PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ).docx
DOCX document 32 KB Posted
- Attached to
- USDA George Washington Carver Center (GWCC) Modernization Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 12314420B0001
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire and details of a federal contract opportunity for the modernization of the George Washington Carver Center located in Beltsville, Maryland. The opportunity is a firm fixed-price request for proposal issued by the Department of Agriculture's Assistant Secretary for Departmental Management. Offerors are required to obtain past performance evaluations from clients using the questionnaire provided as an attachment, with responses due by the date and time stated on the RFP. The modernization effort will be conducted in two phases over a ten-month period per phase and includes temporary barriers, systems, and adjustments to allow for continued occupancy. Evaluation criteria include bonding capacity, experience, project schedule, key personnel qualifications, small business utilization, past performance, oral presentation, and pricing.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 12314420B0001 SF 30 ammendment 001 (RFI responses).pdf | ||
| GWCC Modernization RFP.pdf | ||
| GWCC Modernization DRAFT RFP updated 3-5-2020.pdf | ||
| Factor 2 Prior Experience Form.docx | DOCX document |
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
ATTACHMENT 3
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ)
12314420B0001
Past Performance Questionnaire GWCC Modernization
ATTACHMENT 3
The Offeror shall complete Section 1 of this Attachment and provide a separate form to each of the Offeror’s clients who are serving as their past performance references. Each client shall complete Section 2 of this form and respond by sending the completed form via e-mail to the USDA Contracting Specialist, Frederick Freeman at Frederick.Freeman@usda.gov. Completed forms should be received no later than time and date of acquisition as stated on RFP.
Section 1 – Contract Information (to be completed by the Contractor) Prime Contractor Company Name:
Subcontractor(s)/Teaming Partner(s) Company Name(s):
Program/Project Title:
Contracting Agency/Company:
Contract Number:
Brief Contract Description:
(include magnitude and level of complexity as compared to Internal Control/Financial Management Support Services RFQ/PWS)
Contract Type:
(e.g., firm-fixed-price, time-and-materials, cost plus)
Period of Performance:
From:
To:
Contract Value:
Original Dollar Value:
Final Dollar Value:
Reason for Any Difference between Original and Final Dollar Values:
Names of Key Personnel:
Program/Project Manager:
Functional Lead:
Technical Lead:
Others (provide positions/titles):
Section 2 – Client Information (to be completed by Offeror’s Client) Note: To assist our Agency, in providing relevant performance feedback, the following is a brief description of our requirement is listed below.
USDA – Office of Operations(OO), Departmental Management(DM), Facility Management Division(FMD), Engineering Branch
The George Washington Carver Center (GWCC) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is an office complex which was built in 1997. It consists of four interconnected buildings and a small entry building called the Reception Building. Building 1 and 2 have three stories and Building 3 and 4 and Reception have two stories. The complex has an approximate 351,805 gross square feet and 276,109 usable square feet. The facility has a Cafeteria, Child Development Center with outdoor playground, Health Unit, Fitness Center, and a Credit Union. The entire campus size is approximately 73.7 acres which includes an 847-space surface parking lot as well as a separate outbuilding which houses the landscaping operation and a space for emergency generators and fuel tanks. The site also has a photovoltaic solar farm at the rear of the complex.
The project is for the modernization of all five buildings in a two-phase construction approach. Each phase is to be completed in a 10-month period. This work will require temporary drywall construction barriers for noise/vibration/dust/smoke control; provide also the temporary systems such as Heating Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC), power, and water; and bypass and adjustment to allow occupants in the occupied zones and the Special Areas to conduct normal business during the construction. The Special Areas, shown in bid plans, are in B1 and they must remain in normal operations 24x7 year-round
Name:
Agency/Company:
Position Title:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Mailing Address:
Length of Time Involved with the Contract:
Questionnaire Completion Date:
Please rate the Contractor’s performance on the identified program using the following scale:
| Adjectival Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Quote is exceptional overall; fully addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Several strengths and/or significant strengths exist which far outweigh any weaknesses. |
| Good |
| Quote is good overall; fully addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates a good approach and understanding of the requirements. Some weaknesses may exist; however, the weaknesses, if any, are relatively insignificant and are outweighed by one or more strengths. |
| Satisfactory |
| Quote is satisfactory overall; addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates an adequate understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. |
| Marginal |
| Quote is marginal overall; fails to address all of the criteria and does not demonstrate an adequate approach or understanding of the requirements. One or more weaknesses exist which are not offset by strengths. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Quote does not address all aspects of the criteria and/or does not present evidence demonstrating an understanding of the requirements. Many weaknesses and/or omissions exist. |
Assessments should reflect only contract performance for which the Contractor is responsible. If an unsatisfactory rating is given, please provide more details in the comments section.
| Rating Scale: E=Exceptional, G=Good, S=Satisfactory, M = Marginal, U = Unsatisfactory |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
QUALITY
| 1. |
| Overall quality of the project |
| 2. |
| Qualifications and quality of performance of key management/design/maintenance personnel to perform the requirements of the project |
| 3. |
| Accuracy of the recordkeeping procedure and ability to prepare accurate and timely reports |
| 4. |
| Procedures that ensured that the level of quality remained constant throughout the life of the project |
| 5. |
| Adequacy, relevance, and reasonableness of the quality control approach, procedures, documentation, and methods |
| 6. |
| Ability to implement effective corrective actions and improvements |
| 7. |
| Qualifications of subcontractors and/or teaming partners |
| 8. |
| Quality of products, materials, and services received for the price paid |
Comments:
TIMELINESS
| 9. |
| Timeliness in completing the overall project |
| 10. |
| Provide requisite expertise resulting in the completion of tasks/milestones/deliverables within the established or set time schedule under the current contract |
Comments:
BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
| 11. |
| Relationship with client technical and functional personnel |
| 12. |
| Relationship with Contracting Office |
| 13. |
| Relationship with subcontractors |
| 14. |
| Cooperation and innovation in problem solving |
| 15. |
| Compliance with the terms of the contract |
Comments:
MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE
| 16. |
| Adequate and complete management plan |
| 17. |
| Adequacy of subcontractor management procedures |
| 18. |
| Availability and accessibility of Contractor organization’s key personnel |
| 19. |
| Availability and accessibility of Contractor organization’s senior management personnel |
| 20. |
| Turnover rate of Key Personnel |
| 21. |
| Quality of risk/issue identification, escalation and mitigation/resolution procedures |
| 22. |
| Ability to accommodate changes to the baseline schedule resulting in earlier deadlines |
| 23. |
| Overall Rating |
Comments:
| QUESTIONS |
| Y |
| N |
| REMARKS |
If you had a choice, would you contract with this contractor again? If no, why not? If yes, does the contractor have any particular performance strong points?
Did the end product or services meet contractual requirements, particularly with respect to the quality provided?
Did the contractor make contractual and administrative deliveries on time? If not, why not, and what specific delivery dates were not met?
Did the contractor complete the effort within the budget? If not, were the cost growth or other cost control problems due to contractor inefficiency or lack of expertise? (Does not apply to fixed price contracts)
Were contract changes made because of the manner of the contractor’s performance, particularly with respect to delivery times and contract specifications?
Was the contractor cooperative and responsive to your needs?
If there were problems, did the contractor act promptly to resolve them?
Additional Comments: Please include any other pertinent information such as awards the Contractor may have earned, ability to meet subcontracting plans, any incentive/disincentives earned/penalized, etc.
image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .