Agency Corrections Dept

Contractor Paulson & Clark Engineering, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 90090

Project Name Arc Flash Study at MCF-Moose Lake & WR

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Engineering effort required for mandated arc flash study.

Project Duration

Start Date Thu, 03/26/2015 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 01/31/2016 - 00:00

Actual end date Sun, 01/31/2016 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $34900

Amendments $0

Contract total $34900

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? '15 Agency

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) Within guidelines for single source and there was economy as they were on site for another project.

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 Excellent – The Consultant performed in a better than average manner that demonstrating a good understanding of the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The consultant’s overall performance outweighs any negative performance. The Consultant contributed a great deal 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