ATT_4_W912CM25QA012_Past_Perf_Quest.docx

Past and Present Performance Questionnaire W912CM25QA012 Attachment 4

TO BE COMPLETED BY THE OFFEROR’S REFERENCE AND SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER

When filled in this document is source selection sensitive information IAW FAR 3.104

INFORMATION REQUEST - PAST PERFORMANCE

1. This office is currently in the process of awarding a competitive service contract. The contractor listed below is being considered in a Source Selection by the Regional Contracting Office, Wiesbaden. You have received this questionnaire because you have been identified as a source of Past Performance Information for that offeror. Any comments you can provide regarding the past performance of the contractor providing this form is greatly appreciated.

2. Please complete the attached questionnaire for the contractor and program described below based on the following guidance and email this along with any other pertinent information, no later than the closing date of the solicitation [INSERT OFFEROR TO BE EVALUATED] to:

Dan Organtzis, Contract Specialist: iordanis.organtzis.ln@mail.mil Chris Paitson, Contracting Officer: john.c.paitson.civ@army.mil AND usarmy.rheinland-pfalz.409-contr-spt-bde.mbx.rco-wie-bids@mail.mil.

Any relevant information you have would be vital in our assessment of the aforementioned Contractor.

Do not send the completed questionnaire to the contractor. We appreciate your help.

Please fill in all sections. State “not applicable” if question does not apply or you have no comment.

3. Indicate a rating, based on the description below, for the contractor’s performance on the identified program. Underline the selected rating. Assessments should reflect only contractor liable performance. The following is a definition of the rating levels.

RATING DEFINITIONS

Unsatisfactory Entirely unfavorable past performance. Offeror has consistently not satisfied previous customers and/or violated laws, regulations, and contract requirements. Performance did not meet contractual requirements and any corrective action taken was not effective.

Marginal Record of performance split between favorable & unfavorable. Performance did not meet some of the contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor did not implement or has not implemented satisfactory corrective actions.

Satisfactory Record of performance favorable. Offeror has satisfied previous customers, laws, regulations, and contract requirements.

Very Good Record of performance very favorable. Offeror has satisfied previous customers, laws, regulations, and contract requirements and exceeded some of the contract requirements to the government’s benefit.

Exceptional Record of performance extremely favorable. Offeror has always satisfied previous customers, laws, regulations, and contract requirements to a high degree and exceeded many contractual requirements to the government’s benefit.

4. In addition to completing the attached questionnaire for the identified program, please provide comments on any other programs for which your activity has contracts with this contractor. You are urged to supplement your own knowledge of the contractor’s performance with the judgment of others in your organization.

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please email:

Dan Organtzis, Contract Specialist: iordanis.organtzis.ln@mail.mil and Chris Paitson, Contracting Officer: john.c.paitson.civ@army.mil with any questions.

SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

A. Contractor:

B. Cage Code of contractor contract was awarded to: _________________________________

C. Contract number: _______________________________________

D. Contract type: ______________________________(FFP, CPFF, etc.)

E. Was this a competitively-awarded contract? Yes _____ No _____

F. Period of performance: _________________________________________________________(dates)

G. Initial contract cost: $____________________________(total)

H. Current/final contract cost: $_______________________________(total)

SECTION 2: CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION

A. Customer or agency name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable): _________________________________________________________________________________________________

C. Geographic and customer description of services provided under this contract, i.e. local, nationwide, worldwide, specific customer, multiple customers, etc.:

D. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs: __________________________________

E. Description of service provided by the contractor:

SECTION 3: EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION

A. Evaluator's name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________ B. Evaluator's title: _________________________________________________________________________________________________ C. Evaluator's phone/fax number:

D. Number of years worked on subject contract:

SETION 4: EVALUATION

a.) QUALITY:

(1) The Contractor provided a product or service that conformed to contract requirements

(2) The Contractor successfully recruited, hired, and maintained a high quality workforce

(3) The Contractor submitted accurate reports.

(4) The Contractor’s performance demonstrated technical excellence and reliability.

(5) The Contractor employees were fluent in English

(writing, reading, & speaking) b.) SCHEDULE:

(1) The tasks required under this effort were performed in a timely manner and in accordance with the period of performance of the contract.

(2) The contractor’s actions avoided any negative schedule variances; or, appropriate corrective action was taken.

c.) INVOICES:

(1) The Contractor submitted all invoices in accordance with the prices in the contract.

(2) The Contractor submitted accurate invoices on a timely basis.

(3) The Contractor submitted invoices in accordance with the payment instructions.

d.) BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP:

(1) The Contractor demonstrated effective management over effort performed.

(2) The Contractor maintained an open line of communication so that the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) was appraised of technical and schedule issues.

(3) The Contractor submitted information and correspondence in a clear, concise, and businesslike manner.

(4) The Contractor promptly notified urgent issues to the COR, Technical Point of Contact, or Contracting Officer.

(5) The Contractor recommended flexible, proactive, and effective solutions to critical program issues.

(6) The product or service met the needs of the program

(7) I am satisfied with the Contractor’s performance under this contract.

(8) I would contract with this Contractor again.

e.) KEY PERSONNEL:

(1) The labor turnover in Key Personnel labor categories was minimal and did not adversely affect the Contractor’s performance.

(2) The Contractor did not frequently propose personnel that were clearly unqualified.

(3) The Key Personnel effectively managed their portion of the contract.

SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY

Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?

Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.

Government Contracts Only: Has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations?

Yes___ Default___ Convenience___ Pending Terminations___ No ___

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

Evaluator’s Name/Signature Date