Legacy Evaluation Form_.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- PE-48401-RFQ-2026-000000519
- Issued by
- Georgia
About this file
This is a Local Project Evaluation Form used by the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) to assess consultant performance on contracted projects. The form captures evaluation data across two primary rating categories: Management (Factor A) and Prosecution and Progress (Factor B). The evaluation addresses consultant resource management, independence, scope adherence, communication, timeliness of deliverable completion, quality and completeness of work products, and budget compliance. The form accommodates ratings on a scale where 5 represents exceeding requirements, 3 represents meeting requirements, 1 represents failing to meet requirements, and N/A indicates non-applicable criteria. The evaluation includes fields for the consultant's project identification number, project manager information, project phase, and service dates, with scoring subtotals for each rating category that contribute to a maximum total score of 50 points.
The form structure provides designated spaces for justification of scores by the Agency/Owner Project Manager or Subject Matter Expert, consultant responses to evaluations, and signature blocks for the Agency/Owner PM, consultant PM, and evaluating supervisor. The scoring methodology assigns weighted point values to each rating level, with factors receiving between 8 and 20 points based on their assigned rating. This evaluation instrument serves as a legacy assessment tool for monitoring consultant performance on GDOT projects and establishing a performance record that may inform future contract awards and consultant selections for services such as those outlined in RFQ-484-022626 for roundabout and alternative intersection design support services.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFQ_484_022626 Roundabout Alt Intersections I.pdf | ||
| LAP Evaluation Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Finalist (Shortlist) Announcement.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
Local Project Evaluation Form
Local Project Evaluation Form
Evaluation Date:
Consultant:
GDOT PI No.(if applicable):
GDOT PM (if applicable):
Agency/Owner:
Agency/Owner 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. | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | Consultant remained within the scope of work as contracted. | 5 | 20 | 0 | |
| 4 | Consultant communicated well and worked cooperatively with agency staff, and Consultant promptly responded to calls, emails, correspondences, and direction given by agency staff. | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | Ratings | ||||
| Sub Total: | 20 | ||||
| Agency/Owner 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. | 3 | 15 | 0 | |
| 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. | 3 | 15 | 0 | |
| 2 | Ratings | ||||
| Sub Total: | 30 | ||||
| Agency/Owner PM/SME Justification for Scores (required): |
Consultant Response to Evaluation (if applicable):
Total Score: 50
| Agency/Owner PM: | ||
| Signature: | Date: | |
| Supervisor's 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: | 60 | 5 | 3 | 1 | |
| 0 | Ratings | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1 | Ratings | 60 | 30 | 0 | |
| 2 | Ratings | 30 | 15 | 0 | |
| 3 | Ratings | 20 | 10 | 0 | |
| 4 | Ratings | 15 | 8 | 0 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .