Att.4_Past Performance Questionnaire_REV-01.pdf
PDF 281 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Strip & Paint - Bombardier Challenger 605/650 Series
- Solicitation number
- 6973GH-22-R-00006
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire and scoring key for evaluation of contractor performance on federal contracts. The questionnaire requires references to rate contractors on six criteria: quality and timeliness of service, cost control, business relations and effective management, customer satisfaction, and integrity. Ratings are assigned for each sub-element on a scale of 0 to 4, with definitions provided. The scoring key then translates each rating to a numeric score. The questionnaire also includes fields for contract and contractor identification, the reference's contact information, and comment sections. An additional form is provided to record questionnaire responses, calculate average scores and ratings for each criterion and overall, and assess recency and relevancy for the past performance being considered.
This federal contract opportunity is a solicitation for strip, prime and painting services for up to four Bombardier CL-605 and 650 series aircraft belonging to the Federal Aviation Administration flight program. Interested parties must register in the System for Award Management and submit responses by the specified due date. The acquisition will result in a firm-fixed-price contract awarded based on a best value determination to the technically acceptable contractor meeting minimum specifications. The primary NAICS code is provided along with other eligibility and response requirements.
View the file
Other files
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
- SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE -
CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE Questionnaires for subcontractors cannot be submitted for work done for the prime contractor.
PAST PERFORMANCE PROJECT INFORMATION (To be filled out by the Offeror):
CONTRACTOR NAME:
CONTRACT NUMBER:
ORDER NUMBER (if applicable):
PROJECT TITLE:
TOTAL PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE,
INCLUDING OPTIONS : MM/YYYY –
MM/YYYY OR Present
TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE:
CONTRACT TYPE:
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
PERFORMED:
PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCE INFORMATION (To be filled out by the RATER/CUSTOMER):
NAME:
TITLE:
AGENCY OR CUSTOMER:
PHONE:
E-MAIL:
SIGNATURE OF RATER: (Rater must be provided by a Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer Representative or Corporate Officer with cognizance over the project for the ordering activity.
Evaluation Plan Overview
SIR 6973GH-22-R-00006
NOTE TO RATER/CUSTOMER:
DO NOT return this questionnaire to the Offeror. Please submit only to the Contracting officer via email: helaina.k.germosen@faa.gov.
Please provide you response no later than Thursday, 30 December, 2021
For each of the six (6) criteria listed below, the rater must choose one (1) Adjectival Rating by checking the box, as applicable. At a minimum, for any rating that is checked as equivalent to unsatisfactory, please submit additional comments to substantiate the rating.
For any rating that would be Not Applicable, please explain why it does not apply.
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
1. Quality/Timeliness of Service.
a. How would you rate the contractor's general overall compliance with contract requirements?
Considerably surpassed minimum requirements ( ) Exceeded minimum requirements ( ) Met minimum requirements ( ) Less than minimum requirements ( ) Not Applicable ( )
b. How would you rate the timeliness of the Contractor's service - delivered reports on time and adhering to the required schedule?
Considerably surpassed minimum requirements ( ) Exceeded minimum requirements ( ) Met minimum requirements ( ) Less than minimum requirements ( ) Not Applicable ( )
c. Did the contractor commit adequate resources in timely fashion to meet contract requirements?
Provided abundant resources ( ) Provided sufficient resources ( ) Provided minimal resources ( ) Provided insufficient resources ( ) Not Applicable ( )
d. Did the contractor commit adequate resources in timely fashion to solve problems?
Provided abundant resources ( ) Provided sufficient resources ( ) Provided minimal resources ( ) Provided insufficient resources ( ) Not Applicable ( )
e. How would you rate the contractor on the timeliness of its responses to inquiries or other administrative matters?
Extremely timely ( ) Generally timely ( ) Generally not timely ( ) Seldom timely ( ) Not applicable ( )
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION
Evaluation Plan Overview
SIR 6973GH-22-R-00006
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
2. Cost Control.
a. If applicable, to what extent did the contractor meet the proposed cost estimates?
Less than estimated cost ( ) Comparatively equal to estimate ( ) Exceeded the costs ( ) Considerably surpassed estimate ( ) Not applicable ( )
b. How would you rate the contractor's initiative, if any, in reducing overall costs to the Government?
Extremely efficient ( ) Generally efficient ( ) Generally inefficient ( ) Extremely inefficient ( ) Not applicable ( )
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
3. Business Relations - Effective Management.
a. To what extent was the contractor able to solve contract performance problems without extensive guidance from government (or entity with requirement) counterparts?
Considerably successful ( ) Generally successful ( ) Little Success ( ) No success ( ) Not applicable ( )
b. To what extent did the contractor display initiative in meeting contract requirements?
Displayed considerable initiative ( ) Displayed some initiative ( ) Displayed little initiative ( ) Displayed no initiative ( ) Not applicable ( )
c. Was the contractor's selection and use of personnel appropriate for the performance of this contract?
Provided highly qualified personnel ( ) Provided qualified personnel ( ) Provided minimal personnel ( ) Provided insufficient personnel ( ) Not applicable ( )
d. To what extent was the contractor effective in interfacing with the Government's (or other) staff?
Extremely effective ( ) Generally effective ( ) Generally ineffective ( ) Extremely ineffective ( ) Not applicable ( )
e. Has this contract been partially or completely terminated for default, or is a termination pending?
( ) Yes ( ) No
f. Has it ever been necessary to send this Contractor a Notice to Cure letter?
( ) Yes ( ) No
CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
g. How would you rate the performance of the contractor's key personnel?
Extremely effective ( ) Generally effective ( ) Generally ineffective ( ) Extremely ineffective ( ) Not applicable ( )
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
4. Customer Satisfaction.
a. To what extent did the contractor provide timely assistance, when responding to problems?
Considerably surpassed minimum requirements ( ) Exceeded minimum requirements ( ) Met minimum requirements ( ) Less than minimum requirements ( ) Not applicable ( )
b. How would you rate the contractor's response to inquiries related to administrative issues?
Displayed considerable initiative ( ) Displayed some initiative ( ) Displayed little initiative ( ) Displayed no initiative ( ) Not applicable ( )
c. Would you select this contractor again?
( ) Yes ( ) No
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
5. Integrity.
a. Did you experience any integrity problems with this Contractor?
( ) Yes ( ) No
b. Did the contractor maintain integrity during contract performance?
( ) Yes ( ) No
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
6. Please provide any other comments you may have.
CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE SCORING KEY
1. Quality/Timeliness of Service.
a. How would you rate the contractor's general overall compliance with contract requirements?
Considerably surpassed minimum requirements ( ) 4 Exceeded minimum requirements ( ) 3 Met minimum requirements ( ) 2 Less than minimum requirements ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
b. How would you rate the timeliness of the Contractor's service - delivered reports on time and adhering to the required schedule?
Considerably surpassed minimum requirements ( ) 4 Exceeded minimum requirements ( ) 3 Met minimum requirements ( ) 2 Less than minimum requirements ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
c. Did the contractor commit adequate resources in timely fashion to meet contract requirements?
Provided abundant resources ( ) 4 Provided sufficient resources ( ) 3 Provided minimal resources ( ) 2 Provided insufficient resources ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
d. Did the contractor commit adequate resources in timely fashion to solve problems?
Provided abundant resources ( ) 4 Provided sufficient resources ( ) 3 Provided minimal resources ( ) 2 Provided insufficient resources ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
e. How would you rate the contractor on the timeliness of its responses to inquiries or other administrative matters?
Extremely timely ( ) 4 Generally timely ( ) 3 Generally not timely ( ) 2 Seldom timely ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE SCORING KEY
2. Cost Control.
a. If applicable, to what extent did the contractor meet the proposed cost estimates?
Less than estimated cost ( ) 4 Comparatively equal to estimate ( ) 3 Exceeded the costs ( ) 2 Considerably surpassed estimate ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
b. How would you rate the contractor's initiative, if any, in reducing overall costs to the Government?
Extremely efficient ( ) 4 Generally efficient ( ) 3 Generally inefficient ( ) 2 Extremely inefficient ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE SCORING KEY
3. Business Relations - Effective Management.
a. To what extent was the contractor able to solve contract performance problems without extensive guidance from government (or entity with requirement) counterparts?
Considerably successful ( ) 4 Generally successful ( ) 3 Little Success ( ) 2 No success ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
b. To what extent did the contractor display initiative in meeting contract requirements?
Displayed considerable initiative ( ) 4 Displayed some initiative ( ) 3 Displayed little initiative ( ) 2 Displayed no initiative ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
c. Was the contractor's selection and use of personnel appropriate for the performance of this contract?
Provided highly qualified personnel ( ) 4 Provided qualified personnel ( ) 3 Provided minimal personnel ( ) 2 Provided insufficient personnel ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
d. To what extent was the contractor effective in interfacing with the Government's (or other) staff?
Extremely effective ( ) 4 Generally effective ( ) 3 Generally ineffective ( ) 2 Extremely ineffective ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
e. Has this contract been partially or completely terminated for default, or is a termination pending?
( ) Yes 1 ( ) No 4
f. Has it ever been necessary to send this Contractor a Notice to Cure letter?
( ) Yes 1 ( ) No 4
CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION
SIR 6973GH-22-R-00006
FORM PPEP C
PAST PERFORMANCE SCORING KEY
g. How would you rate the performance of the contractor's key personnel?
Extremely effective ( ) 4 Generally effective ( ) 3 Generally ineffective ( ) 2 Extremely ineffective ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
4. Customer Satisfaction.
a. To what extent did the contractor provide timely assistance, when responding to problems?
Considerably surpassed minimum requirements ( ) 4 Exceeded minimum requirements ( ) 3 Met minimum requirements ( ) 2 Less than minimum requirements ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
b. How would you rate the contractor's response to inquiries related to administrative issues?
Displayed considerable initiative ( ) 4 Displayed some initiative ( ) 3 Displayed little initiative ( ) 2 Displayed no initiative ( ) 1 Not applicable ( ) 0
c. Would you select this contractor again?
( ) Yes 4 ( ) No 1
5. Integrity.
a. Did you experience any integrity problems with this Contractor?
( ) Yes 1 ( ) No 4
b. Did the contractor maintain integrity during contract performance?
( ) Yes 4 ( ) No 1
SIR 6973GH-22-R-00006
FORM PPEP E
PAST PERFORMANCE SCORING/RATING SHEET
Offeror Name:
Past Performance Questionnaire Reference No.:
Contract No.:
Project Description:
RECENCY DETERMINATION:
RELEVANCY DETERMINATION:
a. Contract requirement compliance
b. Timeliness of service
c. Resource commitment for requirement
d. Resource commitment for problem solving
e. Timeliness of responses
Question 1 Average Score: 0.00 0.00 0.00 Question 1 Acceptability Rating:
a. Meet cost estimates
b. Initiative to reduce costs
Question 2 Average Score: 0.00 0.00 0.00 Question 2 Acceptability Rating:
a. Performance problem solving
b. Initiative to meet requirement
c. Selection and use of personnel
d. Effective interface with Government
e. Contract termination
f. Cure Notice letter issued
g. Key personnel performance
Question 3 Average Score: 0.00 0.00 0.00 Question 3 Acceptability Rating:
a. Timely assistance to problem response
b. Response to administrative issues
c. Select contractor again
Question 4 Average Score: 0.00 0.00 0.00 Question 4 Acceptability Rating:
a. Integrity problems experienced
b. Integrity maintained during contract performance
Question 5 Average Score: 0.00 0.00 0.00 Question 5 Acceptability Rating:
TOTAL FACTOR AVERAGE SCORE: 0.00 0.00 0.00
TOTAL FACTOR ACCEPTIBILITY RATING: 0.00 0.00 0.00
Question 5 - Integrity
Question 1 - Quality and Timeliness of Service
Question 2 - Cost Control
Question 3 - Business Relations - Effective Management
Question 4 - Customer Satisfaction
Note: The above Excel spreadsheet must be modified to add columns for the appropriate number of questionnaire responses received.
Untitled
| CONTRACTOR NAME: |
| CONTRACT NUMBER: |
| ORDER NUMBER if applicable: |
| PROJECT TITLE: |
| TOTAL PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE INCLUDING OPTIONS MMYYYY MMYYYY OR Present: |
| TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE: |
| CONTRACT TYPE: |
| DESCRIPTION OF WORK PERFORMED: |
| NAME: |
| TITLE: |
| AGENCY OR CUSTOMER: |
| PHONE: |
| EMAIL: |
| SIGNATURE OF RATER Rater must be provided by a Contracting Officer Contracting Officer Representative or Corporate Officer with cognizance over the project for the ordering activity: |
| ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: |
| ADDITIONAL COMMENTS_2: |
| ADDITIONAL COMMENTS_3: |
| ADDITIONAL COMMENTS_4: |
| ADDITIONAL COMMENTS_5: |
| undefined: |
| Offeror Name: |
| Past Performance Questionnaire Reference No: |
| Contract No: |
| Project Description: |
| RECENCY DETERMINATION: |
| RELEVANCY DETERMINATION: |
| Question 1 Quality and Timeliness of Service: |
| a Contract requirement compliance: |
| b Timeliness of service: |
| c Resource commitment for requirement: |
| d Resource commitment for problem solving: |
| e Timeliness of responses: |
| 000Question 1 Acceptability Rating: |
| 000Question 1 Acceptability Rating_2: |
| 000Question 1 Acceptability Rating_3: |
| 000Question 2 Cost Control: |
| 000Question 2 Cost Control_2: |
| a Meet cost estimates: |
| 000a Meet cost estimates: |
| 000a Meet cost estimates_2: |
| b Initiative to reduce costs: |
| 000b Initiative to reduce costs: |
| 000b Initiative to reduce costs_2: |
| 000Question 2 Acceptability Rating: |
| 000Question 2 Acceptability Rating_2: |
| 000Question 2 Acceptability Rating_3: |
| Question 3 Business Relations Effective Management: |
| 000Question 3 Business Relations Effective Management: |
| 000Question 3 Business Relations Effective Management_2: |
| 000a Performance problem solving: |
| 000a Performance problem solving_2: |
| b Initiative to meet requirement: |
| 000b Initiative to meet requirement: |
| 000b Initiative to meet requirement_2: |
| c Selection and use of personnel: |
| 000c Selection and use of personnel: |
| 000c Selection and use of personnel_2: |
| d Effective interface with Government: |
| 000d Effective interface with Government: |
| 000d Effective interface with Government_2: |
| e Contract termination: |
| 000e Contract termination: |
| 000e Contract termination_2: |
| f Cure Notice letter issued: |
| 000f Cure Notice letter issued: |
| 000f Cure Notice letter issued_2: |
| g Key personnel performance: |
| 000g Key personnel performance: |
| 000g Key personnel performance_2: |
| 000Question 3 Acceptability Rating: |
| 000Question 3 Acceptability Rating_2: |
| 000Question 3 Acceptability Rating_3: |
| 000Question 4 Customer Satisfaction: |
| 000Question 4 Customer Satisfaction_2: |
| a Timely assistance to problem response: |
| 000a Timely assistance to problem response: |
| 000a Timely assistance to problem response_2: |
| b Response to administrative issues: |
| 000b Response to administrative issues: |
| 000b Response to administrative issues_2: |
| c Select contractor again: |
| 000c Select contractor again: |
| 000c Select contractor again_2: |
| 000Question 4 Acceptability Rating: |
| 000Question 4 Acceptability Rating_2: |
| 000Question 4 Acceptability Rating_3: |
| 000Question 5 Integrity: |
| 000Question 5 Integrity_2: |
| a Integrity problems experienced: |
| Question 5 IntegrityRow1: |
| 000Row3: |
| 000Row3_2: |
| Question 5 IntegrityRow2: |
| 000Row4: |
| 000Row4_2: |
| 000Question 5 Acceptability Rating: |
| 000Question 5 Acceptability Rating_2: |
| 000Question 5 Acceptability Rating_3: |
| TOTAL FACTOR ACCEPTIBILITY RATING: |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .