Legacy Evaluation Form.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 21 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- PE-48401-RFQ-2026-000000503
- Issued by
- Georgia
About this file
This is a Local Project Evaluation Form utilized by the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) and local agencies to assess consultant performance on completed projects. The form is designed to evaluate consultant performance across two primary rating categories: Management and Prosecution and Progress. The evaluation covers the consultant's ability to manage resources including manpower, equipment, and subconsultants; work independently on routine tasks; remain within the contracted scope of work; and communicate and cooperate effectively with agency staff. The form also assesses whether the consultant completed deliverables by agreed-upon dates, produced complete and accurate documentation with minimal revisions, and stayed within budget constraints.
The evaluation utilizes a five-point rating scale where 5 indicates exceeding requirements and expectations, 3 indicates meeting requirements and expectations, and 1 indicates failure to meet requirements and expectations, with N/A as an option when applicable. Evaluators must provide justification for scores in each section, and the form allows for consultant response to the evaluation. The scoring methodology applies weighted values based on the number of ratings provided, with single ratings valued at 50 points for a score of 5, 30 points for a score of 3, and 10 points for a score of 1. The form requires signatures from the Agency/Owner PM, Consultant PM, and the Agency Evaluator's Supervisor, establishing formal documentation of project performance for future reference and consultant qualification assessments.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Public Notice Of Advertisement RFQ_484_121825.pdf | ||
| LAP Evaluation Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFQ 484_121825A Lighting Engineering Design S.pdf | ||
| RFQ 484_121825A_Lighting Engineering and Desi.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. | 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 .