Agency Human Services Dept

Contractor Public Consulting Group

SWIFT Contract Number PTK%211978

Project Name Lead Agency Process Mapping

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Analyze the business processes related to the Eligibility, Assessment and Support Planning Process of a minimum of 15 individual lead agencies to obtain recommendations, efficiencies, improvements, and best practices within each agency. Following the review, create a recommendation report for each of the lead agencies analyzed and present these findings to the State leadership. Develop a professional guide for applicants from diverse backgrounds and their families on the high-level steps of the Eligibility, Assessment and Support Planning Process.

Project Duration

Start Date Wed, 06/01/2022 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 06/30/2023 - 00:00

Actual end date Sun, 03/31/2024 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $1075819

Amendments $439169

Contract total $1514988

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? State funds. EBFD 34013 and 34416 (HCBS-Art17_Map)

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 Elizabeth Wielinski

Evaluator Email Address Elizabeth.A.Wielinski@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness On time (or within 60 days)

Evaluate the contractor's quality Average

Evaluate the contractor's cost Market rate

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance 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.): Communication and transparency was a negative drawback from the very beginning of the project. As sight visits occurred, it was very difficult to discern the details of those visits (often referred to as high level overview). When questions were raised regarding those visits, that were not addressed in those reports, it would be noted it would be addressed in the Recommendation Report. As sight visits came to a close, and the culmination of the Recommendation Report draft was presented to us, we felt as though Public Consulting Group did address the contracted initiative of the project-finding efficiencies with the LTSS process. Listening to our concerns; PCG adjusted staff and how we collaborated with deliverables moving forward.

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied