Agency Health Department

Contractor Shepherd Data Services

SWIFT Contract Number 206450

Project Name Subpoena -- Document Review, Hosting & Technical Services

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Provide MDH with document review services, hosted document services, and data collection and processing services to produce documents in response to subpoena. Due to the volume of documents involved and other demands on legal staff time, MDH did not have the in-house resources necessary to complete this project within the requisite timeframe.

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 01/14/2022 - 00:00

Original end date Thu, 03/31/2022 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 05/06/2022 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $90000

Amendments $70000

Contract total $160000

Did project finish within budget? No

What was the funding source? 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 Mindy Hexum

Evaluator Email Address mindy.hexum@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Completing the project took over a month longer than originally planned. A portion of this delay was caused by negotiations with opposing counsel, rather than the contractor, though the cost overruns (see cost section below) that necessitated additional encumbrance of funds and amendment of the original work order contract were the underlying cause of the need to renegotiate terms of reimbursement with opposing counsel.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The contractor did not meet expectations in terms of quality control of document review work. This required an significant investment of MDH staff time to review and recode documents to ensure consistent and accurate coding and redactions. The contractor was receptive to our feedback and made process changes aimed at addressing the identified issues the next time we worked with them.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Midway through the project, the estimated cost nearly doubled, requiring encumbrance of additional funds and contributing to further delay in completion of the project. In a subsequent project, the vendor provided a more accurate estimate of cost, informed by the experiences with this project.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Overall, the contractor did perform the services specified in the contract, allowing MDH to complete production for this subpoena, albeit on a significantly longer timeframe than originally planned or hoped. There was need for improvement in the contractor's document review services, particularly with respect to effective oversight of the review team and quality control of their work. That said, the contractor did work to address these issues in subsequent projects. MDH was more satisfied with the technical and document processing services provided under the contract, especially the assistance with production format/ESI protocol.

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.): N/A

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 3 - neutral