Agency Administration Dept

Contractor HR Green, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 34086

Project Name Design for parking Meters in Specific PMD Parking

Project Number (if applicable) 02746CPP

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Engineering services needed to select and design a parking pay station system, including civil and electrical engineering, for various PMD parking facilities.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 11/21/2011 - 00:00

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

Actual end date Tue, 12/11/2012 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $48900.00

Amendments $6162.00

Contract total $55062.00

Did project finish within budget? No

What was the funding source? FY11 AP

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 Glen Heino

Evaluator Email Address glen.heino@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Unsatisfactory – The Consultant performed in an unacceptable manner in regards to the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The Consultant’s overall unsatisfactory performance outweighs any positive performance. The Consultant has made significant errors or omissions or has otherwise failed to contribute to the success of the project.
Specifically, we had few issues with the subconsultant (who seemed to do most of the work), but the lack of HRGreen electrical and civil engineering effort on the project, which was evident just before bidding caused quality issues and delay. The subsequent site investigation, civil input, and electrical drawings -which all should have been known to be part of the contract - was cause for the project being late to issue and bid.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Unsatisfactory – The Consultant performed in an unacceptable manner in regards to the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The Consultant’s overall unsatisfactory performance outweighs any positive performance. The Consultant has made significant errors or omissions or has otherwise failed to contribute to the success of the project.
Same as above, but exasperated by the fact that HRGreen kept giving us new project managers throughout the project (three during the project, and a new one now for 4 different PMs) The lack of knowledge/continuity on the project was frustrating to not only myself, but to PMD. There were over $34,000 in contractor added electrical costs to cover elements of the project requested in design, but left out of the documents.

Evaluate the contractor's cost n/a - initially looked o.k., but the rework and time lost is hard to calculate.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Unsatisfactory – The Consultant performed in an unacceptable manner in regards to the owner’s requirements and contract requirements. The Consultant’s overall unsatisfactory performance outweighs any positive performance. The Consultant has made significant errors or omissions or has otherwise failed to contribute to the success of the project.
None of the HRGreen PMs seemed to read the contract, and I was, and still am, dealing with issues to close this project out.

Would you engage the contractor's services again? No

Describe any negative action taken during the duration of this contract (i.e., termination, pursuit of suspension, etc.): Nothing formal, but I made calls to HR Green upper management about an unacceptable condition of losing a key staff person (the project manger) to layoff during a critical phase of the project just before bidding.

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 1 - very dissatisfied