Legacy Evaluation Form_.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFQ-484-051426 Statewide Transit Plan Update
- Solicitation number
- PE-48401-RFQ-2026-000000564
- 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 state and local projects. The form evaluates consultants across two primary rating categories: Management (Section A) and Prosecution and Progress (Section B). The evaluation covers consultant performance on resource management, scope adherence, communication and cooperation with agency staff, timely delivery of deliverables, quality and completeness of work products, and budget compliance. The form utilizes a five-point scale where 5 represents exceeding requirements and expectations, 3 represents meeting requirements and expectations, and 1 represents failing to meet requirements. Evaluations are documented with project descriptions, service dates, and project phases, with signatures required from the Agency/Owner Project Manager, the consultant's Project Manager, and the Agency Evaluator's Supervisor.
The evaluation framework assigns weighted point values to each rating factor, with Management ratings contributing up to 60 points and Prosecution and Progress ratings contributing up to 40 points, resulting in a total possible score of 100 points. The form requires justification narratives from the Agency/Owner Project Manager/Subject Matter Expert for all scores and provides space for consultant response to evaluation findings. This standardized assessment tool enables GDOT to maintain consistent performance documentation and create a historical record of consultant capabilities for future procurement decisions and vendor management purposes.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFQ_484_051426 _ Statewide Transit Plan Updat.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 .