B08_Att_5_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

PDF 216 KB Posted

Attached to
NR-ARD-271 IMPROVE ION ANALYSIS RFP Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
140P2126Q0009
Issued by
Department of the Interior National Park Service National Office

About this file

This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire template for Solicitation 140P2126Q0009, issued by the U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service for an IMPROVE Ion Analysis Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. The questionnaire serves as a source selection evaluation tool and consists of two forms: a Performance Rating Form and a Supplemental Comment Form. Offerors are responsible for compiling and submitting completed past performance questionnaires with their proposals, though the Government may contact references to verify information. References are explicitly prohibited from sending completed questionnaires directly to the Government.

The Performance Rating Form evaluates contractors across eight performance elements organized into four categories: Technical Performance (Quality of Technical Approach and Understanding of Requirements), Timeliness of Performance (Effective and Efficient Use of Resources and Timeliness of Performance), Quality/Customer Satisfaction (Quality of Performance/Customer Satisfaction, Business Behavior, and Communication), and Cost Control (Cost Control). Each element uses standardized rating criteria: Outstanding (performance exceeded customer expectations with significant features or benefits), Satisfactory (met customer expectations or contract requirements), Unsatisfactory (performance was marginal or did not meet expectations), and Other (for N/A or when no data is available). The form also includes a yes/no question asking whether the evaluator would do business with the contractor again. An Additional Comment Form allows evaluators to provide supplementary narrative regarding performance element ratings. A Notice to Contractor section clarifies that the questionnaire information is Source Selection Sensitive and restricts contractors from using the information in advertising or promotional materials that imply Government endorsement.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to NR-ARD-271 IMPROVE ION ANALYSIS RFP, newest first.
File Type Posted
Sol_140P2126Q0009_Amd_0002.pdf PDF
B08_Sol__Amd__2_IMPROVE_Ion_IDIQ_Questions_and_Responses_0002.pdf PDF
B08_140P2126Q0009_0001.pdf PDF
Sol_140P2126Q0009_Amd_0001.pdf PDF
B08_Attch_4_Price_Schedule_Task_Order.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Sol_140P2126Q0009.pdf PDF
B08_Attch_1_IDIQ_SOW.pdf PDF
B08_Attach_6_Small_Business_Participation.pdf PDF
B08_1449_140P2126Q0009.pdf PDF
B08_Attch_2_Price_Schedule_IDIQ.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
B08_Attch_3_SOW_Task_Order.pdf PDF
B08_Attch_7_Amend_1_SB_Sub_Plan.pdf PDF
Show all 12

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

Solicitation 140P2126Q0009 – Attachment 3

Past Performance Questionnaire

The U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service (NPS) has a requirement for a IMPROVE Ion Analysis Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. As part of the procurement process, past performance is a source selection factor.

Two forms are provided to complete the evaluation: 1) Performance Rating Form; and 2) Supplemental Comment Form. The offeror is responsible for compiling and submitting completed past performance questionnaires in its proposal, though the Government may contact references to verify the veracity of provided information. References shall not send completed past performance questionnaires to the Government.

The following standards shall be used in arriving at the rating.

Outstanding Contractor’s performance exceeded customer expectations and was technically acceptable, providing significant features or benefits.

Satisfactory Contractor met customer expectations or contract requirements and demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the requirements.

Unsatisfactory Contractor’s performance was either marginal or did not meet customer expectations or contract requirements.

Other If the element is not applicable, indicate with “N/A.” If no data has been obtained or additional comments are provided, please note in this column.

Other If the element is not applicable, indicate with “N/A.” If no data has been obtained or additional comments are provided, please note in this column.

Performance Rating Form

NAME OF COMPANY EVALUATED

ADDRESS OF COMPANY EVALUATED

CONTRACT NUMBER CONTRACT PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT TYPE

CONTRACTING OFFICER/CUSTOMER NAME,

ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND EMAIL ADDRESS

TYPE OF SERVICES PERFORMED (ACTIVITY)

NAME OF EVALUATOR, COMPANY/AGENCY,

ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER AND

EMAIL ADDRESS

DATE EVALUATION PROVIDED/

SIGNATURE OF EVALUATOR

Performance Element Outstanding Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Other

Technical Performance (Quality of Product or Service)

1. QUALITY OF TECHNICAL APPROACH

(For example: Were the services comprehensive, complete, and feasible? (Met the needs, performed successfully, and accommodated changing requirements.)

2. UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIREMENTS

(For example: Did the contractor show an understanding of the scope of the requirements and an appreciation of the complexity of the requirements? And did the contractor effectively identify flaws, inconsistencies and other inaccuracies in your technical direction?)

Timeliness of Performance

3. EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES

(For example: Was the contractor able to obtain in a timely manner the amount and type of personnel resources required to support the project, effectively train personnel to perform the work required for the project, and maintain the required workforce throughout the term of the contract?)

4. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE

(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic schedules, monitoring performance, completing work on time, and implementing corrections/changes in a timely manner?)

Quality / Customer Satisfaction

5. QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE/CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

(For example: Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?)

6. BUSINESS BEHAVIOR

(For example: Was the contractor reasonable and cooperative at the corporate and program levels in response to changes in technical direction, correcting errors, poor performance, criticism/rejection of contract deliverables and other quality issues?)

7. COMMUNICATION

(For example: Did the contractor work and communicate well with contracting officers, contracting officer’s technical representatives, end users, other contractors, subcontractors, and in-house staff?)

Cost Control

8. COST CONTROL

(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic costs, monitoring performance, operating at or below budget, and implementing corrections/changes in a cost effective manner?)

FOR #9, PLEASE ANSWER “Yes” or “No”, as appropriate YES NO

9. Given the choice, would you do business with this contractor again?

Additional Comment Form

Please provide any additional comments regarding your performance element ratings in the space below. Please add additional pages as necessary.

Notice to Contractor

Information provided in this questionnaire is intended for use as source selection information and as such is deemed Source Selection Sensitive. Statements or comments provided in the questionnaire do not signify an express or implied endorsement of any product, supply, service, or enterprise.

This information shall not be construed as an endorsement by the Government or its employee(s) of the contractor for advertising purposes or in a manner that implies the contractor, its products, or services, are approved, endorsed, or considered by the Government to be superior to other products or services.

The contractor shall not be permitted to use any information provided in this questionnaire to publicize, or otherwise circulate, promotional materials that state or imply Governmental, organizational, group, expert, or individual endorsement or consumer testimonial of a product, service, or position which the contractor represents.

Additional Comment Form

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