Agency Human Services Dept

Contractor DCCS Consulting, LLC

SWIFT Contract Number PTK-119031

Project Name Compliance consultation services

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: To provide compliance consultation services to assist State in performing the duties and obligations of a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Systems Improvement Agreement, and to assist State in achieving and sustaining compliance with CMS' applicable Medicare Conditions of Participation for Hospitals and for Psychiatric Hospitals.

Project Duration

Start Date Sun, 01/01/2017 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 12/31/2017 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 12/31/2019 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $774000

Amendments $963130

Contract total $1737130

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Appropriated

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 Jay A. Brunner

Evaluator Email Address jay.brunner@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness This was a contract that was originally 12 months in length but ultimately took place over a 36 month period. It was extended because of the ongoing requirement of CMS to meet a specific set of their requirements under a Systems improvement agreement. As the contract was periodically amended to add additional work and modify the schedule the contractor and State agreed to those terms and conditions. The Contractor was very timely in submitting work and upon request would amend the necessary reports to meet the needs of State.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The quality of the Contractor's work was continually very very good. This contractor was skilled in the technical aspects of regulatory compliance as well as the practical requirements of implementation. As noted, the evolving nature of the work required a broad set of skills which were regularly met or exceeded. The fact that the State was ultimately relieved from the burden of the Systems Improvement Agreement speaks highly to the work of the Contractor as well as the ability of the Contractor to work with the State and CMS.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The cost was reasonable given the possible impact on the State for failure to meet the terms of the Systems Improvement Agreement. Again, this was a contract that evolved over 36 months and provided technical skills and administrative consultation. Advising a facility with in excess of 500 employees provided opportunity to align systems which previosly were understaffed or overstaffed and may or may not have been properly supervised.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance This was a very very good contractor with which to work. There was the provision of professional consultation as well as the teaching and instruction which leads to greater institutional skill ability and capacity.

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 5 - very satisfied