12b-815883 -Ex-G-PPQ-Fill.doc
DOC document 167 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 143748
- Issued by
- Travis County, Austin City, Texas
About this file
This file is a Past Performance Questionnaire issued by the Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (CapMetro) for RFP 815883 regarding the Double Tracking & Plaza Saltillo Station Platforms project. The questionnaire requests that references from firms responding to this procurement forward completed forms to CapMetro by September 3, 2026, prior to 3:00 p.m. The project scope encompasses construction of utility relocation infrastructure, double tracking, track work and special track work, wayside signalization, Positive Train Control (PTC) modification, station side platforms with canopies, communications infrastructure, road reconfiguration work, bike trail development, and utility works as defined in the project's 100% design plans, specifications, and estimates. Past performance evaluations will serve as one criterion in the selection process and should reflect objective assessments based on program, project, and contract management data. Responses may be submitted via email to procure.help@capmetro.org or through other designated channels, with questions directed to Sean Wighaman, Contracts Administrator.
The questionnaire format requests that responding firms provide contract details including contract number, type, amount, award date, and completion date in Section A, completed by the offeror. Section B requests respondent contact information, while Section C establishes a rating scale ranging from Exceptional (1) to Unknown (6) for evaluating contractor performance across twenty categories. These evaluation categories assess contractor capabilities in areas including startup management, schedule compliance, reporting and communication, personnel qualifications, subcontractor management, resource adequacy, regulatory compliance, technical problem resolution, innovation, customer responsiveness, and overall contract performance. The questionnaire also requests narrative explanations for ratings other than "Acceptable" and identification of documented strengths, weaknesses, and any contract modifications or terminations resulting from contractor performance deficiencies.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 04-815883-Ex-B-RepsNCerts-Fed-Fill.docx | DOCX document | |
| 07-815883-Ex-C-1-ExceptionsAndAssumptions-Fill.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 03-815883-Ex-A-n-A-1-Pricing-Schedule-Fill.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFP-815883-Double-Track-Saltillo-Solicitation-Vol-I-Cmplt.pdf | ||
| RFP-815883-Double-Track-Saltillo-Solicitation-Vol-II-Cmplt.pdf | ||
| 05-815883-Ex-B1-BuyAmerica-Fill.docx | DOCX document |
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 815883, Double Tracking & Plaza Saltillo Station Platforms The Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (CapMetro) is in the process of selecting a firm to provide construction of utility relocation infrastructure, double tracking, track work/special track work, wayside signalization and Positive Train Control (PTC) modification, station side platforms with canopies, communications, road reconfiguration work, bike trail and utility works as defined by scope of services, specifications and other project supporting documents.
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 September 3, 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 Sean Wighaman, at Sean.Wighaman@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, Sean Wighaman Sean Wighaman Contracts Administrator
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. 815883
CAPMETRO PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
SOLICITATION NO. 815883
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .