LAP Evaluation Form (2).xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 29 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- PE-48401-RFQ-2027-000000634
- Issued by
- Georgia
About this file
This document is a Local Administered Project (LAP) Evaluation Form used by the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) to assess consultant performance on projects. The form is designed to evaluate consultants across two primary rating categories: Management and Prosecution and Progress. The Management section contains four rating factors assessing the consultant's resource management, independence from agency staff, adherence to scope of work, and communication and cooperation with GDOT personnel. The Prosecution and Progress section includes three rating factors evaluating whether deliverables were completed by agreed-upon dates, whether all invoices, studies, reports, and design requirements were complete and accurate with minimal revisions, and whether work remained within the assigned budget. Evaluations are scored on a five-point scale where 5 indicates exceeding requirements and expectations, 3 indicates meeting requirements and expectations, and 1 indicates not meeting requirements and expectations, with an N/A option available when applicable.
The form includes designated sections for the GDOT Project Manager and Supervisor to provide justifications for assigned scores and for the consultant to respond to the evaluation if desired. Signature lines and acknowledgment fields are provided for the GDOT PM, supervisor, consultant PM, and agency evaluator's supervisor. The form incorporates a scoring table that calculates weighted point values based on the number of factors rated, with individual factor ratings contributing proportional point values to a total score. The evaluation process requires acknowledgment from the GDOT Assistant Office Head and Office Head if any item receives a rating of 1, establishing an escalation protocol for performance deficiencies. This form serves as a quality assurance and performance management tool for GDOT's on-call roadway design services contracts statewide.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFQ 484_112326 On_Call Roadway Design Service.pdf | ||
| Legacy Evaluation Form_.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
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
LAP Evaluation Form
Local Administered Project (LAP) Evaluation Form
Evaluation Date:
Consultant:
GDOT PI No:
GDOT PM:
Agency:
Agency PM:
Phone:
Email:
Project Description & Scope:
Project Phase:
Service Dates:
Ratings: 5 = Exceeds Requirement and Expectation; 3 = Meets Requirement and Expectation; 1 = Does not Meet Requirement and Expectation; or N/A Requirement and Expectation
| A | Management | Rating | Factor | ||
| 1 | Consultant appropriately managed resources (manpower, equipment, subconsultants, etc.) | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 2 | Consultant worked independently and without significant help from Agency's staff on routine tasks. | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 3 | Consultant remained within the scope of work as contracted. | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 4 | Consultant communicated well and worked cooperatively with GDOT staff, and Consultant promptly responded to calls, emails, correspondences, and direction given by GDOT staff. | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 0 | Ratings | ||||
| Sub Total: | 0.00 | ||||
| GDOT PM/SME Justification for Scores (required): |
Consultant Response to Evaluation (if applicable):
| B | Prosecution and Progress | Rating | Factor | ||
| 5 | Consultant completed the deliverable(s) by the latest agreed upon date or within the duration contracted, as applicable. | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 6 | All invoices, studies, reports, design requirements, and details are complete, accurate, clear, and concise. Revisions are minimal. | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 7 | Consultant completed the deliverable(s) within the assigned budget. | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 0 | Ratings | ||||
| Sub Total: | 0.00 | ||||
| GDOT PM/SME Justification for Scores (required): |
Consultant Response to Evaluation (if applicable):
Total Score: 0
| GDOT PM: | ||
| Signature: | Date: | |
| Supervisor's Acknowledgement: |
Local's Comments:
Local's Acknowledgement:
| The GDOT Assistant Office Head (AOH) and Office Head (OH) Acknowledgements are required if a Rating of 1 is recorded for any item above. |
| AOH Acknowledgement: OH Acknowledgement: |
| Consultant PM: | ||
| Signature: | Date: |
| Agency Evaluator's | ||
| Supervisor (if applicable): | ||
| Signature: | Date: |
&12&A Page &P of &N
Scoring
| 1 | |||||
| 3 | |||||
| 5 | |||||
| N/A | |||||
| Factor Table | |||||
| Section Value: | 50 | 5 | 3 | 1 | |
| 0 | Ratings | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 1 | Ratings | 50.00 | 30.00 | 10.00 | |
| 2 | Ratings | 25.00 | 15.00 | 5.00 | |
| 3 | Ratings | 16.67 | 10.00 | 3.33 | |
| 4 | Ratings | 12.50 | 7.50 | 2.50 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .