Agency Education Department

Contractor ICF Macro, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 177189

Project Name Charter School Program Evaluation

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) did a Request for Proposal (RFP) to select a qualified, independent external project evaluator for its federal Charter School Program (CSP or Program) grant program. The selected Contractor, ICF Macro, Inc. planned and conducted formative and summative evaluations of the Program. The Contractor assessed fidelity to CSP requirements and objectives, conducted research and data analysis, and identified effective practices. The evaluation generated quantitative and qualitative data demonstrating the extent to which outcomes were achieved for the CSP objectives and provided a Program evaluation report.

The purpose of the outside evaluation is to provide an objective view, using both formative and summative evaluation, of the fidelity and effectiveness of the federal CSP grant as implemented in Minnesota and demonstrate the extent to which outcomes are achieved for the grant objectives. The evaluation is critical to improving the Program and corresponding results in order to provide the best outcome for students.

Project Duration

Start Date Wed, 06/03/2020 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 09/30/2022 - 00:00

Actual end date Fri, 09/30/2022 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $169999.53

Amendments $0.00

Contract total $169999.53

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? federal

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 Paula Higgins

Evaluator Email Address Paula.Higgins@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness very satisfactory

Evaluate the contractor's quality satisfactory

Evaluate the contractor's cost reasonable

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Overall, the contractor’s performance was satisfactory. The monthly check-in calls helped the project stay on the timeline. There was heavy reliance on quotes from interviewees for the body of the report. The contractor did not show the ability to provide higher-level analysis. There were a number of staffing changes throughout the process which may have impacted the higher-level analysis and reporting writing. The quality, accessibility and copy editing was very satisfactory. A number of meetings were spent trying to provide background on Minnesota and the charter sector to help provide additional context for completing their evaluation.
There was an issue with invoicing that took a couple of rounds for clarification to meet reporting requirements.

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, no negative action was taken.

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied