05 - J.1 Past_Performance_Questionnaire_.docx
DOCX document 35 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Project Logic Model Expert Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 95332422Q0011
- Issued by
- Millennium Challenge Corporation
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire and details of a related federal contract opportunity with the Millennium Challenge Corporation. The past performance questionnaire is a template for evaluating contractors on cost control, schedule adherence, performance, quality, business relations, personnel qualifications, and an overall rating. It requests ratings in these areas along with supporting narratives.
The related federal contract opportunity is a solicitation seeking a Project Logic Model Expert. Services will involve providing technical advice and assistance to support the development of project and program logics for MCC compacts on an as-needed basis. Assignments may occur in Indonesia, Lesotho, or Malawi. The solicitation provides details on submitting technical inquiries by February 16th, 2022 and proposals in response by February 23rd, 2022. Proposals must cite the primary solicitation number.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| SOLICITATION_95332422Q0011_FE.pdf | ||
| 05 - J.2 DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES FORM SFLLL.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
MOZAMBIQUE II TECHNICAL SERVICES
95332422Q0004
SOLICITATION:
OFFEROR NAME:
TITLE/ROLE:
EMAIL:
PHONE:
AGENCY:
CONTRACT INFORMATION:
CONTRACT #:
TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE:
PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE:
PRIME OR SUB?:
DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE PROVIDED:
RATING CATEGORIES:
| RATING |
| CODE |
| PERFORMANCE LEVEL |
| Very Good |
| VG |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds several requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| S |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| M |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unacceptable |
| U |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| Not Applicable |
| NA |
| Unable to provide a score. Performance in this area not applicable to effort assessed. |
ASSESSMENT ELEMENTS:
Using the rating categories on page 1, check the appropriate box for each assessment element and provide supporting narrative.
(1) Cost/Price Control – Rate the contractor's ability to control cost and deliver at the agreed-to price. Describe the reasons for changes to contract value (e.g., scope changes, overrun/underrun, Government-imposed schedule changes, etc.).
|_| VG |_| S |_| M |_| U |_| NA
Supporting Narrative:
(2) Schedule Adherence – How well did the contractor adhere to the agreed-to schedule? What were the causes of any schedule variances? Were data deliverables and reports submitted on time?
|_| VG |_| S |_| M |_| U |_| NA
(3) Performance – Rate the contractor's ability to successfully comply with the contract requirements, statement of work, subcontracting plan, etc.
|_| VG |_| S |_| M |_| U |_| NA
(4) Quality – How well did the contractor adhere to the requirements of a Quality Assurance Plan or Performance Based Contracting requirements? Did the services provided meet the required level of quality or results?
|_| VG |_| S |_| M |_| U |_| NA
(5) Business Relations – Did the contractor exhibit reasonable/cooperative behavior in dealing with problems? Was turnover of personnel frequent? Rate the contractor's responsiveness to managing changes in providing replacement personnel.
|_| VG |_| S |_| M |_| U |_| NA
(6) Personnel Qualifications – Rate the contractor’s ability to staff and retain a highly-qualified team with the knowledge and experience required to successfully complete the project.
|_| VG |_| S |_| M |_| U |_| NA
(7) What is your overall rating of the contractor’s performance?
|_| VG |_| S |_| M |_| U |_| NA
(8) Please identify the contractor’s strengths.
(9) Please identify the contractor’s weaknesses.
(10) Given the choice, would you award to this contractor again? Why?
CERTIFICATION:
I certify that the ratings and comments reflected in this questionnaire were made by the undersigned and are accurate to the best of my knowledge.
[Enter Name of Reference] Date
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .