Agency Corrections Dept

Contractor Wold Architects and Engineers

SWIFT Contract Number 444629

Project Name Convert Rooms to Seg Living Unit

Project Number (if applicable) 78917SHX

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Facility needed to convert cells and fixtures to more durable Segregation Unit to handle changing population of prisoners. Cost dictated that RFP sent to a couple design firms to prepare bid documents .

Project Duration

Start Date Sat, 03/19/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 01/15/2012 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 04/06/2012 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $18910.00

Amendments $0.00

Contract total $18910.00

Did project finish within budget? No

What was the funding source? FY 11 Agency 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 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
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 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. Facility and DOC did make the comment that they felt they were getting the "B" team and more experienced staff would only attend meetings in reaction to an issue.

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