Agency Health Department

Contractor Southeastern Minnesota Center for Independent Livi

SWIFT Contract Number 192670

Project Name COVID Community Coordinator Contract

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: SEMCIL assisted with linking people with disabilities to COVID-19 related resources and staffed partner vaccination events. SEMCIL assisted people with disabilities in seeking at home testing or access to testing sites. SEMCIL also used social media and other messaging strategies to keep people with disabilities informed about COVID-19. SEMCIL’s work was necessary to serve people with disabilities, who bore disproportionately negative impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. According to data from the CDC, people with disabilities are 50% more likely to be hospitalized from COVID-19 and more likely that people without disabilities to experience barriers in getting COVID-19 vaccine and boosters. The National Council on Disability also reported that social isolation resulting from the pandemic has increased national rates of reported metal health disabilities and adversely affected people who already experienced higher rates of social isolation, including older adults and people with disabilities.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 03/01/2021 - 00:00

Original end date Sat, 07/31/2021 - 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: $106980.00

Amendments $48410.13

Contract total $155390.13

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 Rachel Garaghty

Evaluator Email Address Rachel.Garaghty@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Satisfactory

Evaluate the contractor's quality Poor - Contractor had a strong start, but around January 2022 the quality of their work began to decline. Contractor seemed to lose enthusiasm for the work and did not follow test kit tracking requirements or accept more test kits, in spite of high community transmission rates in their region.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Satisfactory

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Satisfactory - Overall, contractor could have done more to creatively combat vaccine hesitancy in their region and distribute home test kits. Contractor provided very valuable ideas and feedback in cohort meetings and was clearly a strong advocate for disability issues, but towards the end of the grant the contractor's work quality declined.

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