2.01 Attachment 5 - Past Performance Questionnaire.doc
DOC document 75 KB Posted
- Attached to
- DOD CIO Wireless and Telecommunications Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- N00244-24-R-0003
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire template for a Department of the Navy wireless services contract. Key details include:
- The questionnaire is to be completed by an evaluator of a contractor's past performance on a wireless carrier services contract and submitted to Naval Supply Systems Command by April 30, 2024. It requests information on the contract and contractor, the contractor's experience levels in areas such as wireless carrier services and paging, and the evaluator's ratings and comments on the contractor's ability to meet requirements, schedule, customer service, and strengths and weaknesses. Specifically, the contractor is being evaluated on its performance of a wireless carrier services contract to provide mobility and telecommunications services to military members and federal civilians in the U.S., territories and internationally.
The related federal contract opportunity notice is for a follow-on multiple award IDIQ for the same wireless and telecommunications services to the Department of Defense, with a one-year base period and nine one-year options and an estimated total value over $10 billion. Proposals are due by March 15, 2024. The NAICS code is 517112 and registration in SAM is required to receive award.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 30
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
Department of the Navy Wireless Services Contract Attachment 5: Past Performance Questionnaire Spiral 4 RFP N00244-24-R-0003
Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) SECTION 1: Contract Identification A. Contractor:
B. Contractor Cage Code (at award):
C. Solicitation Number:
D. Contract number:
E. Contract type:
F. Was this a competitive acquisition? Yes No
G. Period of performance:
H. Contract Award Amount: $
I. Current/Final Contract Obligation Amount: $
J. Description of service provided:
SECTION 2: Evaluator Identification Information A. Evaluator's name:
B. Evaluator's title:
C. Evaluator’s organization:
D. Evaluator's email:
E. Alternate Point of Contact (POC) and email:
SECTION 3: Relevant Wireless Mobility Service Experience
| EXPERIENCE ELEMENT |
| Significant |
| Moderate |
| Minimal |
| None |
Wireless Carrier Services (as applicable)
Paging Services (as applicable)
Usage and Inventory Reporting
Government Dedicated Website/Portals
Please indicate the level of relevance for each “Experience Element” by placing an “X” in the appropriate block.
SECTION 4: Evaluation Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question.
1. Wireless Carrier Services
| Rating Element |
| A |
| B |
| C |
| D |
| N |
1.1 Ability to understand/comply with contract and technical requirements
1.2 Effectiveness of overall wireless carrier services contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the service requirement)
1.3 Schedule –Timeliness of providing services and devices
1.4 Customer Service – Offeror was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)
2. Paging Services
| Rating Element |
| A |
| B |
| C |
| D |
| N |
1.1 Ability to understand/comply with contract and technical requirements
1.2 Effectiveness of overall paging service contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the service requirement)
1.3 Schedule –Timeliness of providing services and devices
1.4 Customer Service – Offeror was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)
The Performance Rating Scale is described as follows:
| RATING |
| DESCRIPTION |
| A |
| The offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contract(s) met contractual requirements and exceeded some requirements to benefit the Government. The assessed performance was accomplished with no problems for which corrective actions are expected to be required. Performance was consistently of the highest quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to an extremely strong expectation of successful performance |
| B |
| The offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contract(s) met contractual requirements and exceeded some requirements to benefit the Government. The assessed performance was accomplished with very few or minor problems for which corrective actions taken by, or proposed to be taken, the offeror are highly effective. Performance was consistently of the highest quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to an extremely strong expectation of successful performance. |
| C |
| The offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contract(s) met contractual requirements. The assessed performance was accomplished with some problems for which corrective actions taken by, or proposed to be taken, the offeror are effective. Performance was consistently of adequate or better quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to an expectation of successful performance. |
| D |
| The offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contract(s) did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery did not occur within the period of performance. The assessed performance reflected serious problem for which the offeror failed to either identify or implement corrective actions, or corrective actions implemented/ proposed, were mostly ineffective. Performance was consistently of poor quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to a strong expectation that successful performance will not be achieved or that it can occur only with greatly increased levels of government management and oversight. |
NEUTRAL
(N) The offeror lacks a record of relevant or available past performance history. There is no expectation of either successful or unsuccessful performance based on the offeror’s past performance record.
SECTION 5: Narrative Summary A. What were the offeror’s greatest strengths in the performance of the contract?
B. What were the offeror’s greatest weaknesses in the performance of the contract?
C. Would you have any reservation about awarding to this offeror in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding requirements?
Yes No If yes, provide an explanation: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ D. Please provide any additional comments concerning this offeror’s performance.
Evaluator’s Signature
Date
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance.
Please email a copy of this completed questionnaire to juana.m.perez2.civ@us.navy.mil and christine.m.jordan14.civ@us.navy.mil.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .