LAP Evaluation Form.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 21 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- PE-48401-RFQ-2026-000000551
- 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 and local engineering design services contracts. The form evaluates consultants across two primary rating categories: Management and Prosecution/Progress. The Management section assesses resource management, consultant independence, scope adherence, and communication and cooperation with GDOT staff across four evaluation factors. The Prosecution and Progress section evaluates three factors: timely completion of deliverables, quality and completeness of invoices and reports with minimal revisions, and budget compliance. Each factor is rated on a scale of 5 (Exceeds Requirement and Expectation), 3 (Meets Requirement and Expectation), 1 (Does not Meet Requirement and Expectation), or N/A, with a scoring methodology that weights ratings based on the number of factors evaluated.
The evaluation form includes required justification sections for GDOT Project Managers and Subject Matter Experts to document the rationale for scores assigned, with provisions for consultant responses to evaluations. Acknowledgments from the GDOT Assistant Office Head and Office Head are mandatory if any factor receives a rating of 1. The form requires signatures from the GDOT Project Manager, Consultant Project Manager, and applicable supervisory personnel, along with Local comments and acknowledgments. This evaluation instrument is designed to be applied to engineering and design consultant services procured through the RFQ-484-042726 Batch #1 process for 2026 Engineering Design Services in Georgia, providing a standardized mechanism for assessing consultant performance and accountability on GDOT-administered projects.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Legacy Evaluation Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Consultant Scoring Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFQ_484_042726 _ Batch _1_ 2026.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 .