Agency Natural Resources Dept

Contractor Regents of the University of Minnesota

SWIFT Contract Number 251819

Project Name Expanded analysis of elk habitat suitability and conflict risk in northeastern Minnesota

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Expand previous work to estimate elk habitat suitability and the risk of human-elk conflict to cover 100km surrounding the Fond du Lac and Cloquet valley proposed elk release sites.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 07/01/2024 - 00:00

Original end date Tue, 12/31/2024 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 04/22/2025 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $20000.00

Amendments $0

Contract total $20000.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? 2023 Legislative Appropriation for Elk Restoration Project

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) UMN built upon work previously conducted for the Fond du Lac Band during their feasibility studies and we merely wanted an extension (and updated layers) for the same analysis.

Evaluator Name Kelsie LaSharr

Evaluator Email Address kelsie.lasharr@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness 1-Very Dissatisfied

Evaluate the contractor's quality 2-Dissatisfied

Evaluate the contractor's cost 3-Neutral

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance 2-Dissatisfied

Would you engage the contractor's services again? No

Describe any negative action taken during the duration of this contract (i.e., termination, pursuit of suspension, etc.): "The contractor failed to meet multiple deliverable and overall project deadlines, including failing to meet a No-Cost-Extension (NCE) deadline. We specifically asked for layers that were not included in the final report (golf courses, airports). The first progress report was initially due October 30, 2024, and the final report was initially due Dec 31, 2024. After nothing was received by Dec 31, 2024, a NCE was filed with a new end date of Mar 31, 2025. We met to discuss the preliminary analysis on Mar 28 (no progress report provided at this point), just 3 days before the NCE ended. The first draft of the report was sent April 4, 2025 (4 days after NCE ended), with a second draft sent April 14, and the final data layers were sent April 17. But, given the contract was already past due, no additional discussion, feedback, or amendments could be made to the report. This meant the final product did not meet the needs of the project.

In hindsight, inclusion of more check-in meetings with the contractor throughout the project within the contract timelines may have enabled DNR and the contractor to ensure the project stayed on time and addressed outlined objectives. "

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 2 - dissatisfied