2.2.1-RFP - Attachment 3 - Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire.doc
DOC document 56 KB Posted
- Attached to
- FY24 ICE 9MM Luger Caliber Readily Identifiable Training Ammunition Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 70CMSW24R00000010
- Issued by
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement
About this file
The attached document is a Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire associated with a federal contract opportunity for 70,000,000 rounds of 9mm Luger Readily Identifiable Training Ammunition (RITA) over a base year plus four option years. The contract is being solicited by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office for their Office of Firearms and Tactical Program (OFTP) and armed agents in the field. The questionnaire requests the recipient evaluate the contractor's past performance on a similar contract in areas such as customer satisfaction, quality of service, and timeliness of performance. Ratings range from unacceptable to outstanding, and the completed form will be treated as source selection information. The questionnaire must be returned by a specific deadline to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 1.2.1- RFP_Attachment 5 - Sample Subcontracting Plan_r1.doc | DOC document | |
| 2.2.1-RFP_70CMSW24R00000010_RITA.pdf | ||
| 2.2.1-RFP - Attachment 7 - RFP Questions Template.docx | DOCX document | |
| 2.2.1-RFP - Attachment 1 - Statement of Work.pdf | ||
| 2.2.1-RFP - Attachment 4 - Pricing Schedule.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 2.2.1-RFP - Attachment 5 - Sample Subcontracting Plan.doc | DOC document | |
| 2.2.1-RFP - Attachment 2 - Ordering Procedures.docx | DOCX document | |
| 2.2.1-RFP - Attachment 6 – Sample Scoring Sheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
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
RFP #: 70CMSW24R00000010
Attachment 3
CONTRACTOR-PROVIDED LETTER
REQUESTING PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE
RFP #70CMSW24R00000010
DATE:
Company Name/Address
FAX:
PHONE:
SUBJECT:
Past Performance of
Contract No.
Mr./Ms.:
Our company recently completed or is currently engaged under the above contract, which we provided ammunition for your Agency. The requirements of this contract were similar to the requirements of a solicitation for which we have submitted a proposal to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
As part of the proposal evaluation, I ask that you evaluate our performance under the subject contract by completing the attached questionnaire form and emailing directly to the Contracting Officer, Mona Mehta at Mona.Mehta@ice.dhs.gov and CC Contract Specialist, Denise Bowie at Denise.Bowie@ice.dhs.gov no later than Weekday, Month XX, 2024 at 12:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST). Please provide rationale for the assigned ratings, particularly the ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory. The completed form will be marked and treated as “Source Selection Information” in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 3.104, Procurement Integrity, and it will not be released except to Government personnel needing the information for source selection purposes or to your Agency for comments during the source selection process.
Your cooperation and expeditious attention in this matter is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely
Title:
Company:
Name of Proposed Contractor: ____________________
Contract No.:
Name of Rater: _______________________
Phone No.: ________________
Contract Type: _______________________
Place of Performance: ________________
Performance Period: __________________
Contract Dollar Amount:
1. Adjectival Definitions:
Neutral - No past performance available for evaluation. The offeror has asserted that is has no directly related or similar relevant past performance experience. The offeror receives no merit for this factor.
Outstanding – Based on the offeror’s record of past performance, no issues, concerns, or risks are associated with receiving acceptable ammunition in a timely manner. Past performance surveys and offeror’s experiences indicate that the offeror is capable of meeting the delivery requirements.
Acceptable – Based on the offeror’s record of past performance, few issues, concerns, or risks are associated with receiving acceptable ammunition in a timely manner. Past performance surveys and offeror’s experiences indicate that the offeror is capable of meeting the delivery requirements.
Unacceptable – The offeror’s record of past performance indicates it will be unable to deliver acceptable ammunition in a timely manner.
Please circle each of the areas below of the contractor’s past performance based on the comments provided by the customer.
2. Customer Satisfaction Commitment: To what degree was the Contractor considered responsive to and cooperative with customer personnel?
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
Narrative Summary:
3. Quality of Service: This area of the questionnaire deals with compliance of contract requirements, to include appropriateness of personnel and technical excellence.
3.a Overall compliance with contract terms and conditions:
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
3.b Effectiveness and reliability of Contractor’s Key Personnel.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
3.c Adequacy of maintaining and controlling Government equipment.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4. Timeliness of Performance: This is the area that deals with the contractor’s ability to meet milestones and delivery schedule, to include responsiveness to technical direction, completion of efforts on time including wrap-up and contract administration.
4.a Overall performance in planning, schedule, and monitoring.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.b Completion of major milestones on schedule:
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.c Responsiveness to contract changes from a contract administration perspective.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.d Responsiveness to changes in technical direction.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.e Timely completion of efforts within period of performance.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.f Responsiveness/capability to respond to urgent/short term requirements.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.g Efficiency in meeting cost targets without experiencing overruns.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.h Ability to control costs through the use of evolving technology mixed with Commercial Off-The-Shelf technologies.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.i Effectively assess impacts of changes on other associated projects, task and efforts.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.j Appropriately choose effective subcontractors and teaming partners and maintain good business relationships.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.k Ability to solve contract performance problems without extensive guidance from Government personnel.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.l Effectiveness in interfacing with Government personnel.
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
4.m Has the Contractor ever been given a cure notice, a show cause notice, suspension of progress payments, or other letters directing the correction of a performance problem?
Yes_________
No____________
If yes, please explain:
4.n Changes in contract dollars value throughout the life of the contract are/were attributable, for the most part, to:
( ) Government-issued change orders
( ) claims submitted by the Contractor
( ) other Government actions
( ) other contractor actions.
Please explain:
4.o Based on this Contractor’s overall performance, would you award this Contractor another Government contract?
Yes________
No___________
If no, please explain:
5. Overall rating for this offeror:
| Unacceptable |
| Acceptable |
| Outstanding |
| Neutral |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .