RFQ_-_AG-3198-S-16-0191_-_Attachment_2_-_PAST_PERFORMANCE_QUESTIONNAIRE.docx

ATTACHMENT 2

OFFEROR’S PAST PERFORMANCE

THIS FORM IS PROVIDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING TO

AND SUBMITTAL BY THE OFFEROR’S REFERENCES

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR

SOLICITATION NUMBER#: AG-3198-S-16-0191

The contractor listed below is being considered in a Source Selection by the Food and Nutrition, Contract Management Division, 3101 Park Center Drive, Suite 442. It would be appreciated if you would provide us with comments regarding the contractor's past performance. In order to maintain the integrity of the source selection process, respectfully request that you do not divulge the name of the contractor nor discuss your comments on this questionnaire with any other individuals.

This form shall be emailed to: Linda Mullen at linda.mullen@fns.usda.gov and Sean Merritt at sean.merritt@fns.usda.gov. Any questions regarding this matter, please contact Linda Mullen at (703) 305-2256.

Past Project Information:

1. Contractor name and address:

2. Project Title and/or Contract Number:

Evaluator (The following information will assist in the analysis of the data. Information will be kept confidential.)

Name of Evaluator:______________________________Date:_____________ Phone Number:__________________Fax Number:________________ Address:________________________________________________________ Position held or function in relation to the project:_______________________

RATINGS:

Please evaluate the contractor’s performance using the following ratings:

Exceptional (E) Confidence Exceptionally Confident. Based on the vendor’s performance record, essentially no doubt exists that the successful vendor will successfully perform the required effort. Little or no Government oversight is expected to be required in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Very Good (G) Confidence Confidence. Based on the vendor’s performance record, there is no doubt exists that the successful vendor will successfully perform the required effort. Little or no Government oversight is expected to be required in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Satisfactory (S)

Confidence. Based on the vendor’s performance record, little doubt exists that the vendor will successfully perform the required effort. Little Government oversight is expected to be required in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Marginal (M)

Confidence. Based on the vendor’s performance record, doubt exists that the vendor will successfully perform the required effort. Significant Government oversight will be expected in achieving the proposed level of performance.

Unacceptable (U)

No Confidence. Based on the vendor’s performance record, significant doubt exists that the vendor will successfully perform the required effort. No amount of Government oversight will achieve the proposed level of performance.

1. The relationship between the contractor and the customer’s contract team.

2. The contractor’s on-site management and coordination of subcontractors.

3. The contractor’s overall corporate management, integrity, reasonableness and cooperative conduct.

4. The contractor provided competent program/project manager, supervisor, and workers ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. The contractor’s quality control.

6. The contractor’s ability to meet the performance schedule.

7. The contractor took measures to improve his schedule problems, if any?

8. The contractor’s ability to provide the required work at a reasonable price.

9. The contractor’s compliance with laws, regulations, and policies, if applicable.

10. The contractor rectified identified problems in a timely fashion without further incident of the same.

11. Has the contractor been given any of the following: Cure notice; show cause, letters of reprimand, suspension of payments, termination? If yes, please explain.

12. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If no, please explain.

13. Was the customer satisfied with the end product?

14. Was the contractor provided an opportunity to discuss any negative performance ratings? If so, what were the results?

15. The contractor maintained a professional working relationship with Government personnel.

16. The contractor was reasonable and cooperative in resolving customer complaints.

17. OVERALL RATING: ____________

Please provide any additional comments.

26 | Page