Agency Military Affairs Dept

Contractor RSP Architects, Ltd.

SWIFT Contract Number 44062

Project Name Education Complex Addition at Camp Ripley

Project Number (if applicable) 11130

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Consultant services to provide design and construction administration oversight for the Education Complex Addition at Camp Ripley, Little Falls, Minnesota.

Department of Military Affairs does not have adequate staff to complete the required need.

Project Duration

Start Date Sat, 05/05/2012 - 00:00

Original end date Tue, 05/20/2014 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 05/20/2016 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $1578951.00

Amendments $37510.00

Contract total $1616461.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? State and Federal Funds

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 Mr. Patrick Rolph

Evaluator Email Address patrick.t.rolph.nfg@mail.mil

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness During the Design Phase of this project RSP was diligent in keeping the team on task and was able to bid the project to maintain a fall construction start of this multi-phase project.

Evaluate the contractor's quality RSP Design Team had QA/QC procedures in place to review for design conflicts in each phase of design. Gausman & Moore need to address design errors in their process to ensure electrical wire sizing, conduit fill, piping and drain venting meet code compliance.

Evaluate the contractor's cost RSP was trying to pursue additional fees early in the design process. I believe they expended more budget in the early design phases and our contract language was based on a construction cost to a lump sum fee equation. I believe this affected the service in the completion of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance RSP took ownership f problematic errors on the project and ensured that corrections were made. I feel the Engineer Team ran out of money and made few observations of the site during problem solving error corrections. The Owner was left to solve some of the final problems with our own Engineering staff (i.e. heat pump balancing, water pressure).

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