10b-816192-Ex-G-PPQForm-Fill.doc

DOC document 166 KB Posted

Attached to
Solar Power Monitoring System
Solicitation number
144759
Issued by
Travis County, Austin City, Texas

About this file

This is a Past Performance Questionnaire for RFP 816192 issued by the Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (CapMetro) in Austin, Texas. The questionnaire requests references and performance evaluations for a firm being considered to provide project management services for the implementation of a Solar Power Monitoring System. The selected vendor must demonstrate a robust project management team and comprehensive project management plan with appropriate resource allocation, proven ability to coordinate system design and implementation, and capability to complete the project on schedule and within budget. The questionnaire must be submitted directly to CapMetro by October 5, 2026, prior to 3:00 p.m., with responses sent to procure.help@capmetro.org. Responses should be completed by individuals most familiar with the contractor's performance on similar contracts, and CapMetro may contact references to discuss questionnaire responses.

The questionnaire is divided into sections to be completed by the offeror and by respondents providing past performance references. References must rate contractor performance across 20 evaluation criteria using a six-point scale ranging from Exceptional to Unknown, including assessments of startup management, schedule timeliness, communication and reporting, personnel qualifications, management commitment, subcontractor coordination, resource adequacy, technical problem resolution, innovation, customer responsiveness, overall contract performance, documented strengths and weaknesses, any contract changes due to performance issues, and financial stability. The questionnaire emphasizes that evaluations must be based on objective facts supported by program, project, and contract management data, with narrative rationales required for ratings other than acceptable or areas where the contractor exceeded requirements.

View the file

Other files

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

FOR PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCES

FROM:

Procurement Department

Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority

2910 East 5th Street

Austin, TX 78702

RE:

Request for Past Performance Information for RFP 816192, Solar Power Monitoring System The Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (CapMetro) is in the process of selecting a firm to provide a robust project management team and project management plan to support the implementation of Solar Power Monitoring System. The vendor's plan for managing the project shall clearly demonstrate an appropriate allocation of project management resources with the ability and experience to ensure that system design and implementation will be coordinated appropriately and managed and completed on schedule and within budget. The vendor shall provide tools to manage tasks, schedule, risk, change, and the other items listed in this section that are required to manage the project.

In the Instructions to Offerors portion of our request for proposals, we request that this letter and the Past Performance Questionnaire be forwarded to points of contact for similar type services performed by the offeror, or currently in progress. The information contained in your completed questionnaire will be one of the evaluation criteria to base a decision about the relative qualifications of the offeror.

Please have the questionnaire completed by the person(s) most familiar with the contractor’s performance on the subject contract. Evaluations should reflect an honest, straightforward, and objective evaluation of the contractor’s performance. Evaluations must be based on objective facts supported by program/project and contract management data and reports.

Your knowledge is crucial to our evaluation of the company’s past performance, and we request that you provide responses to all questions. A simple “unknown” answer may be appropriate when no evidence is available to you in a particular area. We ask that you indicate based on the definitions provided in the questionnaire, the contractor’s performance on the identified contract. Please provide narrative rationales for your answers that are marked other than acceptable or areas where the contractor clearly exceeded contract requirements. Handwritten responses, printed clearly, are sufficient.

Please submit your past performance questionnaire directly to CapMetro (not to the company) no later than October 5, 2026, prior to 3:00 p.m. It may be necessary to call you to discuss questionnaire responses.

If you have any questions concerning this questionnaire please contact Raymond Lalley, at raymond.lalley@capmetro.org . Responses may be submitted to this office as indicated on the cover of the questionnaire. Your time is greatly appreciated, and we thank you for your participation.

Sincerely, Raymond Lalley Contracts Administrator/Buyer

Enclosure:

Past Performance Questionnaire

THE QUESTIONNAIRE MAY BE SUBMITTED BY EMAIL TO: procure.help@capmetro.org

SECTION A. THIS SECTION ONLY TO BE FILLED IN BY THE OFFEROR:

Offeror (Proposing Firm) Contract Number:
Offeror (Proposing Firm):
Type of Contract:
Contract Amount:

Status:

Active ____ Completed:___

Date of Award:
Contract Completion Date (Including Extensions):
Product Description and/or service provided:
Type and Extent of Subcontracting:

SECTION B. TO BE FILLED IN BY RESPONDENT:

Please provide information for the primary individual completing this questionnaire.

Name:
Firm:
Telephone Number:
Mailing Address:
E-Mail Address:

SECTION C. RATING GUIDELINES:

Use the following descriptions as guidance in providing element ratings. Ratings should only reflect the performance of the contractor in question. For each question, please place an “X” in the box corresponding to the rating.

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

Unknown

SECTION D. CONTRACT/PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION:

Place an X in the appropriate box and provide narrative, if applicable.

1= Exceptional, 2= Very Good, 3= Satisfactory, 4= Marginal, 5= Unsatisfactory, 6= Unknown.

Question:

1
2
3
4
5
6
1
Did the contractor initiate and support startup and management control?
2
Timeliness in achieving schedule elements (delivery/performance), taking into account all excusable delays.
3
Did the contractor accurately and timely attend to and communicate the project status via required reports, inspections etc?
4
Did the contractor provide qualified management and key personnel throughout the contract performance period?
5
Did the contractor provide adequate, competent and qualified technical personnel capable of meeting contract requirements throughout the performance period of the contract?
6
Was the contractor’s top management involved and committed to project success?
7
Rate the contractor’s ability to manage and coordinate subcontractors, and please note any subcontracting issues (positive or negative) that impacted the performance of your contract.
8
How timely and sufficient were the contractor’s resources (manning levels, skill mix, equipment, etc.) to meet contract requirements (technical, management, and contractual)?
9
How well did the contractor work independent of your guidance, oversight and assistance?
10
Rate the effectiveness of the contractor’s program to ensure compliance with federal, state and local regulations.
11
How timely and effective were the contractor’s responses to and resolution of technical problems?
12
How innovative was the contractor in performing the technical aspects of this contract and resolving problems?
13
How well did the contractor respond to and act on customer feedback?
14
How well did the contractor perform the terms of the contract (schedule, scope and budget)?
15
How would you rate the contractor’s overall performance?
16
What were the contractor’s top documented strengths, if any, in performing the contract requirements?
17
What were the contractor’s top documented weaknesses, if any, in performing the contract requirements?
18
Were there any contract concessions/changes/terminations made due to the contractor’s inability to meet contract requirements (Cost schedule/performance)?
19
Have there been any indications that the contractor has financial concerns that would jeopardize contract performance?
20
Please provide any additional information you feel is important not covered elsewhere:

02/03/2026 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE 1

SOLICITATION NO. 816192

CAPMETRO PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

SOLICITATION NO. 816192

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .