Agency MN.IT

Contractor Jim Jagow - Intertech

SWIFT Contract Number 3-70897

Project Name CRS Rewrite and Workforce One Rewrite

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The Customer Registration System (CRS) was rewritten to expand online self-services for job seekers and employers in Minnesota. Workforce One, an employment and training services case management system, was completely rewritten as a .NET application. Both projects required a quality assurance lead who could establish a quality assurance and testing lifecycle. Specific responsibilities included the following: provide leadership and mentoring on QA topics to the project team; create and execute test plans and test cases and review those of others to ensure consistency; identify and recommend improvements to MN.IT@DEED QA standards and processes; collaborate with DEED project managers to coordinate functional, user acceptance, regression and exploratory testing procedures.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 10/15/2012 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 04/14/2013 - 00:00

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

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $109200.00

Amendments $237930.00

Contract total $347130.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? CRS Rewrite and Workforce One Rewrite projects

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 Britta Holland

Evaluator Email Address Britta.Holland@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Jim is on always on time and follows through with commitments he makes to the team.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Jim's work is high quality. His testing is very thorough and methodical. Jim identified bugs and enhancement opportunities that otherwise would have gone unnoticed before project launch. He ensured that these items were logged appropriately and took responsibility for seeing them through until they were fixed. Jim took the lead on user acceptance testing, and helped to ensure a quality user testing experience and meaningful feedback for the project team.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The cost was acceptable considering the quality of work.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Jim's overall performance was excellent. His thorough testing and commitment to ensuring a positive user experience were vital to the success of both projects. Jim not only excelled at quality assurance work, but also developed a great relationship with the team. I would highly recommend Jim for other quality assurance contract work in the department.

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 5 - very satisfied