C1a Attachment 5 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 26 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Armed Security Guard Services and Patrolled Seervices Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 70FBR220R00000002
About this file
This document includes a past performance questionnaire and federal contract opportunity solicitation. The past performance questionnaire is a template for references to provide feedback on a contractor's previous work on a similar contract. It requests ratings on quality, resources, communication, timeliness, customer satisfaction, responsiveness, and cost control. The federal contract opportunity is solicitation number 70FBR220R00000002 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency for armed security guard and patrolled services. It is set aside for local firms in Puerto Rico and seeks quotes by December 19, 2019 for contract award. The work requires compliance with the included statement of work.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 70FBR220R00000002 0003.pdf | ||
| C1a. 70FBR220R00000002 0001.pdf | ||
| C1a SF30 70FBR220R00000002 0002.pdf | ||
| C1a. Attachment 4 - Armed Security Guard Services QASP.pdf | ||
| C1a. Attachment 6 - Question Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| C1a Guard RFP 70FBR220R00000002 11.12.19.pdf | ||
| C1A ATTACHMENT 3 WAGE DETERMINATION.pdf | ||
| C1a 70FBR220R00000002 Guard II 11.9.19.pdf | ||
| C1a Attachment 1 - PRICING SHEETS INCLUDING OPTIONS.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| C1a Attachment 7. Local Representation Certification and Documentation.docx | DOCX document | |
| C1a Attachment 2 - Main Facilities Locations_Redacted.pdf |
Show all 11
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
ATTACHMENT 4
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
PLEASE EMAIL THIS PACKAGE TO: Carolyn Knight, CONTRACTING OFFICER AT Carolyn.Knight@fema.dhs.gov, BY November 15, 2019 at 10:00 am EST
MUST INCLUDE IN EMAIL SUBJECT LINE:
PAST PERFORMANCE, RFP Number RFP 70FBR220R00000002
Protective Service Officers (PSO)
NAME OF CONTRACTOR
The Federal Emergency Management Agency recently released a solicitation for a contractor to provide armed security guard services and patrolled services. Offerors were asked to provide information on contracts, similar in size and complexity to the procurement, on which they had performed in the past. An Offeror has submitted you as a reference for past performance.
We need your opinion on how well the Contractor performed on this contract (Complete blocks 1 & 2 below). Please fill out the attached questionnaire and forward to the above mentioned individuals. FEMA may contact you to clarify or verify any information provided.
Your input will be confidential. Please note your comments will be used to form the basis for evaluation of this Offeror. Thank you in advance for your assistance. If you have any questions, please contact, Carolyn Knight, by email at Carolyn.Knight@fema.dhs.gov .
CERTIFICATION
By law, the Government will not disclose the names of individuals providing reference information during discussions with the contractor identified in Block 1 below.
Block 1. Contractor PLEASE ENTER NAME OF CONTRACTOR Block 2. Contract Name/Identifier PLEASE ENTER CONTRACT NUMBER I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IS ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
Evaluator’s Printed Name Title/Role (e.g. Program Manager, Contracting Officer)
Evaluator’s Mailing Address (Agency, Bldg/Rm, Street, City, State, Zip
| ________________________ | __________ | ___________ | _________ | ||
| Evaluator’s Signature | Date | Phone | Fax |
INSTRUCTIONS
Two forms are provided to document your opinion: 1) Performance Rating Form; and 2) Supplemental Comment Form. Please fill out each form in accordance with the instructions provided on each. Please use the following standards in arriving at your rating:
Rating Scale is located on the last page of this document
Please mark the column to the right of each element that most appropriately reflects your experience with this contractor. Please use the additional page to discuss more fully any of the elements. Whenever you mark “Other”, please provide comments.
| Performance Element |
| Outstanding |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Other/Comments |
1. QUALITY OF SOLUTION: The contractor comprehended the goals, thoroughly analyzed the task, and presented a comprehensive, complete, feasible, and effective solution. (Met the needs and performed successfully).
2. EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES: The Contractor assigned, in a timely manner, the proper amount and type of personnel, facilities, and other resources to support the project.
3. COMMUNICATION: The contractor worked and communicated well with client management, staff, and contracting officials as well as with his or her own staff and subcontractors.
4. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE: The contractor planned and proposed realistic schedules, successfully monitored performance and completed work on time.
5. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION: The contractor exhibited a commitment to customer satisfaction and achieved customer satisfaction.
6. RESPONSIVENESS AND ATTENTIVENESS: The contractor exhibited reasonable and cooperative behavior in response to client changes, criticism/rejection of contract deliverables and in detecting and correcting errors, poor performance, and other problems.
7. COST CONTROL: The contractor successfully planned and proposed realistic costs and monitored performance, and consistently operated at or below budget.
For #8 and #9 please answer "Yes" or "No" as appropriate
| YES |
| NO |
8. Given the choice would you do business with this contractor again?
9. Did either you or the contractor have to resort to litigation to resolve problems?
Supplemental Comment Form
Please provide any additional comments regarding your performance element ratings in the appropriate spaces below. Please add additional pages as necessary.
Performance Element #1, Quality of Solution:
Performance Element #2, Effective and Efficient Use of Resources:
Performance Element #3, Communication:
Performance Element #4, Timeliness of Performance:
Performance Element #5, Customer Satisfaction:
Performance Element #6, Responsiveness and Attentiveness:
Performance Element #7, Cost Control:
Question #8, Given the choice would you do business with this contractor again?
Question #9, Did either you or the contractor have to resort to litigation to resolve problems?
Additional Comments.
RATING SCALE: Please use the following ratings to answer the questions on page 3.
| Rating |
| Definition |
| Outstanding |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’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. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’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. |
| Acceptable |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed 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. |
| Unacceptable |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| Neutral |
| No record exists. |
NOTE: For statements indicating less than “Acceptable”, please provide a brief explanation in the comments section of the survey.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .