Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor Science Applications International Corporation (SA

SWIFT Contract Number 3000009423, 3000044372

Project Name IntelliDriveSM for Safety, Mobility and User Fee E

Project Number (if applicable) 92809

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The purpose of this contract was to evaluate the user perspective and effectiveness of the connected vehicles for safety, mobility and user fee applications. In Phase I of the project, the Contractor developed a concept of operations, requirements, evaluation goals, detailed schedule & budget for the operational test and provided general technical support to MnDOT for the overarching Mileage Based User Fee demonstration project. In Phase II, Contractor implemented the finalized evaluation plan, created a final report documenting its evaluation of the deployment and presented its findings. Contractor also recruited and selected the participants for the 500 vehicle demonstration deployment and collected the resulting data for use in the evaluation.
This Contract was necessary to advance MnDOT’s role in the National connected vehicles for safety effort and to provide an unbiased, independent third party evaluation of the Mileage Based User Fee demonstration project mandated by the Minnesota legislature.

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 12/19/2008 - 00:00

Original end date Mon, 08/31/2009 - 00:00

Actual end date Thu, 02/28/2013 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $122193.20

Amendments $1290834.98

Contract total $1413028.18

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Federal & 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 Cory Johnson

Evaluator Email Address Coryj.johnson@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The contractor timeliness was very good. The contract was amended as planned due to the project staging and structure of the project. Within each stage/amendment the contractor was very concerned and stayed on schedule.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The quality or work provided by the contractor was excellent. Tasks were complete and thoughtfully assembled. Good data was accurately evaluated and the reporting of the conclusions was well established in facts obtained by the data. Final report was well written.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The cost of the contract seemed in line with the labor rates of other companies and the hours estimated to conduct the work were correct.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance The contractors overall performance was great. I hope to work with Jennifer and the SAIC team on future projects. Everyone was quick to respond to my needs as the needs changed throughout the very complex 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.): {Empty}

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 5 - very satisfied