Agency Natural Resources Dept

Contractor Azentive LLC

SWIFT Contract Number 144321

Project Name DNR Invasive Species Community-Based Social Market

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The State was in need of services to use Community-Based Social Marketing methodologies to inform the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources' aquatic invasive species communication strategies. No state employee nor agency had the expertise or capacity to meet these needs.

Project Duration

Start Date Wed, 07/11/2018 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 06/30/2019 - 00:00

Actual end date Sun, 10/31/2021 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) 1068

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $88282.07

Amendments $48425

Contract total $136707.07

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? federal and 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 Tina Fitzgerald

Evaluator Email Address tina.fitzgerald@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Very Satisfied. All tasks and deliverables were completed by contract deadlines. The contractor worked with the DNR project manager to establish timelines upfront for accomplishing tasks and deliverables for each phase/parts of the contract. Timelines were adjusted as needed and somewhat frequently, due to the nature of the work which required sgnificant back-and-forth consultation between the contractor and DNR staff, which benfited the project greatly.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Very Satisfied. This contractor demonstrated they are leading experts in the field of community-based social marketing and behavior change. They are professional and responsive, pay great attention to detail, are open and readily willing to encorprate feedback, quickly learned and adpoted electronic accessibility practices, and produced thorough, high quality end-products (surveys, data, workshops, reports).

Evaluate the contractor's cost Very Satisfied. Costs were pragmatic given the scope of work. Since this type of work rapidly evolves as each step is completed, the breadth and depth of following steps, and therefore costs, are hard to determine upfront. The contractor estimated costs up front and requested reasonable adjustments as the project progressed. All tasks and deliverables were completed within approved budgets.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Very Satisfied. All work was completed in a collaborative, itterative effort between the contractor and the State. They put significant effort into getting to know the DNR and learning the intricacies of the aquatic invasive species issue specific to Minnesota, in order to meet the needs of the State through each phase of the contract. This strong relationship paired with their expertise and experience in designing and implementing behavior change projects resulted in high-quality, thorough, and cutting-edge products. Beyond the end-products, the State learned an incredible amount simply working with this contractor on this contract.

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 5 - very satisfied