127EAV25Q0008 Past Performance Questionnaire Wilderness RD Janitorial Gila NF.pdf
PDF 114 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 127EAV25Q0008
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire for a federal contract opportunity related to sanitation services for the Gila National Forest. The solicitation (127EAV25Q0008) is a 100% small business set-aside for portable toilet and handwash supply services, with a NAICS code of 562991 and a small business size standard of $9.0 million. The procurement will result in a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract for sanitation support at the Gila National Forest in New Mexico. The questionnaire is designed to evaluate a contractor's past performance by soliciting detailed feedback from previous clients on various performance metrics including customer satisfaction, quality of services, timeliness, and overall recommendation for future work. Responses are requested by 04/02/2025 and must be submitted confidentially to ellena.silva@usda.gov, with the understanding that general performance information may be released to the quoter while maintaining respondent anonymity.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| MAP - Luna Work Center.pdf | ||
| MAP - Saddle Mountain Lookout.pdf | ||
| MAP - Silver City Fire Cache.pdf | ||
| 127EAV25Q0008.pdf | ||
| MAP - Glenwood RD Helispot.pdf | ||
| WD 2015-5461 REV NO 26.pdf | ||
| MAP - Signal Peak Lookout.pdf | ||
| WD 2015-5459 REV NO 26.pdf |
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
127EAV25Q0008 Gila NF
Description of work this company performed:
Sanitation Supply Toilet and Handwash Contractor Past Performance Inquiry
INFORMATION/CONFIDENTIAL
Dear Customer:
Our firm has submitted a quote to the USDA Gila National Forest NM. In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), they will evaluate our firm’s past performance. Your firm has been listed as a reference for work previously performed.
Your candid response to the attached survey will assist the evaluation team in this process and your participation in this evaluation is greatly appreciated. Please complete the enclosed survey as thoroughly as possible. General information regarding the responses may be released to the quoter; the FAR prohibits the release of names providing the responses. Complete confidentiality will be maintained.
Please email the completed form NO LATER THAN 04/02/2025.
DO NOT RETURN THIS FORM TO OUR COMPANY, PLEASE RETURN TO: ellena.silva@usda.gov
Contractor Name:
Address:
Contract or Order No:
Total Value of Contract:
Liquidated Damages Assessed:
Contract Award Date:
Final Completion Date:
Name of person completing this form:
Phone Number:
Name of Company or Government Agency:
mailto:ellena.silva@usda.gov
Comments:
RATINGS - Summarize contractor performance and check the number that corresponds to the rating for each category.
RATING DEFINITION
E = Excellent Performance exceeded what was required by the contract VG = Very Good Performance met all the requirements of the contract S = Satisfactory Contractor met most (essentially all) of the requirements of the contract M = Marginal Contractor met some of the requirements of the contract however changes to the contractor’s processes were necessary to achieve contract requirements
U = Unsatisfactory Contractor failed to meet requirements of the contract N/A = Not Applicable Question did not apply to the contract performed for your firm.
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
Was the project completed in accordance with the contract specifications?
How well did the contractor identify and correct deficient work?
Were submittals, testing, certifications, and final drawings (as-builts) completed accurately and timely?
Was work performed as scheduled?
Were delays resolved quickly and to both parties satisfaction?
QUALITY OF SERVICES
Did the contractor provide adequate oversight to sub-contractors, suppliers, employees?
Did the contractor maintain a good relationship with the owner, contracting agency, and management personnel?
If there were change orders, was the contractor reasonable in defining scope of change and controlling cost?
Did the contractor provide adequate work force (number and skills) for work being performed?
How well did the contractor manage the quality of work?
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Would you recommend the selection of this contractor again?
TIMELINESS
Did the contractor complete the project on time? If there were problems, were they addressed and resolved?
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
| CUSTOMER SATISFACTION |
| TIMELINESS |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .