:
Attachment A
SCHEDULE L-1
CITY OF OAKLAND
CONSULTANT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FORM
Consultant Name & Address: Lake Merritt Institute
568 Bellevue Avenue, Oakland, CA 94611
Type of Services/Work Provided: Professional Services
Project Complexity (Standard or Difficult): Difficult
Consultant Lead Project Manager: James Robinson
Project Name: Clean Lake Contract
City Project No: 1001514
Final Value of Consultant Contract: $780,000
Duration of Consultant Contract (Start & end dates): 7/1/2019 - 6/30/2023 Final Value of Construction Contract:
City Construction Resident Engineer (with phone #):
Date of Evaluation: 3/22/2023
City Project Manager/Evaluator (with phone #): Mark Arniola, (510) 238-7371 Reviewed and Approved By (with phone #)
Derek Lee, (510) 238-6981
Ratings Guidelines:
• Poor - Work required extensive revisions, included numerous & significant errors; consultant was unable or unwilling to perform consistently, required an inordinate amount of supervision, and/or failed to meet professional standards/project objectives. • Needs to Improve – Performance was marginal; work required more review and included more errors than would normally be anticipated; level of service or expertise below average. • Average – Performance and work were satisfactory; services provided were at least of industry standard; no significant errors or problems; professional service objectives met. • Excellent – Performance was clearly above standard; expectations exceeded; objectives were met with an added level of service and/or with a higher level of professional expertise.
Consultant Performance Evaluation
DRAFT EXHIBIT B
Please rate the Consultant on the following topics by checking the appropriate box:
QUESTIONS
Poor
Needs to
Improve
Average
Excellent
Not
Applicable
1. Quality of Design/Work
X
2. Ability to meet the Project
Objectives
X
3. Knowledge, Expertise, and State-
of –the Art Technologies
X
4. Innovation of Design/Work
X
5. Thoroughness of Design/Work
X
6. Quality Control of Work
X
7. Ability to React and Respond to
Problems/Issues
X
8. Ability to Maintain to the Project
Schedule and to Time Commitments
X
9. Ability to Maintain to the Project
Budget
X
10. Accuracy of Cost Estimating
X
11. Constructibility of the
Design/Work
X
12. Quality of Construction Support
Services
X
13. Accuracy and Timeliness of
Billings and other Documents
X
14. Sufficient and Appropriate
Staffing of the Project by the
Consultant
X
15. Ability to Manage and
Coordinate Sub-Consultants
X
Consultant Performance Evaluation
DRAFT EXHIBIT B
QUESTIONS
Poor
Needs to
Improve
Average
Excellent
Not
Applicable
16. Ability and Ease of
Communicating with City Staff
X
17. Ability to Communicate with the
Community and to Make
Presentations
X
18. Willingness, Flexibility, and
Attitude in Working with the City
X
19. Ability to Follow City Directives
(i.e. Architectural Design Concept,
other Requirements, etc.)
X
OVERALL RATING
X
Additional Comments (attach additional information, as necessary): Lake Merritt Institute has been a consistent longtime contractor since 2013. Lake Merritt Institute staff have met all terms of their contract including cleanup, maintenance, monitoring, volunteer coordination, technical assistance, and public outreach services related to Lake Merritt. The services provided by the Lake Merritt Institute have helped the City to comply with state and
federal regulations related to trash and low dissolved oxygen which impacts the quality of aquatic life in the lake.
Note: The Project Coordinator/Manager shall complete this evaluation form for each primary consultant within 60 days upon the completion of an individual project or assignment. Interim evaluations shall also be prepared for projects of a long duration (i.e. over one year) or if the consultant’s performance merits notification of any deficiencies.
Information is to be submitted to and kept on file by the PWA Contract Administration Division for five (5) years. A copy of the evaluation shall also be provided to the consultant. These forms may be used, in part, as a reference to evaluate the consultant for future City professional services contracts.
Consultants with an overall evaluation of “Poor” or “Needs to Improve” are given an opportunity to 1) appeal the evaluation to the Assistant Director of Public Works, or his designee, and/or 2) append the evaluation with a one-page statement that explains or refutes the City’s finding.
To the extent permitted by law, the City shall treat the evaluations as confidential information.