Agency Natural Resources Dept

Contractor SDK Software Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 80393

Project Name WIREs Upgrade

Project Number (if applicable) ER1118

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. Neither agency or MN.IT were available with the right skillset to perform this work.

Project Duration

Start Date Thu, 07/17/2014 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 12/19/2014 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 11/07/2014 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) 962

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $92000.00

Amendments $0.00

Contract total $92000.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? DNR Operations Services Division

Is this a sole source contract? Yes

If this was a single source contract, explain why the agency determined there was only a single source for the services (if applicable) The contract had been used in planning phases of the project - Used the ASAP.IT program

Evaluator Name Michelle Sentyrz

Evaluator Email Address shelly.sentyrz@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Charan arrived to work on time or called in to daily 9:00 a.m. meetings if stuck in traffic. He worked the hours on his timesheets.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Quality was variable. Some days Charan was attentive in meetings, focused on tasks, recalled his previous work completed, and understood customizations of the DNR Oracle platform. Other days he was tired, unfocused, and could not grasp those same concepts. Project schedule fell behind because of this.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Charan was a good value for this contract cost 50% of the time - when his performance was as expected. It was less expensive to keep him on the project and facilitate performance than it was to hire a different contractor with no previous history of the project.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance It was apparent that Charan was struggling with something personal during his time with us. I inquired regularly if there were ways we could mitigate arrangements to increase level of performance, but he declined and vowed to improve. The last few days of the project Charan shared some information that explained some of his work inconsistencies. This information may have been used to adjust work tasks and allow him to be more successful.

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.): Termination before extent of hours were used.

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 2 - dissatisfied