Attachment 3 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 23 KB Posted
- Attached to
- ICITAP/OPDAT Worldwide Support Services
- Solicitation number
- 15JPSS26R00000038
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire template designed to evaluate contractor performance on the ICITAP/OPDAT Worldwide Support Services contract (Solicitation 15JPSS26R00000038). The questionnaire is completed by Government evaluators or contracting officers who have direct knowledge of a contractor's prior performance on similar work, and the completed forms are submitted by offerors as part of their proposal evaluation.
The questionnaire requires evaluators to assess contractor performance across five key elements: Quality (whether services met contract requirements), Schedule (adherence to required timelines), Cost Control (management within negotiated budgets), Management (communication and responsiveness), and Regulatory Compliance (adherence to contract terms, reporting, and security requirements). Each element is rated on a six-point scale ranging from Exceptional (E) to Unsatisfactory (U), with a Not Applicable option. Evaluators must provide narrative justifications for their ratings and conclude with an overall performance assessment and recommendation regarding the contractor's suitability for similar future contracts. The questionnaire collects essential administrative data including contractor name and address, contract number, performance period, contract value, contract type, contracting officer contact information, and evaluator identification. This template functions as a standardized tool for Government source selection to verify and validate past performance claims submitted by offerors competing for the $500 million IDIQ contract supporting DOJ's Criminal Division international programs.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Amendment 2 - 15JPSS26R00000038.pdf | ||
| Sol. 15JPSS26R00000038.docx | DOCX document | |
| Questions Answers.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 1 - Pricing Tables - Amendment 1.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 2 - Labor CLIN Descriptions Qualifications - Amendment 1.pdf | ||
| Questions - Answers.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Amendment 1.pdf | ||
| SF 33 for 15JPSS26R00000038.pdf | ||
| Sol. 15JPSS26R00000038.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - Labor CLIN DescriptionsQualifications.pdf | ||
| Attachment 5 - DD Form 254 Contract Security Classification Specification.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 - ICITAP and OPDAT Presence Countries.pdf | ||
| Attachment 6 - DOJ Acquisition Policy Notices.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - Pricing Tables.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Vendor_Questions Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 3 - Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf |
Show all 16
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
SOLICITATION N.: 15JPSS26R00000038
ATTACHMENT 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
ATTACHMENT 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
The U.S. Department of Justice is conducting a source selection for worldwide support services in support of the Criminal Division's International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program (ICITAP) and Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, Assistance and Training (OPDAT). As part of the evaluation, the Government is assessing the quality of each Offeror's past performance. Your responses will assist the Government in evaluating the contractor's performance on the referenced contract or task order.
In order to accurately evaluate the Offeror’s past performance, your assistance is requested in obtaining and verifying the past performance history of this Offeror.
The Offeror has completed the contractor information section of this questionnaire. Please complete the evaluation portion and return the completed questionnaire directly to the Offeror for inclusion in its proposal. The Government reserves the right to verify the information provided and to contact the evaluator if additional clarification is required.
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
NAME AND ADDRESS OF COMPANY EVALUATED:
CONTRACT NUMBER
CONTRACT PERIOD AND PLACE(S) OF PERFORMANCE
| CONTRACT VALUE |
| CONTRACT TYPE |
CONTRACTING OFFICER NAME,
AGENCY, TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND EMAIL ADDRESS
DESCRIPTION OF WORK PERFORMED BY THE OFFEROR:
| NAME OF EVALUATOR, COMPANY/AGENCY, TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND EMAIL ADDRESS |
| DATE EVALUATION PROVIDED |
Instructions to the Evaluator: The Offeror has completed the contractor information section below. Please complete only the evaluation portion of this questionnaire based on your personal knowledge of the Offeror's performance under the referenced contract or task order. Please return the completed questionnaire to the Offeror.
| Performance Element |
| Select Rating*: E, VG, S, M, U, NA |
| Narrative Supporting the Rating |
1. QUALITY
Did the contractor consistently provide services meeting contract requirements?
2. SCHEDULE
Did the contractor meet required schedules?
3. COST CONTROL
Was work managed within negotiated cost?
4. MANAGEMENT
Did contractor management effectively communicate with the Government, respond promptly to issues, and successfully manage contract performance?
5. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
Did the contractor comply with applicable contract terms, reporting requirements, security requirements, and other contractual or regulatory obligations?
| * Rating |
| Definition |
| E – Exceptional: | Performance consistently exceeded contract requirements to the Government's benefit. |
| VG – Very Good: | Performance exceeded some contract requirements and otherwise met all requirements. |
| S – Satisfactory: | Performance met contract requirements. |
| M – Marginal: | Performance did not consistently meet contract requirements; corrective action was required. |
| U – Unsatisfactory: | Performance failed to meet contract requirements. |
NA – Not Applicable: The evaluation element did not apply to the referenced contract or task order.
Overall Performance Based on your overall experience administering or overseeing this contract, how would you characterize the contractor's overall performance?
Would you recommend this contractor for contracts of similar scope, size, and complexity? Yes/No. If No, please explain.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .