Agency Secretary of State

Contractor YK5 Consulting Company

SWIFT Contract Number 80327

Project Name FY15 SVRS/ERS Business Analyst

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Enhancements to SVRS surrounding Absentee Applications including new Online functionality.
Enhancements to ERS with re-writing some of the core functionality surrounding County admin screens, Ballot Vendor functionality, Reports and ultimately pushing the results to the Election Results system for the Public and Media to view/report on election results.

Project Duration

Start Date Tue, 07/01/2014 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 03/15/2015 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 03/13/2015 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $95000.00

Amendments $0

Contract total $95000.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Federal & General Funds

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) Contractor was the only person who had the in depth knowledge of our systems to facilitate the completion of the project in question. Contractor had been involved since the beginning of our systems creation with regards to writing requirements and testing the applications. Given this knowledge and skill set there was no one else that could step in and complete the tasks given the timelines set in place.

Evaluator Name Matt McCollough

Evaluator Email Address matt.mccollough@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Project scope and deliverables were all completed on schedule with no delays. Contractor held regular meetings to gather needed information and inform management of potential delays or issues well in advance of deadlines.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Contractor had vast knowledge of our systems as they were part of the original building, testing and requirements gathering of said systems. Contractor produced detailed work that was able to be interpreted by both management and IT staff. Contractor was very thorough and detailed oriented. Requirements document and test plans are still in use today.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Contractors cost was reasonable given the system background knowledge and work being produced.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Contractor performed exceptionally well. Without the contractors vast system knowledge the project would not have been a success nor would it have finished on time.

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