Agency Human Services Dept

Contractor FEI

SWIFT Contract Number 204950

Project Name MnCHOICES work

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: MnCHOICES Modernization

Project Duration

Start Date Thu, 04/15/2021 - 00:00

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

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

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $1142800.97

Amendments $-279027.89

Contract total $863773.08

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? 34137

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 contract was set up as a single source contract because the vendor had responded to an RFP and this work is tied to of that contract.

Evaluator Name Rebecca Melang

Evaluator Email Address rebecca.melang@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The vendor has been responsive to questions posed by MN staff in a timely manner. They have been responsive to the needs of MN staff and have been willing to meet as needed. While the project wasn't delivered on time, this is part of a larger contract where the work is being continued.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The contractor struggled at times to seek clarity when requirements were unclear and would complete work that resulted in re-work, that affected the quality of work. Errors that have been identified by DHS staff are being fixed in a new contract. A change management process was initially missing from the project which has since been established. Communication is important and has improved between the vendor and MN staff.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Hard to respond as we don't have something to compare to. Higher costs when more difficult work was being asked of the vendor, example: algorithm work. Costs sometimes have been challenged, the vendor has been open to re-estimating the work which has resulted in lower costs and negotiated between both parties.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Improved communication is needed from the vendor prior to starting work, gain clarity before they work. MN staff feel the vendors overall performance is good and a partnership has developed. Responsive, produced deliverables that were mostly on time. Establishing a process for asking questions/clarifying before implementing, would have helped both the vendor and MN staff.

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 3 - neutral