Describe the project, trades, and standards you need to review. Makeform turns them into a contractor evaluation form with consistent rating scales, issue follow-ups, and a clear recommendation for future work.
Route completed evaluations to Slack, Google Sheets, and Zapier.
Sample prompts for the builder
Choose a practical starting point, tailor the prompt, and send it to the Makeform builder. The structure shown is an example for planning your evaluation.
Audience
Project managers reviewing a completed construction job
Format
Weighted scorecard with closeout recommendation
Prompt size
449 chars
Example form structure
Weighted scorecard with closeout recommendation
Project, contractor, and contract details
Quality, schedule, and cost ratings
Safety and site management
Explain any rating below three
Recommend for future work?
Suggested routing tags
Recommended
Conditional review
Corrective action
Define what each score means. A shared one-to-five scale makes ratings easier to compare across projects and reviewers.
Step 1
Identify
project, contractor, scope, and reviewer
Step 2
Rate
quality, timing, safety, and communication
Step 3
Explain
examples, attachments, and open issues
Step 4
Decide
follow-up owner and future-work recommendation
A more useful closeout review
A quick email often captures only the latest frustration. A structured evaluation asks every reviewer about the same performance areas and preserves the examples behind the score.
Label each point on the scale, from unacceptable to exceeds expectations, so different reviewers interpret the numbers in a similar way.
Conditional comment fields can appear after a low rating, prompting the reviewer to record the event, location, impact, and requested correction.
End with next actions: close the review, request follow-up, or flag the contractor for internal discussion before another invitation.
Built around the job
Start with shared criteria, then show specialized questions based on job type, project phase, or reviewer role.
Review workmanship, schedule, coordination, change orders, punch items, and turnover documents when the project ends.
Capture arrival time, diagnosis, repair quality, disruption, housekeeping, safety observations, and whether a return visit is needed.
Let a project manager, site lead, and facilities representative answer the criteria they directly observed.
Show commissioning for HVAC, test records for electrical work, or finish protection for painting only when relevant.
Evaluation workflow
Give the builder your scope and review process, check the generated criteria, then route each completed evaluation to the right owner.
Name the contractor type, project phase, reviewer roles, rating scale, and the decisions the completed form should support.
Remove questions the reviewer could not observe, define score labels, and reveal follow-up fields only for exceptions or low ratings.
Share a link with the assigned reviewer and include the project or work-order identifier so the response can be matched correctly.
Send responses to your inbox or spreadsheet, compare category scores, and read comments before making a future-work decision.
Form vs email vs generic scorecard
The useful record is not just an overall number. It connects project facts, category ratings, observed examples, attachments, and the next decision.
Field guide
Keep the form focused on observable work and documented outcomes. These six sections give reviewers a practical sequence from project identification to follow-up.
Project context
Record enough detail to distinguish one contract, phase, or service call from another. A contractor may perform differently across scopes, locations, and site conditions, so avoid a context-free vendor rating.
Work quality
Separate workmanship from completion status. Ask whether work matched the approved scope, how defects and rework were handled, and whether punch-list items were closed within the agreed process.
Schedule & coordination
Capture planned and actual milestones, then let the reviewer distinguish contractor-controlled issues from approved changes, access constraints, or dependencies. The explanation makes a timeliness score more useful later.
Safety practices
Ask about site orientation, protective equipment, housekeeping, hazard communication, and response to observations. Use factual descriptions and route open concerns to the person responsible for your internal review process.
Communication & administration
Strong field work can still create closeout problems when questions, changes, invoices, or documents arrive late. Rate the communication mechanisms the project actually required rather than general likability.
Outcome & action
Summarize the overall result only after category ratings and examples. Record unresolved obligations, assign a follow-up owner and due date, and keep the future-work recommendation distinct from final selection decisions.
Related tools
Use live Makeform tools for prequalification, job documentation, safety observations, work orders, and supplier reviews around the closeout evaluation.
Collect qualifications and operating details before deciding whom to consider for a bid list.
Open toolRecord milestones, site activity, delays, and open items while work is underway.
Open toolDefine requested work, location, priority, approvals, and completion details for a job.
Open toolCapture specific site observations, immediate actions, attachments, and follow-up owners.
Open toolRoute a facility issue with its location, urgency, symptoms, and supporting photos.
Open toolAssess supplier quality, delivery, service, and communication alongside contractor performance.
Open toolFAQ
Practical answers for project and facilities managers designing a consistent post-job review.
A contractor evaluation form is a structured post-job review of a contractor's performance on a specific project or work order. It typically records project context, ratings for quality, timeliness, safety practices, communication, cost administration, and closeout, plus examples and a recommendation for future consideration.
A five-point scale is easy to understand when every point has a definition, such as unacceptable, needs improvement, meets expectations, above expectations, and exceeds expectations. Include a not observed or not applicable choice so reviewers are not forced to score work they did not see.
Use the same core criteria, define each score, ask only about observable performance, and require a factual explanation for unusually low or high ratings. Record the reviewer role and project conditions, then review comments alongside totals instead of treating the overall number as the entire decision.
Yes, when the reviewer observed site activity. Ask about the practices required by your organization or project, how the contractor responded to observations, and whether follow-up remains open. Capture the date, location, description, attachment, and assigned owner without presenting the form as a certification or compliance determination.
Yes. Add conditional logic so a rating below your chosen threshold reveals fields for the observed issue, its impact, supporting details, attachments, any immediate response, and the follow-up owner. This keeps a weak score from becoming an unexplained number.
Yes. Share the form with each reviewer and collect their role, project identifier, and the areas they observed. You can compare submissions or route them to a spreadsheet. Avoid averaging away important differences; a site supervisor and facilities manager may have seen different phases of the work.
Yes. Makeform provides unlimited free forms and responses, so you can generate, edit, publish, and collect contractor evaluations without a response cap. The paid tier removes the Makeform badge.
Send it while details are fresh: after a service call, at a major phase gate, or during project closeout. For a long project, use milestone reviews as well as a final review. Keep unresolved items visible with an owner and target date rather than waiting for every issue to disappear.
Close the job with a useful performance record.
