Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor Iteris, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 3000014561

Project Name Safe Corridor Enhancement – Work Zone Accident Red

Project Number (if applicable) 97532W01

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: This Destination Innovation Project for Safe Corridor Enhancement included improving safety for snow and ice and other work zone operations, and used innovative technology to enhance law enforcement efforts.
This portion of the project was to provide innovative dynamic systems to improve traffic safety during snow and ice operations and other work zones caused by planned maintenance operations or in response to incidents or traffic enforcement activities. The goal of this project was to provide systems engineering documents to facilitate the integration and operation of the work zone portion of the project utilizing the hardware installed during construction. The project had an optional task of providing training to operations and maintenance staff for the system. The project also had an optional goal to compare traffic operations between eastbound and westbound I-94 to determine if the system improved operations and mobility or to make recommendations on improvement to the system.

This contract wprovided the following deliverable items:
Final Concept of Operations Memorandum
Final System Requirements memo
Final Design Document
Operator training course outline and course materials
Operator training manuals
Maintenance training course outline and course materials
Maintenance training manuals
Conduct operator training

This contract supported the completion of a Destination Innovation Project that addressed the Department’s strategic directions of safety and mobility. The primary goal was to help avoid car-plow collisions or crashes due to evasive maneuvers in the vicinity of plows. The congestion management and incident management portions of the project addressed the Department’s strategic direction for mobility.

It was reasonable to use a contract for this project because staff was not available to complete the amount of work needed to make the system operational before the 2011-2012 winter snow plowing season.

Project Duration

Start Date Tue, 02/22/2011 - 00:00

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

Actual end date Thu, 05/31/2012 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $295292.29

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $295292.29

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? State 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 contractor usually turned in their deliverables on time. However, they were late with two documents, but their tardiness did not cause issues with the overall timeframe of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The quality of the contractor’s deliverables was very good.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Although additional tasks were added to the original contract, the contractor was able to complete the contract within the budgeted amount.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance The contractor’s overall performance was very good. They were always willing to make suggestions on improvements to our system and were responsive to requests.
Two amendments were written for additional time for this project. Decisions were made to the contract regarding the addition and deletion of specific tasks. Based on these changes to the contract, the contractor was asked to estimate what could be accomplished without adding cost. They provided us with their estimate and they ended up with having tasks to complete after the last invoice had been paid. Although one of the final tasks was completed beyond contract end date, the contractor completed this task without any compensation form the State and the delay caused no harm to 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.): None

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied