120 likes | 272 Views
2004 District-wide Copier Assessment in Partnership with the Xerox Corporation Dr. Randolph Ward – State Administrator Gloria Gamblin – Deputy Superintendent Michael L. Moore, Sr. – Operations Officer. Scope of Assessment.
E N D
2004 District-wide Copier Assessmentin Partnership with the Xerox CorporationDr. Randolph Ward – State AdministratorGloria Gamblin – Deputy SuperintendentMichael L. Moore, Sr. – Operations Officer
Scope of Assessment • 15 members of Xerox Assessment team visited 120 sites and interviewed over 150 individuals. • Xerox conducted the survey over a 2 month period • Data collected in the survey included identification of all units (copiers, printers, fax machines, and multi-functional devices), unit volumes, and current costs. • Identified outsource volume by application and site. Captured total output management cost District wide.
Global Assessment Results • K-5: 63 Locations • Current Volume: 75,489* per month • Current Cost: $3,019* • Current Equipment: 1 fax, 2-4 copiers, multiple laser printers, 1-2 Risographs. • Assessment – Overall Dissatisfaction, copiers did not meet their needs. * Figures based on OUSD interviews & National Averages
Elementary School Sample Sites • Worst Scenario: Garfield (1) Lanier 40 ppm, (1) OCE 75 ppm, (1) Panasonic 50 ppm, (1) Sharp 22 ppm, (1) Mita 20 ppm, (1) Savin 65 ppm, (1) Konica 40 ppm. (1) Risograph (43) Desktop printers. Total estimated monthly site cost: $3,800 + ? • Average Site: Bella Vista (2) Ricoh 65 ppm, (2) Savin 55 ppm, (1) Risograph. (35) HP desktop printers. Total estimated monthly site cost: $2,135.00 • Benchmark School: Carl Munck (1) Sharp 75 ppm, (1) Konica 25 ppm, (1) Risograph (broken). 12 Desktop Printers. Total estimated monthly site costs: $827.50
Global Assessment Results • Middle Schools: 14 Locations • Current Volume: 145,626* • Current Cost: $5,825* • Current Equipment: 1 fax, 2-6 copiers, multiple laser printers, 1-2 Risographs. • Assessment – Needs improvement, Copy quality issues. * Figures based on OUSD Interviews & National Averages
Middle School Sample Sites • Worst Scenario: Westlake (2) Canon 65 ppm, (3) Canon 50 ppm, (2) Risograph 50 ppm, (1) Konica 35 ppm, (1) A.B. Dick 35 ppm. (41) Desktop copiers. Total estimated monthly site cost: $6,100 • Average Site: Madison (1) Panasonic 55 ppm, (1) Panasonic 60 ppm, (1) Savin 65 ppm, (1) Xerox 30 ppm, (1) Risograph, (1) Panasonic 15 ppm. (42) Desktop printers. Total estimated monthly site cost: $5,300 • Benchmark School: Havenscourt (2) Panasonic 50 ppm, (1) Oce 2475 75ppm. (46) Desktop printers. Total estimated monthly site cost: $3,200
Global Assessment Results • High Schools: 17 Locations • Current Volume: 176,882* • Current Cost: $7,075* • Current Equipment: fax, 4-39 copiers, multiple laser printers, 1-2 Risographs. • Assessment – Equipment issues, machines not networked, reliability issues. * Figures based on OUSD Interviews & National Averages
High School Sample Sites • Worst Scenario: Castlemont High (39) copiers various speeds, models, and vendors. (150) Desktop printers. Total estimated monthly sites cost: $8,500+ • Average Site: Oakland High (2) Oce, 100 ppm, (3) Canon 60 ppm, (1) 55 Konica, (1) Royal 25 ppm (2) Oce 75 ppm (135) Desktop Printers. Total estimated monthly site cost: $6,200+
Outsourcing - Captured • Current: $254,251.51 • Proposed: $24,558.87 • Savings: $229,692.52 Many sites currently “send out” jobs that could easily be captured by printing utilizing the OUSD Print Shop or proper onsite equipment…
Current Estimated Monthly OUSD Costs$219,325** Estimate based on OUSD Interviews & National Averages
Next Steps • Research and propose “piggy-backable bid” to State Administrator and CFO to address one-year needs of sites • Validate Desired OUSD Solution • Publish copier “Request for Proposal” (RFP) to meet long-term copier needs • Develop Information Dissemination and Implementation Plan for full Support of the long-term Solution provided by successful bidder provided by the RFP process
Special thanks to the Xerox Corporation for donating the time, expertise and resources that made this comprehensive assessment possible! Oakland Unified School District Procurement Department June 2004