Travis County Commssioners Court
December 2, 2003
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Item 6
6. Discuss and take appropriate action on contract with consultant to assist with jail operations analysis and recommendations. And several of these individuals were here this morning. We appreciate their cooperation and patience with us. They did learn a little bit about landfills, though, while they were here with us.
>> was that an editorial comment, kimberly? [laughter]
>> good afternoon, I know we are here to talk about the jail operations consultants. I just want to talk a little bit about the work the evaluation committee has done. Based on prior direction from the court, the evaluation committee had been negotiating with the final two consultants and came up with an intfreighted work plan and -- integrated work plan. I'm going to turn it over in a second to kimberly to talk about that and give a brief overview about that scope of work. I want to say that the evaluation committee did an exceptional job in trying to meet the budget amounts that were put on this. And the final list in putting this together. I will turn it over to kimberly to talk about the overview of the scope of work and what's entailed.
>> thanks, mike. I think the first thing that I would like to do or start off doing, while you were at lunch this afternoon, I gave each of you a packet and it's titled the jail operations consultant chronological time line. Do you all have that? Last week when I was preparing for today's presentation, I realized it's been a little over three months since we have been in front of the court and give an update on this item or on this project. So what I would like to start off doing first is just give you just one or two minutes, let me hit some key dates, key areas where basically a series of events that have led to us where we are today, if that's okay. Of course on August the 12th the court voted to reduce the amount of money for this project not to exceed $100,000. And that Travis County staff would perform roughly half of the initial scope of work. On August the 13th, the evaluation team met to finallize the readvised scope of work, specifically noting which tasks Travis County would be responsible for and those asked of the consultant. On August 20th cyd e-mailed a memo to the top two consulting firms advising the of the revised scope of work and asked that a updated ... On September the 18th and 23rd, the evaluation team met to discuss a new proposal submitted by the top two consulting firms. On October 10th and 14th the evaluation team met to discuss specific questions for the interviews scheduled for October 15th. Of course on October the 15th the evaluation team interviewed the top two firms. On October the 21st, we conducted a follow-up interviews, phone interviews in attempt to get the cost proposals at or under the $100,000 cap. Following the interviews on the 21st the evaluation team decided to begin negotiations with the top consulting firm, criminal justice solutions or cjs. We received ... A November of questions and concerns. On the 27th of October cyd smaild the court that the negotiation was team in the final stages of negotiations with cjs and were hopeful to have a contract before the court on November th 18th. Obviously we have passed November the 18th and we are still hopeful that we will have a contract in front of the court, within the next two weeks.
>> before christmas.
>> on October the 29th, purchasing submitted a memo suggesting clarifications and answers to some of our questions. On November 4 the evaluation team began drafting a contract for the county attorney's office to begin reviewing. On -- again on November 4th the evaluation team met prior to the conference call with cjs scheduled fo November 5th. On November 5th we conducted a conference call regarding the integrated approach they discussed with us at our initial interview on October 15th. Cjs agreed to submit a new scope of work, time line and cost proposal. We received it on [indiscernible] and belinda powell the following day began directing a new scope of work. That was presented to the evaluation team and cjs last week, November 21st.
>> we are waiting to hear back from cjs on answering our questions, making sure that they agree with the scope as it's written. We are just waiting to hear from them. They know that time is of the essence and we want this done before the end of the year.
>> I would like to say, though, that cjs's approach is more of an integrated team process approach. All of Travis County staff will continue to be held responsible for roughly 60% of the work, they agreed to provide technical assistance, feedback and a help desk throughout the duration of this project. I would like to point out to the court, though, that by going with this approach we do lose quite a bit of the independent and external review that the court initially was planning within the original scope of work. I wanted to kind of point that out before we went any further. Our department submitted the -- the backup last week to the court. And in that is a new scope of work. A one-page document entitled Travis County jail study proposed payment and delivery schedule submitted by cjs and attached to that is a revised task time line. If you could refer to your backup, and we can briefly go over -- this budget, these two documents pretty much mirror each other. The only difference is the revised task line is a breakdown of each task by detail, responsibility and duration. So if you could pull that out of the backup. And we can briefly go over that.
>> now which -- what documents should we look at now.
>> looks like this, judge, without my doodles on it. It's in the backup, it should be toward the very end of your backup.
>> okay.
>> proposed payment and delivery schedule?
>> yes, sir.
>> all right.
>> this one page document is divided up into three separate categories, one on the left side is going to be the specific tasks. Second is going to be the responsibility and to the far right is the amount of money that cjs is requesting. The first task underneath the review of jail operations is reviewing and evaluate the current organizational structure and staff deployment. This task will be Travis County will be responsible for conducting this class. Bed utilization, develop a detailed profile of the jail population, Travis County will also be responsible for that. However, cjs will be responsible to validate the classification study. So let's see here I'm getting off line. No I'm not. They are requesting $5,575. Underneath 1 c, they will be responsible for evaluating the health care delivery at the del valle jail. They are requesting 5,475 $5,475. The subtotal is $21,050. Underneath that is the allocation for the project management support, an additional $3,704. If you go to the middle of the page, you will see roman numeral ii, evaluation of inmate populations and projections, this entire portion here will be conducted by the cjs.
>> conducted by who?
>> cjs.
>> okay. First one is population analysis at $4,950. The population projections $19,125. You go down to iii, physical evaluation of facilities, Travis County will be responsible for iii a the update to the physical evaluation of del valle. Iii b, develop cost trade analyses for renovations or any changes, cj's responsibility 11,100. Travis County would be asked to identify any architectural changes, cjs will be responsible for developing estimated cost improvements, $11,000. In addition to del valle redeveloped scenarios, 21,550. Your subtotal there would be 677 $25. 67,725. Allocation and support [indiscernible], takes it to the $100,000 cap.
>> so does the committee believe if we get these services, the value to Travis County is at least $100,000?
>> based on the way this breaks down, based on the consultant involvement, based on what Travis County is doing, I would say more or less yes. I mean, this is $100,000 worth of value. Again, you have got to footnote that with a couple of things, though. As kimberly started mentioning, you know, there are a couple of things to consider with this. One is, you know, at $100,000 this is a lot of work to do honestly. There are a couple of pieces here that typically you go out and get consulting firms to do just by themselves. So looking at this, I think is it a good value for $100,000 to get this type of consultant involvement and have this integrated approach I would have to say yes it is. I mean it's -- to cover this scope of work.
>> what do the other members of the committee say?
>> well, one of the other things that we are buying in this that I think is a benefit they are a recognized firm, a lot of people look to them and the references we got were excellent on them. One of the things in discussing who is going to do what, they are going to sort of be overseeing the process, they are also going to provide specialized tools that they have developed over the years to collect data and do some of the interviewings and they have all of those forms and tools that they are going to give to us that -- they are also going to come and train staff on how to do that. In the discussions those tools will be going g for use in the future so we can continue to updaylight the analysis and the projections through the use of those tools. So I think that there is a -- a high value in just getting those tools. And learning from the experts and kind of directing what we do. Based on the other proposals that we got, I think union for the $100,000, we are going to get a good study. Of course I don't have to be involved in it. It's these folks that are actually going to be doing the work and the sheriff's office, so they might have a different perspective, but that's my perspective.
>> cyd, sorry, judge --
>> that answer is yes, I guess.
>> yes.
>> we think the sheriff, the things that the sheriff's department has to do, the sheriff can do these?
>> yes, sir.
>> because a whole lot of this, we are looking doing some of the preliminary work, passing that on to them for analysis. Basically, right?
>> there's the analysis that we are also doing, you should be aware of that. From -- from p.b.o. Perspective, do we think this is a good value and a good approach at one hundred thousand dollars, yes, we do. Would we like to see more analysis done by the consultant? Yes, we would. But you can't get that for $100,000 unless you want to look at doing less. But -- but there is, you should be aware that on certain of the items that are identified, as Travis County, we will also be developing a set of recommendations and doing analytical work. The consultant in the help desk format with us, we have available dialogue with them as we are developing that analysis and recommendations and then they will also review and give us feedback on our analysis and our recommendations. But it will not wholly be done by the outside consultant. Only those tasks that are designated as cjs on that spread sheet that kimberly walked you through will wholly be done by the outside consultant.
>> following up on what belinda is saying. That's one of the tradeoffs here. Going with this approach, again after the fact saying that it's a good value at $100,000, one of the things that you lose as you go to this integrative approach is that you don't have that external involvement. You don't have the consultant doing some of the analysis and recommendation on the ground. You have the county taking up some of that slack and some -- in some big areas. What does that mean? That means that even though we have the consultant reviewing and validating some of the things that are being developed, ultimately when you talk about ownership and accountability, it's going to be the county that takes that accountability and ownership of that. I doubt that the consultant would stand too much behind things that are developed so much in house. At least for those sections where they are providing more just a help desk and advisory role.
>> okay.
>> judge, I -- can you -- even $100,000 going through the different categories which kimberly laid out, I think a zig -- I think are significant, there are some benefits, however a $100,000 investment, grand total here, can you point out to me a track record whereby this particular company has been involved in previous activities whereby they have actually did this and the person that they dealt with actually is available to say yes they did a great job, the jail population has been reduced because of their investment of performance based type situation, can you point those things outlet to me in -- and who have they dealt with other than if Travis County elects to go with them, to point out a history or a paper trail or something that I can hang my hat on and say, "well, this is a worthwhile investment because such and such a county or such and such other place used this approach" and they had achieved this amount of reduction in the jail population and things like that? Is there any paper trail to suggest that?
>> Commissioner, in their proposal, we did ask for the qualifications, references, and information from their company. And the two -- the two main partners, george and camille, they have been in the business for a long, long time. They did give us, I believe kimberly passed this out to everyone, a list of all of the -- or a sample of projects that they have done in the past, going back all wait to 1982. They worked in almost every state in the united states. They have done staffing analysis, operational assessments, operation management studies, master plans. In fact I believe we talked to one of the -- of the department of corrections that they had done a master plan, they said they were still using the master plan, they were very satisfied with the work. And the other consultant that we were talking to has partnered with this firm before and he said that they were a very reputable firm. Michael said yesterday that they also put out a --
>> yeah, this --
>> I think that I have posed the question to you yesterday.
>> right.
>> so can you -- [multiple voices]
>> wasn't a part of what I had so can you maybe framework that to give me a comfort level?
>> I will try my best.
>> all right.
>> please.
>> based on, you know, the information that cyd was saying, they have a long track record of doing this type of work. And I can tell you from just the time that I was a consultant out there that i've heard of this firm and from all things I know of, they are -- they are a pretty reputable firm. They -- cjs also has an entity that it is in charge of that's called the criminal justice institute. And this criminal justice institute puts out a corrections year book which is a compendium of correction statistics for both like state and jail, prison and jail corrections. This is pretty wide lie used and pretty ridely regarded in the corrections community as far as I know. So is this a reputable firm, is it somebody that has the background and experience to do this? All indications to me are that -- that they are. They have done work at the federal, state and local level. And they have several project that's we can point to in their background that point to the fact that they have the experience to do this. And like I said, based on what my knowledge is of this firm, they do have a good reputation for the work that they do.
>> so I guess in essence what you are saying is they have done a good job in the jail population, of course the management that they have put in place [indiscernible] some significance as far as the jail population.
>> well, I can't speak specifically for, you know, the -- for any particular county or state on what the results are, but I can tell you that you -- that you probably won't stay in business too long if you don't do a good job. Their track record reflect the fact that they've had some success and their results have been well receive understand a lot of jurisdictions, that's kind of all I can say about that.
>> they have extensive experience. In the information we gave you, they list all of the different entity that's they work for, what they specifically did for them. It's extensive.
>> okay.
>> I don't know that I have that, can I get another copy of that?
>> sure.
>> it was just passed -- it wasn't part of the backup yesterday.
>> just today.
>> just put on there today, judge. That's what I requested yesterday.
>> floating around.
>> and I didn't have that as far as backup yesterday.
>> I will find mine at the close of business today. [laughter]
>> that's why I posed that question.
>> some of the other -- I'm sorry, did you all have a question.
>> I was going to say the thing that -- I think there's two questions, are we getting $100,000 worth of work, I think the answer to that is yes. There's another piece of that, what will our investment bring back. If there's just one line item which I'm reading here, health care delivery cost reduction strategies, that is one area that we more than reap investment of $100,000, how much money we spend in the health care of these inmates who are with us 24/7 and have not generally been to see a doctor lately and come to with us a world of problems. So -- so that's the other case of this. Are we going to get the investment in terms of a payback value. I think that's where we have significant opportunity to get our money's worth here. The other thing is that I would, rather than use the word well we reduced the amount of money that we needed, we right-sized this project. I appreciate Commissioner Daugherty you brought up some good suggestions about what kinds of things properly do we have the expertise on staff to do. And to not get some outside consultant to recreate the expertise that we already have. But to then specifically give them assignments related to some best practices kinds of things, the health care thing is simply where we don't have that kind of expertise on staff and to validate some of the numbers related to the projections, validate something else by the very good people who are working for us. So this I think is a nice blending together of -- of outside expertise and the validation with our in-house resources and together I think we can come up with something that will give us more than our fair share of value. I think this has been a very good process to get us from what was just a target number to, okay, what exactly are we purchasing and why are we purchasing it. This is one of the largest -- it is the largest department in county government. And we can make even a one percent impact on that budget, that is a whole lot of money that pales in comparison to $100,000.
>> Commissioner Sonleitner, the corrections bureau simply for -- for corrections, central booking and inmate services is $55.4 million budget. That is not the entire cost attributable to, you know, to the operation because there's some support pieces that go into that. But the nuts and bolts of it is -- is 55.4 million, so you are talking about a substantial budget that you are working with in assessing.
>> so you have a contract before us in two weeks?
>> we hope so.
>> we hope that we will have one before now, but --
>> I hoped that we would have one before now, too, but what's the holdup? We have the numbers here, the scope of service. What's the problem if.
>> part of the difficulty in trying to make sure that we are all understanding exactly what is expected of each other in this integrated approach is to try to get more specificity in the scope language that we are not misrepresenting anything, that we all clearly understand who is doing what and how that is going to work. Because it is a fairly unique approach in the -- as far as scoping the consultant contract is concerned, so once we get comment back from the [indiscernible] we will have a much better feel for how long it will take to finalize the contract documents which I believe purchase being has sent to the county attorney's office already. That's been the difficulty making sure that everyone is on the same page at understanding exactly what our expectations of each other are. That has taken lengthy dialogue with them.
>> we have not been negotiating with them for two years, but this is a two-year process right now.
>> that's right.
>> [indiscernible]
>> took too long to get here.
>> trying to be nice.
>> we will have it back on in two weeks.
>> can I ask a couple of questions. David, how many years experience do you have in dealing with law enforcement?
>> 24 in February.
>> I'm going to get back and beat this horse a little bit more. I mean I'm -- I guess I'm happy that we have gone from 250 down to 100. But -- but, you know, I'm always a little leery -- leary when you start out with something, you want to spend a quarter of a million on something, it's gone down to 100, you ask consultants, what can you do for me for 100. It has been my experience whenever I have dealt with these kind of things that -- that if you get $100,000, and you expect this thing to just come to a screeching halt, that $100,000, then everybody still has questions, it's kind of like well, we've still got? Questions. Well the answers, we have only given you answers for $100,000. Maybe I should feel comfortable that we now have a consultant that is head of our justice and public safety. Because michael I'm going to expect you to be able to answer all of those -- all of that next set of questions since you come out of that industry. I'm a little uncomfortable with giving the fact that we have a consultant on board with us now, head of this department, I wouldn't know why we wouldn't give you an -- a shot at saying you know what, I did this when I was a consultant. I mean, part of the reason that you got the job is because of your background and what you were able to bring to the table. I'm very fearful if we undertake this project and spend our $100,000, that either we are going to just get partial -- well, we still have a lot more questions. I can't mean that david balagia can't sit down and say with all of the years of experience and with everything -- everybody else that we have in the jail system that we basically couldn't tell you how -- what's the best way to operate all of this system with the that this we have right here. We didn't just start jail operations in the last couple of years. I mean when you see all of these years of experience that these consultants have, they pale in comparison to the number of years that we have in our jail employee base. If pom just want a consultant to come in and say you tell you, takes the monkey off of our back, which is basically what a consultant does instead of going to your staff and saying it is your job to run this system the most efficiently and effectively that we can. We expect that of you, you get paid to do that job. I'm -- I'm really struggling. $100,000 is insignificant with a 55 to an $80 million budget which is depending on what you throw into the jail system. I just think that we are -- that we may be going out here saying, listen, you tell us some of the things that we ought to do -- I can't believe we would have people saying this is a problem, let's sit down and solve this problem. Especially given that we have a consultant, you know, as head of our justice and public safety. I mean coordinator position. You know staffing of jail, overtime factors, some of the things that they are talking about doing. Gosh, I can't imagine that I need a consultant to tell us how to deal with our overtime situation. Here's a guy that -- I mean I would think that would have forgotten more about that than the average everyday joe knows. You know, I think that we are going to be really perplexed whenever we see -- because one of the things that I think will come back tohis consultant is you know what, you all need to build some more jails. I'm going to tell you right now, I mean, going out on this street today and telling people that we are fixing to build more facilities when they are trying to get over what we just went through over the last number of years I think is something that's going to be hard to sell. Now if the consultant says you know what, this is something you all got to do, it's different telling us what we got to do and being able to get out on the street and sell it. I'm very leary about the tools and data bases that we are getting. The last thing that I want to get into is somebody else having another data base. The integration process that we go through in this community or in this county with the left hand really having no idea what the right hand is doing scares me to death. Somebody says well we gave you the data base, it doesn't really function with any other things that we have condition the county. I mean that frightens me. So what I would be the most comfortable with, I realize that I might be just be one out of five up here willing to do this, but we have got a guy that's come out of the industry. I don't think that michael, in your defense, that you have been here long enough to look at this thing and to say, you know, this is what I would do. These are the things that I think that we need because you haven't been here long enough to really know the things that you would like to see. I'm sure that six months down the road you are going to come back and say boy I would have scoped this thing a little bit differently because this is something that we are not getting. But before we just haphazardly sign-off again on $100,000, again that out of $300 million o and m budget is probably pretty insignificant, it is $100,000. Especially if at the end of it they are going to go, you know, to really connect that dot where you really know what this thing is, we need to spend more than $100,000.
>> well, I don't know that we can call two years of deliberation I guess preparation haphazard. We started off with a quarter million because we knew it would be substantial. I did not vote for michael trimble because he was a consultant. I fought real hard not to use that against him. I looked at other aspects of his background and we gave him that job. But david cannot fulfill his job with Travis County at the same time act as a consultant for corrections in Travis County, the job that we are asking for. Chief balagia has done an outstanding job for Travis County, I think, but how much david have you done for indiana or the state of utah or new york or florida, montana of all places, new jersey. I really like montana, for our montana residents here. Connecticut, georgia, washington, new mexico, vermont, idaho, maryland, arizona, I mean it's the experience that you are buying here basically. We decided two years ago, though, along with the sheriff's agreement, that we should get an outside consultant for part of this work. Because we wanted an independent analysis, my guess is we could have stopped everything else and gotten 20 of Travis County's finest and probably taken a look at this. What would have happened to the work that the 20 had been doing and must do even while we do this unless? So it's the independent analysis I think that we are looking at. And any -- any help I think in two or three small pieces of this big apple would produce cost benefits, I think, and substantial dollars for years to come. The other thing, though, is in my view if you buy $100,000 worth of services and conclude that you need more, you are floolish not to buy it. We backed off the 250,000 to try to get as much as we could for $100,000. We knew we couldn't get the same amount of work. So our question was what parts of this can we do to obviate for doing outside help to get it done, at the same time maximize outside expertise and although I have gotten on the committee for taking too long, I can understand that was not easy. That's what you have been trying to do basically. Narrow down to an appropriate scope of services that we think will get us what we need to buy from the outside. With us doing as much of the work in house as possible. I mean, this has been a two-year process. And I remember that fluently because this last budget process, [indiscernible] the budget, while we have been basically carrying part of the initially budgeted money toward until we got this done. So we concluded the work needed to be done more than two years ago, the question was how to do it. Initially we were looking at a larger amount of money than we have available today. These problems are not going away. Our needs for them haven't gone away either. The analysis, i've been trying to push us because I think at some point we need to start getting good recommendations, acting on them. This is one of those big areas that require expenditure, investment of a lot of money, the other thing is that we committed to the state jail commission more than a year ago that we would conduct the analysis necessary for us to determine how many beds we need. We wanted to buy more additional time to get as efficient as we could so we made sure we could maximize our utilization of our beds, but the understanding was at in some point we may well need additional beds. We will reach that point at some point, only I'm hoping it will be five or 10 years from now, you know, not five or 10 months.
>>
>> [one moment please for change in captioners]
>>
>> I find it interesting that this $100,000 is the same amount of money that we did not hesitate to put in a line item to validate work under 1445 with the city of Austin. And there we have the city of Austin saying, oh, no, no, no, we don't want to get an outside consultant, we want to do that work in-house. And I think our body, myself included, is quite critical of the city saying you need to step up to the plate. There is expertise, outside validation, we need to get this work done in a short period of time. This is an awful lot of work. Again, 14 people, 370 years' worth of experience in a very short time period so that we can take this information and turn this into some results that we can use during our next budgetary process. So I think it is appropriate. It has never been who who the top cop is. We know who the top cops are. But if there was an opening at the city of Austin for city manager, I don't think david would be applying for that job. It's different. We're talking about some management kinds of issues that simply are beyond what these folks have to do. They've got other jobs to do, and boy, have we sure used them in dealing with the overcrowding crisis in terms of their time and expertise. They've got that and their regular jobs. You simply can't have 14 people more jobs to get done in a four-month period. It's just -- you can't do it.
>> and one other point is in-house staff are going to be doing a lot of work on this project themselves in addition to the 14 people you are mentioning. And it's going to be a lot of work for p.b.o., The sheriff and c.j.e.
>> as it is, it's a lot of staff time. We're going to be pretty well organized and have our ducks in a row just as any consultant from the outside needs to do to get this work done in the time line.
>> do you all think you will feel comfortable at the end of this deal is part of what the consultant is telling you you really need to go out and find more money to complete this process? To really complete this thing?
>> the recommendation we would come before the court again and we would evaluate that.
>> and so to answer that from my perspective, I would kind of go back to the tradeoff on this is that you are not going to have, you know, full involvement of an independent external review for the $100,000. You are going have -- you know, that tpaoeupblt report is going to be sections done by that final consultant and sections done by us, reviewed and validated by the consultant, but it's going to be work primarily done by county staff, however is doing that. So I guess the question is, yes, is that going to satisfy the requirements of this project and are we going to be ready to act on those. I guess that's the question envisioning that final product.
>> and my question was not whether we get $100,000 worth of work it's weather we get $100,000 worth of value. And I heard your answer to be yes. If you come back and ask for $5,000 more, the question would be why. An additional $5,000 worth of value, $5,000 worth of work that we cannot, should not do in-house? We would ask the same questions and if we like the answers we would vote it up, if not, vote it done. I guess my thinking was we deliberated over this two years ago and voted let's go in this direction. And I think when we reduced the amount of money we did it thinking it was the right thing to do at that point but knowing we had to make some concessions. The concession was we had to do more work. If we don't want to do that amount of work we ought to beef that up to the $200,000 range. My guess is we've got two vendors to look at. It would take another year to get an appropriate scope of service, you know.
>> I'm ready to move on.
>> I am too.
>> I'm suggesting in two weeks -- I'm not asking you all to guarantee that you won't come back and ask for more, just that you are trying to. Trying to look at the consultant for $100,000. That's the plan. I don't want to cut our throats where we think the benefit would greatly outweigh the costs. That's what we're here to consider. But if we don't agree the benefit would greatly outweigh the costs, we would vote it done.
>> judge, I guess your question was earlier as far as did they think they would have something ready for us in two weeks to vote as far as the contract is concerned.
>> and before I would answer, I put it down for December 16th. I was going to call it back December 16th.
>> all right. I was wondering -- [indiscernible]. Would they feel comfortable having it back before the Commissioners court at that time. I did get an answer, they didn't answer.
>> the more it's going to slip and the whole point is --
>> December 16th would be fine with you all?
>> it's fine with us.
>> but I think we're in good shape at least to get this in front of you.
>> if it's later than that, we may lose the precinct 3 Commissioner's support. Think about that the next couple of weeks.
>> all right, thanks.
>> thank you all.
>> thank you all very much. Appreciate your hard work.
>> thank you all very much.
Last Modified: Tuesday, December 3, 2003 6:52 AM