Agency Transportation Department

Contractor Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 232453

Project Name Administrative Rules and Structures of Speed Safety Camera Systems

Project Number (if applicable) 1054076

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: This TRS built on the results of the Automated Speed Enforcement TRS published in January 2023 and was the next phase of
research into regional, national, and international best practices regarding the implementation and operation of speed safety
cameras and their related administrative programs. It focused on the following topics/questions:
1. How have other states dealt with â??maskingâ?? and federal motor carrier administrative rules?
2. How have law enforcement agencies structured and dealt with speed safety camera (SSC) program administration?
3. How have courts structured and dealt with SSC administration?
4. Where SSC programs have been retracted, what happened and why?
This work helped inform state and local policymakers and staff at MnDOT and local transportation departments on
implementation and operation of automated speed enforcement best practices when traffic safety camera legislation was
proposed and subsequently passed by the state legislature.

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 07/14/2023 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 03/31/2024 - 00:00

Actual end date Mon, 09/30/2024 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $43242.60

Amendments $1740.00

Contract total $44982.60

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? state funds

Is this a sole source contract? No

If this was a single source contract, explain why the agency determined there was only a single source for the services (if applicable) {Empty}

Evaluator Name Sindt,Matthew George

Evaluator Email Address Matthew.Sindt@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Deliverables were on time and communication was prompt. Overall timeliness was great.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Excellent. Deliverables were high quality.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Costs were as expected for SEH compared to other consultants that might be qualified for this work. They strove to minimize the hours and budget necessary to complete the project.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance good

Would you engage the contractor's services again? Yes

Describe any negative action taken during the duration of this contract (i.e., termination, pursuit of suspension, etc.): {Empty}

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 5 - very satisfied