Agency Natural Resources Dept

Contractor University of Minnesota

SWIFT Contract Number 69104/3000047394

Project Name Biological Control of Garlic Mustard

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Garlic mustard is an invasive species and management of this plant using current methods is cost and labor intensive. The purpose of the project was to continue to conduct research to prepare for field release of the garlic mustard biological control insect Ceutorhynchus scrobicollis pending approval for release by the USDA. Efforts focused on optimizing the rearing techniques to increasing the productivity and abundance (yield) of C. scrobicollis and exploring additional means to further enhance rearing and release. Research also explored methods to ensure parasitoid-free C. scrobicollis in containment. Data was also collected on the garlic mustard monitoring plots and analysis of that data was carried out.

Project Duration

Start Date Wed, 10/02/2013 - 00:00

Original end date Mon, 06/30/2014 - 00:00

Actual end date Mon, 06/30/2014 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $52213.70

Amendments $0

Contract total $52213.70

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? MN Environmental and Natural Resources Trust Fund

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) The University of Minnesota has been extensively involved in this project and the University of Minnesota is the only site in Minnesota that has a biocontainment facility available for conducting research on an insect not yet approved for release in the United States.

Evaluator Name Laura Van Riper

Evaluator Email Address Laura.Vanriper@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The contractor conducted the work on time and in accordance to the schedule laid out in the contract.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The work was high quality and scientifically rigorous.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The cost was as expected for this type of work requiring high levels of education and skills and access to the University's biocontainment facility.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance The overall performance was professional.

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.): Not applicable.

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