LAP Evaluation Form.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 25 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- PE-48401-RFQ-2027-000000620
- 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 state-funded contract projects. The evaluation form is designed to rate consultants across two primary categories: Management and Prosecution/Progress. Under the Management section, consultants are evaluated on four factors including appropriate resource management, independent work performance, adherence to scope of work, and communication and cooperation with GDOT staff. The Prosecution and Progress section contains three evaluation factors assessing whether consultants completed deliverables by agreed-upon dates, whether all invoices, reports, and design requirements are complete and accurate with minimal revisions, and whether work was completed within the assigned budget. Ratings are scaled from 1 (Does Not Meet Requirement) to 5 (Exceeds Requirement), with a score of 3 representing meeting requirements and expectations. The form accommodates N/A responses where applicable.
The evaluation form requires signatures and acknowledgments from the GDOT Project Manager, Supervisor, Consultant Project Manager, and Agency Evaluator's Supervisor, with additional acknowledgment required from the GDOT Assistant Office Head and Office Head if any factor receives a rating of 1. The scoring methodology applies weighted calculations based on the number of factors rated, with scores of 5 valued at 50 points, scores of 3 at 30 points, and scores of 1 at 10 points per factor. Prime consultants awarded Government Estimator contracts under this program are granted exclusivity with GDOT and are prohibited from competing on Design-Bid-Build contracts during the contract term, though sub-consultants may be released from this restriction at GDOT's discretion.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Legacy Evaluation Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFQ_484_090826 Government Estimator Contract .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 .