LAP Evaluation Form.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 21 KB Posted

Attached to
RFQ-484-091225 Geotechnical Engineering, Environmental, and Geotechnical Field Operation Svcs
Solicitation number
PE-48401-RFQ-2026-000000416
Issued by
Fulton County, Georgia

About this file

The file is a Local Administered Project (LAP) Evaluation Form from the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT), designed to assess consultant performance across multiple management and project delivery criteria. The form provides a structured scoring mechanism with ratings ranging from 1 (Does not Meet Requirement) to 5 (Exceeds Requirement), with additional N/A options for each evaluation factor. The evaluation covers two primary assessment categories: Management Rating Factors and Prosecution and Progress Rating Factors, which examine aspects such as resource management, scope adherence, communication effectiveness, deliverable completion, invoice accuracy, and budget compliance.

The evaluation form appears to be a standardized performance tracking tool that allows GDOT to systematically document and quantify consultant performance on local transportation projects. While no specific project details are provided in this document, the form suggests a comprehensive approach to vendor assessment that includes space for GDOT project managers' justifications, consultant responses, and required supervisory acknowledgments. The scoring methodology includes weighted values for different rating levels, enabling a nuanced evaluation of consultant performance across multiple dimensions of project execution and management.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Legacy Evaluation Form.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
RFQ_484_091225.pdf PDF

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

AManagementRatingFactor
1Consultant appropriately managed resources (manpower, equipment, subconsultants, etc.)N/A- - -1
2Consultant worked independently and without significant help from Agency's staff on routine tasks.N/A- - -1
3Consultant remained within the scope of work as contracted.N/A- - -1
4Consultant 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
0Ratings
Sub Total:0.00
GDOT PM/SME Justification for Scores (required):

Consultant Response to Evaluation (if applicable):

BProsecution and ProgressRatingFactor
5Consultant completed the deliverable(s) by the latest agreed upon date or within the duration contracted, as applicable.N/A- - -1
6All invoices, studies, reports, design requirements, and details are complete, accurate, clear, and concise. Revisions are minimal.N/A- - -1
7Consultant completed the deliverable(s) within the assigned budget.N/A- - -1
0Ratings
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:50531
0Ratings0.000.000.00
1Ratings50.0030.0010.00
2Ratings25.0015.005.00
3Ratings16.6710.003.33
4Ratings12.507.502.50

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