Agency VETERANS HOME BOARD

Contractor Lindell Engineering Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 444657

Project Name Design for Replacing B-6 HVAC Insulation

Project Number (if applicable) 75074MPP

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Design for, and bid replacement of, damaged roof top thermal pipe insulation

Project Duration

Start Date Sun, 04/17/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Tue, 12/06/2011 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 12/06/2011 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $14000.00

Amendments $-2000.00

Contract total $12000.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Asset Preservation FY10

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) Within guidelines, cost savings by engineer being familiar through other current work on campus, also made them a new vendor so they wouldn't be under another consultant's mark-up.

Evaluator Name Glen Heino

Evaluator Email Address glen.heino@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Satisfactory – The Consultant performed in an average manner that demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The consultant’s overall performance is equal to any negative performance. The Consultant has contributed to the success of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Excellent – The Consultant performed in a better than average manner that demonstrating a good understanding of the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The consultant’s overall performance outweighs any negative performance. The Consultant contributed a great deal to the success of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Satisfactory – The Consultant performed in an average manner that demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The consultant’s overall performance is equal to any negative performance. The Consultant has contributed to the success of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Satisfactory – The Consultant performed in an average manner that demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The consultant’s overall performance is equal to any negative performance. The Consultant has contributed to the success of the project.

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 4 - satisfied