PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CRITERIA EVALUTION FORM

Evaluation Instructions

A. Weighting of factors by magnitude of performance:

7-8-9 - Highly Important

4-5-6 - Important

1-2-3 - Not Critical

B. Each firm is to be rated on a scale of 1 t0 9 points for each project criteria requirement in accordance with the following scale:

7-8-9 - Excellent

4-5-6 - Good

1-2-3 - Weak

C. Evaluation: Each item shall be assigned a weight factor according to the scale in A, a rating according to the scale in B, and the two multiplied to form a factor score.

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CRITERIA EVALUTION FORM

PROJECT: __________________________________________________________________________

LEAD FIRM NAME: ___________________________________________________________________

EVALUATION DATE: __________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY	WEIGHT	RATING	SCORE
I. Organization A. Evaluate management capability for project including Principal-in-charge, prime consultant engineers and specialized consultants.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
B. Evaluate capability of firm to provide timely design, inspection/supervision service during construction including required consultants. Evaluate "Chain of Command " between consultants and architect in respect to communication with Using Agency during design and GSFIC during the inspection/ supervision phase of the project.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
C. Degree of knowledge of local conditions affecting the proposed project, including Il working with MARTA & City of Atlanta.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
D. Determine the capacity of the firm to accomplish this project, in light of current and projected workload.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
E. Evaluate the firm's techniques for cost and budget control.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
F. Location of firm and consultants.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3

COMMENTS ON ORGANIZATION: SUBTOTAL

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CRITERIA EVALUTION FORM

PROJECT: __________________________________________________________________________

LEAD FIRM NAME: ___________________________________________________________________

EVALUATION DATE: __________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY	WEIGHT	RATING	SCORE
2. Design Ability A. Evaluate design record with any large State level project.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
B. Evaluate design record with large Federal level projects.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
C. Evaluate design record with large projects at the County and City level.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
D. Evaluate degree of knowledge of special conditions associated with contract work.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
E. Evaluate overall design experience of past work considering complexity, size and cost.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
F. Evaluate the firm's possible method of approach to the design problem.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
G. Evaluate the firm's design ability in regard to this type of facility.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3

COMMENTS ON ORGANIZATION: SUBTOTAL

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CRITERIA EVALUTION FORM

PROJECT: __________________________________________________________________________

LEAD FIRM NAME: ___________________________________________________________________

EVALUATION DATE: __________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY	WEIGHT	RATING	SCORE
3. EXPERIENCE A. Evaluate the firm's past record of performance on any contracts with any State agencies considering the factors of quantity of contracts budgets, schedules, and project scope.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
B. Evaluate the firm's past record of performance on any contracts with any Federal agencies considering the factor of quantity of contracts, budgets, schedules, and project scope.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
C. Evaluate the firm's past record of performance on any contracts with other governmental agencies considering the factors of quantity of contracts, budgets, schedules and project scope.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
D. Determine estimating ability, record of success in bidding within the budget, all projects past three years.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
E. Determine abi1ity to meet time limit(s) and deadlines for design production. What is the firm's record?	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
F. Evaluate the firm's experience in dealing with this type of facility.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3

COMMENTS ON ORGANIZATION: SUBTOTAL

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CRITERIA EVALUTION FORM

PROJECT: __________________________________________________________________________

LEAD FIRM NAME: ___________________________________________________________________

EVALUATION DATE: __________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY	WEIGHT	RATING	SCORE
4. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Volume GBA work previously awarded to the firm, with the object of effecting an equitable distribution of architect/engineer contracts among qualified firms.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
B. Familiarity with Georgia State Financing and Investments Commission (GSFIC) procedures, standards and criteria.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
C. Determine extent firm is involved with minority professionals.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
D. Evaluate firm's record of litigation.	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3
	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3	7-8-9 4-5-6 1-2-3

COMMENTS ON SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: SUBTOTAL

COMMENTS ON OVERALL EVALUATION :