Agency TRANSPORTATION DEPT

Contractor University of Minnesota

SWIFT Contract Number A90288

Project Name (CICAS) Gap Assessment Processing (GAP) System

Project Number (if applicable) 89031

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The Cooperative Intersection Collision Avoidance Systems (CICAS) initiative is one of nine intelligent transportation systems (ITS) initiatives supported by the U.S. Department of Transportation ’s (USDOT). The CICAS initiative focuses on determining the optimal combination of infrastructure and in-vehicle systems needed to address a full range of intersection crash problems. CICAS integrates two types of intersection collision avoidance systems: infrastructure-based and vehicle-based. Infrastructure-vehicle cooperative systems, which comprise the bulk of the CICAS future research, unify infrastructure and in-vehicle systems to give drivers the best possible information to help avoid a collision.

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 06/23/2006 - 00:00

Original end date Thu, 06/30/2011 - 00:00

Actual end date Thu, 06/30/2011 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $6900000.00

Amendments $-1778405.00

Contract total $5121595.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Federal 80% & State Match (ITS) 20%

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 Federal funding agency providing 80% of the project funds expected that the University of Minnesota would perform the work. This project was an extension of the Intersection Decision Support (IDS) project which was dompleted by the University of Minnesota as well.

Evaluator Name Jon Jackels

Evaluator Email Address Jon.jackels@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Milestones were delivered in a timely fashion, many of them were delivered ahead of schedule.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The milestone deliverables met or exceeded quality expectations and requirements.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Due to changed conditions and unexpected traffic performance results the contract was completed under budget and additional work was completed within this reduced budget.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance The University personnel did an excellent job of completing the work and responding to changing conditions.

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.): NONE

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 5 - very satisfied