Att 4 PPQ.docx

DOCX document 40 KB Posted

Attached to
Facility Services for Non-Real Property
Solicitation number
FA282326Q0005
Issued by

About this file

This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for a facilities maintenance and repair services contract solicitation (FA2823-26-Q-0005) by the Air Force Test Center at Eglin AFB. The solicitation is a 100% Small Business set-aside under NAICS code 561210 with a $47M size standard, seeking a contractor to provide facility services for non-real property. The current quote submission deadline is 1200 CST on 22 January 2026, with the government planning to award a firm-fixed price purchase order based on best value evaluation criteria.

The PPQ is designed to collect detailed performance feedback from previous customers about potential offerors, covering areas such as personnel management, quality control, problem-solving, schedule adherence, and overall contract performance. The questionnaire uses a rating scale from Exceptional (E) to Unsatisfactory (U) across 18 specific performance dimensions, and will become part of the official source selection records. The document emphasizes the importance of verified past performance in selecting a contractor for the facilities maintenance and repair services contract.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
RFIs 23 Jan 26.pdf PDF
SF1449 Amend 0006.pdf PDF
Conformed SF1449 22 Jan 26.pdf PDF
Att 3 Pricing Workbook 22 Jan 26.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
SF1449 Amend 0005.pdf PDF
Interested Vendors List 20 Jan 26.docx DOCX document
Att 3 Pricing Workbook 20 Jan 26.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
RFIs 20 Jan 26.pdf PDF
Att 1 PWS 20 Jan 26.pdf PDF
SF1449 Amend 0004.pdf PDF
SV MFR.pdf PDF
RFIs 9 Jan 26.pdf PDF
RFIs 18 Dec 25.pdf PDF
SF1449 Amend 0003.pdf PDF
SF1449 Amend 0002.pdf PDF
Att 3 Pricing Workbook 17 Dec 25.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Att 1 Facility Services PWS 17 Dec 25.pdf PDF
RFIs 17 Dec 25.pdf PDF
Att 2 WD 15-4531 Rev 32.pdf PDF
SF1449 Amend 0001.pdf PDF
RFIs 11 Dec 25.pdf PDF
52.212-2 Amend 1.pdf PDF
52.212-2 Addendum.pdf PDF
52.212-1 Addendum.pdf PDF
Att 5 FRQ.docx DOCX document
Att 3 Pricing Workbook 9 Dec 25.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Att 2 WD 15-4531 Rev 31.pdf PDF
SF1449 FA282326Q0005.pdf PDF
Att 7 Site Visit Map.png PNG image
Att 6 Subcontractor Consent.docx DOCX document
Att 1 PWS 9 Dec 25.pdf PDF
Show all 31

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

For Official Use Only When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

FA2823-26-Q-0005 Facilities Maintenance and Repair Past Performance Questionnaire AFTC/PZIOA (OL-EGLIN) of the Air Force AFMC MAJCOM is in the process of competitively selecting a source to provide facility maintenance and repair services at Eglin AFB.

One of the considerations in offer evaluation is the verification of the Offerors' past performance on contracts or other work efforts which reflect the offeror's ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from organizations such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with the Offeror, for the evaluation of the Offeror's performance on those contracts or work efforts.

Our areas of interest regarding the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. The current due date for offers is 1200 CST on 22 January 2026.

Please email completed questionnaires to kristina.brannon.1@us.af.mil. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official source selection records.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this contractor selection.

//SIGNED//

KRISTINA B. BRANNON

Procuring Contracting Officer

1 Atch Past Performance Questionnaire

Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Contractor (Company/Division):

B. Contractor Cage Code:

C. Contract Number:

D. Contract Type (e.g., FFP, FPIF, CPIF, CPFF, etc.):

E. Program Title:

F. Brief Program Description:

G. Program Phase (e.g., Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD)):

H. Period of Performance

1. Original Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

2. Current Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

3. Reason for difference (if applicable):

I. Contract Dollar Value

1. Original maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

2. Current maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

3. Reasons for difference between original and current contract dollar value (if applicable):

J. Description of work performed:

K. Was this a competitively awarded contract? ☐ Yes ☐ No

L. Contractor’s Role: ☐ Prime Contractor ☐ Subcontractor ☐ Key Personnel

Note: If offeror holds or has held other contracts with your agency/organization in the last six (6) years, please complete separate Past Performance Questionnaire forms for those contracts as well.

Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of work performed under this contract (i.e., local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands):

Section 3: Respondent Identification

A. Respondent’s name:

B. Respondent’s title:

C. Respondent’s phone/e-mail address:

D. Length of time (number of years/months) respondent worked on subject contract and description of responsibility/position/role:

E. Other suggested points of contact:

Section 4: Performance Information

In the table below, indicate your rating for the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block to the right of each question. Provide supporting information for each response in the space provided. Attach additional pages if more space is needed. The performance rating scale is defined as follows:

Code Performance Rating

E EXCEPTIONAL – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

V VERY GOOD – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

S SATISFACTORY – Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

M MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

U UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

N/A NOT APPLICABLE – Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect, performance was not observed, or information was not available. Do not know.

The Contractor:
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

1. Provided experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

2. Demonstrated the ability to hire, maintain, and replace, if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period.

3. Delegated authority to project managers and superintendents commensurate with contract requirements.

4. Provided effective quality control and/or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements.

5. Corrected deficiencies in timely manner and pursuant to their quality control procedures.

6. Provided timely resolution of contract discrepancies.

7. Identified problems as they occurred.

8. Suggested alternative approaches to problems.

9. Displayed initiative to solve problems.

10. Developed realistic progress schedules.

11. Met established project schedules.

12. Provided timely resolution of warranty defects.

13. Was responsive to contract changes.

14. Provided adequate project supervision.

15. Cooperated with Government personnel after award.

16. How would you rate the contractor's overall performance on this contract?

17. Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain.

EXPLANATION:

☐ Yes ☐ No

18. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain.

EXPLANATION:

☐ Yes ☐ No

Additional remarks:

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

For Official Use Only Page 7 of 7

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .