Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor University of Minnesota

SWIFT Contract Number 40263

Project Name Statewide Cycloplan: Bicycle Planning Tool & Parti

Project Number (if applicable) 99008 W35

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: With the development of the statewide bikeways plan as well as the development of an updated statewide bicycle map, two key needs are clear: innovative public participation (by cities, counties, Districts, MPOs and the general public) and a way to compile bikeways data from a myriad of sources. These needs would be met by implementing Cycloplan (a Twin Cities project) statewide.
Cycloplan is a project that was developed by Grouplens (the U of MN) with Metropolitan Council; it is an extension of Cyclopath that supports transportation planners in their planning and analysis and in communication with the public. The project was developed in the Twin Cities as an innovative way to assist planners in creating a regional bikeways system map through coordination and input from various agencies and innovative public participation. This enhanced version of Cyclopath (Cycloplan) lets planners create a regional bikeways system map that can be kept current and will help determine where additions and improvements to the system are most needed. A key feature of Cycloplan is that it lets agencies put up information on bicycle routes they mark as official/approved.
We propose to implement Cycloplan statewide. By implementing Cycloplan statewide, Mn/DOT, DNR, MPO¿s, RDC¿s and other local partners will be able to input bikeways data (existing, planned, and proposed) from any agency to get a picture of what the statewide bikeways system looks like so that we can effectively plan and prioritize bikeway improvements. Furthermore, the online participatory GIS function will greatly enhance public participation on transportation projects. This will contribute to more effective and easy-to-update bikeways data and public involvement.
Other existing features of Cycloplan include: maintenance of a bikeways registry; communication of things like route closures, additions, and upcoming projects that need feedback; and receiving comments from personalized geographic regions.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 02/06/2012 - 00:00

Original end date Wed, 04/30/2014 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 06/30/2015 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $130000.00

Amendments $32500.00

Contract total $162500.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? TH/FEDERAL

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 Hadzic, Jasna

Evaluator Email Address jasna.hadzic@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Good

Evaluate the contractor's quality Good

Evaluate the contractor's cost FAIR

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Good – overall, they delivered the tasks and produced a good working product.
#7: A totally unacceptable lack of attention by the PI to providing what the PC needed to document the progress and get tasks paid in a timely manner. The PI seemed willing to let the contract expire with tasks unpaid and no final report, and the PA had to write the amendment request letter for the PI, incorporating several past due task payments into the final report tasks. From the TL’s perspective the web site was completed in a timely manner, but from the PC’s perspective the PI did not do his part to get the tasks documented and, approved and paid.
#8: The final report was a lackluster effort and not a good record of the outcome of the project. Task reports were not done.

Would you engage the contractor's services again? No

Describe any negative action taken during the duration of this contract (i.e., termination, pursuit of suspension, etc.): There was disconnect in communication and at times difficult to receive a response/call back.

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 3 - neutral