102.01 Prequalification of Bidders - Revision history

Clarkj25: /* Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition */

2023-09-26T19:22:29Z

Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition

Clarkj25 at 17:52, 20 July 2023

2023-07-20T17:52:13Z

Clarkj25 at 20:25, 12 July 2023

2023-07-12T20:25:47Z

Clarkj25: /* Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition */

2023-07-12T20:24:43Z

Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition

Clarkj25: /* Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition */

2023-07-12T20:23:12Z

Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition

Clarkj25 at 20:20, 12 July 2023

2023-07-12T20:20:13Z

Clarkj25: /* Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 form for Non-Compliance Transition */

2023-07-12T20:19:43Z

Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 form for Non-Compliance Transition

Clarkj25 at 20:19, 12 July 2023

2023-07-12T20:19:20Z

Clarkj25: Reverted edits by Clarkj25 (talk) to last revision by SchaeferS

2023-07-12T19:10:36Z

Reverted edits by Clarkj25 (talk) to last revision by SchaeferS

Clarkj25: Blanked the page

2023-07-12T19:09:36Z

Blanked the page

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 ==[[#Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition | Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition]]==
-MDOT is implementing a shift away from Contractor Performance Evaluations (CPE), instead engineers may use the 1165 form for issues with contract non-compliance when dialogue with the Contractor has failed to produce an acceptable result. This transition will take place over several years, with MDOT Trunkline projects being the first projects to stop performing Contractor Performance Evaluations. As a result of this, MDOT will maintain both processes below: Contractor Performance Evaluations for Local Agency projects, and Non-Compliance for MDOT Trunkline projects.
+MDOT is implementing a shift away from Contractor Performance Evaluations (CPE). Projects with [https://mdotjboss.state.mi.us/SpecProv/getDocumentById.htm?docGuid=628a1c7e-9726-4d89-9961-639c84250a8d&fileName=%2220SP-102D-01.pdf%22 20SP-102D-01 Non-Compliance with Contract Requirements] will not utilize the CPE process, but will instead use the [http://mdotjboss.state.mi.us/webforms/GetDocument.htm?fileName=1165.pdf 1165 Form] in place of the CPE process. Per the use statement for this FUSP, this will be applicable for trunkline projects with final completion dates on or after June 5, 2024.
-Issuance of non-compliance in lieu of Contractor Performance Evaluation will begin for all MDOT Trunkline projects with final completion dates on or after June 5, 2024.
+Guidance for the submittal of CPE's and 1165 Non-Compliance Documents an be found here:
-Guidance for the submittal of CPE’s and Non-Compliance Documents can be found here:
+[[102.19_Evaluation_of_Contractor_Performance_and_Contract_Non-Compliance|MDOT Non-Compliance Process]]
-[[102.19_Evaluation_of_Contractor_Performance_and_Contract_Non-Compliance|MDOT Non-Compliance Process]]
+[https://mdotwiki.state.mi.us/construction/index.php/102.01_Prequalification_of_Bidders#Contractor_Performance_Evaluation_.28CPE.29_and_1165_Form_for_Non-Compliance_Transition 102.01 Prequalification of Bidders]
-[[102.19_Evaluation_of_Contractor_Performance_and_Contract_Non-Compliance#Contractor_Performance_Evaluation_.28CPE.29|Contractor Performance Evaluation_(CPE)_Process]]
+Please review the Special Provision: [https://mdotjboss.state.mi.us/SpecProv/getDocumentById.htm?docGuid=628a1c7e-9726-4d89-9961-639c84250a8d&fileName=%2220SP-102D-01.pdf%22 20SP-102D-01 Non-Compliance with Contract Requirements] for more details.
 ===[[#Oversight | Oversight]]===

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 [[102.19_Evaluation_of_Contractor_Performance_and_Contract_Non-Compliance|MDOT Non-Compliance Process]]
-[[102.19_Evaluation_of_Contractor_Performance_and_Contract_Non-Compliance#Contractor_Performance_Evaluation_.28CPE.29_for_Local_Agency_Jobs|Contractor Performance Evaluation_(CPE)_Process for_Local_Agency_Jobs]]
+[[102.19_Evaluation_of_Contractor_Performance_and_Contract_Non-Compliance#Contractor_Performance_Evaluation_.28CPE.29|Contractor Performance Evaluation_(CPE)_Process]]
 ===[[#Oversight | Oversight]]===

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 <center><span STYLE="font: 30pt arial;">'''102.01'''</span></center>
-<center><span STYLE="font: 20pt arial;">102 Bid Submission, Award, and Execution of Contract</span></center>
+<center><span STYLE="font: 20pt arial;">102.01 Prequalification of Bidders</span></center>
 <center>[mailto:Change?body=http://mdotwiki.state.mi.us/construction/index.php?title=102.01_Prequalification_of_Bidders Email this Page]</center>

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 Guidance for the submittal of CPE’s and Non-Compliance Documents can be found here:
 [[102.19_Evaluation_of_Contractor_Performance_and_Contract_Non-Compliance|MDOT Non-Compliance Process]]
@@ Line 19: / Line 18: @@
 [[102.19_Evaluation_of_Contractor_Performance_and_Contract_Non-Compliance#Contractor_Performance_Evaluation_.28CPE.29_for_Local_Agency_Jobs|Contractor Performance Evaluation_(CPE)_Process for_Local_Agency_Jobs]]
 Contract Performance Evaluation Review Team looks for patterns and trends of non-compliance. This group will evaluate Contractor non-compliance/performance and may refer issues to the MDOT Prequalification Committee in the event of serious or recurrent violations.

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 Link to CPE process
-Link to Non-Compliance Process
+[[102.19_Evaluation_of_Contractor_Performance_and_Contract_Non-Compliance|MDOT Non-Compliance Process]]
 Contract Performance Evaluation Review Team looks for patterns and trends of non-compliance. This group will evaluate Contractor non-compliance/performance and may refer issues to the MDOT Prequalification Committee in the event of serious or recurrent violations.

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:20, 12 July 2023
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Contract Performance Evaluation Review Team looks for patterns and trends of non-compliance. This group will evaluate Contractor non-compliance/performance and may refer issues to the MDOT Prequalification Committee in the event of serious or recurrent violations.		Contract Performance Evaluation Review Team looks for patterns and trends of non-compliance. This group will evaluate Contractor non-compliance/performance and may refer issues to the MDOT Prequalification Committee in the event of serious or recurrent violations.

−	~~==[[#Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and Prequalification \| Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and Prequalification]]==~~

−	This article explains revisions in the Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) procedure, along with mailing instruction changes. The purpose of the CPE is to document and improve contractor performance, to ultimately improve quality in construction projects. The CPE procedures are to provide evaluation consistency and promote project management/contractor communication. A CPE is used as a basis for modifying the prequalification rating of the contractor. Any action to modify the contractor’s prequalification ratings will be taken in accordance with duly promulgated prequalification rules.
−
−	A project let through the MDOT letting process will require the project management staff to evaluate the prime and subcontractor(s) performance at the completion of each project, or at the end of each year for multiple year projects. A final estimate cannot be produced until all CPEs are approved in FieldManager; therefore, timely evaluation of the contractor is important. A CPE may also be completed at the end of a warranty period or at any interim project date management staff deems appropriate. Instructions and rating criteria for completing the CPE are available in FieldManager.
−
−	~~Forward the completed CPE to the respective contractor or subcontractor(s) by e-mail.~~
−
−	Within 21 days of the date of receipt of a performance evaluation, the contractor may make a written request to meet with project management staff to review an evaluation. As a result of this meeting, the evaluation may be left unchanged or revised as deemed appropriate by the engineer. The engineer will then give the contractor written notice with the final performance evaluation. If the meeting is not requested within the 21-day period, the original evaluation becomes final and will not be subject to later contest or appeal.
−
−	The engineer may require the contractor to submit a performance improvement plan to address needs identified in an interim CPE, and appear for a meeting to discuss the improvement plan. Upon the engineer’s approval of the plan, the contractor will be required to immediately implement the plan.
−
−	~~If the contractor does not agree with an engineer’s final performance evaluation or the engineer’s requested changes to a contractor’s improvement plan, the appeal process is as follows:~~
−
−	Within 14 days after the date a performance evaluation becomes final and is sent to the contractor, they may file a written appeal of any rating of seven or below to the engineer. The written appeal shall contain documentation supporting the contractor’s position that the rating is not warranted. If no appeal is filed within the 14-day period, the evaluation becomes final and will not be subject to later contest or appeal.
−
−	If the contractor files an appeal, the engineer shall contact the Construction and Technology Division’s Construction Contracts Unit to schedule an appeal meeting. An appeal filed by a contractor will be considered by a Contractor Performance Evaluation Appeal (CPEA) Panel. The panel shall be composed of three licensed professional engineers from the department (following the format of a Central Office Review Panel) who were not directly involved in the management of the project. This panel will review appeals on all evaluations and/or performance improvement plan for this project. The contractor and the engineer must submit supporting documentation relevant to the appeal and will attend a formal appeal hearing. The panel may visit a project site and gather information to assist them in making an informed decision, if necessary. Upon concluding its review, the panel will confirm or modify the evaluation and/or improvement plan. The panel will send the contractor and engineer written notice of its decision within 30 days, along with a copy of the modified evaluation, if applicable. The decision of the panel constitutes the final department decision and is not subject to further contest or appeal.
−
−	~~Interim CPEs cannot be appealed to the CPEA Panel.~~
−
−	If a contractor fails to honor a request by project management staff to submit a performance improvement plan, meet to discuss such a plan, or implement an approved performance improvement plan, the failure may be used as a basis for modifying the prequalification ratings of the contractor. Any action to modify the contractor’s prequalification ratings will be taken in accordance with the duly promulgated prequalification rules.
−
−	The [https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/-/media/Project/Websites/MDOT/Business/Construction/Standard-Specifications-Construction/CFS-Reference/Contractor-Perforamance-Evaluation-Factors-Rating-Criteria.pdf?rev=57b32486bf85427a8fc0116a30d5fb16&hash=88CF4D394FDA359B4C054D3FE85E4B35 Contractor Evaluation Factors and Rating Criteria] are published on the MDOT website.
−	~~{{top}}~~
−
−	~~==[[#Processing of Contractor Performance Evaluations\|Processing of Contractor Performance Evaluations]]==~~
−	The final approving signature on a contractor performance evaluation is the respective TSC Manager. It must be noted that this signature is not to be delegated to staff that report to the TSC Manager. The signature must be the respective TSC Manager or another TSC Manager in the region or an equivalent position or higher in the region office. This signature requirement ensures an independent review of the contractor evaluation by a person not directly managing or providing oversight of the project.
−
−	Interim contractor evaluations are strongly encouraged to provide feedback on performance issues or to immediately note performance deficiencies. Construction staff should not wait until the end of a project to provide extremely low ratings. MDOT’s goal is to provide contractor evaluations upon discovery of performance challenges, open communications and work cooperatively to improve performance. Final contractor performance evaluations with very low numbers may be appropriate if interim evaluations have been disregarded by the contractor.
−	If a contractor performance evaluation appeal proceeds to central office the appeal hearing binder must be prepared as a central office claim review hearing binder is prepared. The region is to create the central office binder with both the engineer and contractor’s positions included and tabbed for reference. All documentation to address the position of each party must be included in the binder.
−	~~The construction manual will be updated with this information.~~
−
−	~~{{top}}~~
−
−	~~===[[#LAP Project Considerations \| LAP Project Considerations]]===~~
−
−	~~The local agency will follow the most recent MDOT procedures for contractor performance evaluations. The LRC must sign off on all CPE’s prior to routing to the DR for execution by the TSC Manager.~~
−
−	In the event the engineer requires the contractor to submit a contractor performance improvement plan, the LRC must also sign off. The DR must be notified of any contractor performance improvement plans.
−
−	If the contractor makes a request to review an evaluation, the engineer, LRC and the DR must attend the project level meeting. If the contractor files a CPEA, the engineer, LRC and the DR must attend the appeal hearing.

	{{top}}		{{top}}

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 __forcetoc__
-==[[#Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 form for Non-Compliance Transition | Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 form for Non-Compliance Transition]]==
+==[[#Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition | Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and 1165 Form for Non-Compliance Transition]]==
 MDOT is implementing a shift away from Contractor Performance Evaluations (CPE), instead engineers may use the 1165 form for issues with contract non-compliance when dialogue with the Contractor has failed to produce an acceptable result. This transition will take place over several years, with MDOT Trunkline projects being the first projects to stop performing Contractor Performance Evaluations. As a result of this, MDOT will maintain both processes below: Contractor Performance Evaluations for Local Agency projects, and Non-Compliance for MDOT Trunkline projects.
@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 Link to Non-Compliance Process
 Contract Performance Evaluation Review Team looks for patterns and trends of non-compliance. This group will evaluate Contractor non-compliance/performance and may refer issues to the MDOT Prequalification Committee in the event of serious or recurrent violations.
 ==[[#Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and Prequalification | Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and Prequalification]]==

← Older revision	Revision as of 19:10, 12 July 2023
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	<center><span STYLE="font: 30pt arial;">'''102.01'''</span></center>
	+	<center><span STYLE="font: 20pt arial;">102 Bid Submission, Award, and Execution of Contract</span></center>

	+	<center>[mailto:Change?body=http://mdotwiki.state.mi.us/construction/index.php?title=102.01_Prequalification_of_Bidders Email this Page]</center>
	+	__forcetoc__
	+
	+	==[[#Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and Prequalification \| Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and Prequalification]]==
	+
	+	This article explains revisions in the Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) procedure, along with mailing instruction changes. The purpose of the CPE is to document and improve contractor performance, to ultimately improve quality in construction projects. The CPE procedures are to provide evaluation consistency and promote project management/contractor communication. A CPE is used as a basis for modifying the prequalification rating of the contractor. Any action to modify the contractor’s prequalification ratings will be taken in accordance with duly promulgated prequalification rules.
	+
	+	A project let through the MDOT letting process will require the project management staff to evaluate the prime and subcontractor(s) performance at the completion of each project, or at the end of each year for multiple year projects. A final estimate cannot be produced until all CPEs are approved in FieldManager; therefore, timely evaluation of the contractor is important. A CPE may also be completed at the end of a warranty period or at any interim project date management staff deems appropriate. Instructions and rating criteria for completing the CPE are available in FieldManager.
	+
	+	Forward the completed CPE to the respective contractor or subcontractor(s) by e-mail.
	+
	+	Within 21 days of the date of receipt of a performance evaluation, the contractor may make a written request to meet with project management staff to review an evaluation. As a result of this meeting, the evaluation may be left unchanged or revised as deemed appropriate by the engineer. The engineer will then give the contractor written notice with the final performance evaluation. If the meeting is not requested within the 21-day period, the original evaluation becomes final and will not be subject to later contest or appeal.
	+
	+	The engineer may require the contractor to submit a performance improvement plan to address needs identified in an interim CPE, and appear for a meeting to discuss the improvement plan. Upon the engineer’s approval of the plan, the contractor will be required to immediately implement the plan.
	+
	+	If the contractor does not agree with an engineer’s final performance evaluation or the engineer’s requested changes to a contractor’s improvement plan, the appeal process is as follows:
	+
	+	Within 14 days after the date a performance evaluation becomes final and is sent to the contractor, they may file a written appeal of any rating of seven or below to the engineer. The written appeal shall contain documentation supporting the contractor’s position that the rating is not warranted. If no appeal is filed within the 14-day period, the evaluation becomes final and will not be subject to later contest or appeal.
	+
	+	If the contractor files an appeal, the engineer shall contact the Construction and Technology Division’s Construction Contracts Unit to schedule an appeal meeting. An appeal filed by a contractor will be considered by a Contractor Performance Evaluation Appeal (CPEA) Panel. The panel shall be composed of three licensed professional engineers from the department (following the format of a Central Office Review Panel) who were not directly involved in the management of the project. This panel will review appeals on all evaluations and/or performance improvement plan for this project. The contractor and the engineer must submit supporting documentation relevant to the appeal and will attend a formal appeal hearing. The panel may visit a project site and gather information to assist them in making an informed decision, if necessary. Upon concluding its review, the panel will confirm or modify the evaluation and/or improvement plan. The panel will send the contractor and engineer written notice of its decision within 30 days, along with a copy of the modified evaluation, if applicable. The decision of the panel constitutes the final department decision and is not subject to further contest or appeal.
	+
	+	Interim CPEs cannot be appealed to the CPEA Panel.
	+
	+	If a contractor fails to honor a request by project management staff to submit a performance improvement plan, meet to discuss such a plan, or implement an approved performance improvement plan, the failure may be used as a basis for modifying the prequalification ratings of the contractor. Any action to modify the contractor’s prequalification ratings will be taken in accordance with the duly promulgated prequalification rules.
	+
	+	The [https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/-/media/Project/Websites/MDOT/Business/Construction/Standard-Specifications-Construction/CFS-Reference/Contractor-Perforamance-Evaluation-Factors-Rating-Criteria.pdf?rev=57b32486bf85427a8fc0116a30d5fb16&hash=88CF4D394FDA359B4C054D3FE85E4B35 Contractor Evaluation Factors and Rating Criteria] are published on the MDOT website.
	+	{{top}}
	+
	+	==[[#Processing of Contractor Performance Evaluations\|Processing of Contractor Performance Evaluations]]==
	+	The final approving signature on a contractor performance evaluation is the respective TSC Manager. It must be noted that this signature is not to be delegated to staff that report to the TSC Manager. The signature must be the respective TSC Manager or another TSC Manager in the region or an equivalent position or higher in the region office. This signature requirement ensures an independent review of the contractor evaluation by a person not directly managing or providing oversight of the project.
	+
	+	Interim contractor evaluations are strongly encouraged to provide feedback on performance issues or to immediately note performance deficiencies. Construction staff should not wait until the end of a project to provide extremely low ratings. MDOT’s goal is to provide contractor evaluations upon discovery of performance challenges, open communications and work cooperatively to improve performance. Final contractor performance evaluations with very low numbers may be appropriate if interim evaluations have been disregarded by the contractor.
	+	If a contractor performance evaluation appeal proceeds to central office the appeal hearing binder must be prepared as a central office claim review hearing binder is prepared. The region is to create the central office binder with both the engineer and contractor’s positions included and tabbed for reference. All documentation to address the position of each party must be included in the binder.
	+	The construction manual will be updated with this information.
	+
	+	{{top}}
	+
	+	===[[#LAP Project Considerations \| LAP Project Considerations]]===
	+
	+	The local agency will follow the most recent MDOT procedures for contractor performance evaluations. The LRC must sign off on all CPE’s prior to routing to the DR for execution by the TSC Manager.
	+
	+	In the event the engineer requires the contractor to submit a contractor performance improvement plan, the LRC must also sign off. The DR must be notified of any contractor performance improvement plans.
	+
	+	If the contractor makes a request to review an evaluation, the engineer, LRC and the DR must attend the project level meeting. If the contractor files a CPEA, the engineer, LRC and the DR must attend the appeal hearing.
	+
	+	{{top}}
	+
	+	<div style="text-align: right;">[mailto:Change?body=http://mdotwiki.state.mi.us/construction/index.php/102.01_Prequalification_of_Bidders#Processing_of_Contractor_Performance_Evaluations Email this Page]</div>
	+
	+	[[Category:Construction Manual]]
	+	[[Category:Division 1]]
	+	[[Category:Section 102]]
	+	[[Category:Pre-Construction]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:09, 12 July 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~<center><span STYLE="font: 30pt arial;">'''102.01'''</span></center>~~
−	~~<center><span STYLE="font: 20pt arial;">102 Bid Submission, Award, and Execution of Contract</span></center>~~

−	~~<center>[mailto:Change?body=http://mdotwiki.state.mi.us/construction/index.php?title=102.01_Prequalification_of_Bidders Email this Page]</center>~~
−	~~__forcetoc__~~
−
−	~~==[[#Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and Prequalification \| Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) and Prequalification]]==~~
−
−	This article explains revisions in the Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE) procedure, along with mailing instruction changes. The purpose of the CPE is to document and improve contractor performance, to ultimately improve quality in construction projects. The CPE procedures are to provide evaluation consistency and promote project management/contractor communication. A CPE is used as a basis for modifying the prequalification rating of the contractor. Any action to modify the contractor’s prequalification ratings will be taken in accordance with duly promulgated prequalification rules.
−
−	A project let through the MDOT letting process will require the project management staff to evaluate the prime and subcontractor(s) performance at the completion of each project, or at the end of each year for multiple year projects. A final estimate cannot be produced until all CPEs are approved in FieldManager; therefore, timely evaluation of the contractor is important. A CPE may also be completed at the end of a warranty period or at any interim project date management staff deems appropriate. Instructions and rating criteria for completing the CPE are available in FieldManager.
−
−	~~Forward the completed CPE to the respective contractor or subcontractor(s) by e-mail.~~
−
−	Within 21 days of the date of receipt of a performance evaluation, the contractor may make a written request to meet with project management staff to review an evaluation. As a result of this meeting, the evaluation may be left unchanged or revised as deemed appropriate by the engineer. The engineer will then give the contractor written notice with the final performance evaluation. If the meeting is not requested within the 21-day period, the original evaluation becomes final and will not be subject to later contest or appeal.
−
−	The engineer may require the contractor to submit a performance improvement plan to address needs identified in an interim CPE, and appear for a meeting to discuss the improvement plan. Upon the engineer’s approval of the plan, the contractor will be required to immediately implement the plan.
−
−	~~If the contractor does not agree with an engineer’s final performance evaluation or the engineer’s requested changes to a contractor’s improvement plan, the appeal process is as follows:~~
−
−	Within 14 days after the date a performance evaluation becomes final and is sent to the contractor, they may file a written appeal of any rating of seven or below to the engineer. The written appeal shall contain documentation supporting the contractor’s position that the rating is not warranted. If no appeal is filed within the 14-day period, the evaluation becomes final and will not be subject to later contest or appeal.
−
−	If the contractor files an appeal, the engineer shall contact the Construction and Technology Division’s Construction Contracts Unit to schedule an appeal meeting. An appeal filed by a contractor will be considered by a Contractor Performance Evaluation Appeal (CPEA) Panel. The panel shall be composed of three licensed professional engineers from the department (following the format of a Central Office Review Panel) who were not directly involved in the management of the project. This panel will review appeals on all evaluations and/or performance improvement plan for this project. The contractor and the engineer must submit supporting documentation relevant to the appeal and will attend a formal appeal hearing. The panel may visit a project site and gather information to assist them in making an informed decision, if necessary. Upon concluding its review, the panel will confirm or modify the evaluation and/or improvement plan. The panel will send the contractor and engineer written notice of its decision within 30 days, along with a copy of the modified evaluation, if applicable. The decision of the panel constitutes the final department decision and is not subject to further contest or appeal.
−
−	~~Interim CPEs cannot be appealed to the CPEA Panel.~~
−
−	If a contractor fails to honor a request by project management staff to submit a performance improvement plan, meet to discuss such a plan, or implement an approved performance improvement plan, the failure may be used as a basis for modifying the prequalification ratings of the contractor. Any action to modify the contractor’s prequalification ratings will be taken in accordance with the duly promulgated prequalification rules.
−
−	The [https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/-/media/Project/Websites/MDOT/Business/Construction/Standard-Specifications-Construction/CFS-Reference/Contractor-Perforamance-Evaluation-Factors-Rating-Criteria.pdf?rev=57b32486bf85427a8fc0116a30d5fb16&hash=88CF4D394FDA359B4C054D3FE85E4B35 Contractor Evaluation Factors and Rating Criteria] are published on the MDOT website.
−	~~{{top}}~~
−
−	~~==[[#Processing of Contractor Performance Evaluations\|Processing of Contractor Performance Evaluations]]==~~
−	The final approval on a contractor performance evaluation is the respective TSC Manager. It must be noted that this approval is not to be delegated to staff that report to the TSC Manager. The approval must be made by the respective TSC Manager or another TSC Manager in the region or an equivalent position or higher in the region office. This requirement ensures an independent review of the contractor evaluation by a person not directly managing or providing oversight of the project.
−
−
−	~~A pdf review stamp must be applied at the bottom of contractor performance evaluation by the evaluator, engineer and TSC Manager. The pdf stamp must include the Reviewer’s Name, Date, and Time.~~
−
−	~~[[File:CPE pic1.png\|600px\|thumb\|center\|Sample Approval Stamps]]~~
−
−
−	Interim contractor evaluations are strongly encouraged to provide feedback on performance issues or to immediately note performance deficiencies. Construction staff should not wait until the end of a project to provide extremely low ratings. MDOT’s goal is to provide contractor evaluations upon discovery of performance challenges, open communications and work cooperatively to improve performance. Final contractor performance evaluations with very low numbers may be appropriate if interim evaluations have been disregarded by the contractor.
−	If a contractor performance evaluation appeal proceeds to central office the appeal hearing binder must be prepared as a central office claim review hearing binder is prepared. The region is to create the central office binder with both the engineer and contractor’s positions included and tabbed for reference. All documentation to address the position of each party must be included in the binder.
−
−
−	~~{{top}}~~
−
−	~~===[[#LAP Project Considerations \| LAP Project Considerations]]===~~
−
−	~~The local agency will follow the most recent MDOT procedures for contractor performance evaluations. The LRC must approve all CPE’s prior to routing to the DR for execution by the TSC Manager.~~
−
−	In the event the engineer requires the contractor to submit a contractor performance improvement plan, the LRC must also approve. The DR must be notified of any contractor performance improvement plans.
−
−	If the contractor makes a request to review an evaluation, the engineer, LRC and the DR must attend the project level meeting. If the contractor files a CPEA, the engineer, LRC and the DR must attend the appeal hearing.
−
−	~~[[File:CPE pic2.png\|600px\|thumb\|center\|Sample Approval Stamps]]~~
−
−
−	~~{{top}}~~
−
−	<div style="text-align: right;">[mailto:Change?body=http://mdotwiki.state.mi.us/construction/index.php/102.01_Prequalification_of_Bidders#Processing_of_Contractor_Performance_Evaluations Email this Page]</div>
−
−	~~[[Category:Construction Manual]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Division 1]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Section 102]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Pre-Construction]]~~