36C25718R0346-004.docx
DOCX document 26 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Design-Build Visitor Parking Garage (674-280)
- Solicitation number
- 36C25718R0346
About this file
This document contains a past performance evaluation questionnaire and information about a federal contract opportunity for a design-build parking garage project. The past performance questionnaire seeks input on a contractor's compliance, management, personnel use, scheduling, safety, communication, problem-solving, financial stability, responsiveness to notices, and overall performance on a previous project. It will be used to evaluate contractors for a competitive solicitation from the Central Texas Veterans Health Care System to design and construct a parking garage at the Temple VA Medical Center in Temple, Texas. The opportunity involves providing all labor, materials, tools, and design-build services to design and build the parking garage within 365 calendar days of the notice to proceed for an estimated cost between $5-10 million. The project is set aside 100% for Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses.
36C25718R0346 PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE.docx
View the file
Other files
Show all 49
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 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
PARKING GARAGE PHASE II DESIGN/BUILD PROJECT SOLICITIATION
PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE
Your Company Letterhead
| Date: | _________________ |
| To: | ______________________________________ |
We have listed your firm as a reference for the work we have performed for you as listed below. Our firm has submitted a proposal under a project advertised by the Department of Veterans Affairs- Central Texas Health Care System, Olin E. Teague Veterans Medical Center, Temple, Texas.
In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), they will evaluate our firm's past performance. Your candid response to the attached questionnaire will assist the evaluation team in this process. We understand that you have a busy schedule and your participation in this evaluation is greatly appreciated. Please complete the enclosed questionnaire as thoroughly as possible. Space is provided for comments. Understand that while the responses to this questionnaire may be released to the offeror, FAR 15.306 (e) (4) prohibits the release of the names of the persons providing the responses. Complete confidentiality will be maintained. Only one response from each office is required.
Please send your completed questionnaire to the following address to arrive NOT LATER THAN March 20, 2018. DO NOT return them to our company.
Network Contracting Office (NCO) 17 Attn.: Camille Dye, Contract Specialist 2002 Scott Blvd Temple, TX 76504 Or email to: Camille.dye@va.gov If you have questions regarding the attached questionnaire, or require assistance, please contact the Contracting Officer at (254) 899-6042 Thank you for your assistance.
Signature and Title
RATING DEFINITION
E- Exceptional Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation exceeded that required by the contract.
VG-Very Good Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation met all contractual requirements.
S-Satisfactory Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation met essentially all contractual requirements.
M-Marginal Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation met some of the contractual requirements. However, changes to the contractor’s existing processes may be necessary in order to achieve contract requirements.
U-Unsatisfactory Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation failed to meet the minimum government requirements.
N-Neutral Past performance for a contractor who has no identifiable past performance record will be evaluated as Neutral.
1. How would you rate the Offeror’s compliance with the contract requirements?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. How would you rate the effectiveness of the Offeror’s on-site management?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. How would you rate the Offeror’s use of appropriate personnel for contract requirements?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
| 1. How would you rate the Offeror’s timeliness in submission of schedule? | Reports? Submittals? | ||||
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. How would you rate the Offeror’s adherence to the construction schedule?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. How would you rate the Offeror’s responsiveness towards safety issues?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. How would you rate the Offeror’s ability to effectively deal with the customer and other Government personnel?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. How would you rate the Offeror’s cooperativeness in solving problems and negotiating changes?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. How would you rate the Offeror’s abilities to address any financial difficulties (i.e., payment of subcontractors and/or vendors, labor disputes, etc.)?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
| 1. How would you rate the Offeror’s responsiveness to cure notices, show | cause letters, suspension of payment, or termination notices? | ||||
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. As the end user/customer, how would you rate your satisfaction with the end product?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. How would you rate the Offeror’s overall performance on this project?
| E | VG | S | M | U | N (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
1. Would you recommend or use this contractor again?
| E | VG | S | M | U | (circle one) |
| REMARKS: |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .