Agency VETERANS HOME BOARD

Contractor Lindell Engineering

SWIFT Contract Number 444656

Project Name Design for B-6 HVAC Controls

Project Number (if applicable) 75MP0026

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: MVH requested updating controls from pneumatic to digital controls.

Project Duration

Start Date Sun, 04/17/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Wed, 12/31/2014 - 00:00

Actual end date Mon, 05/23/2016 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $9000.00

Amendments $0.00

Contract total $9000.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? 14 AP

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, was currently working as engineer on other project in that building.

Evaluator Name Glen Heino

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

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Unsatisfactory – The Consultant performed in an unacceptable manner in regards to the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The Consultant's incomplete documents resulted in a time-lengthy PR (steam meter). To be fair, the project started out with stops and starts by the facility, and performed somewhat slowly when given the final go-ahead, Also took too long to close out the project...Substantial Completion was 5/1/15 on the controls, and 1/1/16 on the steam piping PR.

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 3 - neutral