Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor University of Vermont

SWIFT Contract Number 171419

Project Name Synthesis of Technical Requirements and Considerat

Project Number (if applicable) 1034820

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Roadway snow and ice control (RSIC) constitutes a substantial expenditure for many U.S. states throughout the winter and spring months. Properly maintaining the roadways involves complicated decisions regarding the staging, routing, and
refueling of the RSIC vehicle fleets that are responsible for plowing roadways and spreading chemicals and abrasives. DOTs
are increasingly contracting with vendors for automated methods of snowplow route optimization. Route optimization efforts
frequently account for vehicle fleets composed of a mix of vehicle types with differing salt and fuel capacities, and restrictions
on serviceability (i.e., which vehicle/plow combination can service which road or lane) and roadway prioritization.
Restrictions on where and how RSIC vehicles can safely turn around can also have significant impacts on routing results and
incorporating these restrictions has implications for both optimization methodology and data preparation. Failure to
consider these and other technical details can result in route optimization project results that are infeasible to implement or
that do not improve on existing practices. Developing contract language that clearly designates the DOTâ??s technical
requirements for the project is essential for ensuring the success of a snowplow route optimization effort.

Project Duration

Start Date Tue, 01/21/2020 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 04/30/2021 - 00:00

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

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $73516.00

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $73516.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? partnership/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 Sindt,Matthew George

Evaluator Email Address Matthew.Sindt@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Timeliness met expectations

Evaluate the contractor's quality Quality met expectations

Evaluate the contractor's cost Cost met expectations

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance good

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 4 - satisfied