Att_7and_8_Past_Performance.docx

TRIP Claims Management A-13-034

ATTACHMENT#7

PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCE FORM

Offeror’s Name:

Client/Customer Company Name and Address:

Title of Contract or Agreement plus Contract and other Identification Numbers, if any:

Client Project Manager or Contracting Representative Name, telephone number, fax number and E-mail Address, if available:

Period of Performance:

Description of Service(s) or Product(s):

Number and Names of Sub-contractors, if any:

Contract/Compensation Type (client fixed price or cost reimbursement, user fee, or other):

Total Amount of Compensation:

ATTACHMENT #8

PAST PERFORMANCE SURVEY FORM

Offeror’s Name

Client/Customer Company Name

Questionnaire Respondent Name and Title

Questionnaire Completion Date

EVALUATION

Below are listed specific questions relating to the following five categories for contractor performance: quality, timeliness, cost control, business relations, and customer satisfaction. Please rate the contractor for each question on a scale from Excellent to Unacceptable or N/A for not applicable. Please support each rating with a brief justification in the Comment Section.

Excellent - Highly relevant past performance record managing contracts similar in size, scope, and complexity to the solicitation requirements. Little or no potential exists for disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation in quality of performance based on the contractor’s past performance.

Good - Highly relevant or relevant past performance record managing contracts similar in size, scope, and complexity to the solicitation requirements. Some potential exists for disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation in quality of performance based on the contractor’s past performance.

Acceptable – Relevant or somewhat relevant past performance record managing contracts similar in size, scope, and complexity to the solicitation requirements. Some potential exists for disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation in quality of performance based on the contractor’s past performance.

Unacceptable - Not relevant, or somewhat relevant past performance record may exist. Significant potential exists for disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation in quality of performance based on the contractor’s past performance. Proposal is not awardable.

Neutral - not rated. Not enough information available to assign a rating.

A. QUALITY OF PRODUCT OR SERVICE

1. To what extent did the contractor comply with the specific contract requirements?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

2. To what extent did the contractor provide quality improvement recommendations?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

3. Did the contractor commit adequate resources to support the commercial software provided, including responsiveness to requests for assistance, corrections of errors, and the provision of updates and upgrades?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

4. Effectiveness and reliability of Contractor’s Key Personnel.

5. Adequacy of maintaining and controlling Government equipment.

B. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE

1. To what extent did the contractor adhere to contract delivery of performance schedules?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

2. To what extent did the contractor meet the response times in the contract?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

3. Overall performance in planning, scheduling, and monitoring.

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

4. Responsiveness to contract changes from a contract administration perspective.

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

5. Responsiveness to changes in technical direction

C. COST CONTROL

1. To what extent did the contractor provide current, accurate, and complete billings?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

2. To what extent did the contractor ensure only the services required by the terms of the contract were provided?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

3. To what extent did the contractor exhibit efforts to control costs while providing quality services?

D. BUSINESS RELATIONS

1. To what extent was the contractor able to solve contract performance problems without extensive guidance from Government counterparts (COTR)?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

2. To what extent was the contractor effective in interfacing with Government staff?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

3. Effectively assess impacts of changes on other associated projects, task and efforts.

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

4. Appropriately choose effective sub-contractors and teaming partners and maintain good business relationships.

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

5. Ability to solve contract performance problems without extensive guidance from Government personnel.

E. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

1. How would you rate the overall quality of supplies and/or services of the contractor?

[ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Acceptable [ ] Unacceptable [ ] N/R

Comment:

2. Has this contract been partially or completely terminated for cause, default or convenience?

[ ] Yes for: [ ] Default [ ] Convenience [ ] Cause [ ] No

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules).