HomeMy WebLinkAbout5J Professional Services Agreement - Greenwood Consulting Group 001p�OtiurT' 4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
4 NNESO,
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 2015
AGENDA #: 5J
PREPARED BY: CASEY MCCABE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST
PRESENTED BY: DAN ROGNESS, COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR PRO-
FESSIONAL SERVICES WITH GREENWOOD CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
DISCUSSION: Introduction
The purpose of this agenda report is to consider approval of a resolution author-
izing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the City's Standard Agreement for
Professional Services with Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc. related to a pro-
gram analysis and expansion plan for the Technology Village Business Acceler-
ator program.
History
The Technology Village Business Accelerator program has been growing with a
total of seven current program participant businesses and a total of twenty-eight
employees. The available Technology Village space within City Hall is essen-
tially fully occupied and the Technology Village Board of Directors has been dis-
cussing opportunities to expand the program and move into Phase III, which is
expansion into a building(s) in Prior Lake, outside of City Hall.
The Technology Village Board has also been exploring opportunities to i)expand
the program focus, beyond emerging-technology and professional service busi-
nesses; ii) bring more participants into the program; and iii) consider a Scott
County partnership or leadership role with satellite or sister accelerator programs
in communities throughout the county.
In May 2015 the City of Prior Lake was awarded Technical Assistance Grant in
the amount of up to $12,500 from the Scott County CDA to assist with one-half
of the cost to evaluate the Technology Village program and develop options for
program expansion.
The Technology Village Board of Directors sent out a Request for Proposals
(Attachment 1) to evaluate the Technology Village Business Accelerator pro-
gram requesting:
➢ Recommendations for program expansion, including collaboration opportu-
nities with Scott County, MN and other Scott County communities;
➢ Recommendations for a program director position;
➢ Identify funding necessary for program expansion;
➢ Identify funding sources to support program expansion; and
Identify necessary next steps and an implementation schedule to achieve
program expansion.
Current Circumstances
The City of Prior Lake received two responses to the Phase III RFP. Proposals
were received from Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc. and Innovative Partners
Incubation (Attachments 2 and 3). Their proposals were as follows:
Greenwood Consulting Group $24,935.00
Innovative Partners Incubation $17,400.00
The Technology Village Board of Directors met on September 16, 2015 to review
and discuss the proposals. The Board recommended the City enter into a Pro-
fessional Services Agreement with Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc., to ana-
lyze the current program and prepare an expansion plan for the Technology Vil-
lage Business Accelerator. The Economic Development Authority met on Sep-
tember 21, 2015 and also recommended the City enter into a Professional Ser-
vices Agreement with Greenwood Consulting Group.
Conclusion
The Technology Village Board of Directors and EDA support the hiring of Green-
wood Consulting Group, Inc., to utilize their experience working with business
accelerators to complete an analysis of the Technology Village program and de-
velop a plan to expand the program into Phase III. The Technology Village
Board and EDA made their recommendation due to Greenwood's past experi-
ence, qualifications, project outline, references and direct contact with City staff
about the RFP.
Despite the higher cost associated with Greenwood, both the Technology Village
Board and the EDA felt their experience and proposal matched best the tasks
for Prior Lake. With the 50-50 matching grant, the difference in local cost would
be $8,700 versus $12,467.50, or a difference of$3,767.50.
The Technology Village program has five businesses within Prior Lake City Hall
and two businesses located at private office locations within the city. The pro-
posed study will help determine if expansion of the program is feasible, estimate
the investment required to expand the program and prepare a plan for expan-
sion.
ISSUES: The City of Prior Lake has not worked with Greenwood Consulting Group in the
past. Staff has checked references and is comfortable recommending Green-
wood Consulting to complete the work.
FINANCIAL Short-term: consulting costs and city staff time dedicated to the supporting the
IMPACT: Technology Village Phase III planning. Consulting costs are anticipated to be
$24,935. The EDA previously allocated $12,500 from its professional services
fund for one-half of the cost related to the Technology Village Phase III study;
the remaining costs, up to $12,500, will be paid with funds from a Technical As-
sistance Grant awarded to the City of Prior Lake from the Scott County CDA.
Long term: potential financial impacts related to acquiring/leasing property and
additional financial contributions to the Technology Village program.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and a second as part of the consent agenda approving a resolution
authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to enter into the City's Standard
Agreement for Professional Services with Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc.
to analyze the current Technology Village Business Accelerator program and
prepare an expansion plan for the Technology Village Business Accelerator
program.
3. Provide direction to staff and continue discussion at a future meeting.
RECOMMENDED Alternative No. 1
MOTION:
ATTACHMENT: 1. Technology Village Business Accelerator RFP
2. Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc. Proposal
3. Innovative Partners Incubation Proposal
4. Standard Agreement for Professional Services
o. P�o�
ti
u ti
4646 Dakota Street SE
` NNESo'te' Prior Lake, MN 55372
RESOLUTION 15-xxx
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
A STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
WITH GREENWOOD CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Motion By: Second By:
WHEREAS, The City of Prior Lake was awarded a $12,500 Scott County CDA Technical Assistance Grant
in May 2015 to assist with one-half of the cost to evaluate the Technology Village program and
develop options for program expansion; and
WHEREAS, City staff submitted a Request for Proposals that defines the proposed study and timeline to
eleven consultant firms; and
WHEREAS, Two proposals were received; Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc. ($24,935) and Innovative
Partners Incubation ($17,400) with the Technology Village Board of Directors and the City of
Prior Lake Economic Development Authority recommending that the City Council select
Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, The Prior Lake City Council has considered the recommendations of the Technology Village
Board of Directors and the City of Prior Lake Economic Development Authority and has selected
Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc. to complete the study.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA as follows:
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc. is hereby selected to complete an Analysis of the Current Program
and Prepare an Expansion Plan for the Technology Village Business Accelerator Program.
3. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute a Standard Agreement for Professional
Services with Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2015.
VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson
Aye ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Frank Boyles, City Manager
04 FR.
�t;
u "1 4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake,MN 55372
44MvEsolt.
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
TECHNOLOGY VILLAGE BUSINESS ACCELERATOR PROGRAM
The City of Prior Lake,Minnesota invites you to submit a proposal to evaluate the City of Prior Lake Technology
Village Business Accelerator program (Technology Village)with:
> Recommendations for program expansion,including collaboration opportunities with Scott County,MN
and other Scott County communities;
➢ Recommendations for a program director position;
➢ Identify funding necessary for program expansion;
D Identify funding sources to support program expansion; and
➢ Identify necessary next steps and an implementation schedule to achieve program expansion.
BACKGROUND
The City of Prior Lake Economic Development Authority(EDA)established the Technology Village Business
Accelerator in January 2013. With multiple support services and a professional office environment,the Tech-
nology Village program offers emerging technology businesses the support and assistance necessary to nurture
and accelerate business development. The Technology Village program currently has seven new Prior Lake
businesses with a combined total of 22 new employees. The available office spaces for the Technology Village
program are full and the funding necessary to support the program participants is limited. An analysis of the
current program and recommendations for expansion are desired to determine how to build upon the program
success and identify the best strategies for program expansion in Prior Lake and potentially to other Scott
County,Minnesota communities.
SCOPE OF WORK
The selected consultant will recommend the best option(s)available to expand the Technology Village Business
Accelerator program. At a minimum,the following analysis shall occur by the consultant:
> Review and evaluate the Technology Village Phase 11.2 Business Plan.
> Identify existing and successful regional accelerator programs of a similar scale(public sponsorship).
➢ Develop options for program expansion within Prior Lake and Scott County, MN.
> Provide recommendations for a program director position.
> Identify funding necessary for program expansion.
➢ Identify funding sources available for program expansion.
> Recommend next steps and an implementation schedule.
➢ Consider partnership or sponsorship options with Scott County, other Scott County communities and
local businesses.
At a minimum,the proposal must include the following meetings:
> One initial meeting with city staff and the Technology Village Board of Directors.
➢ One meeting with Technology Village program participants.
➢ One progress meeting with city staff,the Technology Village Board of Directors and/or EDA.
➢ A final presentation meeting to city staff,the Technology Village Board of Directors and the EDA.
SCHEDULE
It is anticipated that the scope of work will be completed no later than February 5,2016,which may be extended
upon mutual agreement of the City and consultant. It is anticipated that the city will enter into a contract with
the selected consultant by September 30,2015.
BUDGET
The estimated budget for the work is within the range of$20,000 to$25,000 with partial funding being provided
by the Scott County Community Development Agency.
PROPOSALS
Written proposals should include the following information:
1. Project Approach—The proposal should reflect the firm's understanding of business accelerator/busi-
ness incubator programs.
2. Work Plan—The proposal should address how the scope of work is to be accomplished with a defined
schedule and the methods employed by the consultant; each task must include a breakout of hours,unit
rate and overall cost.
3. Project Personnel—The proposal should clearly identify the names of key personnel and each person's
individual role/responsibility; it should provide resumes of persons to be involved in this planning pro-
cess.
4. Relevant Experience—The proposal should provide examples of other similar projects undertaken for
public and/or private clients, including references.
5. Performance—The proposal should describe resources available in the firm to accomplish this planning
process in a timely manner, including a description of other projects currently underway or anticipated
during the project timeline.
6. Conflict of Interest—The proposal should identify any possible conflicts of interest.
SELECTION PROCESS
City staff will review all complete proposals and forward a recommendation to the City of Prior Lake EDA for
its consideration on September 21, 2015. Proposals will be evaluated by criteria, including but not limited to
the following:
D Clarity and structure of the proposal, including how well it fits with the city's objectives.
> Suitability of the project approach, including a schedule that works well within the project timeline.
> Qualifications and expertise of key personnel assigned to this project, including the firm's experience
with other similar projects.
➢ Project cost and the firm's ability to perform the work in a timely and cost-effective manner.
➢ Potential conflicts of interest.
OUTCOME
The outcome of this study shall be a report with recommendations from the consultant to the city concerning i)
the current state of the Technology Village program; ii)options for program expansion; iii)recommendations
for a program director position; iv) necessary funding to expand the program; v) available funding sources to
accomplish program expansion; vi) next steps and an implementation schedule to track and achieve program
expansion;and vii)partnership or sponsorship opportunities with Scott County and/or Scott County communi-
ties.
2
PAST REPORTS,PLANS&INFORMATION
➢ Technology Village Business Accelerator Website
http://www.technologyvillage.net/
> Technology Village Phase II.2 Business Plan(2015)
http://www.technologyvillage.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Business-Plan-Phase-II.2-PL-Technol-
ogy-Village.pdf
> Technology Village Goals&Metrics
http://www.technologyvillage.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Technology-V illage-Goals-and-Met-
rics.pdf
➢ Technology Village Phase II Business Plan(2014)
http://www.technologyvil lage.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Business-Plan-Phase-II-PL-Technol-
ogv-Village.pdf
> Technology Village Business Plan(2012)
http://www.technologyvillage.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Business-Plan-PL-Technology-V il-
lage.pdf
SUBMITTAL
Five(5)paper copies and one electronic copy of the proposal must be addressed to:
Dan Rogness,Community&Economic Development Director
4646 Dakota St. SE
Prior Lake,MN 55372
Email: drogness@cityofpriorlake.com
Phone: 952.447.9813
DEADLINE: Proposals are due by Friday,August 28,2015 by 4:30 PM
3
Proposal
003G)-1,4,.
� Prior Lake Technology Village Business Accelerator
H ,
•••
Growing Entrepreneurial Opportunities in Prior Lake
'OR t1
To Analyze the Current Program
& Prepare an Expansion Plan
for the
Technology Village Business Accelerator Program
August 28, 2015
Submitted to PRI0"
Dan Rogness, Community & Economic Development Director 0' '4-
City of Prior Lake
4646 Dakota St. SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372 U
952-447-9813
drogness(cityofpriorlake.com 4/NNESO l`
Submitted by
Jim Greenwood, President
Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc.
1150 Junonia
Sanibel, Florida 33957
239-789-7619
pail-iim(a�q-igreenwood.com
www.g-idreenwood.com
1. Project Approach & Accelerators/Incubators
This project will begin with an analysis of the current Technology Village Business
Accelerator (TVBA) program and progress into a recommendation for expansion of this
popular and successful economic development initiative in Prior Lake, Minnesota.
A business accelerator or incubator is defined as a facility, programs, and services that
collectively support the creation and development of new and small businesses. It is
more than a facility, although the building can be a very important part of an
incubator/accelerator and often is its largest financial obligation. The
incubator/accelerator industry has roots in Minnesota, with Control Data Corporation
being an early developer and innovator in the industry through its "Business and
Technology Centers." The value of incubators has been documented; according to the
National Business Incubation Association (NBIA), over 80% of entrepreneurs who go
through an incubation program are still in business, compared with other statistics that
up to 80% of small businesses fail in their first 5 years of operation.
The City of Prior Lake started TVBA about 2.5 years ago, and has seen considerable
interest and success in the program. TVBA is at a critical crossroads, where it can
continue in its current successful but limited scope, or it can elevate to a new level and
serve the community and its entrepreneurs even better than it has thus far. The purpose
of the proposed project is to analyze the current TVBA program, and then explore what
the "next level" might look like, by looking at several alternative scenarios, and
considering the pros and cons of each alternative as well as its cost and potential
funding sources. It also will help define the characteristics and qualifications of the
TBVA program director; this individual not only will lead the accelerator into the future,
but will also heavily influence the environment of the TVBA, ranging from the business
services provided to the informal opportunities for accelerator tenants and clients to
network and learn from each other.
2. Work Plan
Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc. (GCGI) is very experienced with
accelerator/incubator studies, with our extensive project list of more than 90
consultation projects across the United States and Canada. GCGI has performed
approximately 66 feasibility analyses and prepared approximately 27
business/implementation/operations plans. Importantly, about 22 of GCGI's projects
have been for existing accelerators/incubators where their stakeholders/operators
sought our assistance in everything from operating assessments to recommendations in
correcting fatal flaws.
1 GCGI understands that the City of Prior Lake uses the term "accelerator" as something more like a
traditional incubator, versus the"pure" accelerator model in which high/rapid growth clients are given
intense services over a brief period of only a few months, leading to seed or angel investment
1
This breadth of experience is unparalleled by any other incubator consultant in the
country, particularly given that the principals of GCGI also have over 20 years of
collective experience managing and operating business incubators. Put another way,
we know and appreciate what it takes to run a business accelerator/incubator day-to-
day, and that ensures that our assessment and recommendations regarding the TVBA
will be grounded in reality and reflect what we learned firsthand as incubator program
directors.
GCGI proposes to conduct the existing program analysis and expansion assessment for
the TVBA by completing the following 10 tasks:
Task 1. Review relevant literature and databases to understand the area's overall
economy. GCGI would rely on the City of Prior Lake to provide copies of any
relevant documents that will help us come up to speed quickly on the economy of
the service area, and its challenges and opportunities. GCGI has made a quick
review of the documents referenced in the RFP for this project, and will conduct a
more thorough review in this task—this will include the review and assessment of
the Technology Village Phase 11.2 Business Plan, as requested in the RFP, which
will be reported to the city in memorandum form. GCGI will provide written and
electronic databases at its disposal; for example, GCGI will use these data to
determine the trends in the number of microbusinesses in technology and
professional services industries in the Prior Lake/Scott County area to help us better
understand the current and emerging market for the TVBA.
Task 2. Hold meetings with TVBA leadership and program participants. GCGI
concurs fully with the RFP expectation that we will hold meetings with City staff,
TVBA Board of Directors, and EDA representatives, and with TVBA program
participants (both present and graduates). One of the benefits of a project involving
an existing accelerator/incubator is the opportunity to learn, from those in the
program, what has worked well and what has not, and what opportunities may be
emerging. GCGI will hold these meetings in person during our multiple site visits to
Prior Lake; we envision the initial meeting with the City staff and TVBA Board, and
the meeting with program participants, will occur during our first site visit.
Task 3. Conduct interviews with TVBA stakeholders; local business and civic leaders;
government officials; entrepreneurs; potential incubator partners and funding
sources; business assistance service providers (non-profit and for profit);
commercial/industrial realtors; construction contractors; and others who are relevant
to the future of the accelerator. This is a time intensive effort to meet one-on-one
with a variety of potential sources of information about the economy, entrepreneurial
activity, employment trends and challenges, economic and community issues,
preferred location/configuration for an accelerator/incubator, and development cost
and sources of funding for a new TVBA location. Some TVBA program participants
also may be appropriately met with individually, if they cannot participate in the
group meetings in Task 2, or if GCGI and City staff agree that an individual interview
is advisable. GCGI understands there is a desire to include Scott County and other
2
communities in the County in this project, so it is our intention to interview
appropriate community and business leaders, entrepreneurs and service providers
from the region as well as local area. Similarly we will meet with representatives of
other regional accelerator programs, either in person or via teleconference. These
programs will be identified from membership rolls of the National Business
Incubation Association, knowledge of City staff and TVBA Board members, our own
knowledge of similar programs, and comments/suggestions by interviewees.
GCGI will rely on City staff to suggest appropriate persons to interview; Tasks 1 and
2 will help identify others. GCGI will ask City staff's help in setting up meetings and
interviews. These interviews will be conducted by GCGI during three site visits to
the Prior Lake area.
Task 4. Disseminate a market survey via seminar, website, direct mailing, and other
means to ensure widespread distribution to existing and potential entrepreneurs in
the Prior Lake area, then compile and interpret the responses. GCGI believes that
evidence of an adequate market for an expanded TVBA is a crucial part of this
project, and that the best evidence of that market comes from expressions of interest
by potential tenants and clients. In addition to helping quantify the market for an
expanded accelerator/incubator, another outcome of this exercise is a database of
specific individuals and their companies who might be targeted as possible tenants
and clients of a new accelerator facility, or who can be contacted in the future
regarding their opinions and preferences for a new, expanded TVBA. The survey
also will ask about the kinds of services and facilities in the accelerator/incubator
that are desired by prospective tenants, and preferred geographic location(s) for the
TVBA. It also typically asks about existing service providers from which local
entrepreneurs have sought assistance and how satisfied they were with the help
they received—this helps identify partners with which the TVBA may link to provide
services to its clients.
GCGI has successfully used several means for disseminating a survey to help
identify candidates for business accelerators/incubators, and we propose to use
some of those techniques here. One is a free evening seminar on a topic of interest
to Prior Lake area small and start up businesses that is promoted widely in the
community, with assistance from local entities. The seminar would include a brief
discussion about the proposed relocation and expansion of the TVBA. Attendees of
the seminar will be asked to complete surveys that identify themselves, their
companies, and their potential interest in the accelerator/incubator. The survey also
asks the attendees to identify any others who did not attend the seminar but who
should be contacted about the proposed expansion of TVBA. One possible topic for
this seminar is "how to apply for Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and
Small Business Technology Transfer (STIR) funding for small and start up
businesses." This could be highly relevant to the technology and professional
services clients of the TVBA, small business funding often is a popular seminar
topic, and GCGI conveniently is a nationally recognized expert in SBIR/STTR.
3
The survey also may be distributed to SBDC clients in the area, chamber of
commerce members, persons recommended by current TVBA participants (and
anyone on the waiting list to be admitted to the accelerator), and holders of city
and/or county business licenses. It can be promoted in local media and social
networks. The survey form will be put online by GCGI for those who prefer to
complete and return it electronically (GCGI has found survey response levels are
much higher in some of our projects when respondents can use the convenience of
completing the survey online).
GCGI also envisions an abbreviated version of this market survey being given to
past and present TVBA program participants. While the meetings and interviews in
Tasks 2 and 3 provide qualitative data, this survey can provide supplemental
quantitative information on what is working well with the current TVBA and what
needs to be provided in an expanded, enhanced accelerator/incubator to maximize
its effectiveness and value to the entrepreneurs of the community. Ample attention
must be paid to existing tenants and program participants, especially if City hopes to
retain them in an expanded TVBA facility and program.
GCGI will discuss and decide with the City staff and TVBA Board of Directors what
options for survey dissemination will be utilized in this project. GCGI defers to these
parties' knowledge of the most effective entrepreneur communication vehicles in the
Prior Lake area, and the broader Scott County region and other communities
therein.
After allowing suitable time for responses, GCGI will tally and interpret the results,
and include them in the analysis in Task 6 and in the final report in Task 9.
Task 5. Tour existing buildings and vacant parcels to assess availability and cost of
alternative locations for relocating or expanding the TVBA. GCGI believes that both
new construction as well as renovation of an existing building should be explored as
alternatives for a new location for the accelerator/incubator. GCGI would work with
City staff and TVBA Board members (and possibly a commercial real estate
professional familiar with the area) to identify possible sites (both vacant as well as
those that could be cleared of dilapidated structures) and existing buildings, and to
refine that list to the most promising locations based on factors such as availability,
cost, size, zoning and compatibility with surrounding uses, and opportunity to have
positive impact on the neighborhood. Consideration will be given to locations to
which the entire TVBA could be relocated, as well as those that might be sites in
addition to the current accelerator/incubator space in City Hall.
GCGI also will interview appropriate local realtors and contractors to collect
information about rental rates and construction (including renovation) costs for
commercial and industrial space.
Task 6. Use the data collected from Tasks 1 through 6 to conduct the analyses
requested in the RFP. The RFP calls for eight analyses to be conducted in this
4
project, and all will be completed during this task. To accomplish many of the
required analyses, GCGI will identify multiple alternative scenarios for the future of
the TVBA. The information collected during the project will dictate what those
scenarios look like, but relevant parameters may include:
• Continue status quo, with improvements
• Implement Phase 11.2 Business Plan
• Add one or more additional locations to supplement existing site
• Relocate to small, medium, or large facility and vacant existing site
• Create satellite locations around a central TVBA "headquarters"
possibly to include sites elsewhere in Scott County
• Add program director, either full-time or half-time
Financial projections (both for development and operations) will be prepared for all
scenarios; based on GCGI's extensive experience doing this, we anticipate some
scenarios will drop out as being infeasible, while one or more may rise to the top as
the most viable alternatives for the future of TVBA.
Task 7. Conclude whether a new or expanded TVBA is feasible, infeasible, or
conditionally feasible, with any shortcomings highlighted and mitigating measures
recommended. Using the analyses from Task 6, along with consideration of the
multiple scenarios for the TVBA, GCGI will conclude what is possible and advisable
as a future direction for the accelerator. Consideration must be given to (a) what the
market of Prior Lake entrepreneurs wants and will support, (b) what facilities,
programs, and resources are desired by that market that can be provided
realistically by the TVBA, (c) the cost and potential funding availability for alternative
scenarios, (d) the sustainability of each scenario in terms of long run operations of
the accelerator, and (e) the appetite and ability of the City and TVBA for taking on
the most viable future direction for the accelerator.
This task is where GCGI's extensive, 35 years of experience in the
accelerator/incubator industry plays a key role. We have operated
accelerator/incubators ourselves, and we have consulted on over 90 projects around
the US and Canada, so we have a good sense of what is going to work in reality
versus what might look viable on paper and in spreadsheets.
If conditions are not favorable, GCGI is prepared to conclude that a new, expanded
TVBA is infeasible, and explain why. GCGI has seen many situations where an ill-
advised accelerator/incubator program was started in a community, only to languish
for years (and consume enormous amounts of money and other scarce resources)
and eventually be shut down—we would much prefer to advise the City and TVBA
Board that an expansion and/or relocation of the accelerator is infeasible, rather than
to cause this unfortunate situation to occur here. And, even in this worst case
scenario, GCGI is confident that we will be able to offer suggestions on how the
existing TVBA could be improved in terms of its operations, programs, services,
and/or existing facility.
5
Task 8. Prepare draft report. This report will summarize the data collected and
analyzed during this project, the alternative scenarios considered, and the outcome
of the eight analyses called for in the RFP. It also will include recommendations for
next steps, which will be dependent on the conclusion about the most viable
scenario going forward, as well as an implementation schedule. The memo prepared
at the end of Task 1 on our evaluation of the Technology Village Phase 11.2 Business
Plan will be attached to this report as an appendix. A job description for the TVBA
program director also will be attached to the report. All 7 outcomes specified in the
RFP will be included in this report.
Task 9. Make presentation about conclusions and recommendations to City staff, the
TVBA Board of Directors and Economic Development Authority, and then prepare
final report. This task begins with dissemination of the draft feasibility report from
Task 8 that summarizes the project and our findings and recommendations, and
then continues with a presentation to City staff, Board members, and representatives
of the EDA. GCGI will receive comments during and after this presentation, revise
the draft feasibility report accordingly, and issue the final report.
The following table shows graphically how the eight analyses requested in the RFP will
be accomplished in the nine tasks proposed by GCGI in this project. The large number
of correlations between the requested analyses and the proposed tasks indicate (a) our
approach will support the required analyses, and (b) there is strong consistency
between what the City and TVBA Board are seeking from this project and what GCGI
believes should be done. Note that all required analyses will be incorporated into the
draft and final reports.
Tasks 112 o .0 om• c
N C M .1) V vi � CO � �' N: cc; -t oi C j„L -t
Analyses 2 l 20 Nadi 2Y mm11 w a-im Yng oma 292Ca
y HJ H2 H 1-2 HCt W 1— co ozs F-- U 1- oEt ct 1— o_ Oct
Ph11.2 bplan review • • • • • • • • •
ID other accelerators • • • • • • •
Develop options • • • • • • • •
Prepare Proj Director • • • • • • • •
recommendations
Estimate funding needed • . • • • • • •
Identify funding sources • • • • • • • • •
Prepare Next steps/ • • • • • • • •
implementation plan
Evaluate partnership options • • • • • • • • •
The following figure shows the time frame for the proposed project, as well as the timing
and duration for each task. The RFP suggests approximately a 120 time period for the
project, and GCGI believes that is reasonable, particularly with major holidays within the
project period of October 2015-January 2016. The timeline reflects what we said in the
Task 3 description above (that interviews are time consuming); this table also shows
that the market survey can take considerable time to distribute and collect (and again,
6
this will be extended by virtue of major holidays falling within the anticipated project time
period). The table also indicates when the four meetings required in the RFP will be
conducted; the initial meeting and a meeting with the TVBA program participants are
anticipated during the initial site visit, a progress meeting will be held during one of
GCGI's site visits at approximately the midpoint of the project, and a final presentation
will be made near the conclusion of the fourth month. Reasonable adjustments to the
schedule can be made to accommodate the needs and preferences of City staff and
TVBA Board members.
Task Month#1 Month#2 Month#3 Month#4
1.Literature&data review
2. Initial meetings A
3. Interviews
4. Market survey
5. Facility assessment
6.Scenarios&Analysis
7.Conclusion
8. Draft feasibility report
9. Present conclusions,finalize feasibility report
A Initial meeting with City staff, TVBA Board of Directors, EDA representatives
o Meeting with Technology Village program participants
• Progress meeting
Final presentation
All of the work proposed for the TVBA Analysis & Expansion Assessment will be done
by Gail and Jim Greenwood, the owners and principals of Greenwood Consulting
Group, Inc. The Greenwoods led and did the bulk of the work on the 90+ incubator
consulting projects done by GCGI, and jointly have over 20 years experience operating
and managing small business accelerators/incubators.
The hourly fee for Jim Greenwood is $115. Gail Greenwood's time is billed at $55 per
hour. Costs for travel, printing, and other direct charges are billed at actual cost.
GCGI proposes to do the nine tasks described above for a total of$24,935, as broken
down in the following table. Of that total, over $21,500 is devoted to labor required to
complete the tasks.
7
TASK HOURS- HOURS- TRAVEL, SUB
JMG GAG MATERIAL TOTALS
1. Literature&data review 8 2 $1,030
2.Kick off meeting 4 460
3. Interviews 54 $2,550 8760
4.Market survey 32 3,680
5. Real estate assessment 12 5 1,655
6.Feasibility analysis 12 1,380
7.Feasibility conclusion 8 920
8.Draft feasibility report 36 4,140
9. Presentation,final report 16 4 850 2,910
Total Hours 182 11
Total Cost by Category $20,930 $ 605 $3,400
Project Total $24,935
GCGI recognizes that this is at the upper end of the budget range specified in the RFP.
Our approach is to give the City and TVBA Board as much time and effort as possible to
maximize the value of this project. Given the desire to build on past and present
success of the TVBA, it is important to "get it right" when it comes to consideration of
alternatives for the future of the accelerator. However, if the City and TVBA Board are
not comfortable with the proposed budget, GCGI is willing to negotiate a reduced scope
that will bring the project in line with a more modest budget.
3. Project Personnel
GCGI's knowledge of how /accelerators/incubators work and what is required to create
a successful incubator program is not limited to our extensive consulting project list.
GCGI's principals have been in this industry for over 31 years, and collectively have
over 20 years of experience managing and operating business incubators. GCGI's
President, Jim Greenwood, will lead the TVBA analysis and expansion project and do
about 94% of the work based on hours. Jim has served on the Board of Directors of the
National Business Incubation Association (NBIA), and was a founding member of state
incubator organizations in Florida and Georgia. He was a speaker at every National
Business Incubation Association (NBIA) annual conference between 1989 and 2014,
and was co-developer and co-presenter of the original NBIA Fall Training Institutes for
incubator/accelerator developers and managers. He is a contributing author to several
NBIA publications and has consulted on other NBIA books, such as the NBIA guide to
developing business incubators. He also has taught several webinars for NBIA, on
topics such as feasibility studies and incubator funding sources.
Mr. Greenwood also is a certified economic development finance professional, as
designated by the National Development Council. His interest and expertise in
economic development finance helps ensure that the financial viability of a proposed
accelerator/incubator, like the expanded TVBA, will be carefully analyzed with a goal of
identifying one or more scenarios where the incubator can achieve financial self
8
sustainability in its operations while supporting the cost of a project director and other
staff.
All work on the TVBA expansion plan project will be done by the two most senior
personnel in our company. The project will be led, and primarily conducted by, Jim
Greenwood who is president of GCGI. Jim holds a Masters degree from Harvard
University in City and Regional Planning, and has had an extensive, 32 year career in
economic development including incubator management, co-directorship of a Small
Business Development Center (SBDC), and directorship of a local economic
development program. He will be supplemented by Gail Greenwood, who has 11 years
experience running the day-to-day operations of two mixed-use business incubators,
and who has served 6 years as an SBDC business counselor.
As the primary and key staffer on this project, Jim Greenwood's resume is attached to
the end of this proposal.
4. Relevant Experience
GCGI has performed over 90 incubator analyses throughout the United States and in
several provinces and territories of Canada. Our work ranges from feasibility analyses
and needs assessments for proposed accelerators/incubators, to operational
assessments for existing ones. GCGI's accelerator/incubator consulting experience can
be summarized as follows:
• 66 feasibility assessments
• 22 projects involving existing accelerators/incubators
• 27 business/operations/implementation plans
• 24 technology accelerator/incubator projects
Particularly relevant is the 22 projects that were done for existing accelerators and
incubators. Some of these were similar to the proposed TVBA project, in which a
successful existing accelerator/incubator is being taken to the "next level" in terms of
programs and/or facilities, while others represent operating assessments to solve
lingering problems and fine tune facilities and service offerings.
A complete list of GCGI's prior and current incubator consulting projects is available on
request. The following paragraphs describe several past GCGI projects that are similar
to the TVBA expansion plan.
Feasibility of relocating Nashville Business Incubation Center. The NBIC is a well
established, well respected mixed-use incubator in downtown Nashville, Tennessee. It
existing facility has structural issues and its location is not conducive to some
entrepreneur markets it wishes to serve. GCGI evaluating several scenarios for
alternative locations (including extensive renovation of the existing facility), and
extensively surveyed the market to determine the services and locations most needed
9
by area entrepreneurs. GCGI maintained open communication with the NBIC's existing
tenant and client base, because of their vested interest in a relocated, revamped
program, their importance to the financial viability of the incubator, and their concerns
about large changes in the facility and/or programs.
Business & implementation planning for technology incubator on campus of University
of Mississippi. As part of a new business park, the university decided to include a
technology incubator. GCGI was retained to advise the university on everything from
interior space layout to admissions and graduation criteria. GCGI also provided advice
on staffing, including desired qualifications for the project director/manager.
Assessment and Recommendations for the Advanced Manufacturing and Innovation
Training Center In Carlsbad, New Mexico. The local department of development asked
that GCGI evaluate the market for this incubator and the suitability of the current
building configuration for that market, and make recommendations for changes. GCGI
determined, through a market study, that the market had shifted considerably since the
incubator had first opened, and we recommended a change in focus as well as
modifications to the facility accordingly. Incorporating an anchor tenant into largely
vacant portions of the incubator facility was assessed. GCGI prepared an
implementation plan for its recommendations broken down chronologically between
immediate, near term, intermediate term, and long term.
Business accelerator/incubator network in Saskatchewan, Canada. The successful
mixed-use incubator in Saskatoon had been asked to consider adding satellite centers
in two other communities in the region. GCGI assessed the viability of each, and
determined that one had good potential while the other would not be feasible. The
Board of Directors also asked GCGI to assess the qualifications and responsibilities of
its incubator manager, and make recommendations about salary and other
compensation.
Kentucky Highlands Entrepreneur Center Operations Assessment and Assistance. This
new incubator was constructed and was opening its doors to clients when GCGI was
asked to assess its facility and viability, and provide assistance with evaluation of its
pricing structure and development of a tenant handbook. The facility was extremely
inefficient and would never generate revenues sufficient to even begin to cover its
operating costs, so GCGI recommended extensive changes such as eliminating
duplicative common areas and creating more leasable space instead. GCGI provided
training for the manager and his support staff on how to effectively operate an
accelerator/incubator.
Additionally, GCGI is pleased to offer the following references for its
accelerator/incubator consulting work:
Julie Throckmorton, Foundation and Corporate Relations Officer
Washington & Jefferson College
60 South Lincoln Street
10
Washington, PA 15301
724-250-3372
Ithrockmortonwashjeff.edu
This college wanted to develop a business incubator to serve its students and faculty,
and to help stimulate business development in the older downtown area. GCGI was
retained to prepare conduct a feasibility study; its extensive market analysis showed
modest but adequate demand for a mixed-use incubator. GCGI subsequently drafted
the business plan to guide development and operations of this incubator, but it has not
been finalized pending extended negotiations with owners of downtown facilities that
would house the incubator. GCGI has been retained to provide ongoing support and
assistance to the college as it attempts to find an arrangement that is acceptable to a
prospective landlord while also being consistent with the viability parameters of the
incubator—the latter are being constantly reworked and re-evaluated as alternative
scenarios are considered.
Dr. Syd Spain, Executive Director (Retired)
The University of Mississippi Research Park
University, MS
662-259-2407
svdspaint�gmail.com
See description of this project under sample projects earlier in this section of our
proposal.
Marie Longserre, President& CEO
Santa Fe Business Incubator
3900 Paseo Del Sol
Santa Fe, NM 87507
505-424-1140
Mariel[a�SFBl.net
Ms.Longserre is the former president of the National Business Incubation Association,
and formerly chair of a state government committee that awarded grants to New Mexico
communities to develop new incubators and improve existing ones. She also is the
long-time manager of an incubator within about 35 miles of the accelerator/incubator
that the principals of GCGI managed for 11 years. She is a good general reference for
GCGI's expertise in incubation/acceleration and our reputation within the industry.
Susan Duggins, Manager
Northeast Louisiana Business & Community Development Center
700 University Blvd, Stubbs Hall #204
Monroe, LA 71209
318-342-1143
duggins(c�ulm.edu
This community of about 50,000 residents retained GCGI to prepare a feasibility study
and business plan for a proposed business accelerator/incubator. Given the strong
involvement of a university in the project, the original facility was a small (7,000 square
foot) office space on campus, with the business plan calling for a doubling of that space
11
by year 3 to support the goal of financial self sustainability of the incubator. The initial
incubator space is filled, and its expansion is ahead of schedule. GCGI also was asked
to prepare a tenant handbook for this accelerator/incubator
Mildred Walters, former Executive Director
Nashville Business Incubation Center
Nashville, TN
615-975-9235
The Nashville Business Incubation Center is a successful, long standing incubator in
downtown Nashville, Tennessee. Challenges with the facility and an interest in taking
the program in new directions led the NBIC board to hire GCGI to conduct a feasibility
study for a new NBIC. GCGI considered a variety of scenarios, ranging from staying in
the current building but undertaking massive renovation and repairs, to leasing space in
a nearby upscale, suburban business park. Consideration was given to needs and
preferences of the current incubator tenants, and competition from a newly created
business accelerator offering very short term but accelerated business assistance and
access to venture capital. Organization structure issues also were relevant, given the
informal and sometimes adversarial relationship of the incubator to its primary
stakeholder and landlord.
5. Performance
GCGI is currently conducting a feasibility study for a proposed business incubator in
New York State but that project is slated to be completed by mid October 2015. Jim
Greenwood, President of GCGI and the staffer who will do about 94% of this work per
the budget in Section 2 of this proposal, is not committed more than 25% of his time
during the October 1-January 31 time frame during which the Technology Village
Business Accelerator Program expansion plan project would be conducted, and
therefore there are no anticipated problems in scheduling and dedicating the
appropriate resources for the TVBA project. The timeline shown in Section 2 indicates
how the proposed tasks will be completed in the allotted time frame.
6. Conflict of Interest
GCGI has no known prior work with or for the City of Prior Lake, Economic
Development Authority, Scott County, or Scott County Community Development
Agency, or any staff members or elected officials thereof, and therefore we have no
conflict of interest in proposing to perform this work.
12
ATTACHMENT: RESUME FOR JIM GREENWOOD
JAMES M. GREENWOOD
Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc.
1150 Junonia
Sanibel Island, FL 33957
(239) 395-9446 (voice & fax)
(239) 789-7619 (mobile)
Bail-jim(a q-igreenwood.com
EDUCATION
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Master's degree in City & Regional Planning, 1980
POMONA COLLEGE
B.A., Economics, cum laude, 1978
EXPERIENCE
1989 - GREENWOOD CONSULTING GROUP, INC., Sanibel , FL
present
PRESIDENT
Prepare feasibility studies, needs assessments, business
plans, & operational assessments for business incubators
Conduct training for incubator managers & developers
Conduct training in proposal writing for Small Business
Innovation Research (SBIR) & Small Business Technology
Transfer (STTR) programs
Prepare business plans & provide services for start up
businesses, especially cash flow projections & financial
analyses, market assessments & compensation strategies
Conduct economic impact assessments
1983 - LOS ALAMOS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORP.,
1996 Los Alamos, NM
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Develop and implement program of retention & expansion
of small businesses
Develop and implement small business creation program
Develop and implement Youth Business Grant Program
Manage office with eight FTEs and 3 consultants
Develop and implement strategy to mitigate impact of
major employer layoffs on regional economy
1
Oversee, manage, and provide services for technology
transfer support contracts with two Federal Laboratories
Facilitate focus groups & planning retreats
MANAGER, Los ALAMOS SMALL BUSINESS CENTER
Develop and manage 2 mixed tenant incubators
Modify incubator focus to reflect market trends, economic
development goals of community
Identify and implement innovative uses of incubator program
CO-DIRECTOR, SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER
Coordinate counseling and training services to clients
Provide small business counseling
Conduct training sessions for entrepreneurs and small
business owners
Oversee, manage, and provide services for business
assistance contract with major public university
1984 - UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO, Albuquerque/Los Alamos, NM
1990 ADJUNCT INSTRUCTOR
Develop and teach computer programming course for
educators
Teach computer programming course to business
students
Develop and teach computer programming course for
urban planning graduate students
Develop and teach business plan preparation course
Teach marketing course to undergraduate students
1980 - LOS ALAMOS TECHNICAL ASSOCIATES, Los Alamos, NM
1983 PROGRAM MANAGER
Lead projects in economic development, site
selection, site layout
Lead projects in group decision making
OTHER
Certified Economic Development Finance Professional
Delegate, White House Conference on Small Business
Former Elected official, Los Alamos County Council
Former Co-Chair, Northern New Mexico Defense
Adjustment Task Force
Former president, Tri-Area Association for Economic Development
Former 1st vice president, New Mexico Industrial
Development Executives Association
Former board member, National Business Incubation Assn
Advisory board member, Florida Business Incubation Assn
2
innovative
[PARTNERS
26 August 2015
Dan Rogness
Community&Economic Development Director
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Dan:
Attached please find the response of Innovative Partners Incubation to your organization's recent
Request for Proposals to evaluate Prior Lake's Technology Village Business Acceleration Program.We are
pleased to have the opportunity to respond as our niche in the incubator world has traditionally focused
almost entirely on technology incubation and the preparation of entrepreneurs for launching their
companies.
IPI is a veteran consulting firm in the incubation industry,established for the express purpose of working
with organizations engaged in(or contemplating)incubation of technology entrepreneurs.We have
conducted feasibility studies;selected,trained,and hired incubator managers;developed business plans
for incubation programs;evaluated technology incubator locations,and worked closely with
universities,municipalities,state,federal,and international organizations in establishing sustainable and
viable incubation programs.We are confident that our experiences in incubation will prove beneficial to
the City of Prior Lake and your partner organizations in Scott County.
Within,you will find a brief description of our understanding of technology business incubation,an
outline of the steps we would take in accomplishing the goals you have laid out in the RFP and the
Technology Village Goals and Metrics,our approach to the project,a timeline with hours for each
element, my resume,and relevant experience.
We envision a process of about four months including about 20 days of professional time including
about 12 days on site,and 8 days of work from our home office.The results would be a clear
understanding of the mission,the ecosystem and TVBA's role in it,steps required for expansion
(including recommendations regarding any proposed additions to the business plan,a job description
for a program director,and an analysis of the funding sources you might wish to pursue. We are
offering our services for a fee of$13,500,with estimated expenses of$3,900.
We understand that the analysis of incubation programs is no longer a boutique business dominated by
a few firms,and we offer these services in full knowledge that you have many choices. However,we
believe that our credentials and experiences are of significant value and competitive with our peers. Feel
free to contact me at any time for additional information. I look forward to hearing favorably from you
soon.
Sincerely,
ril 4
Jeffrey C. Milanette,
President
innovative Partners incubation 206 Providence Road Annapolis, MD 21409
Tel:+908-789-3424 Web:www.innovativepartners.com E-mail:jeffm@innovativepartners.com
City of Prior Lake
Technology Village Business Accelerator
Evaluation Proposal
Innovative Partners Incubation
August 28, 2015
Innovative
PARTNERS
N C U B AT I O N
For all questions related to this proposal,please contact:
Jeffrey C.Milanette
Innovative Partners Incubation
206 Providence Road
Annapolis,MD 21409
T:908-789-3424
E-mail:jeffm@innovativepartners.com
1
Contents
Introduction 3
Our Company 3
Our Approach to the Project 4
Statement of Work 5
Feasibility Study Schedule 8
Evaluation Activity Budget 9
Budget Narrative 9
Team Organization 9
Insurance 10
Corporate Officers 10
Proposed Payment Schedule 10
Summary 11
References 12
Attachment:Resume of Jeffrey Milanette 13
2
Introduction
In just over two years,the City of Prior Lake,Minnesota has established and grown a successful
technology incubation program.Accomplishments have exceeded goals,and there appears to be
potential for program expansion,requiring more space,more management support,and other
new responsibilities. Expansion of a successful program,however does not guarantee success,
nor would a prudent management move forward without a plan.In response to the Technology
Village Business Accelerator(TVBA) Request for Proposals seeking such services, Innovative
Partners Incubation (IPI) proposes to perform an evaluation of the City of Prior Lake TVBA
program which will consider the options for expansion.The evaluation will develop
recommendations for program expansion,development of a program director position,explore
the possibilities of collaborating with Scott County in its program offerings,identifying the
sources of funding which may enable the expansion,laying out the next steps in a business plan.
Therefore,the purpose of the evaluation is to determine if there is sufficient capacity,within the
region to support this expansion and identify both the challenges and opportunities that must
be considered in order to move forward. The ensuing strategy will provide a step-by-step
process for accomplishing this task. The following proposal is intended to describe in detail the
steps in this process. •
Our Company
Innovative Partners Incubation (IPI)has provided management consulting to public and private
sector organizations interested in business incubation,technology entrepreneurship,
technology commercialization and economic development since 1985.
We specialize in economic development and job creation using business incubation to
accelerate the successful development of technology entrepreneurship and their companies.
Our consultants have current experience in the Energy,Environment, ICT,Transportation,and
Agriculture sectors,and expertise in a wide array of disciplines. We have started and managed
technology businesses and incubators of all types. Headquartered in Annapolis,Maryland,we
have managed new technology ventures,advised technology entrepreneurs,coached incubator
managers and provided business incubation and technology-led economic development
expertise throughout the US and internationally. IPI consultants have current experience in
clean tech,ICT,software development and international business.
Most recently,as a sub-contractor to Maxwell Stamp PLC,Innovative Partners Incubation
established and managed the Ethiopia Climate Innovation Center(ECIC) in Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia (Dec.2013 to May 2015).Ethiopia CIC is a project of the World Bank's Information for
Development(infoDev) program.It is operating as a private non-profit foundation with the
mission of commercializing innovative technologies that mitigate the effects of climate change
on the Ethiopia environment.In a period of about 18 months we developed the operating plan,
hired a staff of 15,executed the work plan,held two major grant funding competitions (and
started a third),held a financing conference,two policy roundtables with representatives of the
Ethiopian Government,a Pitch Competition,a hackathon,several meet-ups,investor meetings,
monthly training on a variety of topics,established a Women's Special Interest Group,put in
place an environmental monitoring program for our grant recipients,developed a policy
manual on mainstreaming women entrepreneurship,designed a mentoring program,and
nurtured 42 client companies with new climate-related technologies.
Prior to the ECIC assignment,we established PortTechLA,a 501(C)3 clean and green technology
incubator and accelerator affiliated with the Port of Los Angeles,and serving the transportation,
logistics,environmental,energy and security businesses that operate in the Los Angeles Basin.
This included creating and managing the PortTechNetwork,a networking organization,
organizing a monthly PortTechforum to discuss topics of interest regarding clean technology,
logistics,security and environmental issues at the largest seaport in the US (in terms of
container volume) and producing the annual PortTechEXPO a two-day event featuring new
clean and green technologies being developed in the region. We managed PortTechLA from
November 2009-February 2013.
We are entrepreneurs. We have taken products from the lab bench to market.We have
managed start-up technology ventures. As incubator managers,we have hands-on experience
recruiting and supporting technology entrepreneurs,and as coaches we have trained both
entrepreneurs and incubator managers. When we talk about the ecosystem that is vital to the
development of a successful entrepreneur support program,it's because of our first-hand
experience in their design and implementation. We have advised economic developers,
government ministries,donor agencies,international financial institutions and local entities
worldwide. The highly successful Forums,Venture Fairs,and Expos we have produced are clear
evidence of our ability to organize,and lead.
IPI proposes full-service incubation assistance from feasibility study to best-practice application
using sustainable,replicable models. More than just a consultant report,our proprietary
incubation readiness rubric enables us to analyze key success factors and produce an objective,
quantitative determination of your new incubator's likelihood of success or areas in need of
improvement.
We listen to our clients and tailor our services to their needs. An IPI Team is formed from a core
group of the most experienced incubation professionals in the industry. Each member of the IPI
Team is an independent,accomplished management consultant with an exceptional and
verifiable track record of experience in developing,managing and analyzing incubator
operations and new companies.
Our Approach to the Project
Evaluating incubation programs is not a new concept,and there are few new innovations in
client services for incubators that haven't been tried in other places.Our job is to help the client
develop an incubation program that will be viable and sustainable.
We structure our project to accomplish three things:
1. Developing a close interaction and open communication with our clients
2. Gaining a deep understanding of the local environmental ecosystem
3. Developing a plan that is realistic,something the client can accomplish,or
recommended courses of action that will help them realize their goals.
We have worked with municipalities of various sizes and understand the financial and
administrative issues that pertain.Our aim is to use that experience to the benefit of our clients
and provide the highest quality services. Our proposed Statement of Work(shown below)
describes the activities we would expect to undertake in this project.
4
Statement of Work
The following activities would be undertaken during this project.Approximate numbers of
service days are shown following each task.
1. Understanding the Community and Client Needs.Meetings with the TVBA Management to
review the evaluation workplan,review the list of proposed interview participants,
schedule interviews and discuss the current economic development situation with respect
to the market that will be served and sectors that appear to offer the most opportunity for
growth.It's important that we understand the TVBA Management expectations clearly so
that both consultant and client are in agreement with respect to project objectives.
Management's assessment of the business climate in the region as well as the details of
TVBA's existing relationships will be extremely helpful in defining the market and
accommodating the needs of the players therein. (2 days)
2. Understanding the Ecosystem.We will make an analysis of the local entrepreneurial
ecosystem with a particular emphasis on financing and services,and ask the following
questions: Does Prior Lake (and the Scott County region in general)possess the requisite
numbers of service providers and access to capital required in order to have a vibrant
program that inspires individuals to innovate new products or accelerate their existing
business?If not,what's lacking and how might those needs be fulfilled?Are there any
potential local investors who may help to fuel the development of the accelerator's client
companies?Can investors (for example,from the greater Minneapolis metropolitan area)be
encouraged to consider the client companies?If so,what would it take to attract them to
invest in TVBA clients?Does the State of Minnesota or some other level of government offer
funding(e.g.,grants or revolving loan funds)which are not currently being tapped?If so,
what would it take to qualify TVBA clients to participate?What debt financing opportunities
are available? (In New Brunswick,NJ,while operating the Rutgers Business Innovation
Center,we had the opportunity to work with a group of banks to establish a community loan
fund for small businesses.Could that be done in Prior Lake?Are there other sources of debt
that can be utilized to benefit the clients of the TVBA?) (3 days)
3. Market Demand Analysis.We will hold several meetings to determine the level of market
demand for services by local entrepreneurs.This would include the interviews mentioned
above,holding one or two focus groups with select participants (including the current
clients) and/or a survey of members of the business community and various other
stakeholders.This is possibly the most important element in the study as the information
gleaned from those who participate in the interviews will be very important in forming our
conclusions.An interview script will be used throughout.As we weigh their responses
against our own observations,we want to discuss the following:
• What market sectors do they think hold the most potential for TVBA (what
opportunities exist)?
• What do they think the future program offerings of the accelerator should be?
• What are the existing entrepreneurial services gaps in the region?
5
• How could TVBA help fill those gaps,and what would they be willing to pay for the
service?
• Is it possible for entrepreneurial companies to obtain debt or equity financing?
• Are there particular market sectors they believe hold promise for entrepreneurial
companies?If so,why do they believe this,and how should they be approached?
• There are several incubator programs in the Minneapolis region including
Technology companies are more likely than any others to create high wage employment.It
would be useful to know if intellectual property is being created in local tech companies,
and understand the needs of the inventors-often those who create IP for their employer
feel the need to invent outside the company as well.Stimulating their creativity can
eventually result in the creation of jobs!
As we review the information we will begin to understand where new opportunities lie for
entrepreneurial development in Prior Lake and Scott County and surrounding area and we
can formulate a priority list of market sectors to be considered. (3 days)
4. Program Offerings Analysis.Investigate the degree to which the required services may be
provided through TVBA program activities. Follow-up interviews or interviews that were
rescheduled will be conducted by telephone.One of our greatest strengths has been the
success of our programs for entrepreneur development,starting in the 1990's with the NJ
Entrepreneurs Forum,and carrying through to the long list of activities provided to the
clients of the Ethiopia CIC.This has included the aforementioned forums,the
PortTechNetwork,various pitch competitions,the Russian Venture Fair,the Ethiopia Green
Tech Hackathon,and other activities that help prepare entrepreneurs to seek financing and
better manage their businesses.We can recommend program activities that will both
enhance the image of the TVBA and provide a meaningful learning experience and be
attractive to investors. (2 days)
5. Competitive Environment and Potential Partnerships.Our report will describe the
competitive environment and the impact of accelerator services delivered by similar
business support organizations that maybe leveraged to assist the clients of the proposed
program would be conducted.Some considerations:
• Partnerships with organizations that can provide deal-flow for the TVBA program.
For example,it is possible a TVBA program would seek accelerator graduate clients
from incubation programs to accelerate?
• Could clients be attracted from local colleges and UMN?
• Does TVBA partner with the local SBDC program to provide pre-incubation services
to companies that were not ready for the rigor of an incubation or acceleration
program?
• Has the UMN Business Accelerator Program been renewed and would it be a source
of grad student interns or even potential start-ups?
The resulting responses,coupled with our own analyses would provide at least some of the
information we seek in prioritizing market sectors and better understanding the services
that could be offered. (4 days)
6
6. Facilities Analysis.During the course of the interviews,one of the questions that will be
asked is if additional accelerator services could be provided through a virtual network.This
is a question highly dependent on the financial model and the available real estate.With
sufficient revenue from rents and services,a facilities-based accelerator should be capable
of sustaining itself financially.If real estate can be acquired very inexpensively,the financial
burden is much less-many incubation programs,for example were started with buildings
abandoned by manufacturing companies departing the Northeast or Midwest(i.e.,
"Rustbelt" companies)who made their facilities available to local economic developers
when they went off-shore.In our experience with incubators and accelerators,the cost of
the real estate is always the most difficult challenge but this may be a function of the kinds
of clients recruited.In an accelerator such as that envisioned in Phase II,there is the
possibility of recruiting some established companies that have sufficient revenues enabling
them to pay market rate rents and service fees.Thus,this problem may be alleviated but it is
unlikely to disappear,given the uncertainties of the business cycle.Projected costs will vary
significantly with the real estate expense and will have to be prepared with specific
facilities,as well as a mix of services,in mind. (1 day)
7. Financial Assessment.Based on the interviews and supplemental research for the region,
we propose to make a projection of the numbers of clients that could utilize the TVBA,and
the magnitude of fee income that could be generated with the addition of a virtual program.
There is also the possibility that sponsorships from other economic development
organizations could be explored. (2 days)
8. Report.Preparation of a preliminary report on our findings analyzing the environment for
the entrepreneurial activities associated with incubation.The report would include a
"Strengths,Weaknesses,Opportunities and Threats" (SWOT)analysis.If an accelerator
facility is suggested,our own"IPI Readiness"assessment tool for illustrating how the
proposed program compares to others in our experience could be employed. (3 days)
Total: 20 service days
7
Feasibility Study Schedule
We have made the assumption that work would commence around October 15,2015.Further,
with the large number of holidays that occur during the fall and early winter,we assume that
the evaluation would last through January.Thus the distribution of days/tasks is as shown on
the accompanying timeline.
Task Task October November December January
No.
1 Community/Client Needs
2 Understanding the Ecosystem « »
3 Market Demand Analysis «
4 Program Offerings Analysis
5 Partnerships <<
6 Facilities Analysis
7 Financial Services Assessment
8 Report Preparation/Delivery «----------»
8
Evaluation Activity Budget
Fees
Task No. Task #Days Daily Rate Total
1 Community/Client Needs 2 $675 $1,350
2 Understanding the Ecosystem 3 $675 $2,025
3 Market Demand Analysis 3 $675 $2,025
4 Program Offerings Analysis 2 $675 $1,350
5 Partnerships 4 $675 $2,700
6 Facilities Analysis 1 $675 $675
7 Financial Services Assessment 2 $675 $1,350
8 Report Preparation/Delivery 3 $675 $2,025
Total Fees: 20 $13,500
Expenses
Type Description # Daily Rate Total
Airfares BWI- MSP- BWI 3 475 $1,425
Meals Per diem basis 24 15 $360
Hotel Hampton Inn 12 112 $1,344
Transport Rental Car 12 60 $720
Misc. Copying,telephone,etc. 1 51 $51
Total Expenses: $3,900
Total Fee and Expenses $17,400
Budget Narrative
As shown in the budget illustration,the daily rate charged per consultant day is$675.Days are
allocated over the entire work activity.Meals are estimated at$15 each with the assumption
that breakfast is included in the hotel rate,which is for the Prior Lake Hampton Inn.An
allowance was included for miscellaneous reimbursable expenses such as parking,materials,
etc.
Team Organization
Each member of the IPI Team is an independent,accomplished management consultant with an
exceptional and verifiable track record of experience in developing,managing and analyzing
incubator and accelerator operations and new companies. Team members have managed new
technology ventures,advised technology entrepreneurs,coached incubator and accelerator
managers and provided business incubation and technology-led economic development
expertise throughout the US and internationally. Team members have not only trained
countless entrepreneurs and incubator managers,they have authored training materials and
software used throughout the industry. The team selected to conduct the TVBA Evaluation will
consist of the following individuals:
9
Jeff Milanette,President of IPI (www.InnovativePartners.com) is an incubation industry
professional who organized one of the first business incubation programs in California (San
Diego Incubator Corporation) in 1986. He is well-known in the US and internationally as an
expert on the industry.He has also been a successful entrepreneur,having started and run
several technology companies.In addition,Mr.Milanette is experienced as a trainer of
entrepreneurs through his leadership of the New Jersey Entrepreneurs Forum and the
PortTechForum.He is certified to facilitate and administer the Fast TracTM series of training
programs (developed by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation) and GrowthWheelTM a
business model development training program.Mr.Milanette has significant expertise in
financing early stage technology companies gained through his experiences with several startup
companies serving as President,CFO,or Director.Jeff was formerly Executive Director of
PortTech Los Angeles,a technology incubator and accelerator serving entrepreneurs with clean
and green technologies that assist the customers of the Port of Los Angeles in meeting their
technology and regulatory challenges from 2009 to 2013 (www.PortTechLA.org).
Karla Milanette,VP/CFO of IPI,Karla is an experienced consultant and financial manager who
will oversee the contract,financial,and project administrative support.Karla is a licensed
School Business Administrator in the State of New Jersey and was formerly the CFO of a large
suburban school district in New Jersey managing a$110 million budget and overseeing the
business operations of the district,supervising a staff of fifty professional and hourly employees
in the fields of logistics,construction,food service,maintenance and transportation.She was
previously an executive with the San Diego Private Industry Council,and is expert in the design
and operation of federal and local government employment and training programs in school to
career transition.Her experience in incubation includes serving on feasibility study teams in
Southern California,New Jersey and Indiana.Karla was the first Director of Operations for Jobs
for America's Graduates,a national level school-to-career transition program.She has an MBA
from Rutgers University with a specialty in marketing and finance.
Insurance
IPI carries professional liability and will maintain it for the duration of the study.
Corporate Officers
Jeffrey Milanette and Karla Milanette are both corporate officers of Innovative Partners,Inc.,
and are authorized to sign documents on behalf of the company.Innovative Partners is a duly
registered Delaware Corporation.Our state tax clearance certificate is available upon request.
Proposed Payment Schedule
IPI proposes that payments for services be on the following schedule:
• 10%of the fees to be invoiced upon execution of the contract.
• 20% of fees at the end of each of the remaining four months of the engagement.
• The remaining 10%upon acceptance of our report.
• Expenses for reimbursement would be presented on a monthly basis.
Although we prefer automated deposit to our bank account,payment by check is equally
acceptable.Checks should be made payable to Innovative Partners,Inc.and mailed to our office
in Maryland.Karla Milanette of Innovative Partners Incubation will administer the contract and
invoicing for the firm.She maybe contacted at the IPI office at(908) 789-3424.
10
Summary
Innovative Partners Incubation proposes to perform an evaluation of the existing Prior Lake
technology Village Business Accelerator. Our understanding is that the evaluation should be
concerned primarily with the issues involved in expanding the program from its present five
clients at the City Hall location to a larger number that includes program services for external
clients in private real estate,and potentially virtual clients as well.Market research to evaluate
both programmatic and service offerings would be part of the process.
The end result of the study would be the development of a final report that would include a
business plan for expanded program.One highly important element of the report would be a
SWOT analysis that would illustrate the various internal and external factors that impact the
proposed expansion.This presumes that sufficient resources can be provided as to make the
program both viable and financially sustainable.In addition,a position description would be
developed for a program director,and recommendations made as to additional funding
opportunities.Finally,we will explore the possibilities for expanded partnering with other
organizations such as the Scott County Community Development Agency.
Innovative Partners has been providing these kinds of services to the business incubation
industry for over twenty-five years.We have started and run several successful programs for
technology entrepreneurs both in the US and abroad.Our aspiration is to provide the TVBA
with guidance and recommendations that will build a long lasting and successful program.We
look forward to working with you.
11
References
The following individuals have worked with IPI in the past.Their names and contact
information is provided below in the event a reference is desired.
1. Herb Zimmer,Chairman of the Board,PortTech Los Angeles,San Pedro,CA,tel. 310-831-
1247,E-mail:hzimmer@porttechla.org.
2. Sara Lundine,formerly Executive Director, Battelle's Environmental Technology
Commercialization Consortium (ETC2),Columbus,OH,tel. 716-969-7134,e-mail:
E-mail: lundine@roadrunner.com.
3. Gina Boesch,former Executive Director,New Jersey City University Business Development
Center,Jersey City,NJ,tel. 201-444-9520,e-mail:gina.boesch@gmail.com.
4. Heinz Fiedler, President, Science Park and Innovation Center(SPICE)Group,Berlin, Germany.
E-mail: Heinz@spice-group.de Phone: +49-160-829-2656
5. Joseph Tetteh,Executive Director of Business Development Incubator,New Jersey City University,
and former Vice President of NJ Commission on Science and Technology.
E-mail:jtetteh@njcu.edu Phone: 201-200-2060
12
Attachment: Resume of Jeffrey Milanette
Jeffrey Milanette
206 Providence Road,Annapolis,MD 21409•USA
www.innovativepartners.com•jeffm@innovativepartners.com
908.789.3424(office)•908.591.8193(mobile)•jmilanette(skype)
Executive Profile
Technology Entrepreneur• Incubation Manager• Business Consultant
Accomplished business management consultant with an exceptional and verifiable track record of experience
in developing,managing and analyzing business incubator operations and new companies.
Currently: Project Manager for J.E.Austin project with World Bank's infoDev organization to write four new
modules of incubator manager training curriculum and update two existing modules for applications in
Caribbean,African,and other developing economies.
Selected Accomplishments
• CEO,Ethiopia Climate Innovation Center,climate technology incubation and technology
commercialization center sponsored by the World Bank,UKaid,and the Norwegian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs serving 40 clients.The Ethiopia CIC provides client companies with access to
finance;mentorship;training; and market and policy research;with a cross-cutting mission of
encouraging the development of women entrepreneurship programs. This includes a Women's
Special Interest Group,numerous conferences and training activities,and multiple means of
disseminating information to the ECIC constituency.Recruited and managed a staff of 15
professional and two hourly employees and report to a managing consortium of two university
organizations and two international consulting firms.Annual budget of$1.5 million USD. (2013-
Present)
• Executive Director of PortTech Los Angeles,a technology commercialization center and
incubator focused on assisting clean tech entrepreneurs commercializing innovative,maritime-
related technology solutions in the areas of environment,energy, logistics and homeland security.
PortTechLA is one of two incubators in the City of LA's Clean Tech Initiative. Established the
PortTechforum(a monthly event featuring networking and training opportunities for
entrepreneurs,service providers and capital providers),the PortTechEXPO(annual venture fair
and technology exposition),and the PortTechNetwork(LinkedIn)as enhancements for
PortTechLA. Secured$2.5 Million in funding for the EXPO and incubator operations.(2009-
2013)
• Led a team of five consultants in developing a sustainable and replicable ICT incubation model
for sub-Saharan Africa for the World Bank's infoDev organization. (2008-09)
• Key team member and incubation expert in a project with the European Bank for Reconstruction
and Development to determine feasibility of establishing ICT incubators in three countries in the
Newly Independent States of the Former Soviet Union.(2006-2007)
• Led a team from Battelle's Environmental Technology Commercialization Center in establishing
the National Environmental Technology(NET)Incubator at Central State University in
Wilberforce,OH,an HBCU.(2000-2001)
13
• Founder and CEO of the Rutgers Business Innovation Center. (1989-1995)
• Recognized innovator in entrepreneur development programs as President of the NJ
Entrepreneurs Forum.(1992-2009)
• Successfully competed for US-DOD research funding as President of SpeakEZ, Inc.,a start-up
technology venture. Successfully negotiated the sale of the company to a publicly held acquiring
company.(1992-1995)
• Served as lead or support consultant in numerous business incubation projects.(1989-Present)
Areas of Expertise
• Mitigation of climate change • Market research • Clean tech and green innovation
impacts • Venture conferences and • Technology entrepreneurship
• Utilization of clean tech in entrepreneur competitions • Strategic planning
maritime and port operations • Operations management • Investment banking
• ICT Incubator feasibility studies • Capacity building • Business turn-around
• Early stage company finance • Incubator management • Association management
• Needs assessment and analysis development • Project management
• Program evaluation using • Sustainable,replicable • Management of NGO's
applied metrics incubation models
Professional Experience Summary
Business Incubation:
Innovative Partners,Inc.(IPI) 1985-present
President and CEO
A consulting firm providing management advisory services to new companies,and to public and private sector
organizations establishing business incubation and technology transfer programs.
➢ Established San Diego Incubator Corporation. Served as first President and Chairman of the Board,
(1986-1989).
➢ Established Rutgers Business Innovation Center,developed the business plan,negotiated with
economic development corporations,selected,hired and trained managers. Served as first President,
(1989-1995).
➢ Business incubation consulting clients have included universities,and economic development
organizations such as: Rowan University,Battelle Environmental Technology Commercialization
Center(ETC),Tallinn Technology Park,Camden County College,New Jersey City University,
California State University Foundation,Rutgers University,Garden State Cancer Center,and
numerous community colleges,(1985-present).
➢ Co-founded,and organized five annual Russian Venture Fairs under the sponsorship of the US
Civilian Research and Development Foundation. Trained entrepreneurs in the art of presenting their
companies to prospective investors before each Fair,(2000-2005).
14
➢ Performed due diligence on applicants to the New Jersey Edison Innovation Fund and NJ Tax
Transfer Program for the NJ Commission on Science and Technology and the NJ Economic
Development Authority. Evaluated over 120 early stage and mature technology applicant companies,
(2006-2008).
> Evaluated potential ICT incubator locations in Moldova,Mongolia and Georgia for EBRD to
determine if the selected countries could support incubation programs,(2006-2007).
> Conducted ICT incubator feasibility studies for cities of West Sacramento,California,and Folsom,
California,(2007-2008).
> Designed sustainable,replicable ICT incubator model programs in sub-Saharan Africa for World
Bank's infoDev program,(2008-2009).
➢ Private Sector member, Innovation Council on High Technology,a bilateral public-private
partnership of US and Russia providing advice and counsel to their respective governments on
entrepreneurship and technology business. Led by US State Department. (2005-2011)
Technology Incubator Management:
Rutgers Business Innovation Center 1989-1995
President and CEO
The Rutgers Business Innovation Center was a for-profit subsidiary of a university-owned non-profit
corporation.Formed the organization and founded the center.Provided day-to-day management expertise and
supported 20+start-up companies. Screened,recruited and advised each tenant company,performing due
diligence on applicants,negotiating leases and contracts,and managing the facility.Provided day-to-day
management guidance to the entrepreneur clients,acting as their on-site business advisor.Achieved
profitability in fourth year despite a downward-trending market.
Entrepreneur Development:
New Jersey Entrepreneurs Forum (NJEF) 1992-2009
President and CEO
Originally a program of the state of New Jersey's Commission on Science and Technology,NJEF was spun-
off in 1995 and became a successful private,non-profit corporation supported by sponsorship and meeting
fees.This organization provided entrepreneurs the skills needed to start,manage and finance a technology
company through the enterprise forum model.Monthly programs provide first-person tutorials concerning
various elements of managing a young company. Practice presentations for companies seeking financing
were a major highlight.
Market Research: 1998
IPI provided market research for Jeppesen Sanderson,Inc.,the world's largest manufacturer of aerial
navigation charts and navigation aids. Project involved developing and administering a survey of eleven of
the largest hub airports in the U.S.and overseas,and all the major air carriers to determine feasibility of
introducing a GIS technology to the market(JeppViewim). Survey instrument was augmented by in-depth
interviews with executive personnel of each airport.
Investment Banking:
CEA Financial Group,Iselin,NJ 1995-2001
Vice President
15
Ten-year-old company investing its own money,and funds raised from investors in promising new
companies. Evaluated business plans,directed administration, conducted due diligence,calculated valuation,
and negotiated investments with entrepreneurs.
Technology-Computer Software:
AuthX,Inc. 2001-2010
President
A start-up biometrics technology company developing software used to validate photo-identity documents
such as drivers licenses,passports,and visas.Raised funds,wrote the current business plan,managed
marketing and sales,hired staff,and negotiated contracts. Staff of 2 full time and six part time employees.
SpeakEZ,Inc. 1992-1995
President and CEO
A start-up company developing speaker verification/speaker identification software for aerospace-defense
and commercial markets. Negotiated technology license from university,raised capital,wrote business plan,
developed marketing strategies,and established strategic partnerships. Acquired by T-Netix,Inc. IPI also
provided market research to T-Netix,Inc.,and Dictaphone Corp. in the formation and management of a
consortium developing new speaker identification software technologies for the US Air Force.
Education, Certification and Professional Development
MBA(finance),George Washington University,Washington,DC
BS,United States Naval Academy,Annapolis,MD
Certificate in Russian,New York University,New York,NY
Certified Facilitator and Marketing Administrator,Fast Trac training,Kauffman Foundation
Certified Advisor,Growth Wheel®tool start-up and growth companies training program,Startup Company
NYC Inc.
Graduate,Leadership Development Program(LEAD New Brunswick),New Brunswick,NJ
Professional Appointments and Affiliations
National Business Incubation Association(NBIA), New Jersey Business Incubation Network(NJBIN),
(1985-present).Elected to the NBIA Board of (2003-2010).
Directors—2014.
New Jersey Technology Council,(2000-2009). International Economic Development Council,
(2005-2010).
US-Russia Innovation Council on High Working Group on Entrepreneurship,US-Pakistan
Technology, sponsored by US Cooperative Program on Science and
Department of Commerce,(2005-2011). Technology, (2007-2009).
Aereon, Inc.,aerospace vehicle design company, AuthX, Inc.,biometric technology products,Board
Board of Directors,(1999-2009). of Directors,(2002-present).
New Jersey City University Business Development New Jersey Commission on Defense Conversion
Incubator,Advisory Council,(2004-2010). and Community Assistance,(1993).
NJ Entrepreneur of the Year,finalist,(1992),judge, NJ Venture Fairs,(1993-2008),Chair Coaching
(1993 and 1994). Committee,(1992 and 1999).
National Defense Industries Assn., life member, Business Incubation Network of Southern
Chapter President,San Diego,CA(1986-88). California,Member, Steering Committee,(2010-
2013).
16
Selected Professional Publications and Presentations
"Ethiopia CIC Impacts Food and Water Security",presentation to the Council on Foreign Relations
conference"Security Challenges in Africa",(November,2014)
"Pitch Training Workshop",preparing entrepreneur presenters for the First Annual Ethiopia CIC Pitch
Competition,(November 2014)
"Tying it All together—Why Marketing Your Incubator is a 24/7 Project",on behalf of PortTechLA,a
presentation at the 2012 National Business Incubation Association annual conference(May 2012)
"Innovative Client Funding Techniques",a presentation for Innovative Partners Incubation at the 2012
National Business Incubation Association annual conference(May 2012)
"Overview of PortTechLA"presentation and participation on a panel concerning port development,
Tenerife,Canary Islands sponsored by the Corporate Council on Africa,(April 2011)
"Sustainable ICT Incubation Environment",presentation and participation on panel entitled High Growth
ICT Enterprise Incubation,infoDev 3`d Global Forum on Innovation and Entrepreneurship,Florianopolis,
Brazil,(October 2009).
"How a Small University Started an Environmental Technology Incubator",—Article in A
Comprehensive Guide to Business Incubation,published by National Business Incubation Association
(NBIA),Athens,OH,(2005).
"Successful Programs for Supporting Technology Entrepreneurs"—Paper published in the Proceedings
of Eighth Annual Meeting of the Asian Science Park Association,Weihai,China(August 2004).
"Training for Technology Entrepreneurs",developed,presented and moderated panel discussion for the
National Business Incubation Association Annual Conference,(April 2009).
"Technology Entrepreneurship"series of five presentations given to technology transfer professionals from
Pakistan,Malaysia, Indonesia and Egypt covering the topics of technology entrepreneurship,venture capital,
business incubation and support for technology entrepreneurs at the Standing Committee on Science and
Technology(COMSTECH)of the Organization of Islamic Council(OIC)Islamabad,PK,(August 2007).
"Successful Venturing"—Presentation to aspiring venture capitalists as part of a seminar entitled"Creating
and Managing a Venture Capital Firm"sponsored by the Russian Venture Capital Association and the US
Civilian R&D Foundation,(October 2004).
"Satisfying Investor Expectations"—Presentation to entrepreneurs accepted as participants in the Fifth
Annual Russian Venture Fair,(September 2004).
17
References
1. Herb Zimmer, Chairman and CEO,PortTechLA.
E-mail: Hzimmer@porttechla.org. Phone: 310-831-1247
2. Stan Tomsic,Chairman Emeritus,Caltech Enterprise Forum,Chairman of Business Incubation Network
of Southern California.
E-mail: sptomsic@att.net Phone: 626-796-9065
3. Sara Lundine retired Executive Director,Battelle Environmental Technology Commercialization Center.
E-mail: lundine@roadrunner.com Phone: 716-969-7134
4. Heinz Fiedler,President, Science Park and Innovation Center(SPICE)Group,Berlin, Germany.
E-mail: Heinzaspice-group.de Phone: +49-160-829-2656
5. Joseph Tetteh,Executive Director of Business Development Incubator,New Jersey City University,and
former Vice President of NJ Commission on Science and Technology.
E-mail: itettehAnjcu.edu Phone: 201-200-2060
18
Standard Agreement for Professional Services
This Agreement ("Agreement") is made on the day of , 2015, between the
City of Prior Lake, Minnesota (hereinafter"City"), whose business address is 4646 Dakota Street
SE, Prior Lake, MN 55372, and Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc., a Florida Corporation
(hereinafter "Consultant") whose business address is 1150 Junonia, Sanibel, Florida 33957.
Preliminary Statement
The City has adopted a policy regarding the selection and hiring of consultants to provide a variety
of professional services for City projects. That policy requires that persons, firms or corporations
providing such services enter into written agreements with the City. The purpose of this
Agreement is to set forth the terms and conditions for the provision of professional services by
Consultant for provision of professional services by Consultant to Analyze the Current Program
and Prepare an Expansion Plan for the Technology Village Business Accelerator Program,
hereinafter referred to as the "Work".
The City and Consultant agree as follows:
1. Scope of Work. The Consultant agrees to provide the professional services shown in
Exhibit A (Work Tasks) in connection with the Work. The terms of this Agreement shall
take precedence over any provisions of the Consultants proposal and/or general
conditions. If the Consultants proposal is attached as the Exhibit A Scope of Work, City
reserves the right to reject any general conditions in such proposal.
2. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from October 1, 2015 through February 5,
2016, the date of signature by the parties notwithstanding. This Agreement may be
extended upon the written mutual consent of the parties for such additional period as they
deem appropriate, and upon the terms and conditions as herein stated.
3. Compensation for Services. City agrees to pay the Consultant on an hourly basis plus
expenses in a total amount not to exceed $24,935.00 for the services as described in
Exhibit A.
A. Any changes in the scope of the work which may result in an increase to the
compensation due the Consultant shall require prior written approval by an
authorized representative of the City or by the City Council. The City will not pay
additional compensation for services that do not have prior written authorization.
B. Special Consultants may be utilized by the Consultant when required by the
complex or specialized nature of the Project and when authorized in writing by the
City.
C. If Consultant is delayed in performance due to any cause beyond its reasonable
control, including but not limited to strikes, riots, fires, acts of God, governmental
actions, actions of a third party, or actions or inactions of City, the time for
performance shall be extended by a period of time lost by reason of the delay.
Consultant will be entitled to payment for its reasonable additional charges, if any,
due to the delay.
4. City Information. The City agrees to provide the Consultant with the complete
information concerning the Scope of the Work and to perform the following services:
A. Access to the Area. Depending on the nature of the Work, Consultant may from
time to time require access to public and private lands or property. As may be
necessary, the City shall obtain access to and make all provisions for the
Consultant to enter upon public and private lands or property as required for the
Consultant to perform such services necessary to complete the Work.
B. Consideration of the Consultant's Work. The City shall give thorough
consideration to all reports, sketches, estimates, drawings, and other documents
presented by the Consultant, and shall inform the Consultant of all decisions
required of City within a reasonable time so as not to delay the work of the
Consultant.
C. Standards. The City shall furnish the Consultant with a copy of any standard or
criteria, including but not limited to, design and construction standards that may be
required in the preparation of the Work for the Project.
D. City's Representative. A person shall be appointed to act as the City's
representative with respect to the work to be performed under this Agreement. He
or she shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information,
interpret, and define the City's policy and decisions with respect to the services
provided or materials, equipment, elements and systems pertinent to the work
covered by this Agreement.
5. Method of Payment. The Consultant shall submit to the City, on a monthly basis, an
itemized invoice for professional services performed under this Agreement. Invoices
submitted shall be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City for:
A. Progress Payment. For work reimbursed on an hourly basis, the Consultant shall
indicate for each employee, his or her name,job title, the number of hours worked,
rate of pay for each employee, a computation of amounts due for each employee,
and the total amount due for each project task. Consultant shall verify all
statements submitted for payment in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections
471.38 and 471.391. For reimbursable expenses, if provided for in Exhibit A, the
Consultant shall provide an itemized listing and such documentation as reasonably
required by the City. Each invoice shall contain the City's project number and a
progress summary showing the original (or amended) amount of the contract,
current billing, past payments and unexpended balance of the contract.
B. Suspended Work. If any work performed by the Consultant is suspended in whole
or in part by the City, the Consultant shall be paid for any services set forth on
Exhibit A performed prior to receipt of written notice from the City of such
suspension.
C. Payments for Special Consultants. The Consultant shall be reimbursed for the
work of special consultants, as described herein, and for other items when
authorized in writing by the City.
D. Claims. To receive any payment on this Agreement,the invoice or bill must include
the following signed and dated statement: "I declare under penalty of perjury that
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 2 of 12
this account, claim, or demand is just and correct and that no part of it has been
paid."
6. Project Manager and Staffing. The Consultant has designated Jim Greenwood to serve
on the Project. They shall be assisted by other staff members as necessary to facilitate
the completion of the Work in accordance with the terms established herein. Consultant
may not remove or replace the designated staff from the Project without the approval of
the City.
7. Standard of Care. Consultant shall exercise the same degree of care, skill and diligence
in the performance of its services as is ordinarily exercised by members of the profession
under similar circumstances in Scott County, Minnesota. Consultant shall be liable to the
fullest extent permitted under applicable law, without limitation, for any injuries, loss, or
damages proximately caused by Consultant's breach of this standard of care. Consultant
shall put forth reasonable efforts to complete its duties in a timely manner. Consultant
shall not be responsible for delays caused by factors beyond its control or that could not
be reasonably foreseen at the time of execution of this Agreement. Consultant shall be
responsible for costs, delays or damages arising from unreasonable delays in the
performance of its duties.
8. Audit Disclosure and Data Practices. Any reports, information, data, etc. given to, or
prepared or assembled by the Consultant under this Agreement which the City requests
to be kept confidential, shall not be made available to any individual or organization without
the City's prior written approval. The books, records, documents and accounting
procedures and practices of the Consultant or other parties relevant to this Agreement are
subject to examination by the City and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor
for a period of six (6) years after the effective date of this Agreement. This Agreement is
subject to the Minnesota Government Data Practice Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13
(Data Practices Act). All government data, as defined in the Data Practices Act Section
13.02, Subd 7, which is created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or
disseminated by Consultant in performing any of the functions of the City during
performance of this Agreement is subject to the requirements of the Data Practice Act and
Consultant shall comply with those requirements as if it were a government entity. All
subcontracts entered into by Consultant in relation to this Agreement shall contain similar
Data Practices Act compliance language.
9. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either party by seven (7) days written
notice delivered to the other party at the address written above. Upon termination under
this provision, if there is no fault of the Consultant, the Consultant shall be paid for services
rendered and reimbursable expenses until the effective date of termination. If however,
the City terminates the Agreement because the Consultant has failed to perform in
accordance with this Agreement, no further payment shall be made to the Consultant, and
the City may retain another consultant to undertake or complete the Work identified herein.
10. Subcontractor. The Consultant shall not enter into subcontracts for services provided
under this Agreement except as noted in the Scope of Work, without the express written
consent of the City. The Consultant shall pay any subcontractor involved in the
performance of this Agreement within ten (10) days of the Consultant's receipt of payment
by the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. If the Consultant fails
within that time to pay the subcontractor any undisputed amount for which the Consultant
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 3 of 12
has received payment by the City, the Consultant shall pay interest to the subcontractor
on the unpaid amount at the rate of 1.5 percent per month or any part of a month. The
minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of$100 or more is $10.
For an unpaid balance of less than $100, the Consultant shall pay the actual interest
penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect
interest penalties from the Consultant shall be awarded its costs and disbursements,
including attorney's fees, incurred in bringing the action.
11. Independent Consultant. Consultant is an independent contractor engaged by City to
perform the services described herein and as such (i)shall employ such persons as it shall
deem necessary and appropriate for the performance of its obligations pursuant to this
Agreement, who shall be employees, and under the direction, of Consultant and in no
respect employees of City, and (ii) shall have no authority to employ persons, or make
purchases of equipment on behalf of City, or otherwise bind or obligate City. No statement
herein shall be construed so as to find the Consultant an employee of the City.
12. Insurance.
a. General Liability. Prior to starting the Work, Consultant shall procure, maintain and
pay for such insurance as will protect against claims or loss which may arise out of
operations by Consultant or by any subcontractor or by anyone employed by any of
them or by anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable. Such insurance shall
include, but not be limited to, minimum coverages and limits of liability specified in this
Paragraph, or required by law.
b. Consultant shall procure and maintain the following minimum insurance coverages
and limits of liability for the Work:
Worker's Compensation Statutory Limits
Employer's Liability $500,000 each accident
$500,000 disease policy limit
$500,000 disease each employee
Commercial General Liability $1,500,000 property damage and bodily injury per
occurrence
$2,000,000 general aggregate
$2,000,000 Products— Completed Operations
Aggregate
$100,000 fire legal liability each occurrence
$5,000 medical expense
Comprehensive Automobile
Liability $1,000,000 combined single limit each accident
(shall include coverage for all owned, hired and
non-owed vehicles.)
Umbrella or Excess Liability $1,000,000
c. Commercial General Liability. The Commercial General Liability Policy shall be on
ISO form CG 00 01 12 07 or CG 00 01 04 13, or the equivalent. Such insurance shall
cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors, products-
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 4 of 12
completed operations, personal and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an
insured contract(including the tort liability of another assumed in a business contract).
There shall be no endorsement or modification of the Commercial General Liability
form arising from pollution, explosion, collapse, underground property damage or work
performed by subcontractors.
d. Professional Liability Insurance. In addition to the coverages listed above, Consultant
shall maintain a professional liability insurance policy in the amount of $2,000,000.
Said policy need not name the City as an additional insured. It shall be Consultant's
responsibility to pay any retention or deductible for the professional liability insurance.
Consultant agrees to maintain the professional liability insurance for a minimum of two
(2) years following termination of this Agreement.
e. Consultant shall maintain "stop gap" coverage if Consultant obtains Workers'
Compensation coverage from any state fund if Employer's liability coverage is not
available.
f. All policies, except the Worker's Compensation Policy, Automobile Policy, and
Professional Liability Policy, shall name the "City of Prior Lake" as an additional
insured on ISO forms CG 20 10 07 04 or CG 20 10 04 13; and CG 20 37 07 04 or CG
20 37 04 13, or their equivalent.
g. All policies, except the Professional Liability Policy, shall apply on a"per project" basis.
h. All polices shall contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City.
i. All policies, except for the Worker's Compensation Policy and the Professional Liability
Policy, shall be primary and non-contributory.
j. All polices, except the Worker's Compensation Policy, shall insure the defense and
indemnity obligations assumed by Consultant under this Agreement.
k. Consultant agrees to maintain all coverage required herein throughout the term of the
Agreement and for a minimum of two (2) years following City's written acceptance of
the Work.
I. It shall be Consultant's responsibility to pay any retention or deductible for the
coverages required herein.
m. All policies shall contain a provision or endorsement that coverages afforded
thereunder shall not be cancelled or non-renewed or restrictive modifications added,
without thirty (30) days' prior notice to the City, except that if the cancellation or non-
renewal is due to non-payment, the coverages may not be terminated or non-renewed
without ten (10) days' prior notice to the City.
n. Consultant shall maintain in effect all insurance coverages required under this
Paragraph at Consultant's sole expense and with insurance companies licensed to do
business in the state in Minnesota and having a current A.M. Best rating of no less
than A-, unless specifically accepted by City in writing.
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 5 of 12
o. A copy of the Consultant's Certificate of Insurance which evidences the
compliance with this Paragraph, must be filed with City prior to the start of
Consultant's Work. Upon request a copy of the Consultant's insurance declaration
page, Rider and/or Endorsement, as applicable shall be provided. Such documents
evidencing Insurance shall be in a form acceptable to City and shall provide
satisfactory evidence that Consultant has complied with all insurance requirements.
Renewal certificates shall be provided to City prior to the expiration date of any of the
required policies. City will not be obligated, however, to review such Certificate of
Insurance, declaration page, Rider, Endorsement or certificates or other evidence of
insurance, or to advise Consultant of any deficiencies in such documents and receipt
thereof shall not relieve Consultant from, nor be deemed a waiver of, City's right to
enforce the terms of Consultant's obligations hereunder. City reserves the right to
examine any policy provided for under this paragraph.
p. Effect of Consultant's Failure to Provide Insurance. If Consultant fails to provide the
specified insurance, then Consultant will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City,
the City's officials, agents and employees from any loss, claim, liability and expense
(including reasonable attorney's fees and expenses of litigation)to the extent necessary
to afford the same protection as would have been provided by the specified insurance.
Except to the extent prohibited by law, this indemnity applies regardless of any strict
liability or negligence attributable to the City (including sole negligence) and regardless
of the extent to which the underlying occurrence (i.e., the event giving rise to a claim
which would have been covered by the specified insurance) is attributable to the
negligent or otherwise wrongful act or omission (including breach of contract) of
Consultant, its subcontractors, agents, employees or delegates. Consultant agrees that
this indemnity shall be construed and applied in favor of indemnification. Consultant
also agrees that if applicable law limits or precludes any aspect of this indemnity, then
the indemnity will be considered limited only to the extent necessary to comply with that
applicable law. The stated indemnity continues until all applicable statutes of limitation
have run.
If a claim arises within the scope of the stated indemnity,the City may require Consultant
to:
i. Furnish and pay for a surety bond, satisfactory to the City, guaranteeing
performance of the indemnity obligation; or
ii. Furnish a written acceptance of tender of defense and indemnity from
Consultant's insurance company.
Consultant will take the action required by the City within fifteen (15) days of receiving
notice from the City.
13. Indemnification. Consultant will defend and indemnify City, its officers, agents, and
employees and hold them harmless from and against all judgments, claims, damages,
costs and expenses, including a reasonable amount as and for its attorney's fees paid,
incurred or for which it may be liable resulting from any breach of this Agreement by
Consultant, its agents, contractors and employees, or any negligent or intentional act or
omission performed, taken or not performed or taken by Consultant, its agents, contractors
and employees, relative to this Agreement. City will indemnify and hold Consultant
harmless from and against any loss for injuries or damages arising out of the negligent
acts of the City, its officers, agents or employees.
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 6 of 12
14. Ownership of Documents. All plans, diagrams, analyses, reports and information
generated in connection with the performance of the Agreement ("Information") shall
become the property of the City, but Consultant may retain copies of such documents as
records of the services provided. The City may use the Information for its purposes and
the Consultant also may use the Information for its purposes. Use of the Information for
the purposes of the project contemplated by this Agreement ("Project") does not relieve
any liability on the part of the Consultant, but any use of the Information by the City or the
Consultant beyond the scope of the Project is without liability to the other, and the party
using the Information agrees to defend and indemnify the other from any claims or liability
resulting therefrom.
15. Non-Discrimination. During the performance of this Agreement, the Consultant shall not
discriminate against any employee or applicants for employment because of race, color,
creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance,
disability, sexual orientation or age. The Consultant shall post in places available to
employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provision of this non-
discrimination clause and stating that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for
employment. The Consultant shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this
paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of its
subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for
program work. The Consultant further agrees to comply with all aspects of the Minnesota
Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes 363.01, et. seq., Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
16. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing services hereunder, the
Consultant shall abide by statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations pertaining to the
provisions of services to be provided. Any violation of statutes, ordinances, rules and
regulations pertaining to the services to be provided shall constitute a material breach of
this Agreement and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement
17. Mediation. Each dispute, claim or controversy arising from or related to this agreement
shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to initiating arbitration or legal or
equitable actions by either party. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the mediation shall
be in accordance with the Commercial Mediation Procedures of the American Arbitration
Association then currently in effect. A request for mediation shall be filed in writing with
the American Arbitration Association and the other party. No arbitration or legal or
equitable action may be instituted for a period of 90 days from the filing of the request for
mediation unless a longer period of time is provided by agreement of the parties. Cost of
mediation shall be shared equally between the parties. Mediation shall be held in the City
of Prior Lake unless another location is mutually agreed upon by the parties. The parties
shall memorialize any agreement resulting from the mediation in a mediated settlement
agreement, which agreement shall be enforceable as a settlement in any court having
jurisdiction thereof.
18. Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement, nor any interest arising herein,
without the written consent of the other party.
19. Services Not Provided For. No claim for services furnished by the Consultant not
specifically provided for herein shall be honored by the City.
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 7 of 12
20. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion hereof is,
for any reason, held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such
decision shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Agreement.
21. Entire Agreement. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This
Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating
to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect
between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments,
deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when
expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided herein.
22. Waiver. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement shall
not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement.
23. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be controlled by the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
24. Conflicts. No salaried officer or employee of the City and no member of the Council of
the City shall have a financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement. The violation
of this provision renders the Agreement void.
25. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which
shall be considered an original.
Executed as of the day and year first written above.
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
Mayor
City Manager
CONTRACTOR: Greenwood Consulting Group, Inc.
By:
Jim Greenwood
Its: President
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 8 of 12
EXHIBIT A
(Contractor agrees to provide, perform and complete the following Work Tasks)
Task 1. Review relevant literature and databases to understand the area's overall economy.
GCGI would rely on the City of Prior Lake to provide copies of any relevant documents that will
help us come up to speed quickly on the economy of the service area, and its challenges and
opportunities. GCGI has made a quick review of the documents referenced in the RFP for this
project, and will conduct a more thorough review in this task—this will include the review and
assessment of the Technology Village Phase 11.2 Business Plan, as requested in the RFP, which
will be reported to the city in memorandum form. GCGI will provide written and electronic
databases at its disposal; for example, GCGI will use these data to determine the trends in the
number of microbusinesses in technology and professional services industries in the Prior
Lake/Scott County area to help us better understand the current and emerging market for the
TVBA.
Task 2. Hold meetings with TVBA leadership and program participants. GCGI concurs fully with
the RFP expectation that we will hold meetings with City staff, TVBA Board of Directors, and EDA
representatives, and with TVBA program participants (both present and graduates). One of the
benefits of a project involving an existing accelerator/incubator is the opportunity to learn, from
those in the program, what has worked well and what has not, and what opportunities may be
emerging. GCGI will hold these meetings in person during our multiple site visits to Prior Lake;
we envision the initial meeting with the City staff and TVBA Board, and the meeting with program
participants, will occur during our first site visit.
Task 3. Conduct interviews with TVBA stakeholders; local business and civic leaders;
government officials; entrepreneurs; potential incubator partners and funding sources; business
assistance service providers(non-profit and for profit);commercial/industrial realtors;construction
contractors; and others who are relevant to the future of the accelerator. This is a time intensive
effort to meet one-on-one with a variety of potential sources of information about the economy,
entrepreneurial activity, employment trends and challenges, economic and community issues,
preferred location/configuration for an accelerator/incubator, and development cost and sources
of funding for a new TVBA location. Some TVBA program participants also may be appropriately
met with individually, if they cannot participate in the group meetings in Task 2, or if GCGI and
City staff agree that an individual interview is advisable. GCGI understands there is a desire to
include Scott County and other communities in the County in this project, so it is our intention to
interview appropriate community and business leaders, entrepreneurs and service providers from
the region as well as local area. Similarly we will meet with representatives of other regional
accelerator programs, either in person or via teleconference. These programs will be identified
from membership rolls of the National Business Incubation Association, knowledge of City staff
and TVBA Board members, our own knowledge of similar programs, and comments/suggestions
by interviewees.
GCGI will rely on City staff to suggest appropriate persons to interview; Tasks 1 and 2 will help
identify others. GCGI will ask City staff's help in setting up meetings and interviews. These
interviews will be conducted by GCGI during three site visits to the Prior Lake area.
Task 4. Disseminate a market survey via seminar, website, direct mailing, and other means to
ensure widespread distribution to existing and potential entrepreneurs in the Prior Lake area, then
compile and interpret the responses. GCGI believes that evidence of an adequate market for an
expanded TVBA is a crucial part of this project, and that the best evidence of that market comes
from expressions of interest by potential tenants and clients. In addition to helping quantify the
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 9 of 12
market for an expanded accelerator/incubator, another outcome of this exercise is a database of
specific individuals and their companies who might be targeted as possible tenants and clients of
a new accelerator facility, or who can be contacted in the future regarding their opinions and
preferences for a new, expanded TVBA. The survey also will ask about the kinds of services and
facilities in the accelerator/incubator that are desired by prospective tenants, and preferred
geographic location(s) for the TVBA. It also typically asks about existing service providers from
which local entrepreneurs have sought assistance and how satisfied they were with the help they
received—this helps identify partners with which the TVBA may link to provide services to its
clients.
GCGI has successfully used several means for disseminating a survey to help identify candidates
for business accelerators/incubators, and we propose to use some of those techniques here. One
is a free evening seminar on a topic of interest to Prior Lake area small and start up businesses
that is promoted widely in the community, with assistance from local entities. The seminar would
include a brief discussion about the proposed relocation and expansion of the TVBA. Attendees
of the seminar will be asked to complete surveys that identify themselves, their companies, and
their potential interest in the accelerator/incubator. The survey also asks the attendees to identify
any others who did not attend the seminar but who should be contacted about the proposed
expansion of TVBA. One possible topic for this seminar is "how to apply for Small Business
Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) funding for small
and start up businesses." This could be highly relevant to the technology and professional
services clients of the TVBA, small business funding often is a popular seminar topic, and GCGI
conveniently is a nationally recognized expert in SBIR/STTR.
The survey also may be distributed to SBDC clients in the area, chamber of commerce members,
persons recommended by current TVBA participants (and anyone on the waiting list to be
admitted to the accelerator), and holders of city and/or county business licenses. It can be
promoted in local media and social networks. The survey form will be put online by GCGI for those
who prefer to complete and return it electronically (GCGI has found survey response levels are
much higher in some of our projects when respondents can use the convenience of completing
the survey online).
GCGI also envisions an abbreviated version of this market survey being given to past and present
TVBA program participants. While the meetings and interviews in Tasks 2 and 3 provide
qualitative data, this survey can provide supplemental quantitative information on what is working
well with the current TVBA and what needs to be provided in an expanded, enhanced
accelerator/incubator to maximize its effectiveness and value to the entrepreneurs of the
community. Ample attention must be paid to existing tenants and program participants, especially
if City hopes to retain them in an expanded TVBA facility and program.
GCGI will discuss and decide with the City staff and TVBA Board of Directors what options for
survey dissemination will be utilized in this project. GCGI defers to these parties' knowledge of
the most effective entrepreneur communication vehicles in the Prior Lake area, and the broader
Scott County region and other communities therein.
After allowing suitable time for responses, GCGI will tally and interpret the results, and include
them in the analysis in Task 6 and in the final report in Task 9.
Task 5. Tour existing buildings and vacant parcels to assess availability and cost of alternative
locations for relocating or expanding the TVBA. GCGI believes that both new construction as well
as renovation of an existing building should be explored as alternatives for a new location for the
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 10 of 12
accelerator/incubator. GCGI would work with City staff and TVBA Board members (and possibly
. a commercial real estate professional familiar with the area)to identify possible sites (both vacant
as well as those that could be cleared of dilapidated structures) and existing buildings, and to
refine that list to the most promising locations based on factors such as availability, cost, size,
zoning and compatibility with surrounding uses, and opportunity to have positive impact on the
neighborhood. Consideration will be given to locations to which the entire TVBA could be
relocated, as well as those that might be sites in addition to the current accelerator/incubator
space in City Hall.
GCGI also will interview appropriate local realtors and contractors to collect information about
rental rates and construction (including renovation) costs for commercial and industrial space.
Task 6. Use the data collected from Tasks 1 through 6 to conduct the analyses requested in the
RFP. The RFP calls for eight analyses to be conducted in this project, and all will be completed
during this task. To accomplish many of the required analyses, GCGI will identify multiple
alternative scenarios for the future of the TVBA. The information collected during the project will
dictate what those scenarios look like, but relevant parameters may include:
• Continue status quo, with improvements
• Implement Phase 11.2 Business Plan
• Add one or more additional locations to supplement existing site
• Relocate to small, medium, or large facility and vacant existing site
• Create satellite locations around a central TVBA "headquarters" possibly to include sites
elsewhere in Scott County
• Add program director, either full-time or half-time
Financial projections (both for development and operations) will be prepared for all scenarios;
based on GCGI's extensive experience doing this, we anticipate some scenarios will drop out as
being infeasible, while one or more may rise to the top as the most viable alternatives for the
future of TVBA.
Task 7. Conclude whether a new or expanded TVBA is feasible, infeasible, or conditionally
feasible, with any shortcomings highlighted and mitigating measures recommended. Using the
analyses from Task 6, along with consideration of the multiple scenarios for the TVBA, GCGI will
conclude what is possible and advisable as a future direction for the accelerator. Consideration
must be given to (a) what the market of Prior Lake entrepreneurs wants and will support, (b) what
facilities, programs, and resources are desired by that market that can be provided realistically by
the TVBA, (c) the cost and potential funding availability for alternative scenarios, (d) the
sustainability of each scenario in terms of long run operations of the accelerator, and (e) the
appetite and ability of the City and TVBA for taking on the most viable future direction for the
accelerator.
This task is where GCGI's extensive, 35 years of experience in the accelerator/incubator industry
plays a key role. We have operated accelerator/incubators ourselves, and we have consulted on
over 90 projects around the US and Canada, so we have a good sense of what is going to work
in reality versus what might look viable on paper and in spreadsheets.
If conditions are not favorable, GCGI is prepared to conclude that a new, expanded TVBA is
infeasible, and explain why. GCGI has seen many situations where an ill-advised
accelerator/incubator program was started in a community, only to languish for years (and
consume enormous amounts of money and other scarce resources) and eventually be shut
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 11 of 12
down—we would much prefer to advise the City and TVBA Board that an expansion and/or
relocation of the accelerator is infeasible, rather than to cause this unfortunate situation to occur
here. And, even in this worst case scenario, GCGI is confident that we will be able to offer
suggestions on how the existing TVBA could be improved in terms of its operations, programs,
services, and/or existing facility. 6
Task 8. Prepare draft report. This report will summarize the data collected and analyzed during
this project, the alternative scenarios considered, and the outcome of the eight analyses called
for in the RFP. It also will include recommendations for next steps, which will be dependent on
the conclusion about the most viable scenario going forward, as well as an implementation
schedule. The memo prepared at the end of Task 1 on our evaluation of the Technology Village
Phase 11.2 Business Plan will be attached to this report as an appendix. A job description for the
TVBA program director also will be attached to the report. All 7 outcomes specified in the RFP
will be included in this report.
Task 9. Make presentation about conclusions and recommendations to City staff, the TVBA Board
of Directors and Economic Development Authority, and then prepare final report. This task begins
with dissemination of the draft feasibility report from Task 8 that summarizes the project and our
findings and recommendations, and then continues with a presentation to City staff, Board
members, and representatives of the EDA. GCGI will receive comments during and after this
presentation, revise the draft feasibility report accordingly, and issue the final report.
Standard Agreement for Professional Services 2014.04 Page 12 of 12