Attachment 2 - Past Perfomance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 25 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Request for Qualifications USDA ARS PWA Architect-Engineer IDIQ Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 12905B23R0005
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for an architect-engineer firm. The questionnaire requests ratings on factors such as design services, general architectural services, mechanical engineering services, and electrical engineering services. It is to be completed for a contractor that provided these services under Contract Number 12905B23R0005 for the Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service Field Research Implementation and Information Delivery Pacific West Area. Respondents are asked to provide ratings on a scale of exceptional to unsatisfactory for various contractual requirements and are given the option to provide narrative explanations for marginal or unsatisfactory ratings. Completed questionnaires must be emailed to the specified individuals by November 2, 2023.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Questions and Answers ver 3.pdf | ||
| Request for Qualifications Ammended.pdf | ||
| Questions and Answers ver 2.pdf | ||
| Questions and Answers.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - Statement of Work.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - Past Perfomance Questionnaire.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 3 - Client Authorization Ltr.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 8 - Lobbying Disclosure.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 - SF330.pdf | ||
| Attachment 7 - Terms and Conditions.pdf | ||
| Request for Qualifications Final.pdf | ||
| Attachment 5 - Questions and Answers.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 6 - PWA Map.jpg | JPG image |
Show all 13
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
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ)
***Please DO NOT send the completed PPQ back to the Contractor. Please email directly to the following individuals no later than November 2, 2023.
Michael Sherlock Michael.Sherlock@usda.gov Telephone (510)559-6339
Section 1: Contract and Program Identification A. Contractor (Company/Division):
B. Contractor Cage Code:
C. Contract Number:
D. Program Title:
E. Brief Program Description: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ F. Period of Performance:
G. Contract Dollar Value H. Contractor’s Role: ☐ Prime Contractor ☐ Subcontractor ☐ Key Personnel I. Are there Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS) or other Past Performance Reports available for this contract or task order? ____ Yes ____ No
Section 2: Rater Identification
A. Respondent’s name:
B. Respondent’s title:
C. Respondent’s phone/fax number/email address:
D. Are you willing to be contacted for additional information? ____ Yes ____ No Section 3: Performance Information Choose the appropriate letter on the scale (E, G, S, M, U and N) that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ANY RATINGS OF M or U.
| Code | Performance Rating |
| E | EXCEPTIONAL – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
V VERY GOOD – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
S SATISFACTORY – Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
M MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.
U UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
N/A NOT APPLICABLE – Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect, performance was not observed, or information was not available. Do not know.
Place an “X” in the appropriate column using the definitions above.
| Factors to be rated |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
Design Services
1. Overall skill level and technical competence of the firm’s personnel.
2. Firm’s ability to identify and resolve design issues expeditiously.
3. Firm’s responsiveness to design review questions.
4. Firm’s ability to effectively coordinate, integrate and manage their consultants/subcontractors/team (Management).
5. Overall accuracy, completeness and coordination of the final design documents (Quality).
6. Firm’s ability to provide detailed and accurate cost estimates (Cost Control).
7. Firm’s ability to meet contract schedule (Performance Schedule).
8. Responsiveness during follow-on construction services.
General Architectural Services
1. Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness and coordination of General Architectural documentation.
2. Firm’s ability and understanding of the overall Architectural process.
| Factors to be rated |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
Mechanical Engineering Services
1. Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness and coordination of Mechanical Engineering documentation.
2. Firm’s ability and understanding of overall Mechanical Engineering process.
Electrical Engineering Services
1. Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness and coordination of Electrical Engineering documentation.
2. Firm’s ability and understanding of the overall Electrical Engineering process.
Civil Engineering Services
1. Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness and coordination of the Civil Engineering documentation.
2. Firm’s ability and understanding of the overall Civil Engineering process.
Structural Engineering Services
1. Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness and coordination of the Structural Engineering documentation.
2. Firm’s ability and understanding of the overall Structural Engineering process.
Cost Estimator
1. Overall accuracy, completeness and timeliness of Cost Estimate documentation.
2. Firm’s ability and understanding of Cost for the overall project.
| Factors to be rated |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
Other
1. Would you ever award another contract to the A&E Firm?
2. Is the contractor rated in CPARS?
Remarks:________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 12905B23R0005 Attachment 2 - Past Performance Questionnaire 1 | Page
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .