Attachment 4 Contractor Past Performance Survey.doc
DOC document 49 KB Posted
- Attached to
- KAIBAB SOUTH ZONE THINNING IDIQ
- Solicitation number
- AG-94TZ-S-10-0024
About this file
PAST PERFORMANCE SURVEY
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Kaibab SZ Thinning Solicitation.pdf | ||
| Kaibab SZ Thinning Attachments.pdf |
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
Attachment 4
Kaibab South Zone Thinning IDIQ
Contractor Past Performance Inquiry
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION/CONFIDENTIAL
KAIBAB SOUTH ZONE THINNING IDIQ, SOLICITATION AG-94TZ-S-10-0024
Dear Customer:
Our firm has submitted a proposal to the USDA Forest Service, Region 3, Western Zone AQM. In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), they will evaluate our firm’s past performance. Your firm has been listed as a reference for work previously performed.
Your candid response to the attached survey will assist the evaluation team in this process and your participation in this evaluation is greatly appreciated. Please complete the enclosed survey as thoroughly as possible. General information regarding the responses may be released to the Offeror; the FAR prohibits the release of names providing the responses. Complete confidentiality will be maintained.
Please send the completed form to the address below to arrive NO LATER THAN 6/28/2010 or one day following the due date of the solicitation.
DO NOT RETURN THIS FORM TO OUR COMPANY. SEND IT TO:
USDA Forest Service R3 Western Zone AQM 2324 E. McDowell Rd.
Phoenix, AZ 85006-2440 Attn: Norma J Howard, Contracting Officer Or email it to: nhoward@fs.fed.us Contractor Name:
Address:
Contract or Order No.
Total Value of Contract:
Liquidated Damages Assessed:
Contract Award Date:
Final Completion Date:
Name of person completing this form:
Phone Number:
Name of Company or Government Agency:
Description of work this company performed:
RATINGS - Summarize contractor performance and check the number that corresponds to the rating for each category.
| RATING |
| DEFINITION |
| E = Excellent |
| Performance exceeded what was required by the contract |
| VG = Very Good |
| Performance met all the requirements of the contract |
| S = Satisfactory |
| Contractor met most (essentially all) of the requirements of the contract |
| M = Marginal |
| Contractor met some of the requirements of the contract however changes to the contractor’s processes were necessary to achieve contract requirements |
| U = Unsatisfactory |
| Contractor failed to meet requirements of the contract |
| N/A = Not Applicable |
| Question did not apply to the contract performed for your firm. |
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
Was the project completed in accordance with the contract specifications?
How well did the contractor identify and correct deficient work?
Were submittals, testing, certifications, and final drawings (as-builts) completed accurately and timely?
Was work performed as scheduled?
Were delays resolved quickly and to both parties satisfaction?
QUALITY OF SERVICES
Did the contractor provide adequate oversight to sub-contractors, suppliers, employees?
Did the contractor maintain a good relationship with the owner, contracting agency, and management personnel?
If there were change orders, was the contractor reasonable in defining scope of change and controlling cost?
Did the contractor provide adequate work force (number and skills) for work being performed?
How well did the contractor manage the quality of work?
TIMELINESS
Did the contractor complete the project on time?
If there were problems, were they addressed and resolved?
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
Would you recommend the selection of this contractor again?
Comments:
PAGE
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .