9a Attachment 2 - Past Performance Questionnaire 1305M322QNRMJ0070.docx
DOCX document 30 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Spectroradiometer Instruments Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 1305M322QNRMJ0070
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a federal solicitation. The solicitation is for spectroradiometer instruments issued by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The questionnaire is to be completed by a government assessor to evaluate a contractor's past technical, schedule, management, and cost control performance on a previous relevant contract. The assessor is asked to rate the contractor's performance in key areas as exceptional, very good, satisfactory, marginal, or unsatisfactory. The questionnaire also requests an overall rating of the contractor's performance and allows for general comments.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 9 Solicitation REV 1 1305M322QNRMJ0070.pdf | ||
| 9 Amendment 1 1305M322QNRMJ0070.pdf | ||
| 9 Solicitation 1305M322QNRMJ0070.pdf | ||
| 9a Attachment 1 - Specifications 1305M322QNRMJ0070.pdf |
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 2 – Past Performance Questionnaire
EA133X-FY-RP-XXXX
ATTACHMENT #
Past Performance Questionnaire Solicitation 1305M322QNRMJ0070
Instructions:
· Sections I and II to be completed by the Offeror/Major Subcontractor and provided to the assessor (Government personnel that had experience with the Offeror/Major Subcontractor on a previous relevant contract). The assessor, in turn, to verify Sections I through III, complete the questionnaire, and submit to the Contracting Office. The Offeror should also submit with its proposal (by the closing date of the Solicitation) copies of Sections I and II of all questionnaires as provided to assessors.
· Section II to be validated by the assessor. If any information is incorrect herein, please annotate and provide the correct information accordingly.
· Sections III through VII to be completed in their entirety by the assessor.
Message to the assessor: Your feedback is requested by NOAA to assist with establishing the performance history for the Contractor named below. In efforts to expedite receipt of the requested information, the Contracting Office respectfully requests that you do not mail hard copies. Instead, please e-mail the completed questionnaire(s) to: darrin.moore@noaa.gov
I. Solicitation Data (for the proposed effort)
| Solicitation Number |
| 1305M322QNRMJ0070 |
| Project/Requirement |
| Spectroradiometers |
| Customer/Agency |
| NOAA - Western Acquisition Division |
| Project/Requirement Description |
| Spectroradiometer Equipment |
II. Current or Historical Contract Information
Assessor: The performance data submitted by the Offeror is ☐ correct or ☐ incorrect.
CONTRACTOR NAME & ADDRESS:
Contract No
Type of Contract
| Initial |
| Final |
Contract Value
Period of Performance/Delivery Schedule
Project/Requirement Description
Please select from the following as it applies to this contract:
| Contracting Role |
| ☐ PRIME |
| ☐ SUBCONTRACTOR |
| Termination History |
| ☐ Convenience |
| ☐ Default |
| ☐ N/A |
III. Assessor Information
Assessor Name
Title
Phone Number/Email Address
Identify your role in the contract award or administration and the period of your involvement.
| ✔ |
| Role |
| Period of Involvement |
Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)
Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)
Contract Specialist
Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)
Technical Project Lead/Project Officer
Quality Assurance Specialist
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) Auditor
Other:
IV. Evaluation Definitions
The following definitions should be used in your assessment of Contractor performance.
| EXCEPTIONAL |
| Performance EXCEEDS MOST contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns. |
| VERY GOOD |
| Performance EXCEEDS SOME contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns, for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were highly effective. |
| SATISFACTORY |
| Performance MEETS contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed contains minor issues or concerns, for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective. |
| MARGINAL |
| Performance MEETS SOME contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed includes significant problems, issues, or concerns for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were only somewhat effective. |
| UNSATISFACTORY |
| Performance DOES NOT MEET contractual requirement. The performance of the areas being assessed includes serious problems, issues, or concerns for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective. |
| NOT APPLICABLE (N/A) |
| Performance information not recent or relevant as defined in the Solicitation. Unable to provide assessment. |
V. Performance Evaluation
1. Technical Performance
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet the technical requirements?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Technical Performance
Please provide rationale for the assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s technical performance in the following areas.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Design
Fabrication
Integration
Software Development
Testing
Training
Documentation
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the technical problems identified in the above assessment? Please explain.
2. Schedule Performance
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet the schedule?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Schedule Performance
Please provide rationale for assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s schedule performance in the following areas.
| Schedule Performance |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Hardware
Software
Data Items
Assess the Contractor’s ability to resolve Schedule Problems
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the technical problems identified in the above assessment? Please explain.
3. Management
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s management performance?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Management
b. Assess the Contractor’s management performance in the following areas.
| Management |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
MANAGEMENT RESPONSIVENESS—Timeliness, completeness, and quality of problem identification, proposal submittal, history of cooperative behavior, effective business relations, teamwork AND Customer satisfaction.
SUBCONTRACT MANAGEMENT—Timely award and management of subcontracts and meeting subcontracting goals for small business, small disadvantaged business, etc.
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT—Effectiveness of integration and coordination of all activities required to execute the contract, use of resources, assignment of responsibility, internal coordination and communication, and risk management practices.
MANAGEMENT OF PERSONNEL—Ability to select, retain, support, and replace personnel with the experience and expertise necessary to accomplish the Government’s requirements within schedule and budget.
INTEGRATED PRODUCT TEAM MANAGEMENT—Commitment and participation to the IPT process.
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the technical problems identified in the above assessment? Please explain.
4. Cost Control
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to forecast, manage, and control costs?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Cost Control
b. Assess the Contractor’s cost performance in the following areas.
| Management |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
COST REPORTING—Accuracy and timeliness of the Contractor’s cost reporting data.
NOTIFICATIONS—Timeliness of the Contractor’s notifications of costs as required by the Limitation of Cost/Funds Clauses.
RESOLUTION OF COST PROBLEMS—Commitment to resolve cost issues—may include utilizing principles such as Cost as an Independent Variable (CAIV)
ADHERENCE TO COST TARGETS—Ability to establish and meet the realistic cost targets.
SUBCONTRACT COST MANAGEMENT— Ability to forecast, negotiate, and control subcontract costs
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
VI. Overall Rating of Contractor’s performance (technical, schedule, management, and cost) on contract being assessed.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
VII. General Comments:
| _________________________________ | ____________________ | |
| Assessor’s Signature | Date |
Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104 For Official Use Only
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .