County may terminate the Contract. Prior to termination of the Contract, the County shall give the
Contractor fifteen- (15) calendar day’s written notice. Upon receipt of such termination notice, the
Contractor shall be allowed fifteen (15) calendar days to cure such deficiencies.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
6.10 STATUTORY RIGHT OF CANCELLATION FOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
Notice is given that pursuant to A.R.S. §38-511 the County may cancel this Contract without
penalty or further obligation within three years after execution of the contract, if any person
significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the contract on
behalf of the County is at any time while the Contract or any extension of the Contract is in effect,
an employee or agent of any other party to the Contract in any capacity or consultant to any other
party of the Contract with respect to the subject matter of the Contract. Additionally, pursuant to
A.R.S §38-511 the County may recoup any fee or commission paid or due to any person
significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the contract on
behalf of the County from any other party to the contract arising as the result of the Contract.
6.11 OFFSET FOR DAMAGES;
In addition to all other remedies at law or equity, the County may offset from any money due to
the Contractor any amounts Contractor owes to the County for damages resulting from breach or
deficiencies in performance under this contract.
6.12 ADDITIONS/DELETIONS OF SERVICE:
6.12.1 The County reserves the right to add and/or delete materials to a Contract. If a service
requirement is deleted, payment to the Contractor will be reduced proportionately, to the
amount of service reduced in accordance with the bid price. If additional materials are
required from a Contract, prices for such additions will be negotiated between the
Contractor and the County.
6.12.2 The County reserves the right of final approval on proposed staff for all Task
Orders. Also, upon request by the County, the Contractor will be required to remove any
employees working on County projects and substitute personnel based on the discretion
of the County within two business days, unless previously approved by the County.
6.13 RELATIONSHIPS:
In the performance of the services described herein, the Contractor shall act solely as an
independent contractor, and nothing herein or implied herein shall at any time be construed as to
create the relationship of employer and employee, partnership, principal and agent, or joint venture
between the District and the Contractor.
6.14 SUBCONTRACTING:
The Contractor may not assign this Contract or subcontract to another party for performance of the
terms and conditions hereof without the written consent of the County, which shall not be
unreasonably withheld. All correspondence authorizing subcontracting must reference the
Proposal Serial Number and identify the job project.
6.15 AMENDMENTS:
All amendments to this Contract shall be in writing and approved/signed by both parties. Maricopa
County Office of Procurement Services shall be responsible for approving all amendments for
Maricopa County.
6.16 ACCESS TO AND RETENTION OF RECORDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF AUDIT AND/OR
OTHER REVIEW:
6.16.1 In accordance with section MCI 371 of the Maricopa County Procurement Code the
Contractor agrees to retain all books, records, accounts, statements, reports, files, and
other records and back-up documentation relevant to this Contract for six (6) years after
final payment or until after the resolution of any audit questions which could be more

SERIAL 14015-RFP
than six (6) years, whichever is latest. The County, Federal or State auditors and any
other persons duly authorized by the Department shall have full access to, and the right to
examine, copy and make use of, any and all said materials.
6.16.2 If the Contractor’s books, records , accounts, statements, reports, files, and other records
and back-up documentation relevant to this Contract are not sufficient to support and
document that requested services were provided, the Contractor shall reimburse Maricopa
County for the services not so adequately supported and documented.
6.16.3 If at any time it is determined by the County that a cost for which payment has been made
is a disallowed cost, the County shall notify the Contractor in writing of the
disallowance. The course of action to address the disallowance shall be at sole discretion
of the County, and may include either an adjustment to future claim submitted by the
Contractor by the amount of the disallowance, or to require reimbursement forthwith of
the disallowed amount by the Contractor by issuing a check payable to Maricopa County.
6.17 AUDIT DISALLOWANCES:
If at any time, County determines that a cost for which payment has been made is a disallowed
cost, such as overpayment, County shall notify the Contractor in writing of the disallowance.
County shall also state the means of correction, which may be but shall not be limited to
adjustment of any future claim submitted by the Contractor by the amount of the disallowance, or
to require repayment of the disallowed amount by the Contractor.
6.18 SEVERABILITY:
The invalidity, in whole or in part, of any provision of this Contract shall not void or affect the
validity of any other provision of this Contract.
6.19 RIGHTS IN DATA:
The County shall own have the use of all data and reports resulting from this Contract without
additional cost or other restriction except as provided by law. Each party shall supply to the other
party, upon request, any available information that is relevant to this Contract and to the
performance hereunder.
6.20 INTEGRATION:
This Contract represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes
all prior negotiations, proposals, communications, understandings, representations, or agreements,
whether oral or written, express or implied.
6.21 VERIFICATION REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES §41-
4401 AND FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS AND REGULATIONS:
6.21.1 By entering into the Contract, the Contractor warrants compliance with the Immigration
and Nationality Act (INA using e-verify) and all other federal immigration laws and
regulations related to the immigration status of its employees and A.R.S. §23-214(A). The
contractor shall obtain statements from its subcontractors certifying compliance and shall
furnish the statements to the Procurement Officer upon request. These warranties shall
remain in effect through the term of the Contract. The Contractor and its subcontractors
shall also maintain Employment Eligibility Verification forms (I-9) as required by the
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, as amended from time to time, for all
employees performing work under the Contract and verify employee compliance using the
E-verify system and shall keep a record of the verification for the duration of the
employee’s employment or at least three years, whichever is longer. I-9 forms are available
for download at USCIS.GOV.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
6.21.2 The County retains the legal right to inspect contractor and subcontractor employee
documents performing work under this Contract to verify compliance with paragraph
6.21.1 of this Section. Contractor and subcontractor shall be given reasonable notice of the
County’s intent to inspect and shall make the documents available at the time and date
specified. Should the County suspect or find that the Contractor or any of its subcontractors
are not in compliance, the County will consider this a material breach of the contract and
may pursue any and all remedies allowed by law, including, but not limited to: suspension
of work, termination of the Contract for default, and suspension and/or debarment of the
Contractor. All costs necessary to verify compliance are the responsibility of the
Contractor.
6.22 CONTRACTOR LICENSE REQUIREMENT:
6.22.1 The Respondent shall procure all permits, insurance, licenses and pay the charges and
fees necessary and incidental to the lawful conduct of his/her business, and as necessary
complete any required certification requirements, required by any and all governmental
or non-governmental entities as mandated to maintain compliance with and in good
standing for all permits and/or licenses. The Respondent shall keep fully informed of
existing and future trade or industry requirements, Federal, State and Local laws,
ordinances, and regulations which in any manner affect the fulfillment of a Contract and
shall comply with the same. Contractor shall immediately notify both Office of
Procurement Services and the using agency of any and all changes concerning permits,
insurance or licenses.
6.22.2 Respondents furnishing finished products, materials or articles of merchandise that will
require installation or attachment as part of the Contract, shall possess any licenses
required. A Respondent is not relieved of its obligation to posses the required licenses by
subcontracting of the labor portion of the Contract. Respondents are advised to contact
the Arizona Registrar of Contractors, Chief of Licensing, at (602) 542-1525 to ascertain
licensing requirements for a particular contract. Respondents shall identify which
license(s), if any, the Registrar of Contractors requires for performance of the Contract.
6.23 CERTIFICATION REGARDING DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION
6.23.1 The undersigned (authorized official signing for the Contractor) certifies to the best of his
or her knowledge and belief, that the Contractor, defined as the primary participant in
accordance with 45 CFR Part 76, and its principals:
6.23.1.1 are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared
ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal
Department or agency;
6.23.1.2 have not within 3-year period preceding this Contract been convicted of or had
a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal
offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a
public (Federal, State or local) transaction or contract under a public
transaction; violation of Federal or State antitrust statues or commission of
embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records,
making false statements, or receiving stolen property;
6.23.1.3 are not presently indicted or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a
government entity (Federal, State or local) with commission of any of the
offenses enumerated in paragraph (2) of this certification; and
6.23.1.4 have not within a 3-year period preceding this Contract had one or more public
transaction (Federal, State or local) terminated for cause of default.
6.23.2 Should the Contractor not be able to provide this certification, an explanation as to why
should be attached to the Contact.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
6.23.3 The Contractor agrees to include, without modification, this clause in all lower tier
covered transactions (i.e. transactions with subcontractors) and in all solicitations for
lower tier covered transactions related to this Contract.
6.24 PRICES:
Contractor warrants that prices extended to County under this Contract are no higher than those
paid by any other customer for these or similar services.
6.25 GOVERNING LAW:
This Contract shall be governed by the laws of the state of Arizona. Venue for any actions or
lawsuits involving this Contract will be in Maricopa County Superior Court or in the United States
District Court for the District of Arizona, sitting in Phoenix, Arizona
6.26 ORDER OF PRECEDENCE:
In the event of a conflict in the provisions of this Contract and Contractor’s license agreement, if
applicable, the terms of this Contract shall prevail.
6.27 INFLUENCE
As prescribed in MC1-1202 of the Maricopa County Procurement Code, any effort to influence an
employee or agent to breach the Maricopa County Ethical Code of Conduct or any ethical conduct,
may be grounds for Disbarment or Suspension under MC1-902.
An attempt to influence includes, but is not limited to:
6.27.1 A Person offering or providing a gratuity, gift, tip, present, donation, money,
entertainment or educational passes or tickets, or any type valuable contribution or
subsidy,
6.27.2 That is offered or given with the intent to influence a decision, obtain a contract, garner
favorable treatment, or gain favorable consideration of any kind.
If a Person attempts to influence any employee or agent of Maricopa County, the Chief
Procurement Officer, or his designee, reserves the right to seek any remedy provided by the
Maricopa County Procurement Code, any remedy in equity or in the law, or any remedy provided
by this contract.
6.28 PUBLIC RECORDS:
All Offers submitted and opened are public records and must be retained by the Records Manager
at the Office of Procurement Services. Offers shall be open to public inspection after Contract
award and execution, except for such Offers deemed to be confidential by the Office of
Procurement Services. If an Offeror believes that information in its Offer should remain
confidential, it shall indicate as confidential, the specific information and submit a statement with
its offer detailing the reasons that the information should not be disclosed. Such reasons shall
include the specific harm or prejudice which may arise. The Records Manager of the Office of
Procurement Services shall determine whether the identified information is confidential pursuant
to the Maricopa County Procurement Code.
6.29 SUBSTITUTION OF CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL:
Contractor shall not substitute or reassign named individuals assigned to any part of this contract’s
scope of work without prior written consent of the County. Changes in Contractor personnel
assigned to any part of this contract’s scope of work due to employee termination shall be done in
consultation with the County.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
6.30 INCORPORATION OF DOCUMENTS:
The following are to be attached to and made part of this Contract:
6.30.1 Exhibit A, Pricing;
6.30.2 Exhibit B, Scope of Work;
6.30.3 Exhibit C, Office of Procurement Services Contractor Travel and Per Diem Policy

SERIAL 14015-RFP
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Contract is executed on the date set forth above.

SERIAL 14015-RFP

SERIAL 14015-RFP

SERIAL 14015-RFP
EXHIBIT A
PRICING
SERIAL 14015 -RFP
NIGP CODE:
COMPANY NAME: VRI Technologies LLC
DOING BUSINESS AS (DBA) NAME: Vigilant Resources International (VRI)
MAILING ADDRESS: 45 Rockefeller Plaza - 20th Floor
New York, NY 10111
REMIT TO ADDRESS: 45 Rockefeller Plaza - 20th Floor
New York, NY 10111
TELEPHONE NUMBER: 212-537-5048
FACSIMILE NUMBER: 212-537-4762
WEB SITE: www.vritechnologies.com
REPRESENTATIVE NAME: Adam Safir
REPRESENTATIVE PHONE NUMBER: 917-536-0370
REPRESENTATIVE E-MAIL: adam@vritechnologies.com
YES NO
WILL ALLOW OTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES TO PURCHASE FROM THIS CONTRACT: [X] [ ]
WILL ACCEPT PROCUREMENT CARD FOR PAYMENT: [ ] [X]
PAYMENT TERMS: RESPONDENT IS REQUIRED TO PICK ONE OF THE FOLLOWING.
PAYMENT TERMS WILL BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING LOW BID. FAILURE TO
CHOOSE PAYMENT TERMS WILL RESULT IN A DEFAULT TO NET 30 DAYS.
[X] NET 10 DAYS
1.0 PRICING:
Initial Program Assessment and Recommendation Year 1 $56,283 NOT TO EXCEED
Optional Annual Assessment and Recommendation
Year 2 $45,363 NOT TO EXCEED
Year 3 $36,290 NOT TO EXCEED
Year 4 $36,290 NOT TO EXCEED
Year 5 $45,363 NOT TO EXCEED
Required Procurement Support Services Through Procurement Award $64,378 NOT TO EXCEED
Required Training and Implementation Services $34,874 NOT TO EXCEED
Hourly Rate for Out of Scope Work:
Project Executive $350 Per Hour
Monitoring Expert / Attorney $325 Per Hour
Project Manager $295 Per Hour
Policing Experts $275 Per Hour
Interviewers (Police Experts) $275 Per Hour
Police Technology Experts $250 Per Hour
Sr. Writer (Experienced Law Enforcement) $240 Per Hour

SERIAL 14015-RFP
Police Training Experts $225 Per Hour
Reconciliation to Budget Detail
Fees Expenses CHECK
Y1- 45,980 10,303 (a) Total from Attachment A:
$318,840.16
Y2- 38,335 7,028 (b)
Y3- 30,668 5,622 (b) Total from Budget Detail:
Y4- 30,668 5,622 (b) $318,840.16
Y5- 38,335 7,028 (b)
Proc. Support-54,190 10,188 (c)
Training+Imp- 29,600 4,734 (d)
(a) Includes All of "Phase I" from Budget Detail
(b) Includes All of "Phase III" from Budget Detail except training hours (24 hours in year 2 and 5 and 20 hours in
years 3 and 4).
(c ) Includes "Drafting, Design & Development Services" + "Procurement Support" from Work Plan with all hours
from Phase II of Budget Detail.
(d) Includes "Project Management" & "Training Services" from Phases II and III.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
Proposed Schedule
Black Boxes denote due dates or deliverables. Green boxes denote work Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Weeks 5 - 13 Q2-4 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Phase I - Discovery, Assessment & Recommendations
1 Submission of Document Request List & Kickoff Meeting
2 Interviews & Stakeholder Relationship Building
3 Document Reviews
4 Technical Systems Review
5 On Site Observations
Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis & Drafting of Assessment
6 Document
7 Strategic Master Planning & Budgeting
Phase II - Capability Building
1 Drafting, Design & Development Services
2 Procurement Support
3 Project Management Services
4 Training
Phase III - Sustained Compliance
1 Annual Assessment & Best Practices Review
2 System Support
3 Training

SERIAL 14015-RFP

SERIAL 14015-RFP
EXHIBIT B
SCOPE OF WORK
Section 1: Executive Summary
VRI shall deliver this program in three progressive phases that shall overlap and continue throughout the assignment:
 Phase I: Discovery and Recommendations
 Phase II: Capability Building
 Phase II: Sustained Compliance
Phase I: Discovery, Assessment and Recommendations shall assess and document MCSO’s current state of
compliance and produce clear, prioritized recommendations and strategies to address gaps in policies, procedures,
metrics, and supporting technology systems. Phase I Deliverables shall include the drafting and presentation of an
assessment report in conformance with the Order and include a blueprint of prioritized, actionable recommendations for
policies, procedures, metrics and supporting technology that advance and maintain MCSO’s compliance with the Order.
While VRI may continue to discover areas for improvement and make recommendations throughout the assignment as
requested by MCSO, Phase I shall be completed within four (4) weeks of Notice to Proceed. Not to exceed budget for
Phase I is $56,283.
Phase II: Capability Building shall involve the enhancement and/or addition of policies, procedures, metrics and
technology systems in support of compliance with the Order as acceptable to the Parties and the Court. Phase II
Deliverables shall include support drafting and implementing compliant policies, procedures and training and the
programmatic conception, design and procurement support services for technology systems that advance and maintain
compliance with the Order. While VRI shall continue to ensure that the above-described actions work in concert
throughout the assignment as requested by MCSO, Phase II shall be completed within one (1) year of Notice to
Proceed. Not to exceed budget for Phase II is $64,378.
Phase III: Sustained Compliance shall involve on-going activities to help MCSO advance and maintain compliance
with the Order. These activities shall include an annual internal progress assessment and periodic support regarding
policies, practices, technology, training and other measures that forward the interests of MCSO in complying with the
Order. Phase III shall involve formal quarterly reporting with additional services as requested provided on a project
basis. Estimated budget for Phase III is $163,305 for required annual assessments in years two (2) through five (5) with
an additional $34,874 budgeted for necessary training and technical system support in years two through five. Please
see Exhibit A which specifies the Total Not to Exceed Budget of $318,840.
To deliver results and value to MCSO as described above, VRI shall provide a core project team of the nation’s leading
law enforcement compliance, technology and change-management experts for all three proposed phases of the
assignment. This core team shall be overseen by VRI Chairman and CEO Howard Safir and include Carlos Maldonado,
Kathleen O’Toole, Dan Rosenblatt, and Adam Safir. The VRI team shall be supplemented by additional subject matter
experts in each phase of the assignment as required and approved by Maricopa County. Please See Section II below for
further specification of VRI’s proposed activities and Targeted Outcomes for each phase.
As summarized above and detailed below, VRI believes that VRI can be a strong partner in Maricopa County’s efforts
to comply with the Order as beneficially and efficiently as possible.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
Section 2: Proposal
VRI proposes a logical schedule that delivers the internal assessment & recommendations within four (4) weeks of
notice to proceed, systems designed and supported with bid packages within eight (8) weeks; systems operational
within thirty-nine (39) weeks, training support for policies, procedures, protocols and systems completed within one
year and on-going support on a quarterly basis in years 2-5: (See Exhibit A – Pricing for Work Plan)
The remaining pages of this section further specify the Program Activities & Targeted Outcomes that are
summarized below:
A. Phase I: Discovery & C. Phase III: Sustained
Recommendations B. Phase II: Capability Building Compliance
Program A1. Interviews & Stakeholder B1. Drafting, Design and C1. Annual Assessment & Best
Activities Relationship Building Development Services Practices Review
A2. Document Review B2. Procurement Support C2. System Support
A3. Technical Systems Review B3. Project Management Services C3. Training
A4. On Site Observations B4. Training
A5. Dynamic Compliance Gap
Analysis & Drafting of Assessment
Document
A6. Strategic Master Planning &
Budgeting
Targeted Clear, comprehensive, and fact- A programmatic approach that Clear, comprehensive, and fact-
Outcomes based assessment that evidences measures and ensures that the based assessment that
current compliance and gaps in policies, procedures and systems evidences continued
compliance with the Order that is implemented for compliance with compliance with the Order that
acceptable to the Parties and Court. the Order: is acceptable to the Parties and
Court.
A prioritized, budgeted plan to a) function as required
orchestrate the people, policies, b) are utilized to their fullest Additional services to advance,
processes and technology needed to capability and purpose maintain and evidence
empower MCSO to comply with the c) work in concert with MCSO’s compliance with the Order as
Order as beneficially, cost-effectively overall operations requested
and soon as possible d) are value-engineered,
procured, maintained and utilized
for the most efficient Total Cost of
Ownership
A. Phase I: Discovery & Recommendations
A1. Interviews & Stakeholder Relationship Building
VRI shall interview members of the MCSO Compliance Unit and other MCSO staff and stakeholders at MCSO’s
direction, to understand and forward compliance status, strategies, goals, tasks and capabilities. VRI anticipate a
series of working sessions that at first define and inform and eventually apply a Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis
to measure MCSO’s compliance with the Order. These activities shall help develop VRI’s understanding of the
particular capabilities and challenges facing MCSO, and work to establish best practices and metrics that are
specifically applicable to MCSO forwarding compliance with the Order.
A2. Document Review
VRI shall submit a document request list early in the project for the dual purpose of developing a baseline
understanding of MCSO’s substantive written material in compliance with the Order and beginning VRI’s analysis
of any gaps in documentation required by the Order. In so doing VRI shall review how MCSO creates and manages
required documentation and identify specific policies, procedures, training materials and other documentation
required by the order that is missing or needs to be modified to meet the requirements of the Order.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
A3. Technical Systems Review
VRI shall assist the MCSO in reviewing existing technical systems that support deployment, supervision, and the
tracking and recording of patrol1 activities to determine which systems can and should be most effectively integrated
into the compliance framework, and which technical system requirements of the Order, if any, shall require the
design and implementation of new, standalone systems. In so doing VRI shall work with MCSO2 to map out the
technical features, network requirements, storage requirements and operational use of each relevant system and seek
to identify and recommend hardware, software and network solutions that meet the requirements of the Order as
effectively and efficiently as possible.
VRI shall present VRI’s findings in a succinct report with appropriate visualizations that identify opportunities,
gaps, and practical recommendations of actions that MCSO should take to most beneficially and profitably comply
with the Order.
A4. On Site Observations
VRI shall observe patrol activities to earn first-hand knowledge of MCSO’s operations and how relevant policies,
procedures, training and supporting systems are utilized in practice to meet the requirements of MCSO and the
Order. In so doing VRI shall be mindful of how to best integrate the requirements of the Order into MCSO’s
operations in a practical manner that minimizes additional costs and time for MCSO deputies and supervisors
(considering both direct and indirect effects) and maintains the highest levels of effectiveness and personal safety for
MCSO deputies and supervisors.
A5. Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis & Drafting of Internal Assessment Document
The Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis shall serve as a barometer for compliance with the Order and be utilized
throughout the project to track, measure and report on MCSO’s compliance. It is conceived to incorporate and work
in parallel with the specific requirements, compliance framework and language approved by the Parties, Monitor
and Court. The Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis shall be structured around the relevant substantive paragraphs of
the Order3 and include both short narrative statements and color-coded visual representations of compliance status.
The Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis shall be used in conjunction with findings and analysis from the Interviews,
Document Reviews, Technical System Reviews and On Site Observations to form the substance of the Internal
Assessment document.
VRI shall draft the Internal Assessment for review, comment and approval by MCSO according to the schedule
required by the Parties and Court.
A6. Strategic Master Planning & Budgeting
Likewise, the Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis and the activities described above shall be utilized to inform a
series of prioritized, budgeted recommendations that VRI shall deliver in parallel with the first Internal Assessment.
1 Systems that VRI anticipates reviewing include CAD/RMS/Civil Process, Radio Systems (P25), Automatic
License Plate Readers (ALPR), Mobile Data Terminals (and supported applications), Audio and Visual Recording
Systems, Scheduling, Deployment, Supervisory and Human Resources MIS Systems, and Crime Analysis &
Intelligence MIS Systems.
2 VRI anticipates working closely with both the MCSO Implementation Unit, assigned MCSO technology & IT
professionals, and command staff during both the discovery, analysis and reporting phases of VRI’s work.
3 In line with the RFP’s requirements, the Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis and internal assessments shall
include: i) analysis of collected traffic-stop and high-profile or immigration-related operations data; ii) written
policies and procedures; iii) training, as set forth in the Order; iv) compliance with policies and procedures; v)
supervisor review; vi) intake and investigation of civilian complaints; vii) conduct of internal investigations; viii)
discipline of officers; and ix) community relations.
3 In line with the RFP’s requirements, the Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis and internal assessments shall
include: i) analysis of collected traffic-stop and high-profile or immigration-related operations data; ii) written
policies and procedures; iii) training, as set forth in the Order; iv) compliance with policies and procedures; v)
supervisor review; vi) intake and investigation of civilian complaints; vii) conduct of internal investigations; viii)
discipline of officers; and ix) community relations.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
These recommendations shall support MCSO’s strategic master planning & budgeting processes and be presented as
an actionable blueprint to inform the creation, modification and integration of policies, procedures, training and
technology systems in compliance with the Order.
B. Phase II: Capability Building
B1. Drafting, Design and Development Services
VRI shall help MCSO draft policies and procedures, design systems and develop operational programs that forward
compliance with the Order. VRI shall use the Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis as a framework to manage these
efforts and to identify and promote synergies, efficiencies and practicality in documentation, technology and
operational use of various compliance elements. Draft policies and procedures may draw from successful language
used elsewhere and shall in every instance be customized to the specific needs of MCSO. System design and
specifications shall be designed to a level sufficient to inform and solicit the highest quality, lowest cost bids from
vendors who can deliver necessary hardware, software and network infrastructure. For operational programs – to
include training on policies, procedure and systems and the implementation of deployment and supervisory actions
as required by the Order – VRI shall assist with the drafting of program documentation as required.
B2. Procurement Support
VRI shall work with MCSO and Maricopa County Office of Procurement Services to ensure the highest quality,
most responsive and lowest cost bids from responsible vendors of necessary and approved technology, systems
integration and IT services. In addition to providing the substantive specifications described above, VRI shall also
ensure that RFIs, RFQs and RFPs are written and presented to the vendor community in a manner that solicits the
most informed, relevant and actionable proposals from responsive bidders. This shall involve assistance drafting and
reviewing clear, concise, and accurate scopes as well as providing assistance identifying qualified bidders as needed.
VRI shall also provide assistance assessing vendor proposals for their responsiveness, quality, value and schedule –
in so doing helping MSCO and the Officer of Procurement Services rank and quantify the strengths, weakness, risks
and overall capabilities of various bidders.
B3. Project Management Services
VRI shall provide Project Management services to oversee technology product vendors, systems integrators and IT
providers to ensure that they complete contracted projects on scope, on schedule, on budget and otherwise in
conformance with project requirements.
In so doing, VRI shall support MCSO in ensuring that its framework of operational, compliance and financial
strategies are followed and that its overall goals of effective and affordable operations and compliance are achieved.
B4. Training
VRI shall review administrator and end-user implementation plans and training for various technology and IT
systems. In so doing VRI shall ensure that such implementation plans and training are sufficiently comprehensive,
practical, sustainable, non-duplicative and otherwise consistent with approved strategies and recommendations.
VRI shall provide end-user training on integrated policies, procedures, programs and systems in compliance with the
Order on a bi-annual basis beginning in the second half of year one
C. Phase III: Sustained Compliance
C1. Annual Assessment & Best Practices Review
VRI shall periodically update the Dynamic Compliance Gap Analysis, conduct interviews, review documentation,
assess system use and make field observations pursuant to the annual Internal Assessments required by the Order. In
so doing VRI shall seek to forward and, when earned and demonstrated by MCSO, evidence the sustained
compliance necessary for cessation of the Order. VRI shall support MCSO as requested in its work with the Parties,
Court and Monitor to demonstrate and evidence compliance.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
C2. System Support
VRI shall periodically survey and interact with administrators and end-users of relevant technology and IT systems
to understand and observe the functionality and practical use of such technology in the field and at headquarters. To
the degree that MCSO requires third party services to effectively operate, modify and/or manage such systems, VRI
shall be available to provide or facilitate the provisioning of such support services.
C3. Training
Likewise, VRI shall be available for both existing and new end-user training as required. Such training shall be
designed to ensure that deputies and supervisors understand what is required of them under the Order and are
sufficiently familiar with the features and functionality of related technology systems that are necessary to perform
their duties as effectively and efficiently as possible.
Section 3: Qualifications
Vigilant Resources International (VRI) was founded in April 2010 and is actively managed by Howard Safir and
Adam Safir.
Howard Safir's ability to deliver results and value to clients has been earned over a 45 year public and private sector
career including successful experience as Police Commissioner of New York City (NYPD), Director of Operations
for the United States Marshals Service (USMS), Assistant Director of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA),
Fire Commissioner of New York City (FDNY), Chairman and CEO of leading DNA forensics laboratory Bode
Technology Group, Chairman and CEO of risk mitigation consulting firm SafirRosetti, consultant to the Chairman
of ChoicePoint, and service on the Board of Verint Systems, Inc. and Lexis-Nexis Special Solutions.
Adam Safir’s ability to deliver results and value to clients has been earned over a 15 year legal and consulting career
including work as General Counsel and Chief Operating Officer of SafirRosetti and Bode Technology where he
successfully managed client assignments and directed the implementation of four acquisitions and all operational
and administrative aspects of SafirRosetti and Bode Technology’s organic growth.
VRI specializes in meeting the strategic and operational requirements of law enforcement, military, intelligence and
private sector organizations.
In this regard, VRI offers a full suite of management consulting, technology development and other professional
services:
Security & Public Safety Services
 Threat/Risk/Vulnerability Assessment
 Risk Mitigation Consulting & Training
 Security & Communications Systems
 Department Management Study
Technology Services
 Needs assessment
 Master planning
 Procurement
 Project Management
Crisis & Emergency Management
 Crisis and Contingency Planning
 Crisis and Incident Management
 Crisis communications
 Disaster mitigation
Investigations & Forensics
 Confidential Investigations
 Integrity Monitoring / Compliance

SERIAL 14015-RFP
 Forensics (DNA, toxicology, ballistics)
 Forensic Accounting
 Expert witness services
VRI and its team members have provided similar consulting services to those required herein to the Jersey City, NJ
Department of Public Safety (including Police & Fire), the Newark, NJ Police Department, the Department of
Justice and the City of East Haven, CT.
Project Team
VRI’s team members for this assignment include Howard Safir, Kathleen O’Toole, Esq., Dan Rosenblatt, Carlos
Maldonado and Adam Safir, Esq.
Commissioner Safir shall serve as Project Executive and be responsible for the review and quality control of all
deliverables to ensure that they are accurate, clear, concise, based on facts and evidence, comprehensive,
purposeful, timely delivered and relevant. In this regard he shall draw on a 45+ year career operating at the highest
levels of law enforcement and as a private sector consultant (please see below for Commissioner Safir’s Curriculum
Vitae). VRI estimate that Commissioner Safir shall commit 42 hours of consulting time to the project.
Commissioner O’Toole shall serve as Team Lead of the Internal Assessment, ensuring that it meets the needs of
MCSO and is created in a manner satisfactory to the Parties, Monitor and Court. In this regard Commissioner
O’Toole shall draw on a 30+ year career operating at the highest levels of law enforcement, as a constitutional
policing monitor, attorney, compliance expert and consultant (please see below for Commissioner O’Toole’s
Curriculum Vitae). VRI estimate that Commissioner O’Toole shall commit 137 hours of consulting time to the
Project.
Chief Maldonado shall be VRI’s team lead for reviewing, analyzing, measuring the results of and providing
technical assistance to MCSO regarding its staffing, training and supervision as required by the Order. In this regard,
Chief Maldonado shall review all MCSO training and deployment plans, schedules, performance evaluations,
vehicle stop reports, arrest reports, utilization of Specialized Units, disciplinary reports and provide technical
assistance to MCSO in line with best practices as specifically applied to MCSO. Chief Maldonado shall work to help
ensure that MCSO meets its deadlines to establish certain programs and capabilities regarding its staffing, training
and supervision and that MCSO fundamentally sustains such training, programs and capabilities in its operations
and working culture over time as required by the Order. To do so, Chief Maldonado shall draw on over three
decades of extensive leadership experience managing, reviewing and implementing constitutional policing practices
in communities on the Southern Border (please see below for Chief Maldonado’s Curriculum Vitae). VRI estimate
that Chief Maldonado shall commit 135 hours of consulting time to the project.
Mr. Rosenblatt shall be VRI’s team lead for reviewing, analyzing, measuring the results of and providing technical
assistance to MCSO on the Compliance Programs and Reporting Systems required by the Order. In this regard, Mr.
Rosenblatt shall review all policies, procedures, reports, data and systems produced by MCSO to comply with the
Order and provide technical assistance in line with best practices as specifically applied to MCSO. To do so, Mr.
Rosenblatt shall draw on extensive experience programmatically catalyzing constitutional policing over two decades
working with diverse communities and police departments while leading the International Association of Chiefs of
Police (IACP). The team shall draw on additional technical resources as necessary and in the interests of the Parties
and Court (please see below Mr. Rosenblatt’s Curriculum Vitae). VRI estimate that Mr. Rosenblatt shall commit 98
hours of consulting time to the project.
Adam Safir, Esq. shall serve as Project Manager responsible for all Scheduling, Administration, Project
Management, Staffing and Quality Control for All Deliverables. He shall also bring his expertise in the technical
systems required by the Order. In this regard, Mr. Safir shall draw on fifteen years of successful technical
consulting, project management and project administration experience serving law enforcement and private sector
clients (please see below for Mr. Safir’s Curriculum Vitae). VRI estimate that Mr. Safir shall commit 160 hours of
consulting time to the Project.
In addition to the 573 hours specified above, there are an estimated 406 hours to perform the following tasks that
shall be performed by additional VRI staff (throughout all phases of the project and primarily in Phases II and III):
1) Document Management and Report Writing (~95 hours); 2) On Site Interviews (~86 hours); 3) Training (~60
hours); and 4) Technical System Review, Analysis and Support (~166 hours).

SERIAL 14015-RFP
Please see Exhibit A for these estimated hours.
Howard Safir, Project Executive
Employment History
Year Title, Location
2010 - Present Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Vigilant Resources International (VRI), New York
2001 – 2010 Chairman and CEO, SafirRosetti, New York; Bode Technology Group, Lorton, VA
1996 - 2000 Police Commissioner, New York City Police Department (NYPD)
1994 – 1996 Fire Commissioner, New York City Fire Department (FDNY)
1990 – 1994 President, Safir Associates, Fairfax, VA
1978 – 1990 Associate Director for Operations, United States Marshals Service (1984-1990); Chief of
Witness Security Division (1978 – 1990), Washington, D.C. (northern Virginia)
1965 – 1978 Assistant Director, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA, and predecessor agencies Federal
Bureau of Narcotics and Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD));
progressive assignments from street agent through Assistant Director including roles as
Supervisory Agent in Charge for the Western Region of the United States
Commendations
Organization Award
President of the United States Presidential Meritorious Service Award (twice)
Department of Justice Attorney General’s Award
USMS US Marshal’s Service Award for Valor
International Association of Chiefs of Lifetime Achievement Award
Police
Education
Year Degree Received
1963 Bachelor of Arts, Hofstra University
1988, 1989 John F. Kennedy School of Government
Howard Safir is an innovative executive with significant experience in federal, state and local law enforcement and
the private sector.
Mr. Safir's ability to deliver results and value has been earned over a public and private sector career including
successful experience as Director of Operations for the United States Marshals Service, Police Commissioner of
New York City, Assistant Director of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Fire Commissioner of
New York City, Chairman and CEO of leading DNA forensics laboratory Bode Technology Group, consultant to the
Chairman of ChoicePoint , member of the Executive Committee of the International Association of Chiefs of Police
(IACP) and Board Member of Lexis-Nexis Special Solutions, Verint Systems and Implant Sciences Corporation.
In his public sector career, Mr. Safir has successfully reduced crime and improved public safety while promoting
organizational transformation, integrity and respect for human rights.
These accomplishments include a 38% reduction in major crime and a 44% reduction of homicides in New York
City during his four year tenure as Police Commissioner, bringing the total number of murders in New York to 667
(the lowest level in three decades) while reducing civilian complaints 21% and allegations of unnecessary or
excessive 41%; a revitalization of the United States Marshals service that included the expansion and improvement

SERIAL 14015-RFP
of the Federal Witness Security Program, the establishment of the Federal Asset Forfeiture Program, radical
improvements to security at Federal courthouses and the high profile capture and arrest of scores of domestic and
international fugitives; and some of the largest and most critical seizures of narcotics and interruption of illicit drug
and weapons distribution during the early days of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
In his private sector career, through his work as consultant, senior executive and board member of various
organizations, Mr. Safir has continued to help municipalities, states, countries and private sector organizations
implement effective security and policing. These accomplishments include development and implementation of
security and law enforcement policies, procedures, protocols, planning, technology and training, with such services
provided both to generally improve entire law enforcement, security and private sector organizations and also to
help them rise to the challenges of particular major events.
Mr. Safir is a graduate of Hofstra University, the John F. Kennedy School of Government and the Federal Executive
Institute.
Kathleen O’Toole, Team Lead Internal Assessment
Employment History
Year Title, Location
2006 - 2012 Chief Inspector, Garda Síochána Inspectorate
2004 – 2006 Police Commissioner, Boston Police Department
1998 - 2000 Commissioner, Independent Commission on Policing in Northern Ireland
1994 - 1998 Secretary, Massachusetts Department of Public Safety
1992 - 1994 Colonel, Massachusetts State Police
1986 - 1990 Chief, Metropolitan District Commission Police
1978 - 1986 Boston Police Department – Multiple Assignments (patrol officer, detective, academy instructor,
supervisor and manager).
Additional Relevant Experience
Year Matter
2013 Joint Compliance Expert (Monitor) for East Haven, CT Consent Decree
2012-2013 Member, Independent Commission for Policing in Ireland and Wales
2009 Member, Northern Ireland Prisons Reform Commission
1999 Expert Witness for Department of Justice Civil Rights Division in USA v. New Jersey
1999 Chair, Boston Fire Department Review Commission (O’Toole Commission)
Education
Year Degree Received
1982 JD, New England School of Law
1976 AB, Political Science, Boston College
Ms. O’Toole is a police monitor, compliance expert and executive with unique national and international
experience.
As Boston Police Commissioner, O’Toole managed 3,000 sworn and civilian personnel and an annual budget of
$235 million. She also won accolades – at City Hall and on the streets – for her non-confrontational, cooperative
style of leadership, a collaborative, consultative and grassroots-oriented approach that emphasizes partnership with
community groups and city organizations to reduce crime and engage people directly in helping to make their
neighborhoods safe. Ms. O’Toole distinguished herself in a similar manner as member of Massachusetts Governor

SERIAL 14015-RFP
William Weld’s cabinet and the state’s Secretary of Public Service, overseeing 20 agencies, more than 10,000
employees and an annual budget exceeding $1 billion. While still in law school in 1979, O’Toole became a patrol
officer in the Boston Police Department and from position to position – across numerous patrol, investigative and
administrative assignments – she quickly rose through the ranks of local and state law enforcement in
Massachusetts. During this period, she served as Superintendent/ Chief of the Metropolitan Police and was also a
Lieutenant Colonel overseeing Special Operations in the Massachusetts State Police. Since then, she has also
supported the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division on police profiling cases and served as a member of
the Independent Commission on Policing in Northern Ireland as part of the peace process there. O’Toole was chosen
from among many other internationally prominent senior police executives to serve as the Chief Inspector of the
Garda Síochána Inspectorate, the governance and oversight body responsible for bringing reform, best practices and
accountability to the 17,000-member national police service in Ireland.
Carlos Maldonado – Team Lead – MCSO Staffing, Training & Supervision
Employment History
aYear Title
2008 – 2012 Chief of Police, Laredo, Texas
2006 - 2008 Course Manager/Instructor, Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC),
EMRTC/New Mexico Tech
2002 - 2006 Deputy Cabinet Secretary, New Mexico Department of Public Safety and Chief of
Police, New Mexico State Police
2001 - 2002 Captain, Federal Bureau of Investigation Academy, Leadership Development Unit
1981 - 2002 Various Roles, State of New Mexico, New Mexico State Police Department
Captain, Criminal Investigations Section (1996-2001),
Lieutenant, Office of Professional Standards and Internal Affairs, Special Operations
Division (1994-1996),
Sergeant, Criminal Investigations Bureau (1990-1994)
Agent, Criminal Investigations Bureau (1986-90)
Governor Protection Detail (1983-1986)
Patrolman (1981-83)
Additional Relevant Experience
Year Matter
2004 Co-Chair for the Border Security Worktable initiated by the Border Governor’s Conference
2007 Chair of Ad Hoc Committee for Border Issues (IACP)
Education
Year Degree Received
2002 Masters of Public Administration, University of New Mexico
1997 Bachelor of Arts, Psychology
Mr. Maldonado is a seasoned police executive, instructor with unique leadership experience in border communities.
As Chief of Police of Laredo, Texas Mr. Maldonado reorganized the agency and redeveloped precincts/beats to
enhance performance capabilities while engaging diverse communities. As Chief of the New Mexico State Police
and Deputy Chair of the New Mexico Department of Public Safety, Mr. Maldonado led the administration’s
programmatic approach to engaging diverse populations in an assertive state-wide community policing initiative.
Pursuant to this, Mr. Maldonado commenced the NMSP’s accreditation through CALEA (Commission on
Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies).
Mr. Maldonado’s work at the FBI’s Leadership Development Unit including teaching an Organizational Behavior
Development and developed Assessment Center Testing Methods for police executives.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
Chief Maldonado served as Commander of the Office of Professional Standards and Internal Affairs (OPSIA). In
this regard he prepared the agency’s Affirmative Action Plan and developed strategies to ensure compliance with the
code of conduct and established objectives, mediated labor/management disputes and worked in concert with
disciplinary hearing boards on issues including use of deadly force, due process and constitutional policing.
Daniel Rosenblatt. Team Lead – MCSO Policies, Procedures, Systems & Reporting
Employment History
Year Title, Location
1989 - 2011 Executive Director, International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)
1984 – 1989 Director of Communications, Police Foundation
1974 – 1984 Department of Justice. Various positions including spokesperson for Watergate Special Prosecutor;
speechwriter for the Administrator; Program Manager, Attorney General’s Task Force on Violent
Crime; President’s Task Force on Victims of Crime.
Affiliations
Organization Award
COPS Lifetime Member
IACP Lifetime Member
NOBLE Member
National Law Enforcement Officer’s Memorial Fund Board member
Education
Year Degree Received
1973 Bachelor of Arts, George Washington University
Daniel Rosenblatt has spent his career advocating for progressive practices in law enforcement.
Mr. Rosenblatt served as the Executive Director of the International Association of Chiefs of Police from 1989 –
2011. The IACP is a private, non-profit law enforcement membership organization with some 22,000 members in
more than 100 countries. As IACP's chief executive officer, Mr. Rosenblatt managed, oversaw and directed the full
range of operations and programs of a staff of 130 individuals who provide a wide range of support services of
critical importance to law enforcement leaders around the world. Key among these offerings is the development of
carefully researched policy documents and positions that significantly enhance the ability of a police chief and a
police agency to deliver efficient and effective law enforcement services. Policies developed are employed in
assessing police agencies and making recommendations that lay the groundwork for improved practices. During his
tenure at IACP, Mr. Rosenblatt has directed the development of a series of special focus conferences that developed
strategies and policies in a variety of areas, addressing a wide variety of issues such as violent crime, family
violence, youth crime, intelligence sharing, hate crime, DNA evidence, law enforcement/university partnerships and
private sector/public sector partnerships.
Prior to joining the Association, Mr. Rosenblatt was employed at the Police Foundation, a law enforcement think-
tank, where he served as director of communications. At the Foundation he developed a 22-part public television
series that provided public audiences with a better understanding and appreciation for the work of police officers and
the challenges of crime in a free society.
From 1974 -1984, Mr. Rosenblatt served in various offices at the United States Department of Justice. In 1981, he
was asked to serve as staff to the Attorney General's Task Force on Violent Crime, which developed a series of
policy and program practices to improve efforts to combat violent crime in the United States. In 1984, he was

SERIAL 14015-RFP
selected to join a small working group charged with implementing recommendations of a Presidential Task Force
that focused on the needs of Victims of Crime.
Mr. Rosenblatt holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from the George Washington University and has undertaken
graduate work at the American University on the American Presidency. He is a life member of the IACP, a past
president of the National Organization for Victim Assistance (NOVA) and holds membership in the National
Organization for Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE), the National Sheriffs' Association and the Virginia
Association of Chiefs of Police. He also serves on the Board of Directors for the National Law Enforcement Officers
Memorial Fund.
Adam Safir, Project Manager
Employment History
Year Title, Location
2010 - President, Vigilant Resources International (VRI), New York
2001 – 2010 Chief Operating Officer & General Counsel, SafirRosetti, New York; Bode Technology
Group, Lorton, VA.
2000 – 2001 Investment Banker, Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette
1998 – 1999 Attorney, Sony Music
Education
Year Degree Received
1997 Juris Doctorate, University of Virginia
1994 Bachelor of Arts – Interdisciplinary Studies; University of Virginia
Adam Safir is responsible for Vigilant Resources International (VRI)’s overall operations including corporate
development, legal, administration, accounting and finance. In this role Mr. Safir has directed the growth of VRI’s
security consulting, data and law enforcement advisory practices both domestically and internationally.
Prior to co-founding VRI, Mr. Safir was Chief Operating Officer of SafirRosetti where he successfully directed the
implementation of four acquisitions and all administrative aspects of SafirRosetti's organic growth. Mr. Safir’s
previously worked as an attorney in Sony Music's Business Affairs department where he assessed and consummated
business transactions on behalf of Columbia, Epic and 550 Records and as a banker in the Mergers & Acquisitions
General Transaction group of Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette working in a variety of industries including
telecommunications, manufacturing and consumer products.
Mr. Safir is admitted to practice law in the State of New York and holds a JD and BA from the University of
Virginia, graduating With Distinction.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
*** ADDED 05/20/15***
IAB TRAINING
Vigilant Resources International shall provide consulting and training services for the IAB Training
Curriculum identified in this Amendment below at contracted rates identified in Exhibit A of the Agreement
to the satisfaction of MCSO designated staff.
IAB TRAINING CURRICULUM
 Brief outline of Corruption Scandals
 Mission Statement of IA
 Managing for Results – Corruption Fighting Strategy
 Identifying and selection of members for IA
 Corruption Patterns:
o Systemic
o Opportunistic
o Familiar
 Supervision
 Training Outline
 Corruption Prevention & Analysis
 Proactive vs. Reactive Response
 Computerized (Compstat) Analysis
 Case Management/Steering
 Voluntary Assistance Unit (Field Associates)
 Philosophy of Inclusion
 Financial Net Worth Investigations
 Confidential Phone Line
 Discipline
 False Allegations
 Police Impersonations
 Proactive investigations: Drug Screening
o Integrity Tests – including actual tests
o Enforcement Programs:
 Warrant Executions
 Prisoner Debriefings
 Bribery Arrests
 Oversight
 Prosecutors– Criminal
 In-house

SERIAL 14015-RFP
EXHIBIT C
Office of Procurement Services Travel and Per Diem Policy
1.0 All contract-related travel plans and arrangements shall be prior-approved by the County Contract Administrator.
2.0 Lodging, per diem and incidental expenses incurred in performance of Maricopa County/Special District (County)
contracts shall be reimbursed based on current U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) domestic per diem rates for
Phoenix, Arizona. Contractors must access the following internet site to determine rates (no exceptions): www.gsa.gov
2.1 Additional incidental expenses (i.e., telephone, fax, internet and copying charges) shall not be reimbursed. They
should be included in the contractor’s hourly rate as an overhead charge.
2.2 The County shall not (under no circumstances) reimburse for Contractor guest lodging, per diem or incidentals.
3.0 Commercial air travel shall be reimbursed as follows:
3.1 Coach airfare shall be reimbursed by the County. Business class airfare may be allowed only when preapproved
in writing by the County Contract Administrator as a result of the business need of the County when there is no
lower fare available.
3.2 The lowest direct flight airfare rate from the Contractors assigned duty post (pre-defined at the time of contract
signing) shall be reimbursed. Under no circumstances shall the County reimburse for airfares related to
transportation to or from an alternate site.
3.3 The County shall not (under no circumstances) reimburse for Contractor guest commercial air travel.
4.0 Rental vehicles may only be used if such use shall result in an overall reduction in the total cost of the trip, not for the
personal convenience of the traveler. Multiple vehicles for the same set of travelers for the same travel period shall not be
permitted without prior written approval by the County Contract Administrator.
4.1 Purchase of comprehensive and collision liability insurance shall be at the expense of the contractor. The
County shall not reimburse contractor if the contractor chooses to purchase these coverage.
4.2 Rental vehicles are restricted to sub-compact, compact or mid-size sedans unless a larger vehicle is necessary for
cost efficiency due to the number of travelers. (NOTE: contractors shall obtain pre-approval in writing from the
County Contract Administrator prior to rental of a larger vehicle.)
4.3 County shall reimburse for parking expenses if free, public parking is not available within a reasonable distance
of the place of County business. All opportunities must be exhausted prior to securing parking that incurs costs
for the County. Opportunities to be reviewed are the DASH; shuttles, etc. that can transport the contractor to and
from County buildings with minimal costs.
4.4 County shall reimburse for the lowest rate, long-term uncovered (e.g. covered or enclosed parking shall not be
reimbursed) airport parking only if it is less expensive than shuttle service to and from the airport.
4.5 The County shall not (under no circumstances) reimburse the Contractor for guest vehicle rental(s) or other any
transportation costs.
5.0 Contractor is responsible for all costs not directly related to the travel except those that have been pre-approved by the
County Contract Administrator. These costs include (but not limited to) the following: in-room movies, valet service,
valet parking, laundry service, costs associated with storing luggage at a hotel, fuel costs associated with non-County
activities, tips that exceed the per diem allowance, health club fees, and entertainment costs. Claims for unauthorized
travel expenses shall not be honored and are not reimbursable.
6.0 Travel and per diem expenses shall be capped at 15% of project price unless otherwise specified in individual contracts.

SERIAL 14015-RFP
VIGILANT RESOURCES INTERNATIONAL, 45 ROCKEFELLER PLAZA – 20TH FLOOR, NEW YORK,
NY 10111
PRICING SHEET: NIGP CODE 91832
Vendor Number: 2011004502 0
Certificates of Insurance Required
Contract Period: To cover the period ending May 31, 2015 2016.