Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

SWIFT Contract Number 71150

Project Name US14 EXPANSION, HYDRAULICS DESIGN, SUE WORK, PHASE

Project Number (if applicable) 04484w01

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Purpose of the contract was to complete final hydraulic design of the Hwy 14 Expansion project to confirm construction impacts for purchasing r/w, complete a subsurface utility investigation to reduce risk to utilities in the future corridor, and complete a Phase II ESA to fulfill commitments in the project FEIS.
When the contract was initiated the project was under an aggressive timeline. After discussing design work to be completed with staff, it was determined that there are NOT sufficient State's employees with the required expertise available to complete the work in nine months. The needs to proceed as scheduled to enable the State to meet Federal requirements for keeping the existing environmental impacts statement (EIS) active for improving the US Highway 14 corridor from Dodge Center to Owatonna. This need for additional help is primarily due to a full workload of qualified employees. The unavailable employees are assigned to expedited work beyond planned program

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 11/15/2013 - 00:00

Original end date Mon, 10/31/2016 - 00:00

Actual end date Thu, 10/01/2015 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $689980.01

Amendments $0.0

Contract total $656691.02

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? STATE

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) xxxxx

Evaluator Name Heather A. Lukes

Evaluator Email Address heather.lukes@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Satisfied with deliverables. Invoicing did get behind a couple of months due to a change in contractor staff, but K-H PM, K. Sannes worked diligently to fix.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Satisfied

Evaluate the contractor's cost Satisfied

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Satisfied. The contractor was proactive in meeting the initial aggressive timeline. Appreciated their responsive. They delivered the needed product, enabling District R/W staff to continue to prepare for acquiring r/w.

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.): na

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied