2_Attachment_B_-_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.doc
DOC document 79 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 70Z02318QPLT00100
About this file
Attachment B - Past Performance Questionaire
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 0_Solicitation_70Z02318QPLT00100_(12_DEC_2017).doc | DOC document | |
| 4_Attachment_D_-_Terms_and_Conditions.doc | DOC document | |
| 1_Attachment_A_-_PWS(1).doc | DOC document | |
| 3_Attachment_C_-_Pricing_Spreadsheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
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
Request for Proposal (RFP) # 70Z02318QPLT00100 Attachment B – Past Performance Questionnaire
Past Performance Questionnaire (Complete one form per reference) Please fill out the following information in regards to the solicitation.
SECTION A – TO BE COMPLETED BY OFFEROR
Offeror’s Name:
Offeror’s DUNS Number:
Contract Number:
BPA Number:
Order Number:
_____ Prime or _____ Subcontractor (Check one)
| Dollar Amount: |
| Period of Performance: |
| Contract Type: |
| _____ Fixed Price _____ Cost Reimbursement _____ Other (Specify) |
(Check one)
Item/Service Description:
Contract Quantity/Period of Performance:
Customer/Business/Agency Name:
Customer POC (Note: Ensure POC information is valid and current)
Name:
Address:
Phone:
E-mail:
SECTION B – TO BE COMPLETED BY THE POINT-OF-CONTACT
The offeror in Section A provided you as reference for a solicitation they are a party to. Please complete the rest of the evaluation.
Please email the completed evaluation no later than the date of proposal submission to the joint attention of the Contract Specialist, Ms. Petra McPherson, at petra.a.mcpherson@uscg.mil and the Contracting Officer, Mr. Nate Dolezal, at nate.dolezal@uscg.mil.
Evaluation Indicate the contractor’s past performance for each category area and overall by identifying with an “X” mark for the most appropriate rating according to the scale shown below. Please provide a rationale, including specific examples, as appropriate, to support your ratings in the space provided for comments for each category area. If more space is needed, continue your comments in the “Additional Comments” section at the end of Table 3.
Table 1 provides the rating criteria for each category area.
TABLE 1- CATEGORY AREA
| Rating |
| Description |
| Quality of Service |
| Assessment based on the contractor’s conformance to contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship (e.g., commonly accepted technical, professional, environmental, or safety and health standards). |
| Schedule |
| Assessment based on the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance). |
| Cost Control |
| Assessment based on the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract cost. |
***If contract is/was Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) or Firm-Fixed Price with Economic Price Adjustment (FFP EPA), please mark “Not Rated”***
| Management of Key Personnel |
| Assessment based on the contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting, and replacing, when necessary, key personnel. |
| Regulatory Compliance |
| Assessment based on whether the contractor complied with statutes and regulations pertained in the Federal Acquistion Regulations |
Where appropriate, please use the ratings definitions in Table 2 below to assess the contractor’s performance. These are the same ratings that are used in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS).
TABLE 2 - PERFORMANCE RATINGS DEFINITIONS
| Rating |
| Description |
| Exceptional |
| The contractor’s performance met contractual requirements and exceeded many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| The contractor’s performance met contractual requirements and exceeded some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| The contractor’s performance met contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| The contractor’s performance did not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflected a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions were only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| The contractor’s performance did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective. |
| Not Rated |
| Not applicable or has no history. A “Not Rated” is the equivalent of a “Neutral” rating. |
Use the ratings in Table 3 to assess contractor performance where appropriate.
TABLE 3 - PERFORMANCE RATINGS
| Category / Comments |
| Rating |
1. Quality of Service:
__Exceptional __Very Good
__Satisfactory
__Marginal
__Unsatisfactory __Not Rated
| 2. Schedule: |
| __Exceptional |
__Very Good
__Satisfactory
__Marginal
__Unsatisfactory __Not Rated
3. Cost Control:
__Exceptional
__Very Good
__Satisfactory
__Marginal
__Unsatisfactory __Not Rated*
(Choose “Not Rated” if prime contract was FFP or FFP EPA)
| 4. Management of Key Personnel: |
| __Exceptional |
__Very Good
__Satisfactory
__Marginal
__Unsatisfactory __Not Rated
5. Regulatory Compliance:
__Exceptional
__Very Good
__Satisfactory
__Marginal
__Unsatisfactory __Not Rated
Additional Comments:
Based on the categorical ratings, use the Table 4 to assess contractor’s overall performance.
TABLE 4 – OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING
| Overall Comments |
| Rating |
__Exceptional
__Very Good
__Satisfactory
__Marginal
__Unsatisfactory __Not Rated
File details come from the government source that posted it.