Agency Employ & Econ Development Dept

Contractor DLT

SWIFT Contract Number b49647

Project Name Telephony at Work Upgrade & Installation

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: • Installation and configuration of Telephony @ Work software/application on new servers for the Unemployment Insurance Disaster Recovery system mimicking current Production System.
• Migration of data from current Production System to Greenfield
• Gateway configuration
• Testing
• Support during cutover of Greenfield to Production

Project Duration

Start Date Sat, 07/10/2010 - 00:00

Original end date Mon, 11/01/2010 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 06/01/2010 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) 130

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $60000

Amendments $12000

Contract total $72000

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? federal

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) DEED’s current version of Telephony @ Work (IVR) is out of support. A search was done to find an Oracle partner who could bid on this work, but we could not find a resource with familiarity with the old Telephony @ Work. Oracle has agreed to provide resources to complete an installation and configuration in Greenfield that mimics the current un-supported version currently in production, but we have to work thru an Oracle Certified Advantage Partner for contract purposes. (DLT) Oracle is not currently on State contract and will not sign a State contract. While Justin Kaufman, ADM, has been working with DEED and Oracle to find an agreeable solution to the contract issues, time constraints make going through an Oracle Partner most viable. Using resources familiar with DEED’s Telephony @ Work installation is more cost effective and reliable, as well.

Evaluator Name Thomas Schaeffer

Evaluator Email Address thomas.schaeffer@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness The contractor's work was completed in a timely manner. It was, however, difficult to get invoices with acceptable receipts in a timely manner. I believe this was partly due to the fact the invoices did not come directly from Oracle. DLT was very attentive to our requests to get missing items, but it was just a lengthy process. The contractor was also available in a timely manner via phone after the work was done and we had questions.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The quality of the contractors from Oracle was very good.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Contractor's cost was acceptable.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance We were very pleased with the performance of the several Oracle contractors. Oracle had some scheduling difficulties which made it impossible to get the contractor we needed for the duration of the cutover work, but another contractor was substitued in an acceptable manner to us and we did not miss a beat. DLT was also a good company to work with for billing and other questions we had.

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