Agency Employ & Econ Development Dept

Contractor MNSCU Northland Community and Technical College

SWIFT Contract Number 3000069345

Project Name UAS Screening infor req FAA

Project Number (if applicable) 52629

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Establish and fund the consultation committee required to respond to the RFP from the FAA and deliver a response.

Project Duration

Start Date Thu, 02/28/2013 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 06/30/2013 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 06/11/2013 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $63000

Amendments $0

Contract total $63000

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? General - B2241100

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) They have the required knowledge and expertise in UAS, the progress with this project, and the experience in submitting RFPs to the FAA.

Evaluator Name Neal Young

Evaluator Email Address neal.young@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The provided results prior to the contractual expiration date.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The contractor performed satisfactually.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The contractor covered costs exceeding the contract amount.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Northland used DEED funds to pay contractors who led formulation of the FAA screening information request response. The response was successfully completed and on time. Looking at each of the contributors individually, the performance of Hughes Aerospace would be rated as a 5. The performance of Fox Consulting would be rated as a 4, due to minor documentation errors in volume III-I (missing cover sheets). Northland’s own performance in managing the contractors would be rated as a 5, as they did an exemplary job of staying on the management of DEED funds. Overall, these three partners were good to work with, efficient, and produced a quality end product.

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