Agency MNIT

Contractor Measurement Technologies Laboratory (MTL)

SWIFT Contract Number 175151

Project Name MPCA Air Laboratory Software

Project Number (if applicable) 69454

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Enhancement of existing air laboratory software is necessary to meet the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) laboratory QA/QC requirements and data chain of custody requirements for automated sample weighing of Particulate Matter < 10 microns, and Total Suspended Particulates from air sample filters. MPCA air lab system was noncompliant with some EPA lab requirements before these enhancements were completed.

Project Duration

Start Date Sat, 05/02/2020 - 00:00

Original end date Wed, 09/30/2020 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 01/26/2021 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $8901.48

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $8901.48

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? State

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) The Filter Weighing System software is proprietary with MTL and cannot be modified by any other source. No other vendors would have the knowledge or authority to customize this software to interface with MPCA’s air lab environment.

Evaluator Name Paul Kim

Evaluator Email Address paul.kim@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Contractor provided the initial release of the software, answers to follow up questions from staff during testing, and subsequent release all on a timely basis.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Staff did find some bugs in the software in user acceptance testing. Some were easily found while others were complex to reproduce. Better testing by the contract developer would have uncovered and chance to resolve them before software release for staff testing.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The cost of the itemized enhancements seemed reasonable: total cost divided by the prevalent $/hr rate for software development. Some business staff stated that the cost seemed high for the enhancement functionality in this contract, but since we are not software developers, it’s difficult to judge that objectively.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance When staff found bugs in testing, the contractor showed willingness to offer a newer release of the software in a timely manner multiple times.

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.): None

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied