Amend 1_ Attachment 4 - PPQ.docx
DOCX document 32 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 70Z02321RPAP02500
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire template for evaluation of contractors responding to a solicitation for acquisition logistics support services for the United States Coast Guard Asset Project Office. The solicitation seeks proposals for an indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract with both firm-fixed price and labor hour task orders to provide acquisition logistics support services. The solicitation number is 70Z02321RPAP02500 and is set aside for women-owned small businesses. Questions regarding the solicitation are due by October 28, 2020 and proposals are due by November 20, 2020. The past performance questionnaire is to be completed by references for contractors responding to the solicitation and will be used to evaluate contractors' past performance on relevant contracts over the past three years.
View the file
Other files
Show all 14
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
USCG RFP 70Z02321RPAP02500 Attachment 4
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Contractor Being Evaluated:
Organization Completing Questionnaire:
Contract Number:
Delivery Order/Task Order Number:
| Contract Value ($): |
| $ |
Reference Point of Contact Information:
Length of Involvement with Contractor (must be within the past 3 years):
Project Title/Deliverable:
REFERENCE INSTRUCTIONS
This questionnaire will be used by the Contracting Officer to obtain past performance information from a reference listed in the Contractor’s proposal. PLEASE TYPE YOUR RESPONSES.
Please provide your assessment of the Contractor’s level of past performance on the contract for which you are a reference. Mark (X) the appropriate block using the following rating guidelines. Please provide comments for each of the headings. A copy of the contract’s specifications document, e.g., Statement of Work or Performance Work Statement, may be substituted for the Contract Effort Description.
NOTE: QUESTIONNAIRES RETURNED WITHOUT COMMENTS AND/OR A SPECIFICATIONS DOCUMENT AND NOT SUBMITTED BY THE PERSON COMPLETING THE PPQ WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR EVALUATION.
Submit completed Questionnaire by the RFP due date via e-mail to:
Nichol Fitzpatrick, nichol.a.fitzpatrick@uscg.mil
Ratings
| RATING |
| DEFINITION |
| No Rating |
| Used if you are unable to rate an item because it was not a requirement and does not apply, or you have no knowledge of the item in question. Please explain in the comments section. This is neither a negative or positive assessment. |
| Exceptional |
| 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 was 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 was effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| 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.
| Unsatisfactory |
| 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 a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
Contract Effort Description:
| No Rating |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
A.) QUALITY OF SERVICE:
OVERALL PERFORMANCE
COMMENTS:
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE DELIVERABLES
COMMENTS:
LEVEL OF EXPERTISE AND PROFESSIONALISM
COMMENTS:
ABILITY TO ADMINISTER THE CONTRACT
COMMENTS:
OTHER TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE
COMMENTS:
B.) SCHEDULE:
SCHEDULE
COMMENTS:
C.) COST CONTROL: Rating and Comments for Cost Control are not required if contract type is Fixed-Price.
COST CONTROL
COMMENTS:
D.) MANAGEMENT:
MANAGEMENT RESPONSIVENESS
COMMENTS:
SUBCONTRACT MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS:
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION: Would you recommend the selection of this firm again? (X)
Definitely Would Not ( ) Probably Would Not ( ) Might Or Might Not ( )
| Probably Would ( ) |
| Definitely Would ( ) |
AGGREGATE RATING:
Thank you for your time.
Name and Title of Person Completing PPQ Date
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .