Agency Pollution Control Agency

Contractor Crow River Organization of Water (CROW)

SWIFT Contract Number B40897

Project Name Meeker County Lakes Data Collection and Management

Project Number (if applicable) CR3330

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The Crow River Watershed encompasses portions of 10 counties in central Minnesota and has a landscape that combines the best of both urban and agricultural settings. The entire watershed boasts over 835 lakes, and over 100 of them are located in Meeker County. In the Meeker County Lakes Data Collection and Management project, the CROW will partner with Meeker County, the Initiative Foundation and local Lake Associations in Meeker County to collect data that can be used to assess lakes in Meeker County. The project will enhance volunteer monitoring efforts and improve the methods used by area Lake Associations in sample collection, handling and data management. We will also assist these organizations in developing simple, straightforward lake management plans that will carry their efforts well beyond the scope of this project.

There are currently 5 Meeker County Lakes listed on the 303d Impaired Waters List, and 3 more are on the 2010 draft list. Dunns and Richardson Lakes are scheduled to begin their TMDL study in 2010, but as of right now there is no contract currently in place.

This project will take place in 2 phases. In the first phase, the CROW will work with the Meeker COLA to organize a lake monitoring training session for area Lake Associations to refresh area volunteers on Lake Monitoring techniques and to provide any necessary monitoring equipment. We will use the monitoring guidance manual the CROW developed in conjunction with Minnesota Waters and the Middle Fork Crow River Watershed District for our Volunteer Monitoring program in 2007 and 2008. Our aim with the training session is to work closely with the volunteers that will be sampling area lakes to make sure that proper protocols are being followed. We will also emphasize the importance of QA/QC measures, and data recording, reporting and utilization at this training session. The CROW will provide the Volunteers with secchi disks, integrated lake samplers, data sheets and a laminated instruction sheet. The CROW will work with Meeker County to organize sample collection and delivery schedules and locate convenient drop off and pick up locations.

The second phase of this project will take place in 2011 when the Initiative Foundation brings their Healthy Lakes Program to Meeker County. Through the Healthy Lakes Partnerships program the Foundation empowers local shoreline associations to improve the quality of their lakes or rivers by helping them:
• Enhance the leadership skills of key lake/river association members.
• Provide a forum for shoreline property owners to plan for the future of their watershed.
• Obtain opportunities to network, work cooperatively, learn from one other, and advocate for healthy waters in central Minnesota
• Create visions, missions, goals, and management plans for their watershed using a template developed by the Healthy Lakes program and modeled after the State Interagency Lakes Coordinating Committee guide.
• Establish indicators to measure the success of their association’s efforts.
• Receive training, technical assistance and support for citizen-based planning and project implementation

Project Duration

Start Date Wed, 03/31/2010 - 00:00

Original end date Sat, 06/30/2012 - 00:00

Actual end date Sat, 06/30/2012 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $36505.00

Amendments $0

Contract total $36505.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? 352 E710 WY2

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 Kelly O'Hara

Evaluator Email Address kelly.ohara@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Excellent

Evaluate the contractor's quality Excellent

Evaluate the contractor's cost Excellent

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Excellent - Grant was managed exellently. All reports submitted on time and grantee excelled at comminicating with project manager as to the progress of the grant.

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