Agency Faribault Academies

Contractor Environmental Management Associates, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 35919

Project Name MSAD Asbestos Abatement/Lead Stabilize Pollard Smi

Project Number (if applicable) 44119DAP

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Window replacement project at Pollard and Smith Halls required separate project for abatement of haz mat containing caulking and paint.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 10/17/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Tue, 07/24/2012 - 00:00

Actual end date Mon, 10/22/2012 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $9500.00

Amendments $1500.00

Contract total $11000.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? FY10 AP

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) On master roster of haz mat vendors rotated through sites and within allowable limits. saved money on construction part by making this a bid project.

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 5 - very satisfied