Agency Pollution Control Agency

Contractor Middle-Snake-Tamarac Rivers Watershed District

SWIFT Contract Number 122002

Project Name Snake-Middle River Watershed Restoration and Prote

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Phase 2 of the Snake River Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) project includes: continued civic engagement; production of the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) report which allocates pollutant load reductions for impaired waters; and production of the WRAPS report which identifies implementation strategies that will maintain or improve water quality in many lakes and streams throughout the watershed.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 04/10/2017 - 00:00

Original end date Tue, 06/30/2020 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 06/30/2020 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $134935

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $134935

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) {Empty}

Evaluator Name Danielle Kvasager

Evaluator Email Address Danielle.kvasager@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness While invoices were supposed by submitted quarterly at the very least, they were usually submitted every 6 months. The TMDL report was timely, but the first draft of the WRAPS report wasn’t submitted to MPCA until about 5 weeks before the end of the contract, which left little time for local, state, and MPCA-internal review. MSTRWD and RESPEC addressed edits/comments from the aforementioned reviewers, but the contract ended before MSTRWD and RESPEC could assist with addressing MPCA supervisor, manager, and division director comments. Speaking in terms of the entire WRAPS project, the 5 year goal would have been to public notice the TMDL and WRAPS reports in 2018. If I were rating the subcontractor as well, they would also get neutral, because they should have drafted the WRAPS report sooner.

Evaluate the contractor's quality I would have preferred that MSTRWD took a more active role in critically reviewing documents produced by RESPEC. Nothing major was wrong with the reports, but there was some errors in numbers, formatting, and grammar that I caught. I’m rating the contractor’s quality as neutral, I would rate the subcontractor as satisfied.

Evaluate the contractor's cost While for the price, I would have preferred documents without the errors in numbers, formatting, and grammar, they definitely were the best quality of the 5 WRAPS projects for which I’ve reviewed first drafts. The cost per hour for the contractor was comparable to WD costs for other WRAPS projects in the basin and the cost per hour for the subcontractor was the same as what it would have been under the master contract, so no issues there.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance The contractor, MSTRWD, subcontracted with RESPEC. The MSTRWD wasn’t as hands-on or timely as I would have preferred, but that may have been due, in part, to such frequent turnover at the MSTWD over the course of the entire WRAPS project. I would have preferred more critical review by MSTRWD of documents produced by the subcontractor before submittal to MPCA. Much of the communication was through RESPEC instead of the MSTRWD. Other than a delay in producing the WRAPS report, RESPEC was great to work with, (they were great about asking good questions and knowing the details before producing reports). I would actually rate the subcontractor as satisfied but the contractor as average (they did what was asked but not with the greatest quality).

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 3 - neutral