PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE-PPQ.docx
DOCX document 19 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Z2DA-- Construct Campus Perimeter Barrier for Physical Security, 657A5-23-114 Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 36C25524R0105
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) template. The PPQ is used to evaluate a contractor's prior work performance on a federal government contract. The questionnaire covers key areas such as the quality of the working relationship with the client, the professionalism and integrity of the contractor, responsiveness to the client's needs, project management abilities, communication, quality control, and whether the project was delivered within budget and on schedule. The evaluator is asked to rate the contractor's performance on a scale of Outstanding, Above Average, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unacceptable, and to provide supporting comments. The questionnaire also asks if the evaluator would award another contract to the contractor and for an overall rating.
The related federal contract opportunity is for the Construct Campus Perimeter Barrier for Physical Security, Solicitation Number 36C25524R0105, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Veterans Integrated Service Network 15. The contract is for construction services.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 36C25524R0105 0003.docx | DOCX document | |
| Floor Plans and Panels.pdf | ||
| 36C25524R0105 0002.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C25524R0105 0001.docx | DOCX document | |
| Pre-Bid Site Visit Attendance Roster 657A5-23-114.pdf | ||
| 36C25524R0105_1.docx | DOCX document | |
| P09 2024-06-06 - 100 percent Final Drawings - 26 pages.pdf | ||
| P09 657A5-23-114 - Specifications 958 PAGES.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 QUESTIONNAIRE
1. Contractor Information
Firm Name:
Address:
Phone Number:
Point of Contact:
Contact Phone Number:
DUNs Number:
2. Work Performed as: |_| Prime Contractor |_| Sub Contractor |_| Joint Venture |_| Other
Percent of project work performed:
If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):
3. Contract Information Contract Number:
Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):
Contract Type: |_| Firm Fixed Price |_| Cost Reimbursement |_| Other (Please specify):
Contract Title:
Contract Location:
Project Description:
Complexity of Work |_| High |_| Med |_| Routine Award Date (mm/dd/yy):
Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):
Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):
Explain Differences:
Original Contract Price (Award Amount):
Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):
Explain Differences:
Rating: Please evaluate the past performance using only the following ratings without variation. DO NOT RATE ON A “+” OR “-“ SCALE. If a “+” or “-“ is used, the rating without the "+" or "-" will be applied. In addition to the ratings, please provide a short narrative in the appropriate block or in the remarks section of this form.
| “O” |
| Outstanding |
| The Offeror’s performance met contractual requirements and exceeded many requirements to the Client’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the offeror were highly effective. |
| “A” |
| Above Average |
| The Offeror’s performance met contractual requirements and exceeded some requirements to the Client’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the offeror were effective. |
| “S” |
| Satisfactory |
| The Offeror’s performance met contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the offeror were satisfactory. |
| “M” |
| Marginal |
| Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. Performance indicated that there are some potential risks associated with the quality products, timeliness of service, and contract performance. |
| “U” |
| Unacceptable |
| Performance did not meet contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflected a serious problem for which the offeror has yet to identify corrective actions or the offeror’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
Please rate and provide any supporting information/comments for the following:
| 1. The quality of the working relationship with the client (the tenant and/ or owner). |
| O A S M U |
| 2. The professionalism and integrity with which offeror conducted business. |
| O A S M U |
3. The responsiveness to the client’s needs and expectations.
O A S M U
| 4. The Offeror’s ability to successfully management and perform the project. |
| O A S M U |
| 5. The offeror’s level of communication. |
| O A S M U |
| 6. The quality control of the project. |
| O A S M U |
7. Any Value added to the project as the result of cost savings, favorable financing, positive asset management, etc.
Yes No
| 8. Would you award another contact to the party being evaluated? If no, please explain. |
| Yes No |
| 9. The delivery of the project within the budget and on schedule. |
| O A S M U |
10. Other relevant aspects in the management of a project development for the client.
| 11. Overall rating for this firm: |
| O A S M U |
Signature of Evaluator
Date
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .