Agency Pollution Control Agency

Contractor Minnesota Department of Agriculture

SWIFT Contract Number 21862

Project Name Cottonwood River Native Vegetation Water Quality

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Data quantifying the soil and water characteristics of native vegetation are very limited in Minnesota an in the Midwest as a while. Typically existing studies have focused on such features as grass filter strips or conducted at a scale where water quality effects are confounded by multiple variables. We will establish infrastructure for measuring surgace runoff and erosion dada at the field edge using a paired watershed approach. The project will be conducted for four years using a paired watershed design to statistically evaluate treatment effects. This study will quantify the soil and water characteristics of native vegetation for which economists could assign values that could be used as the basis for pollution abatement and trading programs.

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 01/01/2010 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 08/29/2014 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 08/29/2014 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $183766.00

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $183766.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? 319 fund

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 Mark Hanson

Evaluator Email Address mark.hanson@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The contractor had good schedule maintenance, and the deliverables were received on time.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The contractor delivered excellent-quality data and good-quality deliverables. The contractor adhered to the program requirements, and accomplished the contract goals.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The contractor had satisfactory budget development. Two change orders were needed in order to adjust the timelines due to weather as well as in-kind and actual cost of equipment. There were no disputed invoices and no invoices were submitted incorrectly.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Overall, the contractor's performance was good.

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 4 - satisfied