Agency Corrections Dept

Contractor BKBM Engineers

SWIFT Contract Number 94982

Project Name Study for Tunnel Repair - Civil & Structural

Project Number (if applicable) 78ML0059

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Emergency study required to determine cause of corrosion to MCF main electrical feeders located in a subtunnel. This portion of the work required on site structural inspection for safety, soil borings, utility locates and drainage analysis to help determine interim and final fix.

Project Duration

Start Date Thu, 06/25/2015 - 00:00

Original end date Wed, 08/05/2015 - 00:00

Actual end date Wed, 08/05/2015 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $30000.00

Amendments $0.00

Contract total $30000.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? CAPRA

Is this a sole source contract? Yes

If this was a single source contract, explain why the agency determined there was only a single source for the services (if applicable) Emergency. They were recommended by consultant who was on site.

Evaluator Name Glen Heino

Evaluator Email Address glen.heino@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Satisfactory – The Consultant performed in an average manner that demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The consultant’s overall performance is equal to any negative performance. The Consultant has contributed to the success of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Satisfactory – The Consultant performed in an average manner that demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The consultant’s overall performance is equal to any negative performance. The Consultant has contributed to the success of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Satisfactory – The Consultant performed in an average manner that demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The consultant’s overall performance is equal to any negative performance. The Consultant has contributed to the success of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Satisfactory – The Consultant performed in an average manner that demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The consultant’s overall performance is equal to any negative performance. The Consultant has contributed to the success of the project.

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.): n/a

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied