Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor SRF Consulting Group, Inc

SWIFT Contract Number 3000024548

Project Name Minnesota Statewide Operations Plan

Project Number (if applicable) 97534W01

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The purpose of this Contract was to develop a Statewide Traffic Operations Plan in order to keep traffic moving or reroute travel when situations occur around the state. This will allow the public to be informed of events and will also allow MnDOT to provide the safest and most efficient path to travel.

The product or result of this contract included documentation of actual and potential events that have had a statewide or regional impact. This also included meetings with MnDOT representatives and stakeholders to address and identify current traffic operation issues and a procedure to remedy them for future situations that may occur. A concise and realistic document and flow list of procedures to follow, appropriate tables, and contacts to notify, established and documented best practices and a PowerPoint presentation explaining the process of the Statewide Traffic Operations Plan.

This Contract was necessary as the expertise required to develop and produce this type of report was not available within the State system.

Project Duration

Start Date Tue, 03/15/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Sat, 07/30/2011 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 01/31/2012 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $80421.38

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $80421.38

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? State ITS Funds

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 Julie Johnson

Evaluator Email Address Julie.johnson@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness SRF was very timely in their deliverables and getting back to emails, phone calls, and comments about content.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Good quality and SRF was very accommodating to MnDOT’s request for changes to drafts submitted for review

Evaluate the contractor's cost Cost was reasonable.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Good overall performance and general concern for delivering a product that is both implementable and practical

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