Agency Education Department

Contractor SchoolWorks LLC

SWIFT Contract Number 168488

Project Name MN Charter School Authorizers Evaluator

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: This project is for an external evaluator to review performance of Minnesota Charter School Authorizers according to the Minnesota Authorizer Performance Evaluation System (MAPES). By Minnesota Statutes 2021, section 124E.07, subdivision 5, authorizer performance must be evaluated at least every five years. The MDE commissioner is committed to the use of an external evaluator to conduct the review of authorizers, so a contract for implementing the MAPES was necessary. During MAPES Round Two, the purpose was to review the performance of Minnesota authorizers and produce evaluative reports on each authorizer as well as a final comprehensive summary report on the state of charter school authorizing in Minnesota.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 11/18/2019 - 00:00

Original end date Thu, 06/30/2022 - 00:00

Actual end date Thu, 03/03/2022 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $164630.00

Amendments $0.00

Contract total $164630.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? federal

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 Karen Calcaterra

Evaluator Email Address karen.calcaterra@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Satisfactory. The contractor met internal deadlines during the project, except that some items were due by noon and were not delivered until the evening of the same day, for example.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Satisfactory. The contractor successfully completed the major tasks and the reviews were conducted professionally. Some of the deliverables were first presented with many typos and poor copy-editing, and the final report did not meet accessibility standards, but all of these items were corrected satisfactorily by the contractor.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The contractor’s costs were very reasonable: The contractor performed within program budget and costs for services were directly linked to the desired outcomes from the contract.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Overall, the contractor’s performance was satisfactory. The contractor fulfilled all expectations of the contract in a timely manner and was collaborative and communicative with MDE. While the contractor was easy to work with and fulfilled all duties on time and within budget, at times the deliverables produced were slightly delayed and needed multiple edits and review and correction for accessibility.

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.): not applicable for this project

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied