ESBD_File_324020_Attachement C-Contractor Vendor Evaluation Form-05112023.pdf

PDF 1 MB Posted

Attached to
754-WASTE HAULING SERVICES-2023
Solicitation number
754-WASTEHAULINGSERVICES-2023
Issued by
Hays County, San Marcos City, Texas

About this file

This document is a Contractor/Vendor Evaluation Form for a state and local contract opportunity related to Waste Hauling Services at Texas State University in San Marcos, Texas. The contract involves the selection of a qualified vendor to provide these services across multiple jurisdictions, including Hays County and the City of San Marcos. The evaluation form assesses the contractor's performance across various criteria, such as scheduling, quality of workmanship, subcontractor management, communication, contract administration, safety, budget management, supervisory personnel, contract close-out, and overall project management. The form also allows for a recommendation on whether to use the contractor for comparable work in the future and provides space for additional comments.

The related state and local contract opportunity is for a 754-WASTE HAULING SERVICES-2023 project at Texas State University, located in San Marcos, Texas. The University is seeking qualified vendors to provide Waste Hauling Services across the main campus and surrounding jurisdictions of Hays County and the City of San Marcos.

View the file

Other files

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Contractor/Vendor Evaluation Project Contact Name Company Name:

Service Date: Contract No. Project Name

Contract Type: ☐ Job Order Contractor ☐ IDIQ ☐Subcontractor ☐Other (check all that apply)

Please rate the effectiveness of the Contractor’s performance on the project across the following dimensions:

Evaluation Criteria: 0 = N/A 1 = Low 5 = Moderate 10 = High

Performance Dimensions: Value Score

1) Scheduling/Productivity

• Project schedule quality and completeness

• Controlling of project schedule

• Manpower allocation for maintaining project schedule

• Material deliveries to support project schedule

• Ability to meet substantial completion date and project milestones

• Productivity of work force

0-10

2) Quality of Workmanship

• Compliance with project drawings and specifications

• Workmanship quality and accuracy

• Tools – quality and sufficient quantity

• Equipment – sufficient quantity and operating condition

• Quality of jobsite craft personnel

0-10

3) Subcontractor Management

• Management of subcontractor

• Project coordination of subcontractor

• Productivity of subcontractor

0-10

4) Communication and Partnering • Timely and open communication with University Contact

• Timely pre-construction site visits and meeting

0-10

5) Contract Administration

• Timely submission of complete and correct documentation required for NTP

• Change order processing

• Timely submission of RFIs, Shop Drawings, and Change Orders

• Subcontractor payments made promptly

• Timely submission of complete and correct payment applications

• Quality of paperwork

0-10

6) Safety

• Timely submission of site specific safety program

• Knowledge of OSHA standards

• Implementation of safety rules and regulations

• Promotion and creation of safety awareness

• Daily and overall housekeeping

• Safety record

• Response to safety concerns

• Awareness of public safety

0-10

1 | P a g e

PO #

Contractor/Vendor Evaluation

7) Budget Management

• Knowledge of Scope of Work

• Minimized change orders

• Offered valuable input to owners for managing project on budget

0-10

8) Supervisory Personnel Rating

• Overall performance of this contractor's on-site supervisory personnel and project management staff

• Demonstrated Quality Assurance/Quality Control processes

0-10

9) Contract Close-Out

• Timely completion of all punch-list items

• Timely resolution of all outstanding change orders

• Timely submission of all close-out documents (O&Ms, As-Builts, Warranties, etc.)

• Quality of close-out documentation

0-10

10) Overall Project Management • Delivered effective overall project management

0-10

Total 0-100

Based on these comments, would you recommend this Contractor for comparable work in the future?

☐ Yes ☐ No

Please provide any comments regarding the Contractor’s performance or the quality of its work.

Comments:

Evaluator’s Name: __ Telephone Number : ________________________________________

Stakeholder’s Group: ☐Fac Mgt ☐PDC ☐Fac Ops ☐Util Ops ☐Fac Grnd ☐Fac Cust ☐Other (check all that apply)

2 | P a g e

Company Name:
Project Contact Name:
Contract No:
Project Name:
Job Order Contractor: Off
IDIQ: Off
Subcontractor: Off
Other: Off
Based on these comments would you recommend this Contractor for comparable work in the future: Off
Comments:
Telephone Number:
Fac Mgt: Off
PDC: Off
Fac Ops: Off
Util Ops: Off
Fac Grnd: Off
Fac Cust: Off
Other_2: Off
Dropdown1: [0]
Text2: 0
Dropdown2: [0]
Dropdown3: [0]
Dropdown4: [0]
Dropdown5: [0]
Dropdown6: [0]
Dropdown7: [0]
Dropdown8: [0]
Dropdown9: [0]
Dropdown10: [0]
Evaluator's Name:
Reset:
PO #:
Date:

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .