2.01d RFP N6264926QB002 Attach 3 Peformance Evaluation Sheet.doc
DOC document 56 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Oily Wastewater Treatment Service
- Solicitation number
- N6264926QB002
About this file
This document is a Contractor's Performance Evaluation Sheet template for a federal contract related to Oily Wastewater Treatment Service. The evaluation form provides a detailed rating system with five adjectival performance levels: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory. Each rating describes the contractor's performance against established standards, with specific criteria defining the probability of successfully completing contract requirements.
The evaluation sheet is part of a competitive, unrestricted solicitation (N6264926QB002) issued by the Department of the Navy Naval Supply Systems Command for oily wastewater treatment services in Japan. The form allows evaluators to assess contractor performance across key areas including statutory compliance, performance compliance, schedule compliance, and communication, with space for comments and official signatures. The comprehensive rating system enables a nuanced assessment of contractor performance, providing a structured method for documenting and rating service quality.
View the file
Other files
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
CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SHEET
1. NAME OF CONTRACTOR:
2. CONTRACT NO.:
3. PERFORMANCE PERIOD OR DATE OF OPERATION:
AREAS TO BE EVALUATED
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Statutory Compliance
Performance Compliance
Schedule Compliance
Communication
COMMENTS:
Name and Title of Evaluator:
Phone No.:
Signature:
Date:
ADJECTIVAL RATINGS:
(a) Exceptional (E): The services performed by the Contractor are considered to have exceeded the performance standards described under “Performance Based Service Contract (PBSC)” and demonstrates a high probability of success without any problems during the remaining period of the contract.
(b) Very Good (VG): The services performed by the Contractor are considered to have satisfied the performance standards and demonstrates a good probability of success during the remaining period of the contract. Even if the Contractor had minor problems on its performance, the Contractor has demonstrated that it could correct such problems without any damage to the Government.
(c) Satisfactory (S): The Contractor’s performance is considered to have substantially met the stated performance standards and demonstrates a good probability of success during the remaining period of the contract. Even if the Contractor had minor problems on its performance, the Contractor has demonstrated that it could correct such problems with minimal damage to the Government. Although some minor inconsistency or weakness exists, it can be readily corrected.
(d) Marginal (M): The Contractor’s performance is considered to have partially failed meeting the stated performance standards, and the response to correct the deficiency was marginal. That is, a substantial number of the Contractor’s performance records responses “good,” but a deficiency or weakness exists, and it/they may be susceptible or correction through the exchange of information. There is marginal probability of success during the remaining period of the contract.
(e) Unsatisfactory (U): The Contractor failed meeting one or more of the stated performance standards, and the failure was considered “major.” Even if the failure was minor, the Contractor did not or could not correct the deficiency properly and/or it adversely affected the Government operation. In such a case, probability to success during the remaining period of the contract is minimal unless a proper corrective action is made.
N6264926QB002
Attachment (II)
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .