Agency Secretary of State

Contractor Meritide Inc

SWIFT Contract Number B54808/B56624/28866

Project Name MBLS Architecture Planning & Assessment

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: See statement of work.

Project Duration

Start Date Wed, 03/30/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Sat, 03/31/2012 - 00:00

Actual end date Sat, 03/31/2012 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $240000.00

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $850000.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? General and Revolving 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 Chris Selstad

Evaluator Email Address chris.selstad@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Contractor failed to meet all objectives of contract by end of June 2011 deadline. Contractor only delivered prototype of part of business system that were not usable. Project required to be started over in July 2011 under state employee staff management and some staff augmentation provided by contractor.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Quality of project management, architecture and planning was poor. Contactor recommended solutions and software purchases that were not in alignment with business needs (Knowledge Lake) and did not incorporate feedback and recommendations from business stakeholders. During meeting in July 2011, contractor was asked why feedback and requirements were not included in the project and contractor responded that there was just too much information provided(para phrased). Work provided by individual programmers by contractors by staff augmentation was good.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Cost for contract was expensive for value the office received.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Contractor's performance was poor. Staff augmentation part of the contract for programming services was good.

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.): Recommended termination of contract with deputy secretary of state.

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 1 - very dissatisfied