Agency Pollution Control Agency

Contractor MINNESOTA RIVER BASIN JOINT POWERS

SWIFT Contract Number 37938

Project Name 319-11, MN POLLUTION REDUCTION AND ECONOMICS TEST

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: This project will professionally validate and demonstrate the Nutrient Tracking Tool (NTT) to evaluate land management scenarios and provide measureable outcomes for conservation practices designed to reduce non-point source pollution. The NTT, being developed by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Texas Institute for Applied Environment Research, compares agricultural management scenarios to calculate a change in nitrogen, phosphorous, sediment loss potential and crop yield.

Project Duration

Start Date Wed, 12/28/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Mon, 08/31/2015 - 00:00

Actual end date Mon, 08/31/2015 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $172916.00

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $172916.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? 319 fund

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 Nick Gervino

Evaluator Email Address nick.gervino@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The project ended prematurely due to conflicts between the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Texas Institute for Applied Environment Research over development of the Nutrient Tracking Tool - the principal focus of the project. Otherwise the schedule maintenance was satisfactory.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Deliverables, when available, were received on time. The contractor did an unsatisfactory job of meeting work plan objectives and accomplishing contract goals due to the conflicts and premature end date mentioned above.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The contractor had excellent budget management. One change order was needed to amend the budget, to incorporate in-kind match average requested by Stearns County SWCD and a staffing change at the Minnesota River Board. This change did not result the grant amount.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Overall the contractor's performance was good. Contract was ended prematurely due to a conflict between the USDA-NRCS and the Texas Institute for Applied Environment Research.

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 4 - satisfied