Exhibit L - Consultant Evaluation.pdf

Exhibit L

CITY OF TOLEDO

CONTRACTOR/CONSULTANT SATISFACTION

PROGRAM

PURPOSE:

To evaluate the performance of contractors and consultants who provide service to the City of Toledo and increase communication and foster positive relationships. The instrument utilized in this program will also provide an avenue to communicate our expectations as it relates to providing timely, cost-effective, and quality service to the citizens of the City of Toledo.

PROGRAM:

This program and evaluation instrument will be included in the bid packet or request for proposal on all bids. The program will also be discussed at each pre-bid meeting and pre-construction meeting. Within 30 days after completion of the project/program, the employee who was directly responsible for overseeing the contract will complete the evaluation form;

then, if necessary, set up a post-contract meeting with the consultant or contractor to review the evaluation with them. Files on every contractor/consultant will be maintained by each Division as well as being placed on a database in the public fileserver on the City network for use by all Divisions. The information may also be utilized as part of the review process for awarding future bids by the City of Toledo.

Effective Date:

CITY OF TOLEDO

CONTRACTOR/CONSULTANT SATISFACTION FORM

Contractor/Consultant:

Contract Name:

Time Period of Contract:

Name of Evaluator:

Post Contract Meeting Date with Contractor/Consultant:

Type of Contract Contract No.

Amount of Contract:

Instructions: Please rate all areas applicable to the contract just completed. For areas rated less than 10, please attach back-up documentation (i.e., inspector reports, etc.) to support the rating or provide information in comment section, as necessary. Be sure to adjust the final score based on the number of criteria being rated.

A. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

1. To what degree are management personnel available with full authority to execute the directions of the engineer?

10 always available 4-6 sometimes available

7-9 routinely available 1-3 routinely not available

Comments:

2. To what degree are management personnel competent and effective in scheduling the work and organizing construction operations, including being punctual in starting and completing the work on the project and meeting critical intermediate phases in accordance with the approved progress schedule?

10 highly competent 4-6 somewhat competent

7-9 fairly competent 1-3 not competent

Comments:

3. To what degree did management personnel have the knowledge necessary regarding specifications, plans and special provisions?

10 highly knowledgeable 4-6 somewhat knowledgeable

7-9 fairly knowledgeable 1-3 not knowledgeable

Comments:

4. How adequately was the project staffed with competent workers who were monitored?

10 always staffed 4-6 sometimes staffed

7-9 routinely staffed 1-3 routinely not staffed

Comments:

5. To what degree did the contractor/consultant furnish the required documentation and reports in a timely manner (i.e., certification of materials, delivery tickets, progress schedule, shop drawings, material sampling, early notice of time extension, potential claims, etc.)?

10 always furnished 4-6 sometimes furnished

7-9 routinely furnished 1-3 routinely not furnished

Comments:

6. Did the contractor/consultant inform project personnel in advance of scheduled day-to-day items of work?

10 always informed 4-6 sometimes informed

7-9 routinely informed 1-3 routinely not informed

7. To what degree was the chain of authority in the City of Toledo respected by the contractor/consultant (positive attitude toward project personnel, etc.)?

10 highly respected 4-6 somewhat respected

7-9 fairly respected 1-3 not respected

Comments:

8. Did the contractor/consultant comply with the direction of project personnel without delay?

10 always complied 4-6 sometimes complied

7-9 routinely complied 1-3 routinely did not comply

Comments:

9. To what degree did the contractor/consultant cooperate with other contractors/consultants/agencies performing work on adjacent or related projects?

10 always cooperated 4-6 sometimes cooperated

7-9 routinely cooperated 1-3 routinely did not cooperate

10. Did the contractor/consultant comply with all wage rates and labor regulations and submit accurate payrolls?

10 always complied 4-6 sometimes complied

7-9 routinely complied 1-3 routinely did not comply

Comments:

11. To what degree did the contractor inform the adjacent residents/business owners of the different phases of construction?

10 always informed 4-6 sometimes informed

7-9 routinely informed 1-3 routinely did not inform

Comments:

12. Did the contractor/consultant effectively handle situations involving problem employees brought to their attention by the City of Toledo?

10 always handled 4-6 sometimes handled

7-9 routinely handled 1-3 routinely did not handle

B. EQUIPMENT

1. Did the contractor provide the appropriate number and type of equipment necessary for performance of the work?

10 always provided 4-6 sometimes provided

7-9 routinely provided 1-3 routinely did not provide

Comments:

2. Did the contractor provide reliable equipment so as not to impede the progress of the project?

10 always provided 4-6 sometimes provided

7-9 routinely provided 1-3 routinely did not provide

C. WORK PERFORMANCE

1. To what degree was the work site maintained in a safe, clean and orderly condition?

10 always maintained 4-6 sometimes maintained

7-9 routinely maintained 1-3 routinely did not maintain

Comments:

2. To what degree did the contractor maintain adequate signs, lights, barricades and properly trained flag persons in accordance with Ohio Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, traffic control plan and approved revisions?

10 always maintained 4-6 sometimes maintained

7-9 routinely maintained 1-3 routinely did not maintain

Comments:

3. To what degree did the contractor/consultant meet contract requirements including specifications, supplemental specifications, special provisions, plans and supplementary documents with minimal instruction from the City of Toledo?

10 always complied 4-6 sometimes complied

7-9 routinely complied 1-3 routinely did not comply

4. To what degree was the overall quality of work performed by the contractor/consultant ?

10 excellent 4-6 fair

7-9 good 1-3 poor

Comments:

5. To what degree did the contractor/consultant properly notify and coordinate work with other agencies/utility companies in protection of existing facilities?

10 always 4-6 sometimes

7-9 routinely 1-3 routinely

Comments:

6. To what degree did the contractor/consultant minimize urgencies of construction or consultations that required the City of Toledo to compromise the quality of work or abandon good construction/engineering practices in order to complete the project?

10 no urgencies 4-6 several urgencies

7-9 few urgencies 1-3 many urgencies

7. Did the contractor/consultant finish the work by the contract end date?

(The contractor/consultant should not be penalized for delays caused by the City.)

10 finished on time 4-6 finished behind, several extensions

7-9 finished behind, 1-3 finished behind, one extension liquidated damages

Comments:

8. Did the contractor/consultant finish the work on budget? (The contractor/ consultant should not be penalized for cost overruns as a result of a change in project scope requested by the City.)

10 finished on budget 4-6 exceeded budget, contractor careless

7-9 exceeded budget, 1-3 exceeded budget, minimally contractor negligent

Comments:

9. To what degree was final clean up and punch list items complete?

10 no punch list 4-6 punch list completed after deadline

7-9 punch list completed 1-3 punch list not completed prior to deadline

D. SUBCONTRACTOR MANAGEMENT

1. To what degree did the contractor/consultant coordinate work with subcontractors’ work?

10 always coordinated 4-6 sometimes coordinated

7-9 routinely coordinated 1-3 routinely did not coordinate

Comments:

2. To what degree did the contractor/consultant exercise authority over subcontractors and provide notice of subcontractor work schedule?

10 always exercised 4-6 sometimes exercised

7-9 routinely exercised 1-3 routinely did not exercise

Comments:

3. To what degree did the contractor monitor subcontractor activities to ensure approved materials were supplied and incorporated into the project?

10 always monitored 4-6 sometimes monitored

7-9 routinely monitored 1-3 routinely did not monitor

4. To what degree did the contractor/consultant ensure that subcontractors submitted all paperwork required for approvals, materials and payrolls?

10 always ensured 4-6 sometimes ensured

7-9 routinely ensured 1-3 routinely did not ensure

Comments:

5. To what degree did the contractor/consultant meet the level of Disadvantaged Business Enterprise utilization which they indicated they would use at the time of contract award?

10 exceeded 4-6 met less than commitment

7-9 met 1-3 met less than 30% of commitment

CONTRACTOR/CONSULTANT SATISFACTION PROGRAM

SCORESHEET

A. Organization and Management Question Number Issue

Score (10 max. ea.)

Weighting Factor Total Score

1 Are management personnel available 1

2 Are management personnel organized 1

3 Are management personnel knowledgeable 1

4 Was project adequately staffed 1

5 Documents furnished timely 1

6 Was schedule known in advance 2

7 Did the contractor/consultant respect the City’s chain of authority 1

8 Did the contractor/consultant comply with City direction 2

9 Cooperation with other project contractors/consultants 1

10 Comply with wage rates, labor regulations, accurate payrolls 1

11 Communication with residents/businesses 1

12 Ability to handle problem employees 1

TOTAL (140 max)

B. Equipment 1 Appropriate number and type of equipment used 1

2 Was equipment reliable 1

TOTAL (20 max)

CONTRACTOR/CONSULTANT SATISFACTION PROGRAM

SCORESHEET

C. Work Performance Question Number Issue

Score (10 max. ea.)

Weighting Factor Total Score

1 Work site maintained 1

2 Maintained traffic control 1

3 Meet contract requirements 1

4 Quality of work 2

5 Coordinate work with other utilities 1

6 Was the quality of work compromised 2

7 Complete by contract end date 3

8 Complete on budget 3

9 Clean-up and punch list items 2

TOTAL (160 max)

D. Subcontractor Management Question Number Issue

Score (10 max. ea.)

Weighting Factor Total Score

1 Coordination with subcontractors 1

2 Exercise authority and provide schedules 2

3 Subcontractor materials oversight 1

4 All paperwork properly submitted by contractor 1

5 DBE utilization 1

TOTAL (50 max)

TOTAL POINTS (ALL SECTIONS)

POSSIBLE POINTS

PERCENTAGE OF POSSIBLE