Past_Performance_Questionnaire.doc

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Procurement Sensitive

See FAR 3.104

INFORMATION REQUEST

PAST PERFORMANCE

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is currently in the process of soliciting proposals for RFP Number 75N980209R00023. [CONTRACTOR NAME] has provided your name and organization as a reference regarding [CONTRACTOR’S NAME] record of past performance under Contract No. [CONTRACT NUMBER]. Specifically, we are looking for past performance information in the following areas:

a.) Quality of Product or Service b.) Timeliness or Scheduling of Service/Deliveries c.) Business Relations/Customer Satisfaction d.) Program Manager and Staffing (Including Subcontractors) e.) Cost Control In order for our team to compile its evaluation, we request that you complete the attached survey form, the respondent identification below, in addition to any other pertinent information, sign, and email all to NIHBPSSIII@mail.nih.gov. Subject line of email shall note the Offeror's name.

Any relevant information you have would be vital in our assessment of the aforementioned Contractor.

Respondent Identification. Please provide the following Information:

Name: ____________________________________________ Title: ____________________________________________ Date: ____________________________________________ Telephone Number: _________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________ E-Mail Address: _____________________________________

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY

CONTRACTOR NAME:

CONTRACT NUMBER: _______________

EVALUATION PERIOD:

TASK ORDER NO:

If Applicable

1.

Please describe the service/supply provided by the Contractor for your firm.

2. Please provide ratings and comments regarding the Contractor’s performance in each area below using the following ratings: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory. PLEASE PLACE A CHECK OR X IN BOXES, See next page for definition of ratings.

EXCEPTIONAL

VERY GOOD

SATISFACTORY

MARGINAL

UNSATISFACTORY

OVERALL PAST PERFORMANCE RATING

Please provide an overall rating of the contractor’s past performance for the referenced contract/delivery order.

a.) Quality of Product or Service:

b.) Timeliness or Scheduling of Service/Deliveries:

c.) Business Relations/Customer Satisfaction d.) Program Manager and Staffing (Including Subcontractors) e.) Cost Control

For ratings of “Exceptional” or “Unsatisfactory,” please provide a brief explanation.

3.

Would you hire this contractor to provide services for your organization in the future? Please provide comments using additional pages if desired.

Signed: __________________________________

Date: _____________________

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY CONTINUED

DEFINITION OF RATINGS FOR PAST PERFORMANCE

Exceptional: Performance met and exceeded many contractual requirements to the customer’s benefit. Performance being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. The Offeror’s past performance record, considering past performance and relevance to the instant procurement, leads to an extremely strong expectation of successful performance.

Very Good: Performance met and exceeded some contractual requirements to the customer’s benefit. Performance being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. Offeror’s past performance record, considering past performance and relevance to the instant procurement, leads to a strong expectation of successful performance.

Satisfactory: Performance met contractual requirements. Performance being assessed contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appeared to be or were satisfactory. Offeror’s past performance record, considering past performance and relevance to the instant procurement, leads to an expectation of successful performance.

Marginal: Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. Performance being assessed reflected a serious problem for which the contractor did not identify corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions were only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. Offeror’s past performance record, considering past performance and relevance to the instant procurement, leads to an expectation that successful performance might be difficult to achieve or that it can occur only with increased levels of Government management/oversight.

Unsatisfactory: Performance did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery did not occur in a timely manner. Performance being assessed contained serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appeared or were ineffective. Offeror’s past performance record, considering past performance and relevance to the instant procurement, leads to an extremely strong expectation that successful performance will not be achieved.