LAP Evaluation Form.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 21 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- PE-48401-RFQ-2026-000000529
- Issued by
- Georgia
About this file
This is a Local Administered Project (LAP) Evaluation Form used by the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) to assess consultant performance on contracted projects. The form evaluates consultants across two primary rating categories: Management and Prosecution and Progress. The Management section assesses resource management, consultant independence, scope adherence, and communication and cooperation with GDOT staff across four factors. The Prosecution and Progress section evaluates timely completion of deliverables, quality and completeness of invoices and reports, and budget compliance across three factors. Each factor is rated on a scale where 5 represents exceeds requirements, 3 represents meets requirements, and 1 represents does not meet requirements, with an N/A option available.
The evaluation form utilizes a weighted scoring system that assigns point values based on the number of rated factors, with ratings of 5 earning 50 points (or adjusted values for fewer factors), ratings of 3 earning 30 points, ratings of 1 earning 10 points, and N/A responses earning 0 points. The form requires documentation of justification for scores by the GDOT Project Manager or Subject Matter Expert, allows for consultant response if applicable, and mandates acknowledgment signatures from the GDOT Project Manager, supervisor, consultant Project Manager, and agency evaluator's supervisor. Additional acknowledgments from the GDOT Assistant Office Head and Office Head are required if any factor receives a rating of 1, indicating non-compliance with project requirements.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFQ 484_121825A Lighting Engineering Design S.pdf | ||
| Legacy Evaluation Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFQ 484_121825A_Lighting Engineering and Desi.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
| 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 .