Past Performance Sheet.pdf

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ)

Your organization has been identified for participation in past performance evaluation on a current solicitation at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) at Bethesda, Maryland. This information contained in this questionnaire will be used to evaluate the past performance for the contractor and contracting action identified below.

Request for Proposal #7011484

Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC), Fixed-Price, Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Construction, Design/Build, Alterations & Repair Services Contract

Your candid response to the questions is important to our evaluation effort and may affect the award outcome. Please indicate "Unknown" in any area that was not applicable to work performed on your contracting action.

THE COMPLETED FORM MUST BE SUBMITTED BY E-MAIL TO THE FOLLOWING

ADDRESSES:

Michael Thomey Contract Specialist Michael.Thomey@NIH.GOV 301-435-4320

Thuy Le Contracting Officer Thuy.Le@NIH.GOV 202-827-1734

If you have any questions/ concerns pertaining to this survey and/or the requested information please contact Michael Thomey, Contract Specialist, using the above contact information.

Thank you for your time and effort in completing this questionnaire.

mailto:Michael.Thomey@NIH.GOV mailto:Thuy.Le@NIH.GOV

Is there a Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) for this contract? Yes or No

If Yes, do not complete this form, rather submit the interim or final CPARS and a PPIS for the project.

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

PART I – TO BE COMPLETED BY OFFEROR

Item Requested Information Information Provided by Contractor

A Contractor Information

Contractor Company Name

Contractor Representative Name

Title

Address

Telephone

Fax

E-mail Address

Contract Number

Task Order Number

Title of Contract

B Owner Information

Owner/Company/ Organization/Agency Name

Owner Representative Name

Title

Address

Telephone

Fax

E-mail Address

PART II – TO BE COMPLETED BY CONTRACTOR’S REFERENCE

DEFINITIONS

Please use the following definitions when completing the Past Performance Questionnaire:

Rating Description

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Clients benefit. The contractual performance of the element was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Clients benefit. The contractual performance of the element was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

N/A Performance was not observed. This indicates neither a favorable nor unfavorable rating.

INSTRUCTIONS

Place a ‘rating’ in the appropriate column box using the definitions above.

Item How do you rate the Contractors...?

Comments Please provide any comments to explain the rationale for the Rating to facilitate the Technical Evaluators in their review of the survey results.

Please indicate if an item is not applicable to the representative project.

1 - Quality of Work (below are factors to consider) Did the Contractor demonstrate an interest in the quality of workmanship of his personnel?

Did the contractor provide an adequate quality control plan and implement the plan with success?

When deficiencies were found, were they identified and corrected in a timely manner?

Item 1. Quality Rating here > E VG S M U NA

2 – Schedule Performance (below are factors to consider) What was the level of accuracy in forecasting and controlling schedules?

Were there any significant delays and if so was resolution taken care of in a timely manner?

Were warranty calls, if placed, answered in a timely manner?

Item 2. Schedule Rating here > E VG S M U NA

3 - Effectiveness of Management (below are factors to consider) Provided experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.

How effective was the level of communications?

Was there effectiveness in forecasting and controlling costs?

Provided accurate and complete proposals and schedule impacts for all aspects of work required for each change order?

How would rate the level of coordination provided during the occupancy/activation process?

Item 3. Management Rating here> E VG S M U NA

4 – Compliance with Regulatory requirements (below are factors to consider) Were labor laws requirements such as payrolls properly completed and submitted?

Was the contractor’s safety plan adequate and was it implemented satisfactorily?

If regulatory deficiencies were found in labor, environmental or safety standards, were they corrected in a timely manner?

Item 4. Regulatory Rating here > E VG S M U NA

Item 5. Overall Rating here > E VG S M U NA

We are interested in knowing if you would recommend this contractor for similar requirements in the future plus any other comments below?