Agency Natural Resources Dept

Contractor Tech-Pro Incorporated

SWIFT Contract Number 72960

Project Name MN DNR MPARS and MAHMA system and applications

Project Number (if applicable) ER 1024

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The contractor was hired to lead control quality processes through verification, documentation, and validation of business requirements for several large development efforts within the Department of Natural Resources. Resources (either agency or MN.IT) were not available with the right skillset to perform this work. This was our second engagement with TechPro and this specific resource (greg Pesall).

Project Duration

Start Date Thu, 01/02/2014 - 00:00

Original end date Mon, 06/30/2014 - 00:00

Actual end date Mon, 06/30/2014 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) 962

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $99587.50

Amendments $0.00

Contract total $99587.50

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Clean Water Legacy Funds and LCCMR project 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 Stephen Lime

Evaluator Email Address steve.lime@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The contractor, Greg Pesall, was punctual, reliable, and always willing to accommodate project needs. I do think it was a little more difficult to balance his time across two very different projects, with completely seperate project teams. It was not always clear what priorities were-our fault. In general most deadlines were met on-time, if not ahead of schedule.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Overall I think Greg did excellent work. He took pride in his work and was able to introduce and integrate quality assurance methods and activities the team did not have experience with. Greg’s knowledge of agile development, change control processes, and different types of testing (e.g. unit, integration, regression, usability, accessibility) ultimately lead to better products. Greg was very professional and offered up suggestions outside his assigned work that helped projects. His work was clearly understandable by all team members, technical or not.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The contact represented a good value for the project. ASAP-IT was a very efficient way to access these specialized QA/QC skills at an affordable price – one consistent with our own professional service rates.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Very good. Greg’s soft skills were as honed and as useful as his technical skills. This combination served the project well. As mentioned earlier, I do think working for two projects provided a challenge and Greg did his best to keep both projects happy. It’s only natural for one project to believe the other was getting the best deal. While we would definitely work with Greg in the future I think we would look to concentrate his work on a single development effort.

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.): NA

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied