Legacy Evaluation Form.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 21 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFQ-484-081726 Environmental Support Services
- Solicitation number
- PE-48401-RFQ-2027-000000613
- 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 local 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 agency staff. The Prosecution and Progress section evaluates timely completion of deliverables, quality and completeness of invoices and reports, and budget compliance. Each evaluation factor is scored on a scale where 5 represents exceeding requirements, 3 represents meeting requirements, 1 represents not meeting requirements, or N/A if not applicable. The form requires documentation of the evaluation date, consultant name, GDOT project identification number, project manager information, agency contact details, project description, phase, and service dates.
The evaluation form includes sections for justification of scores by the Agency/Owner Project Manager and spaces for consultant response to evaluations if applicable. The scoring methodology applies weighted values based on the number of rating factors in each section, with a maximum possible score of 50 points per section. All evaluations require signatures from the Agency/Owner Project Manager, Consultant Project Manager, and the Agency Evaluator's Supervisor. This form is used to document consultant performance on the Environmental Support Services contracts issued under RFQ-484-081726 in Georgia, which encompasses three separate contract areas: NEPA, Air Quality, Noise and Public Involvement; Cultural Resources; and Ecology.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFQ_484_081726 Environmental Support Services.pdf | ||
| LAP Evaluation Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
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. | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 3 | Consultant remained within the scope of work as contracted. | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 4 | Consultant communicated well and worked cooperatively with agency staff, and Consultant promptly responded to calls, emails, correspondences, and direction given by agency staff. | N/A | - - - | 1 | |
| 0 | Ratings | ||||
| Sub Total: | 0.00 | ||||
| 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. | 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 | ||||
| Agency/Owner PM/SME Justification for Scores (required): |
Consultant Response to Evaluation (if applicable):
Total Score: 0
| 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: | 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 .