Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor TranSmart Technologies

SWIFT Contract Number B53307/3000009060

Project Name Signal Optimization, TH 5 Waconia, TH 8 Wyoming,

Project Number (if applicable) 98083

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Signal Optimization for 14 intersections. Signal timing plans improve traffic flow, reduce delays, stops and fuel consumption.

Project Duration

Start Date Tue, 02/08/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Thu, 06/30/2011 - 00:00

Actual end date Thu, 06/30/2011 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) 671.5

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $69825.71

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $69825.71

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Trunk Highway

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 Paul Jung

Evaluator Email Address paul.jung@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Within contract period MnDOT understood that the consultant had incomplete experience and understanding of optimizing and coordinating signal timing plans using Synchro\SimTraffic: however, MnDOT agreed to assist the consultant in learning these specifics while gaining experience inthese capabilities. Although the Consultant was knowledgeable about general priniciples of traffic engineering, the c

Evaluate the contractor's quality Needs guidance MnDOT Contract No. 98083, Exhibit A, page 4 of 4, provides a Tentative Schedule for the project. While we acknowledge the schedule is tentative rather than absolute, most intermediate tasks were completed and deliverables were submitted later than the dates specified in the Tentative Schedule. Mn/DOT staff felt frequent need to contact the consultant and to set deadlines for intermediate deliverables to try to keep the consultant on schedule.
Several errors existed in the invoices submitted. A total of three versions of Invoice 3 had to be submitted before it was correct. Consultant staff was courteous and responsive when asked to remedy these issues. However, it cost mn/dot staff time to sort through the errors and reveiw multiple versions of the invoices. Division of work at the Contractor resulted in a Certified Public Accountant preparing the invoices rather than the Contractor's Authorized Representative (Seth Johnson, P.E.) preparing the invoices: Mr. Johnson was the project leader and one most familiar with the project. Mr. Johnson stated a project, the errors may have been caught before reaching Mn/DOT if there had been some review of the invoices by Mr. Johnson.
In summary, the Consutlatnt was cooperative, but the signal optimization skill level and performance were below what is typical with other consultants.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Within bud
get, final invoiced $69,802.62

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Need guidance and training

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.): {Empty}

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 2 - dissatisfied