4 PPQ FA520920R0009 20200805.pdf
PDF 535 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA520920R0009
About this file
This document includes a past performance questionnaire and solicitation for a multiple award IDIQ contract. The United States Air Force is seeking proposals for office, executive, conference, and housing furniture purchase and installation services worldwide in Japan. Offerors must have experience providing design, space planning, delivery, and installation services. The questionnaire is to be completed by references for past performance evaluation and must be returned by August 28, 2020. The solicitation seeks furniture, fixtures, and related services for Yokota Air Base, Kadena Air Base, and Misawa Air Base. The services required include new furniture installation, executive and conference furniture, housing furniture, layout design, disposal of existing items, and meeting commercial and regulatory standards.
View the file
Other files
Show all 19
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
Attachment 4 Solicitation No. FA520920R0009
MEMORANDUM FOR CONTRACTING ACTIVITY
FROM: 374 CONS/PKS
Unit 5228, Bldg. 620, Yokota Air Base Fussa-shi, Tokyo, Japan
SUBJECT: Past Performance Questionnaire
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (関係者のみ閲覧可)
The 374 CONS/PKS of the United States Air Force, Yokota Air Base, Japan is in the process of competitively selecting a source for Multiple Award IDIQ Japan-wide Office Furniture (Systems and Modular Furniture), Cubicles Furniture, Executive Office and Conference Furniture, and a Variety of Housing/Dorm Furniture Purchase & Installation covering the Areas, Yokota AB, Kadena AB, and Misawa AB, Japan
One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offerors' past performance on contracts or other work efforts, which reflect the offeror's ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from organizations such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with the offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror's performance on those contracts or work efforts.
Our areas of interest regarding the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. Our schedule is extremely tight and we desire your written response no later than (28 Aug 2020). This schedule will allow us sufficient time to analyze the data.
To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to madison.tikalsky.1@us.af.mil and kiyomi.okamura.jp@us.af.mil. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records.
Your assistance is greatly appreciated and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this Source Selection.
在⽇⽶軍横⽥基地契約中隊では、⼊札番号、FA520920R0000, 横⽥基地、嘉⼿納基地、ならびに三沢
基地を含めた空軍基地内のオフィス家具の買い付けとその設置、基地内の幹部組織の家具の買い付けと及 びその設置、さらに軍属の⽅々の住宅において使⽤する家具、また独⾝寮等で使⽤する家具の買い付け等に 関する委託業務のための請負業者を選定しております。⼊札審査の⼀環として、⼊札参加業者の「要求さ れ ている家具及びその設置、またデザイン・レイアウト等の業務をを⾏う能⼒」を確認します。その際、貴社のよう な、既にその業者との取引のある発注者からの情報を参考にさせていただいております。質問内容につきまして は、添付のアンケートをご覧ください。お⼿数ではございますが、添付のアンケートを 2020 年 8 ⽉ 28 ⽇までに 記
Solicitation No. FA520920R0001
⼊をし、当⽅まで送っていただけると幸いです。アンケートに対する回答はワードで作成し、そのまま madison.tikalsky.1@us.af.mi 及び kiyomi.okamura.jp@us.af.mil
までメール送信してください。また、ご質問等ございましたら、いつでも問い合わせていただいて結構です。いただい たアンケートは業者選定の公式書類のひとつとなります。ご協⼒に感謝いたします。
JOSHUA B. GRUBB
Contracting Officer
1 Atch:
Recent (Present)/ Past Performance Questionnaire
RECENT (PRESENT)/PAST PERFORMANCE SURVEY
履⾏履歴調査票
FROM: 374 CONS/PKS
Unit 5228, Bldg 620 Yokota Air Base Fussa-shi Tokyo 197-0001
1. INSTRUCTION: The contractor, who sent this survey, has provided the following project as a reference for their present/past performance. Please provide frank, concise comments regarding your assessment of the contractor’s performance regarding this project. When responding to the descriptive statements, choose the rating that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation.
The ratings correspond with the following descriptive values. In accordance with FAR 15.306(e)(4), the names of individuals providing reference information about an offeror’s past performance shall not be disclosed. 横⽥基地契約中隊では在⽇⽶軍の業務委託契約において応札業者の受注実績とその履⾏内 容を落札の選定基準に加えております。つきましては貴殿の率直で簡潔なご意⾒を頂きたく添付の調査票を お送りした次第です。下記の説明に最も近いと思われる評価を項⽬別にご回答願います。尚、⽶国連邦調 達規則に則り回答者のお名前は公表いたしません。
RATING SCALE 評価の⽬安
(E)xceptional (⾮常に優れている): Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the customer’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. 契約内容を満たした上でさらに多くの利益を顧客に与えた。対象となる業務はほとんど問題もなく、 あった場合でも業者の有効な是正措置で問題なく完了した。
(V)ery (G)ood (⼤変満⾜): Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the customer’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. 契約内容を満たした上でさらに、⾼い満⾜が得られた。 対象の業務に軽微な問題が⽣じても、 業者は有効な是正処置を取って完了した。
(S)atisfactory (満⾜): Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. 契約要件は満たしている。履⾏中に軽微な問題が⽣じたが、業 者の是正処置は満⾜であった。
(N)eutral (どちらでもない): Did not observe performance in this area. 履⾏内容に該当なし。
(M)arginal (不満): Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. 履⾏は⼀部不完全であった。対象の業務に、業者の是正⼿段の不備による重⼤な ⽋陥がある。業者の改善策は有効でないか⼗分に実⾏されていないと思われる。
(U)nsatisfactory (⼤変不満): Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-elements being assessed reflects a serious problem for which corrective actions were not accomplished. The contractor did not take any corrective actions. 契約内容を満たしておらず、期間内に改善の⾒込みなし。契 約した業務は完了せず、業者は是正処置を怠った。
2. CONTRACT INFORMATION (応札する業者が記⼊): The below listed contractor has identified they provided or are currently providing services for your company/agency.貴殿との委託業務は以下の通 りです。
a. Contractor (Company/Agency) 契約者:
b. Contractor Address/Phone 契約者の住所・電話番号:
c. Prime contractor or subcontract 主契約者 または 再委託契約者 (元請/下請)
d. Title of Program/Contract 契約件名:
1) Contract Number 契約番号:
2) Period of Performance 契約期間:
3) Services/On-Site Work Provided (explain in detail the type of services provided by the contractor)
業務の内容:
e. Total Contract Amount 契約⾦額:
3. RESPONDENT IDENTIFICATION (回答者、評価者が記⼊): (This information will be kept confidential in accordance with FAR 15.306(e)(4). You may be contacted for additional information pertaining to past or present performance of the contractor identified in section 1 above. ご回答の内容は
公表いたしません。審査の⼿続き上、再度連絡を取らせていただく場合がありますので、ご理解、ご協⼒お願 いします。
a. Company’s Name 会社名:
b. Name and Title お名前と役職:
c. Phone Number 電話番号: _______________ FAX ファックス: ______________
E-mail Address 電⼦メールアドレス: ___________
d. Address 住所: _________________________________________
e. Relationship to Project 契約案件における地位:
f. Length of Involvement in Project 契約案件の担当年数: ______________
g. Date Questionnaire Completed 回答⽇: ___________
4. QUESTIONNAIRE 調査票 (Circle One いずれかに「」を付けてください)
a. (Quality of Work) Were you satisfied with the quality of work performed or items supplied? E VG S N M U
提供されたお仕事や商品の満⾜度はいかがでしたか?
b. (Quality of Work) How effective did the contractor’s quality control and/ E VG S N M U or inspection procedures operate ?
品質管理と作業上の検査⼿順は妥当でしたか?
c. (Timely Performance/Schedule) Did the contractor provide the required service/work in a timely manner and on schedule?
E VG S N M U
契約者の作業は迅速で予定の納期に間に合いましたか?
d. (Effectiveness of Management for Resolution of Issues, Problems, and Customer Complaints) How well did the contractor resolve Issues/ Problems/Customer Complaints, if any?
E VG S N M U
契約者は作業上の懸案、問題解決、苦情処理に⻑けていましたか?
e. (Compliance with the Applicable Rules, Regs, Laws, including Safety Standards) How efficient was the contractor in abiding by all Rules, Regs, Laws, and Safety Standards?
E VG S N M U
契約者の作業は関連する全ての法規や安全基準を守っていましたか?
The following are technical factors related questions: 以下の3つの質問は契約者のテクニカル技能・ス キルに関するものです。必ずお答えをお願いいたします。
f. (Technical Capability of “Design Tasks”) Did your requirement E VG S N M U include “Design Task” which requires the Contractor to provide all designs of furniture layouts (layout design) for the office furniture/executive furniture? Were you satisfied with the “Design Tasks” provided by the Contractor? (契約者のデザインタスク、設計作業能⼒について)
契約者の作業には“デザインタスク・設計作業”は含まれていましたか?オフィス・ファニチャーもしくは
エグゼクティブ・ファニチャーの設置をする際に設計、レイアウト等に関するデザイン、設計図・図案等 も含まれていましたか?提供されたデザイン、設計図に満⾜いたしましたか?
g. (Technical Capability of “Space Planning and Programming”) E VG S N M U Did your requirement include “Space Planning for cubicles and furniture/material selection and programming” as necessary, including all power requirements regarding location of communication, LAN and power junction boxes. The Contractor was responsible for field verifying all dimensions. Were you satisfied with the Contractor’s Space Planning and Programming capability?
(契約者の空間設計 ・計画及びプログラミング能⼒について)
契約者の作業にはキュービクルタイプのオフィス・ファニチャー、
それらの資材・材料選定、プログラミング等のタスクは含まれていましたか?
また、⼀連のタスクの中には、必要に応じて通信ケーブル、LAN ケーブルや
電⼒変換装置に関連する電源等の配置を確保する作業も含まれます。
また、契約者は現場でファニチャー設置のための必要な⼨法をとり、⼊念に確認作業をします。 契約者から提供された空間設計やプログラミングについて満⾜いたしましたか?
h. (Technical Capability of “Delivery Schedule/Installation Plan”) E VG S N M U Did you require the Contractor to provide the “Delivery Schedule/ Installation Plan”? How many days or periods (i.e., 30 days, 60 days, 90 days) did the Contractor request to complete all the tasks?
The schedule includes on-site coordination of staging and deliveries of their product, to include access to and operation of any equipment needed for unloading and movement of materials or product. The schedule shall include the total process identifying each step of the work phase flow chart. Were you satisfied with the “Delivery Schedule/Installation Plan” ?
(契約者のファニチャー納期計画および設置計画に関する能⼒について)
契約者の作業にはファニチャーの納期計画書・設置計画(作業計画書)
の提出が含まれていましたか?納期及び設置計画の期間を教えてください、
例えば、30 ⽇、60 ⽇、或は 90 ⽇というようにお答えください。
この期間は納期及び設置、検査等のすべてのお仕事の完了までの
期間を意味します。また、契約者から提出されたファニチャーの納期計画書・
設置計画の中には材料・資材の現場への配送、搬⼊等、またその際に
必要な装置を確保する必要があります。
配送、搬⼊を含めた作業の流れ、そして完了にいたるまでの⼀連の全ての
作業の流れを作業計画書の中にフローチャートを使ってまとめたものです。
契約者から提出された作業計画書に満⾜されましたか?
i. Would you hire this contractor again? If no, why? YES NO
機会があれば、またこの業者に依頼したいですか?「いいえ」の場合は理由をお聞かせください。
j. Overall Rating 総合評価: E VG S N M U
k. Additional Comments/Remarks その他:
Please e-mail completed questionnaires to the address shown below:
ご回答後、下記電⼦メールアドレスへご返送の程よろしくお願いいたします。
374 CONS/PKS
Unit 5228, Bldg 620 Yokota Air Base Fussa-shi Tokyo 197-0001
Attn: Madison Tikalsky and Kiyomi Okamura
E-mail: madison.tikalsky.1@us.af.mil and kiyomi.okamura.jp@us.af.mil
〒197-0001
東京都 福⽣市 在⽇⽶軍 横⽥基地内
建物番号 620, 374 契約中隊 (PKS 特殊契約課)
電⼦メール: madison.tikalsky.1@us.af.mil and kiyomi.okamura.jp@us.af.mil
| 2020-08-06T13:33:15+0900 | |
| GRUBB.JOSHUA.B.1290196163 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .