7. Factor 2 Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 36 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 36C26126R0034
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) instruction document and template for evaluating contractor performance on the Repair Exterior Finishes Building 1 and OPC project (Solicitation 36C26126R0034) at the Fresno VA Medical Center. The PPQ will be used to assess offerors' past performance on similar construction contracts, with ratings on a five-point scale (Exceptional, Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory, or Neutral/Not Applicable).
Contractors must submit either a completed CPARS evaluation or a fully executed PPQ signed by the contracting agent or representative responsible for construction contract administration. The PPQ requires identification of the contractor being evaluated, contract details (number, value, award and completion dates), and a point of contact with valid phone and email information. Evaluation criteria include seven major performance categories: Quality (technical data preparation, quality standards adherence, problem resolution, and quality control); Schedule/Timeliness (delivery schedule compliance and resource utilization); Customer Satisfaction (end-user satisfaction, contractor cooperation, and overall satisfaction); Management/Personnel/Labor (on-site management, workforce retention, property control, personnel expertise, multi-project management, change management, and overall management effectiveness); Cost/Financial Management (price compliance, cost reduction innovations, invoice timeliness for cost-type contracts, and financial stability); Safety/Security (safety plan adherence and security compliance); and General (emergency response capability, contractual compliance, and overall performance rating). All PPQs must be submitted to Contracting Officer Mr. Rosario Chaidez at Rosario.chaidez1@va.gov by the solicitation due date. The Government reserves the right to verify all submissions for legitimacy and accuracy, and false or misleading information will result in offer rejection.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 36C26126R0034 0004.docx | DOCX document | |
| DBA WD CA20260018 dated 5_18_2026.pdf | ||
| 36C26126R0034 0003.docx | DOCX document | |
| VA Fresno ACM Survey.pdf | ||
| RFI Responses Repair Ext. Finishes FRE.pdf | ||
| 36C26126R0034 0002.docx | DOCX document | |
| Site Visit Sign-in 570-21-108_.pdf | ||
| 36C26126R0034 0001.docx | DOCX document | |
| 1. 570-21-108 Specifications.pdf | ||
| 4. Price Breakdown Worksheet.docx | DOCX document | |
| 3. Requests for Information RFI_ Form.docx | DOCX document | |
| 6. DBA WD CA20260018 dtd 1 30 2026.pdf | ||
| 5. Pre-Proposal Site Visit Information.pptx | PPTX presentation | |
| 36C26126R0034_2.docx | DOCX document | |
| 2. 570-21-108_VA Fresno Exterior Drawings.pdf |
Show all 15
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
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ) INSTRUCTIONS
VA Central California Healthcare System Fresno, CA
The information obtained from this questionnaire will be utilized to evaluate the past performance of offerors submitting proposals in response to the 36C26126R0034 – Repair Exterior Finishes Building 1 and OPC at the Fresno VA Medical Center.
The information you provide will be instrumental in allowing the Government to evaluate how well the contractor performed under your contract(s). If a CPARS evaluation exists for the project, then there will be no requirement for a PPQ; the contractor would simply submit the completed CPARS evaluation with their proposal.
a. Please complete all sections of the attached PPQ questionnaire. Include your full name and title, organizational address, valid e-mail address, and valid telephone number. PPQs must be fully completed and signed by the contracting agent and/or their representative responsible for construction contract administration. Include the contractor’s full name, valid current point of contact (POC) information including phone number, full title and/or description of the type of work performed, the award number, the value of the contract, the award and completion date of the project and type of award.
b. Use the attached rating scale to rate each performance element.
c. Comments are encouraged and would be appreciated. The last page may be used if additional space is needed for comments.
d. If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it must be submitted with the technical proposal. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation, then submit a PPQ (Attachment 7). PPQs will not be accepted from the designer on a design-build project or from a prime contractor for work performed by a subcontractor.
e. If you have any PPQs, they must be submitted by the contracting agent and/or their representative responsible for construction contract administration on or before the solicitation due date, to the Contracting Officer, Mr. Rosario Chaidez, at email: Rosario.chaidez1@va.gov.
NOTE: The Government reserves the right to verify all submitted Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) to ensure their legitimacy and accuracy. Submission of any false, misleading, or inaccurate PPQ information will result in rejection of the offer and may render the PPQ ineligible for any consideration under this solicitation.
Thank you for your time and participation.
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRE RATING SCALE
| RATING: |
| DEFINITION: |
| USAGE: |
| EXCEPTIONAL |
| Performance exceeded many contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with no more than a few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| An EXCEPTIONAL rating is appropriate when the contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit however could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified |
| GOOD |
| Performance exceeded some contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with no more than a few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| A GOOD rating is appropriate when the contractor has successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified. |
| SATISFACTORY |
| Performance met all contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the elements being assessed were accomplished with no more than a few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. |
| A SATISFACTORY rating is appropriate when there were only a few minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. |
| MARGINAL |
| Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully successful. |
| A MARGINAL rating is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner. |
| UNSATISFACTORY |
| Performance did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective. |
| An UNSATISFACTORY rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. |
| Neutral/Not Applicable or Unknown |
| No performance record identifiable within the area of evaluation |
| Performance was not observed or not applicable to the current effort being reported. |
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ)
NAME OF CONTRACTOR BEING EVALUATED:
CONTRACTOR MAIN POINT OF CONTACT INFORMATION:
CONTRACT NUMBER:
CONTRACT VALUE:
| CONTRACTOR PERFORMED WORK AS: |
| CONTRACT AWARD & COMPLETION DATE: |
Prime Contractor Sub- Contractor Key Personnel
PROJECT TITLE AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORK:
RESPONDENT’S PRINTED NAME AND SIGNATURE (MUST BE SIGNED)
FULL ORGANIZATIONAL ADDRESS:
VALID CONTACT PHONE NUMBER:
VALID E-MAIL ADDRESS:
1. QUALITY:
| A. Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| B. Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| C. Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| D. Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance) |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE WHEN COMPLETED
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:
| A. Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| B. Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:
| A. To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| B. Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports and business communication) |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| C. To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike and concerned with the interests of the customer? |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| D. Overall customer satisfaction |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
4. MANAGEMENT/PERSONNEL/LABOR
| A. Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials and/or labor force? |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE WHEN COMPLETED
| B. Ability to hire, apply and retain a qualified workforce to the effort |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| C. Government Property Control |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| D. Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| E. Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines. |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| F. Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| G. Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program) |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
| A. Ability to meet the terms and conditions contractually agreed to price(s)? |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE WHEN COMPLETED
| B. Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced costs, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client. |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| C. If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate backup documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budges and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns) |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| D. Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes please explain below |
| RATING |
| Yes |
| No |
Comments:
6. SAFETY/SECURITY:
A. To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan and respond to safety issues?
(Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)
RATING
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| B. Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements. |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE WHEN COMPLETED
7. GENERAL:
| A. Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM, or Contracting officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues.) |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
| B. Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues) |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
C. Would you hire or work with this firm again (if no, please explain below)
RATING
| Yes |
| No |
| D. In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor. |
| RATING |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Comments:
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE WHEN COMPLETED
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .