LAP Evaluation Form.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 25 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- PE-48401-RFQ-2027-000000616
- Issued by
- Georgia
About this file
LAP Evaluation Form Summary
This is a Local Administered Project (LAP) Evaluation Form used by the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) to assess consultant performance on state and local projects. The form is designed to evaluate consultant performance across two primary rating categories: Management (Factor A) and Prosecution and Progress (Factor B). The Management section assesses resource management, consultant independence, scope adherence, and communication and cooperation with GDOT staff. The Prosecution and Progress section evaluates whether consultants completed deliverables by agreed-upon dates, produced complete and accurate documentation with minimal revisions, and stayed within assigned budgets. The evaluation employs a five-point scale where 5 indicates exceeds requirements, 3 indicates meets requirements, 1 indicates does not meet requirements, and N/A is available when not applicable. Evaluations require justification from the GDOT Project Manager and allow for consultant response to scores.
The form includes a standardized scoring methodology that converts individual ratings into weighted point values based on the number of factors evaluated within each section. Scoring ranges from 50 points for a rating of 5 down to 0 points for N/A ratings, with proportional adjustments when multiple factors are evaluated. The completed form requires signatures and acknowledgments from the GDOT Project Manager, Consultant Project Manager, Agency Evaluator's Supervisor, and—if any factor receives a rating of 1—the GDOT Assistant Office Head and Office Head. This evaluation tool applies to the General Engineering Consulting and Owner's Verification Firm Services contract for the I-75 South Express Lanes project (PI #0020636) in Georgia.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Legacy Evaluation Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFQ 484_082426 GEC and OVF Services for I_75.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 .