Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor University of Minnesota

SWIFT Contract Number 57139

Project Name Complete Streets Planning and Design Guidance Docu

Project Number (if applicable) 99008 W103

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The Complete Streets Guidance Document will be widely applicable to MnDOT and local agency administrators, planners, designers and transportation practitioners generally, as well as to consultants and external state agency administrators and staff that align with the many potential benefits of Complete Streets in regards to natural environment, public health, economic vitality and quality of life in Minnesota.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 01/14/2013 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 08/31/2014 - 00:00

Actual end date Sat, 10/31/2015 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $200000.00

Amendments $20000.00

Contract total $215772.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? FHWA

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 Scott Bradley

Evaluator Email Address scott.bradley@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Average

Evaluate the contractor's quality Contractor quality was Average overall but ranged from Above Average to Below Average specific to certain tasks and the range of direction and input that had to be digested and factored in from MnDOT and external stakeholders over the duration of the project. Some MnDOT stakeholders saw a need for a different project and scope in the last year of the project duration and some were happy with the project as it evolved.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Average

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Overall, the Contractor’s performance was average and ranging from Above Average in many cases to Below Average in a few cases due to the complexities and challenges and MnDOT and External stakeholder engagement necessary to the project and circumstances not under their control. I would rate them Average to Above Average in responding to the consensus direction provided by the MnDOT core team advisory group members that were in place initially and through the entire duration 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.): Near the end of the contract period, a higher level of core MnDOT Stakeholders, specific to current Complete Streets concerns and MnDOT implementation efforts and directions, was convened to reach some consensus on acceptance of the 90% final deliverable. Opinions and desired varied across a range of potential options from acceptance to needed modifications to rejection of the 90% deliverable for posting or publishing as a MnDOT guidance or draft guidance document. Consensus was ultimately expressed that the Contractor should be paid for the work completed and it can be used as their intellectual property for posting or publishing as with the caveat that they must remove any indication of MnDOT sanction or approval for the guidance and should only reference that MnDOT contributed funding to the project (80% federal SP&R and 20% MnDOT match)

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied