Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor WSB & Associates Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 3000024900

Project Name Pre-Design and Final Design for reconstruction of

Project Number (if applicable) 99621

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Detailed Design services needed for the reconstruction of a one mile segment of Minnesota highway 4, through Cosmos. Services and products required include Public Involvement, Supplemental Surveying, Preliminary Design, Geometric Layout, Utilities Coordination, Hydraulics Design and complete Detailed Design Plans. State Project 4701-27 is a Better Roads for Minnesota project, and was therefore on an accelerated schedule for letting. The project also has received a Federal grant of $1.9M through the Transportation, Community and System Preservation (TCSP) program, further exacerbating the project's schedule problems. State staff was not be able to deliver this work on time for the proposed letting.

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 10/28/2011 - 00:00

Original end date Sat, 12/01/2012 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 02/15/2013 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $293349.39

Amendments $12690.57

Contract total $306039.96

Did project finish within budget? No

What was the funding source? Better Roads for Minnesota

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 Lowell Flaten

Evaluator Email Address lowell.flaten@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Contractor met expectations. Deliverables were received according to schedule. This contract utilized elements from several contributors. The Contractor did an excellent job of coordinating and incorporating those products into the plans and specifications.

Evaluate the contractor's quality High quality work. Contractor’s familiarity with municipal engineering proved to be an asset in working with the city of Cosmos. Also, the Contractor is familiar with MnDOT’s practices and procedures due to their staff working for MnDOT as adjunct employees.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Costs were in line with the work performed.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Contractor was effective at executing their duties under the contract. They responded quickly when MnDOT requested changes, especially during plan development. They were very professional in dealing with MnDOT staff, City staff, and the public.

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