B08_DRTO_241934_Solicitation - Attach 05 Performance Questionnaire.docx

DOCX document 44 KB Posted

Attached to
DRTO 241934 - Harbor LighthouseDry Tortugas Nati
Solicitation number
140P2020R0004
Issued by

About this file

This document contains a past performance questionnaire for evaluation of a contractor's performance on a previous National Park Service construction contract. The questionnaire requests information on quality, schedule, cost control, management, small business subcontracting, and regulatory compliance ratings for a harbor lighthouse project at Dry Tortugas National Park in Florida. References are asked to provide comments to support ratings in these areas and to recommend the contractor for future similar contracts. The completed questionnaire must be returned by the specified contracting officer and contract specialist at the National Park Service Denver Service Center by the stated due date.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Sol_140P2020R0004_Amd_0004.pdf PDF
Sol_140P2020R0004_Amd_0003.pdf PDF
Amend 3 Attach 1 DRTO 241934 QA Part 2_0003.pdf PDF
Amend 2 Attach 4 Lighthouse Scaffolding-Shoring 2017.01.30.pdf PDF
Amend 2 Attach 6 Tortugas Harbor Lighthouse FINAL Report_170414.pdf PDF
Amend 2 Attach 8 SAFA Report 1811-Phase 2.pdf PDF
Amend 2 Attach 7 SAFA Report 1618-Metals Analysis-1.pdf PDF
Amend 2 Attach 5 Original 1875 Lighthouse Drawings.pdf PDF
Amend 2 Attach 1 DRTO_241934_Q and A part 1 02.25.2020_0002.pdf PDF
Amend 2 Attach 2 DRTO 2017 Emergency Action Plan_0002.pdf PDF
Sol_140P2020R0004_Amd_0002.pdf PDF
Amend 2 Attach 3 EVER DRTO 2019 Hurricane Plan_0002.pdf PDF
Attendance Sheet Feb 13 2020_0001.pdf PDF
Sol_140P2020R0004_Amd_0001.pdf PDF
Scaffolding Reports combined_0001.pdf PDF
B08_DRTO 241934_Solicitation - Attach 01 Final Specifications.pdf PDF
B08_DRTO 241934_Solicitation - Attach 2 Final Construction Plans.pdf PDF
B08_DRTO_241934_Solicitation - Attach 03 Wage Determination.pdf PDF
B08_DRTO_241934_Solicitation 140P2020R0004.pdf PDF
B08_DRTO_241934_Solicitation - Attach 07 Proposed Equals.doc DOC document
B08_DRTO_241934_Solicitation - Attach 08 General References.doc DOC document
B08_DRTO_241934_Solicitation - Attach 04 Project Experience.docx DOCX document
Sol_140P2020R0004.pdf PDF
B08_DRTO_241934_Solicitation - Attach 10 Blank Bid Schedule.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
B08_DRTO_241934_Solicitation - Attach 09 Small Business Sub-Contracting Plan.doc DOC document
B08_DRTO_241934_Solicitation - Attach 06 Bid Bond Form.pdf PDF
Show all 26

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

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

INSTRUCTIONS: Offeror to complete Sections A and B and transmit questionnaire to reference.

Reference to complete Sections C and D and transmit back to Contracting Officer listed in section E.

A. CONTRACTOR INFORMATION

Company Name
Company
Street Address
Address
City
City
State
State
Zip Code
XXXXX
DUNS Number
XXXXXXX
Point of Contact
Name, Email, Phone

B. CONTRACT INFORMATION

Project Title
Title
Contract Number
XXXXXXXXXX
Contract Type
Firm Fixed Price / Time & Materials / Cost Reimbursable / Other
Awarded Contract Price
$X,XXX,XXX
Current / Final Price
$X,XXX,XXX
Contract Award Date
XX/XX/XXXX
Contract Completion Date
XX/XX/XXXX
Period of Performance
XX/XX/XXX – XX/XX/XXX
Project Location
Park or Street address, City, State
Client / Owner
Company
Brief description of the contract & work effort:
Scope of work description

C. REFERENCE:

Name
First, Last
Position / Title
Title
Organization
Agency or Company
Phone Number
XXX-XXX-XXXX
Email Address
Email
Signature
Signature
Date
XX/XX/XXXX

D. EVALUATION

Rating
Definition
Exceptional
Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded many to the owner’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
Very Good
Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded some to the owner’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
Satisfactory
Performance met contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
Marginal
Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions.
Unsatisfactory
Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
Evaluation Area
Rating

Quality

Quality of workmanship (including subcontractors)?
Choose an item.
Quality of and adherence to quality control plan?
Choose an item.
Quality of informational and technical submittals?
Choose an item.
Overall Quality Rating
Choose an item.
Comments (Please provide comments supporting the above ratings. Comments supporting ratings of excellent, marginal, & unsatisfactory are especially helpful.):

Schedule (& Time Management)

Met project schedule milestones?
Choose an item.
Responded to owner requests in a timely manner?
Choose an item.
Informational and technical submittals submitted timely?
Choose an item.
Promptly addressed scheduling issues?
Choose an item.
Overall Schedule (& Time Management) Rating
Choose an item.
Comments (Please provide comments supporting the above ratings. Comments supporting ratings of excellent, marginal, & unsatisfactory are especially helpful.):

Cost Control

Addressed differing & unforeseen site conditions so as to minimize additional costs?
Choose an item.
Provided fair and reasonable pricing for contract modifications?
Choose an item.
Submitted accurate and complete invoices?
Choose an item.
Promptly paid subcontractors and suppliers?
Choose an item.
Overall Cost Control Rating
Choose an item.
Comments (Please provide comments supporting the above ratings. Comments supporting ratings of excellent, marginal, & unsatisfactory are especially helpful.):

Management

General oversight by project manager and superintendent?
Choose an item.
Coordination with and control of subcontractors?
Choose an item.
Avoidance of accidents & safety violations?
Choose an item.
Addressed location factors (especially remote locations)?
Choose an item.
Maintained good working relationship with owner representatives?
Choose an item.
Demonstrated flexibility, innovativeness and cooperation in resolving potential problems?
Choose an item.
Overall Management Rating
Choose an item.
Comments (Please provide comments supporting the above ratings. Comments supporting ratings of excellent, marginal, & unsatisfactory are especially helpful.):

Small Business Subcontracting (& Labor Standards)

Met regulatory and contractual labor standards?
Choose an item.
Successfully contracted with small and socio-economically disadvantaged businesses?
Choose an item.
Quality and adherence to applicable subcontracting plans?
Choose an item.
Overall Small Business Subcontracting (& Labor Standards) Rating
Choose an item.
Comments (Please provide comments supporting the above ratings. Comments supporting ratings of excellent, marginal, & unsatisfactory are especially helpful.):

Regulatory Compliance

Met building and life safety codes?
Choose an item.
Overall Regulatory Compliance Rating
Choose an item.
Overall Recommendation:
Given what I know today about the contractor's ability to perform in accordance with the contract’s most significant requirements, I would recommend them for similar contracts:
Choose an item.
Overall Comments:

E. RETURN:

Return by
Time / Date
Name
Frank M. Camacho (Mike) and James Waller
Title
Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist
Organization
National Park Service – Denver Service Center
Email
frank_camacho@nps.gov and james_waller@nps.gov

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .