Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor University of Minnesota

SWIFT Contract Number 3000021907,3090461

Project Name MnDOT Design Bid Build Quality Management Process

Project Number (if applicable) 89261w259

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Mn/DOT has been striving to improve quality within our project development process and deliverables for several years. There have been recent instances where less than adequate quality has resulted in plan errors or inconsistencies that have led to delays in project letting and/or award and in some cases rejection of all bids. This has resulted in additional cost not only to citizens of the state but to external partners involved in the delivery of these projects.
With this training the department will establish consistent statewide guidelines for quality management practices within project development. This will result in identification of high risk error occurrence to enhance opportunities for correction in advance of project development turn in deadlines and letting. The end result will be construction plans that are biddable and constructible with a reduced incidence of complex addenda, bid rejection, and high value change orders and supplemental agreements due to plan errors or inconsistencies.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 02/07/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 09/30/2011 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 08/31/2012 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $119985.00

Amendments $31869.00

Contract total $151854.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Trunk Highway

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 Valerie K. R. Svensson

Evaluator Email Address Valerie.svensson@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness All work was completed in a timely and expedited manner. The consultant was very responsive even when timelines were very short. The project did suffer delay in delivery due to the Government shut down in July 2010 and required an additional round of training classes in 2011

Evaluate the contractor's quality All work completed by the team members was of very high quality. Team members have a high level of expertise and provided exceptional support.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Costs were within dollar values expected. Given the nature of the work, delivery was enhanced with consultant support.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Overall performance was exceptional. Team members integrated well with internal staff, District personnel and external participants

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 5 - very satisfied