Summary#
Montréal’s city council adopted a position in favour of exercising the first 12-month extension of its framework agreement with Cofomo inc. for business-analysis services. It also supported authorizing an additional $2,676,865.10, taxes included, bringing the agreement’s total to $5,284,624.57, taxes included. The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting.
- The extension would let the City order business-analysis services from Cofomo for up to 12 more months, as needs arise.
- The agreement supports projects run by the City’s Information Technology Service, including work to develop and deploy digital solutions.
- The original agreement was awarded through a public call for tenders that received five bids. The materials do not say whether Cofomo’s bid was the lowest compliant bid.
What it means for you#
- City staff and project partners: The Information Technology Service would have access to Cofomo’s business-analysis services to support projects. The decision does not require the City to order a set amount of work; purchases would be made as needs arise.
- Residents and taxpayers: The decision does not directly change a service, fee, tax, or eligibility rule for residents. It authorizes additional spending from the Information Technology Service’s budget.
- City administration: The council’s adopted position supports the extension, but the agglomeration council makes the final decision.
Money#
The council supported an additional spending authorization of $2,676,865.10, taxes included; the agreement total would rise to $5,284,624.57, taxes included.
- The City says purchases would be made as needs arise and charged to the Information Technology Service’s capital works program budget.
- City staff say the expense may be shared with the agglomeration, with the allocation assessed when future work is authorized.
- The agreement is being extended for 12 months. The original agreement was estimated at $2,607,759.47, taxes included.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not specify which assignments Cofomo would receive, how many staff it would provide, or how much work the City expects to order.
- They do not give the rates or other details used to price individual assignments.
- The materials do not set out project-by-project targets or measures for judging the services’ results.
Case for#
- City staff say the extension would help the Information Technology Service maintain capacity and add targeted expertise while projects are underway.
- Staff say the existing agreement has supported projects and helped internal teams deliver planned work.
- The framework agreement allows the City to buy services as needs arise, rather than committing in this decision to a fixed volume of work.
Case against#
- The additional authorization is substantial, but the materials do not show how much work the City expects to buy or what specific deliverables it will receive.
- The agreement relies on an outside firm for expertise. City staff say knowledge will be transferred to internal teams, but the materials do not describe how that transfer will be assessed.
- The original call for tenders received five bids, but the materials do not say whether Cofomo submitted the lowest compliant bid.