Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number B29251

Project Name Rural ITS Safety Solution Systems

Project Number (if applicable) 94502

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: This Contract was awarded as part of the MnDOT Innovative Idea Program. The intent of this program is to fund projects that are beyond the basic or applied research stage. Projects that can benefit from an operational test setting or demonstrate ongoing advances in technology are desired through this solicitation. Projects that demonstrate a higher potential for deployment are desired over simple demonstration projects.

The objective of this project was to develop low cost, readily deployable, low maintenance systems that can be used by government agencies to improve safety on rural roads and non-signalized rural intersections. The following three systems were deployed as part of this effort:
1. Driver Behavior Evaluation System (DBES)
2. Stop Sign Warning System
3. Curve Warning System

Project Duration

Start Date Tue, 06/23/2009 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 07/31/2011 - 00:00

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

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $224282.00

Amendments $15200.00

Contract total $239482.00

Did project finish within budget? No

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 Jon Jackels

Evaluator Email Address Jon.jackels@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The project costs were adjusted due to the need for increased effort to coordinate with the evaluation consultant. The first delay for this project was due to the state shutdown. This moved tasks from the summer season into the fall season which adversely impacted equipment performance and evaluation. This also caused additional delay in task completion resulting in a third amendment for additional time to complete the project. None of these costs and delays could be anticipated by the Contractor or the State

Evaluate the contractor's quality It is typical and anticipated that these types of development projects to have some equipment malfunctions that delay completion of the project, however, the total number on this project was distracting and made evaluation very difficult and complex. Having three distinct systems in a single project added to this issue.
Many of the malfunctions were caused by the equipment vendor overstating the performance characteristics of their product. This resulted in several delays for each system while vendors integrated their equipment with the system. This was not predictable or in the Contractors control.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The cost of this project was appropriate for the type of development work and the outcomes of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Overall the Contractor did an excellent job of responding to issues as they arose. The only criticism is that the equipment failures distracted from the performance of the systems.

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