Attachment 7 - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).docx
DOCX document 31 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Zambia Dining Facility and Warehouse Construction Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 19AQMM24R0139
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) related to a federal contract opportunity for the construction of a Zambia Dining Facility, Warehouse, and Shed for the Department of State.
The PPQ is to be completed by an assessor who has experience with the contractor's past performance on a relevant contract. The assessor is asked to provide feedback on the contractor's quality of work, management ability, quality control, subcontractor management, and cost/pricing performance. The assessor is also asked whether they would enter into another contract with the contractor in the future. The completed PPQ is to be submitted directly to the Contracting Officer and Contracting Specialist for the 19AQMM24R0139 solicitation.
The related federal contract opportunity is for the construction services in Costa Rica, with a period of performance to be determined. The contract type and pricing terms are not specified in the provided information.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 1 - Zambia POTC Construction SOW 0001 (Clean).pdf | ||
| 19AQMM24R0139 0001.pdf | ||
| 19AQMM24R0139-Zambia Dining Facility and Warehouse - B-M 0001.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - Zambia POTC Construction SOW 0001 (Track Changes).pdf | ||
| 19AQMM24R0139 Q and A Final.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 24R0139-Zambia Dining Facility and Warehouse-Pre-Proposal Conference.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 - Appendix 2. Multipurpose Warehouse.pdf | ||
| Attachment 3 - Appendix 1. Dining Facility Drawings.pdf | ||
| Attachment 5 - Appendix 3. Training Shed.pdf | ||
| 19AQMM24R0139.pdf | ||
| 19AQMM24R0139-Zambia Dining Facility and Warehouse - B-M.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - Zambia POTC Construction SOW 4 June 2024.pdf | ||
| Attachment 6 - Appendix 4. Project Scheduling.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - Bid Chart Zambia Warehouse Dining Sheds.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 14
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
Past Performance Questionnaire 19AQMM24R0139
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Thank you for taking time to respond to this Questionnaire. The Contractor who forwarded this to you is competing for a contract with the Department of State. The contract will be to provide construction services in Costa Rica. The project consists of the Zambia Dining Facility, Warehouse, and Shed. Be aware that the terms of the contract require the CO to notify the contractor of any adverse ratings (Marginal or Unsatisfactory) in order for them to respond.
If you have any questions, please contact the Contracting Specialist, Mr. Coy L. Brown at BrownCL1@state.gov; and Contracting Officer, Mr. Joonpil Hwang at hwangj2@state.gov.
Instructions: Section I of the Past Performance Questionnaire to be completed by the Offeror before forwarding to the assessor. The assessor should complete Section II, and submit Sections I and II directly to the Contracting Officer (hwangj2@state.gov.), with a copy to BrownCL1@state.gov;. Responses are due by COB August 23, 2024.
SECTION I – TO BE COMPLETED BY THE OFFEROR/CONTRACTOR
This Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) is submitted in response to 19AQMM24R0139
1. Company Information (Name, address, and DUNS and cage code of company (prime/ subcontractor/ teaming partner/ joint venture partner) performing under the contract.):
2. Contract Number:
3. Program Title:
4. Contract Type (e.g. FFP, T&M, etc.):
5. Period of Performance:
6. Role: |_| Prime Contractor |_| Subcontractor
7. Name and Address of Contracting Activity / Customer:
8. Primary Points of Contact (Offeror is responsible for exerting its best efforts to ensure that current information is provided for all individuals. If this is a commercial reference Offeror should change the Title, if appropriate, to commercial equivalents.):
| Title |
| Name |
| Phone |
| 1. ACO |
| 2. COR |
| 3. Other (Please specify) |
9. Contract Value:
9a. Awarded Total Contract Value (including all options):
9b. Current Total Contract Value (including all options):
9c. Explanation for difference between awarded and current contract price:
10. Place of Performance (country & cities):
11. Scope of Work – Brief description of work performed:
11a. Does your contract include any of the following services? Check all that apply.
|_| Design |_| Build – New |_| Renovation |_| Other, please define:
|_| None of the above 11b. If “none of the above” is chosen for 11a, please complete the following - Relevancy (Provide information that demonstrates why this contract is relevant. Explain what aspects of performance under this reference are deemed relevant to the proposed effort and to what aspects of the proposed solicitation they relate to.):
12. Has this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience (Yes/No response)?
12a. If yes, please provide additional details:
13. Liquidated Damages. Were liquidated damages assessed for failure to complete the work within the time specified in the contract?
13a. If yes, please provide additional details:
SECTION II – TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSOR
Your feedback is requested by the US Department of State, Office of Acquisition Management. Please email the completed questionnaire (Sections I and II) directly to BrownCL1@state.gov; and hwangj2@state.gov.
Evaluated by
| Name & Title: |
| Contract Info (Phone & Email) |
| Organization: |
| Date: |
May we contact you to discuss/ validate? |_| Yes |_| No
1. Is the information completed by the Offeror in Section I of this questionnaire accurate, current, and complete?
|_| Yes |_| No
If no, please explain/correct:
2. How long have you been involved with the Program/Contract?
3. Performance Evaluation. Assign a rating to each area based on the ratings guidelines below. Comments are requested for all ratings, however at a minimum a narrative explanation for any rating of 2 or less should be provided.
| RATING |
| DESCRIPTION |
| 5- |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the client’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective. |
| 4- |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the client’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective. |
| 3- |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| 2- |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| 1- |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| N- |
| Not Applicable |
| Performance did not include such efforts or performance was not observed. |
A. Quality of Product or Service
| Area |
| Rating |
| Comments & Explanation |
| 1. Performance conformed to contract requirements, specifications, quality of product, and standards of good workmanship (e.g. commonly accepted technical, professional standards). |
| 2. Contractor provided accurate and complete deliverables. |
| 3. Contractor was proactive in identifying, notifying the Client, and resolving performance issues/concerns |
B. Management Ability
| Area |
| Rating |
| Comments & Explanation |
1. The contractor provided experienced executives, including project manager and supervisors and replacements with the technical and administrative qualifications required to meet the contract requirements.
| 2. The contractor’s delegation of authority to project manager and supervisors met contract requirements. |
| 3. The contractor provided adequate resources (personnel/ equipment) in each specialty necessary to fulfill contractual requirements. |
| 4. The contractor provided effective emergency response actions and corrective actions to cover incidents such as: disruption of utilities, accidents, material shortages, safety, security, and hazardous materials handling incidents. |
C. Quality Control
| Area |
| Rating |
| Comments & Explanation |
| 1. Contractor provided effective Quality/Inspection procedures and personnel to meet contract requirements. |
| 2. When deficiencies were reported, the contractor took effective corrective actions pursuant to their Quality Control procedures. |
| 3. Contractor completed projects and subsequent corrective actions, including punch-list items, in a timely manner. |
D. Subcontractor
| Area |
| Rating |
| Comments & Explanation |
| 1. Contractor paid subcontractors in a timely manner. |
E. Cost/Price
| Area |
| Rating |
| Comments & Explanation |
| 1. The contractor provided accurate and timely proposals for change orders. |
| 2. Contractor invoiced in a timely manner with accurate progress payment values. |
4. Given the opportunity, would your organization enter another contractual relationship with this contractor in the future?
|_| Yes |_| No If no, please explain:
Again, thank you for taking time to respond to this questionnaire.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .