USDA_Whitten_Building_Elevators_5_&_6_Modernization_Past_Performance_Questionnaire_03_23_2018.pdf

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) dated March 23, 2018 Elevators 5 & 6 Modernization, USDA Whitten Building

USDA Solicitation # 12314218B0006

Past Performance Questionnaire

THIS FORM IS PROVIDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING TO

AND SUBMITTAL BY THE VENDOR’S REFERENCES

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR

USDA Solicitation # 12314218B0006

The offeror listed below is being considered in a source selection by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for the complete Modernization of Elevators 5 & 6 in the USDA Whitten Building located at 1400 Independence

Avenue, SW, Washington DC, 20250. It would be appreciated if you would provide us with comments regarding the vendor's past performance. In order to maintain the integrity of the source selection process, we respectfully request that you do not divulge the name of the vendor nor discuss your comments on this questionnaire with any other individual other than the USDA Contracting Officer.

This form shall be sent via e-mail to gerardo.rivera@wdc.usda.gov directly (pdf or MSWord format will be acceptable) no later than Tuesday, April 10, 2018 @ 2:00PM (EST). Any questions regarding this matter, please contact USDA’s Contracting Officer Gerardo F. Rivera @ gerardo.rivera@wdc.usda.gov.

Past Project Information:

1. Offeror’s name and address: _________________________________

2. Project Title ________________________________

3. Contract Number: ________________________________

4. Approx. Contract Amount: __$ ____________________________

Evaluator

The following information will assist in the analysis of the data. Information will be kept confidential.

Name of Evaluator: __________________________________

Today’s date: __________________________________

Phone Number: __________________________________

Email address: __________________________________

Work address: __________________________________

Position held or function in relation to the project: __________________________________

RATINGS:

Please evaluate the Offeror’s performance using the following ratings definitions:

EXCEPTIONAL

(E)

Performance EXCEEDS MOST contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns.

VERY GOOD

(V)

Performance EXCEEDS SOME contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns, for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were highly effective.

SATISFACTORY

(S)

Performance MEETS contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed contains minor issues or concerns, for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

MARGINAL

(M)

Performance MEETS SOME contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed includes significant problems, issues, or concerns for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were only somewhat effective.

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

Performance DOES NOT MEET contractual requirement. The performance of the areas being assessed includes serious problems, issues, or concerns for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.

NOT APPLICABLE /

NEUTRAL

(N/A)

Performance information not recent or relevant as defined in the Solicitation. Unable to provide assessment.

mailto:gerardo.rivera@wdc.usda.gov mailto:gerardo.rivera@wdc.usda.gov

Please rate (mark with an ‘x’ below the rating) and provide any supporting information for the following: (Use additional sheets as necessary)

1. The relationship between the offeror and the customer’s contract team.

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

NEUTRAL

(N/A)

2. The offeror’s overall corporate management, integrity, reasonableness and cooperative conduct.

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

3. The offeror’s ability to meet the timely delivery.

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

4. The offeror took measures to improve problems, if any?

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

5. The offeror rectified identified problems in a timely fashion without further incident of the same.

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

6. Has the offeror been given any of the following: Cure notice; show cause, letters of reprimand, suspension of payments, termination? If yes, please explain.

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

7. Would you award another contract to this offeror? If no, please explain.

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

8. Was the customer satisfied with the end product?

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

9. Was the offeror provided an opportunity to discuss any negative performance ratings? If so, what were the results?

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

10. The offeror maintained a professional working relationship with Government personnel.

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

11. The offeror was reasonable and cooperative in resolving customer complaints.

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

12. OVERALL RATING:

VERY GOOD

(V)

SATISFACTORY

(S)

MARGINAL

(M)

UNSATISFACTORY

(U)

13. Please provide any additional comments.