Attachment_1_-Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

Solicitation: 140R2019Q0081 Attachment 1 – Past Performance Questionnaire

When Completed, This Document Is Source Selection Sensitive Information In Accordance With FAR 3.104

Instructions:

Sections I and II are be completed by the Offeror/Subcontractor and provided to your reference. The reference, in turn, is to verify Section II, complete Section III and the questionnaire in Sections IV and V.

The completed questionnaire should be submitted directly to the point of contact listed below, by the closing date of the solicitation.

Message to the assessor: Your feedback is requested by Reclamation to assist with establishing the performance history for the Contractor named below. In an effort to expedite the receipt of the requested information, the Contracting Office respectfully requests that you do not mail hard copies. Instead, please email the completed questionnaire(s) to: kfleming@usbr.gov.

I. Solicitation Data

Solicitation No. 140R2019Q0081 Solicitation Title/Name Endeavor Engine Maintenance Services – Bay Delta Office Customer/Agency Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region – Sacramento, CA Contracting Role Prime Subcontractor Key Personnel Teaming/Joint Venture

II. Current or Historical Contract Information

Contractor Name Contractor Address Contract Number Project Description

Type of Contract Contract Value Initial: Final:

Contracting Role Prime Subcontractor Key Personnel Teaming/Joint Venture

III. Reference Information

Reference Name and Title Organization Name and Address

Phone Email mailto:kfleming@usbr.gov

IV. Evaluation Definitions

1 2 N 3 4 5 No Confidence Little

Confidence Unknown Confidence

Satisfactory Confidence

Significant Confidence

High Confidence

Performance did not meet most contractual requirements.

There were serious problems and the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.

Performance did not meet some contractual requirements.

There were problems, some of a serious nature, for which corrective action was only marginally effective.

The record is inconclusive or without comment or the contractor did not perform this effort.

Performance met contract requirements.

There were some minor problems and corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded some requirements.

There were a few minor problems which the contractor resolved in a timely, effective manner.

Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded many requirements.

Problems, if any, were negligible and were resolved in a timely, highly effective manner.

V. Performance Evaluation

Choose the number on the scale of 1 to 5 that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. If there was not performance on the project that can be rated use “Not Applicable (N/A)”.

PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ANY RATINGS OF 1 OR 2.

Technical Expertise and Project Supervision 1 Contractor provided experienced technical and administrative personnel with the abilities needed to meet contract requirements.

2 N 3 4 5

2 Contractor hired, retained and promptly replaced employees with appropriate technical skills (i.e. IT, Engineering, Administrative, etc.)

and training commensurate with those required for successful project completion.

1 2 N 3 4 5

Home Office/On-Site/Government Interaction 3 Identified risks/problems as they occurred and offered constructive and/or viable solutions/alternatives.

1 2 N 3 4 5

4 Contractor was responsive and reasonable to contract changes from the standpoint of timeliness, suggested solutions and price.

1 2 N 3 4 5

5 Contractor displayed a cooperative attitude with company/government personnel before and after award.

1 2 N 3 4 5

6 Contractor’s on-site supervisor displayed imitative to resolve problems on-site.

1 2 N 3 4 5

7 Were there any claims by subcontractors/suppliers for non-payment? If yes, please explain outcome in “Remarks”.

Yes No

Product Quality

8 Contractor’s emphasis on delivering a quality product was apparent in day-to-day operations.

9 Contractor corrected deficiencies in a timely manner.

10 Contractor maintained a quality workforce and subcontractors, if applicable, through project completion.

1 2 N 3 4 5

Other 11 Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain outcome in “Remarks”.

Yes No

12 Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain in “Remarks”.

Yes No

Overall Assessment 13 Overall, on the scale of 1-5, how would you rate the contractor being surveyed?

Remarks:

Please attach additional pages if necessary.