Agency MN Management & Budget

Contractor edChunk Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 115971

Project Name Child Find Plus Training Program

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) needs to create training for child care providers to identify developmental concerns and make appropriate referrals on behalf of any children not yet enrolled in Kindergarten. Federal statute requires States to have a comprehensive child find system in place. Child care providers are considered a primary referral source according to Federal statute §303.302 – 303.

MDE wants to develop, implement and maintain a comprehensive system of professional development and technical assistance programs that support the inclusion of young children with disabilities in natural environments and least restrictive settings.

MDE will post the training materials developed on their Help Me Grow website and for those materials to be 508 compliant.

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 10/07/2016 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 06/30/2017 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 06/30/2017 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $60000

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $60000

Did project finish within budget? No

What was the funding source? 5200

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 Lovlie Bromley

Evaluator Email Address lovlie.bromley@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness MDE received the first deliverable, “Child Find Training to Go” course, on time according to the contract but required multiple revisions for quality and content. The next deliverable, four on-line Child Find Information videos and accompanying assessments were not delivered on time and not of sufficient quality. Two deliverable were not completed within the contracted time.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The scripts for the videos and accompanying quizzes required over six revisions for content, formatting and quality. MDE staff spent over 10 hours reviewing and making corrections to the video scripts including formatting issues. There were inconsistences from one script to the other, improper grammar, content was not to the professional level expected and there were many technical and formatting errors.

Evaluate the contractor's cost No concerns regarding the contractor’s fee.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance The contractor was unprofessional when issues with content and quality were brought to his attention. The contractor stated that only “Two rounds of review are all that allowed. MDE is not permitted endless reviews of the materials.” in an email to MDE. Even though the contract stated that MDE has final review and approval. MDE staff spent multiple days reviewing and making corrections to the deliverables.

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.): Throughout the contract the contractor was unprofessional in both face to face meetings and through emails. When offered a no cost extension to complete the two uncompleted deliverables the contractor declined the extension. The contract ended without the last two deliverables.

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