Agency Commerce Dept

Contractor The Cadmus Group, LLC

SWIFT Contract Number 141707

Project Name Technical Resource Manual Update

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: This contract was initially awarded with a scope that was limited to supporting the maintenance and development of the Minnesota Technical Reference Manual (MN TRM) (Minn. Stat. §216B.241 subd. 1d). Throughout this contract, that scope expanded beyond the MN TRM to include work related to Investor Owned Utility (IOU) and Consumer Owned Utility (COU) Prescriptive Measure Reviews, IOU custom project reviews (Minn Administrative Rules 7690.0550), Pre and Post Measurement & Verification Custom Project reviews (“Director’s Decision: In the Matter of Staff’s Proposed Energy Savings Measurement Protocols for Minnesota Electric and Natural Gas Utilities’ Conservation Improvement Programs.” Minnesota Office of Energy Security. July 23, 2008. Docket No. CIP-06-1591.https://www.edockets.state.mn.us/edockets/searchDocuments.do?method=showPoup&documentId={12D4B154-99D6-464E-96BA-91418BD31CE8}&documentTitle=5376649 andhttp://mn.gov/commerce-stat/pdfs/cip-mv-protocols-large-project.pdf) and Electric Utility Infrastructure (EUI) project reviews (Minn. Stat. §216B.241 subd. 1c(d)(2))

Project Duration

Start Date Thu, 05/02/2024 - 00:00

Original end date Thu, 12/31/2020 - 00:00

Actual end date Wed, 01/31/2024 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $298450.00

Amendments $500000.00

Contract total $798450.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? State Special Revenue funds 2000-B1335400-B132413

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 Lauren Sweeney

Evaluator Email Address lauren.sweeney@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness 4 out of 5

Evaluate the contractor's quality 4 out of 5

Evaluate the contractor's cost 5 out of 5

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance 4 out of 5

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.): There were multiple PM changes on both sides of this contract which led to some project disruptions and to required additional effort to build working relationships (with all parties involved including the Department of Commerce, Cadmus, and stakeholder organizations included in committees like the MN TRM Technical Advosry Committee) and expectations.

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 4 - satisfied