2.04 Attachment 1 (Past Performance Questionnaire).pdf
PDF 510 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Ready Relevant Learning (RRL) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- N6883624Q0008
About this file
This document is a past performance reference questionnaire template for a federal contractor. It requests ratings and feedback on a contractor's past performance on five criteria: quality of products/services, ability to control costs, timeliness of delivery, ability to meet special needs, and management of subcontractors. The questionnaire provides rating definitions for exceptional, very good, satisfactory, marginal, and unsatisfactory performance. It outlines sections for ratings, additional narrative justification from the rater, and their signature with contact information. The related federal contract opportunity is a solicitation from the Naval Supply Systems Command for the Ready Relevant Learning program. No further details are provided on products/services required, response dates, or award dates.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 1.13 Attachment 2 (DD254).pdf | ||
| 2.04 Request for Quote - N6883624Q0008.pdf | ||
| 1.12 Attachment 3 (CDRL_DD Form 1423-1_RRL Support).pdf |
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 REFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE
REQUIREMENT:
Contractor:
Contract Number:
Contract Name:
Rater Name:
Rater Telephone:
Rater E‐Mail Address:
Rater’s Role in Relation to the Contract (program/project manager, contracting officer, major end user, etc.):
Rating Definition Note
Exceptional
(E)
Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded many to the government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
To justify an “exceptional” rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone merits an “exceptional” rating. In addition, there should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
Very Good
(VG)
Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded some to the government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
To justify a “very good” rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
Satisfactory
(S)
Performance met contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub element contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appeared to be or were satisfactory.
Marginal
(M)
Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub element being evaluated reflected a serious problem for which the contractor did not identify corrective actions.
The contractor’s proposed actions were only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.
To justify a “marginal” performance rating, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it affected the government. A “marginal” rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency
(e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).
Unsatisfactory
(U)
Performance did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery was not accomplished in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub element contained a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.
To justify an “unsatisfactory” rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it affected the government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone merits an
“unsatisfactory” rating. An
“unsatisfactory” rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter
INDEX
Section I – Ratings
Section II – Additional Narrative
Justification
Section III – Signature of Rater
Section IV – Return Instructions
Section V – Contact Information
Please provide any relevant information to support the above ratings.
Section I Contractor Performance Response
1. How would you rate the quality of the contractor’s products/services provided? Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
2. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to control costs? Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
3. How would you rate the contractor’s timeliness of the products/services delivered? Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
4. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to meet special needs (such as expedited delivery or crisis support) for delivery requirements?
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
5. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to effectively manage, coordinate, and integrate subcontractors?
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
Section II
Additional Supporting Narrative: <Include the number of the question to which this support narrative applies. Additional pages may be used.>
Section III
Signature of rater: _______________________________________ Date:__________________________
Section IV
Please have the questionnaire completed prior to the solicitation close date.
Section V
For any questions pertaining to the questionnaire, please contact:
| REQUIREMENT: |
| Contractor: |
| Contract Number: |
| Contract Name: |
| Rater Name: |
| Rater Telephone: |
| Rater EMail Address: |
| Additional Supporting Narrative Include the number of the question to which this support narrative applies Additional pages may be used: |
| Please have the questionnaire completed prior to the solicitation close date: |
| For any questions pertaining to the questionnaire please contact: |
| Date1_af_date: |
| Check Box2: Off |
| Check Box3: Off |
| Check Box4: Off |
| Check Box5: Off |
| Check Box7: Off |
| Check Box8: Off |
| Check Box9: Off |
| Check Box10: Off |
| Check Box11: Off |
| Check Box12: Off |
| Check Box13: Off |
| Check Box14: Off |
| Check Box15: Off |
| Check Box16: Off |
| Check Box17: Off |
| Check Box18: Off |
| Check Box19: Off |
| Check Box20: Off |
| Check Box21: Off |
| Check Box22: Off |
| Check Box23: Off |
| Check Box24: Off |
| Check Box25: Off |
| Check Box26: Off |
| Check Box27: Off |
| Check Box28: Off |
| Check Box29: Off |
| Check Box30: Off |
| Check Box31: Off |
| Check Box32: Off |
| Text1: |
| Text2: |
| Text3: |
| Text4: |
| Text5: |
| Text6: |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .