ESBD_File_346083_Exhibit D- Contractor_Vendor Evaluation Form.pdf
PDF 1 MB Posted
- Attached to
- CSP#754- Jowers Roof Replacement Project-2024
- Solicitation number
- 754-JowersRoofReplacementProject-2024
- Issued by
- Hays County, Texas
About this file
This document is a Contractor/Vendor Evaluation Form for a state and local contract opportunity. The form evaluates the performance of a contractor or vendor across various criteria including scheduling, quality of workmanship, subcontractor management, communication, contract administration, safety, budget management, supervisory personnel, contract close-out, and overall project management. The evaluation is scored on a scale of 0-10 for each criterion, with a total score out of 100. The evaluator is then asked whether they would recommend the contractor for comparable work in the future.
The related state and local contract opportunity is for the Jowers Roof Replacement Project at Texas State University in San Marcos, Texas. This project is located in Hays County and is being solicited through a Competitive Sealed Proposal process. The project involves the replacement of the roof on the Jowers building on the university campus.
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 .