October 9, 2013

Ms. Anne R Marshall 3088 Myrtle Street Charlottetown, PE C1C 7P9 Dear Ms. Marshall: Thank you for giving us the opportunity to analyze the three proposals submitted in response to your Request for Proposal and to give you our recommendations. Two of the three proposals were written by consultants who are experienced and who have good reputations in the specific area of work to be performed. The Bradford proposal misses the target. Even though it focuses on productivity and cost reduction as specified in your Request for Proposal, the approach is a standard industrial engineering approach with emphasis on efficiency. This type of approach is more effective for factory and clerical work than it is for work done by professionals. The Eastman proposal uses an approach that is better suited to your employees and should meet your expectations. However, we have concerns about the price quoted. The first phase of the program costs $20,000, and the second phase cost depends on the results of the first phase. The first phase is too high, and you need more specifics on the second phase costs. The McAlexander proposal was submitted by a group that specializes in employee benefits. We would prefer to recommend a group with more expertise in productivity and cost reduction. We recommend that you negotiate the price on the Eastman proposal and will be happy to assist you with that process. Sincerely,

Lynn P. Timmons sb