Agency Faribault Academies

Contractor Angstrom Analytical, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 36478

Project Name Water Line Insul Abatement Air Monitoring Mott Hal

Project Number (if applicable) 44DA0010

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Provide required air monitoring during the asbestos pipe insulation removals as needed for repairs

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 10/28/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 10/28/2011 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 10/28/2011 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $450.00

Amendments $0.00

Contract total $450.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? 2008 Asset Preservation

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) Stae contract mandated by county

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 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 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.): n/a

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied