DESIGN CONSULTANT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REPORT
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
DT1558 1/2014 Ch. 84 Wis. Stats.
State Project ID
Master Contract ID if app!ica"!e#
Wor$ %r&er '(m"er if app!ica"!e#
)e*ion / +(rea(
Co(nt,
Constr(ction -ear
.i*h/a,
Project 'ame
Cons(!tant Project Mana*er
0rea Co&e# Te!ephone '(m"er
S("cons(!tants#
Cons(!tant 'ame an& 0&&ress
)es(rface
)econ&ition
)econstr(ct
Pa1ement )ep!acement Major
+ri&*e Maintenance +r* )eha"
+ri&*e )ep!acement S.)M
%ther
Description of Wor$ Performe& ", Cons(!tant
Description of Wor$ Performe& ", S("cons(!tant
21a!(ation Perio&
3rom To
Percent of Project
Comp!ete 3ina! Post Constr(ction
WisD%T S(per1isor/Team 4ea&er
WisD%T Project Mana*er
Project Comp!e5it,
.i*h Me&i(m 4o/
CONTRACT DATA
T,pe of Contract
2 Part, 6 Part, /ith M(nicipa!it,#
'(m"er of 0men&ments
Date Contract 0ppro1e&
%ri*ina! Contract Comp!etion Date
Date 0ct(a! Comp!etion
)atin* of Str(ct(re P!ans ", C% +ri&*e Ma5im(m 5#
Average Design Consultant Rating to nearest tenth#
EVALUATION SCORE
1 7 8naccepta"!e 2 7 +e!o/ a1era*e 6 7 Satisfactor, 4 7 0"o1e a1era*e 5 7 %(tstan&in*
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Performance e1a!(ation sho(!& "e comp!ete& at !east on an ann(a! "asis9 more often if nee&e& an& (pon contract
comp!etion.
)ate each of the fi1e performance items on the fo!!o/in* pa*es "ase& on the 21a!(ation Score 1:5# !iste& a"o1e.
In&icate performance !e1e! ", chec$in* one of the options; e5cee&s9 satisfactor, or nee&s impro1ement. Consi&er
the <(estions !iste& "e!o/ each performance item an& an, (ni<(e iss(es /here app!ica"!e.
Comments pertainin* to each item sha!! "e entere& in the Comments/8ni<(e Iss(es space pro1i&e& "e!o/ each
item.
=enera! comments or s(**estions an& comments from other specia!t, areas sho(!& "e consi&ere& an& attache&
if nee&e&.
0 post>constr(ction e1a!(ation sho(!& "e ma&e /hen necessar, for &esi*n projects. 0&j(stments to scores an&
ratin*s if necessar, co(!& "e ma&e "ase& on the res(!ts an& e5perience enco(ntere& &(rin* constr(ction.
21a!(ation scores are recor&e& an& $ept on fi!e in the +(rea( of 3inancia! Ser1ices for (se in f(t(re se!ection
processes.
21a!(ation of s("cons(!tant sho(!& "e consi&ere& an& comp!ete& as nee&e&.
Pa*e 1 of
If project ha& a str(ct(re9 contact Centra! %ffice +ri&*e for ratin* score.
Pa*e ! of
DESIGN CONSULTANT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REPORT (continued)
Wisconsin Department of Transportation DT1558
1" PRO#ECT MANAGEMENT : Chec$ as appropriate.
25cee&s Satisfactor,
'ee&s
Impro1ement
Note$ )ate the cons(!tant?s representati1e ,o( contact.
Was the cons(!tant project mana*er/!ea&er in contro! of
the ser1ices pro1i&e& to WisD%T@
Di& the cons(!tant project mana*er/!ea&er assi*n
appropriate staff to the ser1ices@
Was the comm(nication "et/een the cons(!tant project
mana*er/!ea&er an& the Department staff a&e<(ate@
Was the coor&ination /ith s("cons(!tants an& others
in1o!1e& in the project a&e<(ate@
Consi&erin* the a"o1e <(estions the o1era!! Rating is$ %Ma&i'u' (
Comments/8ni<(e Iss(es;
!" )UMAN RELATIONS : Chec$ as appropriate.
25cee&s Satisfactor,
'ee&s
Impro1ement
Was cons(!tant responsi1e to re<(ests from the Department
an& other re1ie/in* a*encies@
Was cons(!tant cooperati1e@
Di& cons(!tant react /e!! to criticism@
Was it eas, to /or$ /ith cons(!tant@
Was cons(!tant co(rteo(s an& he!pf(! in &ea!in* /ith the
*enera! p("!ic an& a*encies@
Di& the cons(!tant effecti1e!, &e1e!op the P("!ic
In1o!1ement P!an@
Di& the cons(!tant proper!, represent WisD%T@
Consi&erin* the a"o1e <(estions the o1era!! Rating is$ %Ma&i'u' (
Comments/8ni<(e Iss(es;
Pa*e * of
DESIGN CONSULTANT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REPORT (continued)
Wisconsin Department of Transportation DT1558
*" TEC)NICAL S+ILLS, Ot-er : Chec$ as appropriate.
25cee&s Satisfactor,
'ee&s
Impro1ement
Di& cons(!tantAs ser1ices ref!ect *oo& en*ineerin* practice@
Were *oo& en*ineerin* tho(*ht an& so(n& j(&*ment
app!ie&@
Were inno1ati1e or ori*ina! concepts propose& /here the
opport(nit, presente& itse!f@
Was the e1a!(ation of a!ternati1es an& tria! so!(tions
a&e<(ate@
Di& the cons(!tant /or$ /e!! in&epen&ent!,9 /itho(t
si*nificant he!p from Department staff@
Were ro(tine &etai!s proper!, (ti!iBe& on this project@
Was the cons(!tants en*ineerin* estimate acc(rate@
0:5C 25cee&s9 5:10C Satisfactor,9 D10C 'ee&s Impro1ement#
Consi&erin* the a"o1e <(estions the o1era!! Rating is$ %Ma&i'u' (
Comments/8ni<(e Iss(es;
." /UALIT0 OF 1OR+ : Chec$ as appropriate.
25cee&s Satisfactor,
'ee&s
Impro1ement
Does the pro&(ct ref!ect comp!iance /ith 3DM proce&(res
an& re<(irements@
Was a <(a!it, contro! p!an in effect an& is there e1i&ence it
/as fo!!o/e&@
Were st(&ies an& reports comp!ete an& acc(rate@
This inc!(&es s(r1e,s9 <(antities9 estimates an& specia!
pro1isions.
Was /or$ /e!! or*aniBe&9 proper!, presente&9 c!ear an&
concise@
Were a!! PSE2 s("mitta! items inc!(&in* p!ans# comp!ete9
acc(rate9 an& in comp!iance /ith WisD%T proce&(re in the
3DM@ Ma$e comments.#
Were errors or omissions9 n(mero(s9 serio(s9 si*nificant or
cost!,@
Di& project res(!t in the e5pen&it(re of reasona"!e time ",
Department staff@
Consi&erin* the a"o1e <(estions the o1era!! Rating is$ %Ma&i'u' (
Comments/8ni<(e Iss(es;
Pa*e . of
DESIGN CONSULTANT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REPORT (continued)
Wisconsin Department of Transportation DT1558
" TIMELINESS : Chec$ as appropriate.
25cee&s Satisfactor,
'ee&s
Impro1ement
Di& cons(!tant $eep the Department informe& of project
/or$ an& sche&(!e stat(s@
Di& cons(!tant meet fina! contract time re<(irements@
Di& cons(!tant meet interme&iate s("mitta! &ates@
Di& cons(!tant ma$e time!, re<(ests for amen&ments@
Di& the cons(!tant s("mit PSE2 items inc!(&in* fina! p!ans#
/ith a*ree& (pon !ea& time to meet PSE2 &ates@
Consi&erin* the a"o1e <(estions the o1era!! Rating is$ %Ma&i'u' (
Comments/8ni<(e Iss(es;
Wo(!& ,o( ha1e reser1ations se!ectin* this firm a*ain for this t,pe of project@
Descri"e stren*ths//ea$nesses an& pro1i&e s(**estions for impro1ement.
Was this e1a!(ation &one at a face>to>face meetin*@
2
21a!(ator : WisD%T Si*nat(re# Date : m/&/,,,,#
2
)e1ie/er : Cons(!tant Si*nat(re# Date : m/&/,,,,#
Pa*e of
