Agency Corrections Dept

Contractor Karges Faulconbridge

SWIFT Contract Number 441046/34879611

Project Name PBEEEP Energy Investigation

Project Number (if applicable) 78829FAD

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The contract is for a study in the state of Minnesota’s Public Buildings Enhanced energy Efficiency Program (PBEEEP) which applies a standard analysis and investigation method to determine the technical and economic feasibility of measures that will result in decreased energy use. The results will be recorded in the State PBEEEP Findings Workbook and in an Investigation Report which will include the measures selected by the staff at MCF Faribault for implementation in the following phase of the project.

Project Duration

Start Date Thu, 06/16/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Mon, 04/30/2012 - 00:00

Actual end date Mon, 04/30/2012 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $87571.00

Amendments $0.00

Contract total $87571.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Federal 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 Christopher Plum

Evaluator Email Address cplum@mncee.org

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The work met the requirements of the program. Opportunities for energy savings were identified. The analysis and final report were completed in the expected time period.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The quality was good and met all the requirements of the program. This was a difficult site due to prison security and lack of access to the building automation system at times; this resulted in some work product that was less complete than desired and KFI had to make do with this.

Evaluate the contractor's cost This was a bid project and the cost was equal to the amount bid with no changes.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance The overall performance met the requirements of the program and identified realistic and achievable energy savings opportunities for the MCF Faribault. A modest 3.9% energy savings was identified in 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