Att. 04_Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).docx

Controlled Unclassified Information When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

Section L Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) The 36th Contracting Squadron is in the process of competitively selecting a source for a project to design and fully repair Rota Dorm B25017 AAFB, GU. The contractor shall include renovation of interiors including floors, walls, ceiling, finishes, full restroom renovation, updating code for Energy and Life Safety, exterior renovations resulting from recent storm damage. Walkway slabs and spandrel beams will be repaired. Repairs will also include a complete update to the HVAC and Plumbing systems in the Rota dorm. Rota is conditioned by a chilled water and a central chiller plant- both will be replaced. A complete replacement of air handlers, ductwork, grilles, variable air volume boxes, and chilled water piping will be replaced. The chilled water pump will be replaced. All existing plumbing utilities will be replaced and updated. The existing heat pump water heaters will be replaced with standard electric water heaters with large storage tanks. Electrical updates include an update to the entire electrical distribution system. The system updates will include a complete replacement of electrical distribution from the pad mount transformer secondary conductors to the entire downstream building distribution system. Fire protection updates include sprinkler protection throughout, installation of a mass notification system, and a wet-pipe sprinkler system throughout the dorm. The Rota dorm must be re-graded to maintain positive drainage away from the building. Existing storm sewer inlets are buried with debris, dirt, and grass- these are to be cleared. The design-build contractor will design and construct the above repairs in accordance with the requirements of this contract.

In accordance with FAR 36.204(h) and DFARS 236.204(ii) the magnitude of this project is between $25,000,000.00 and $100,000,000.00.

One of the considerations in the proposal 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. To meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than 16 July 2025 by 1600 hours (ChST).

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to all of the following: katrina.pangelinan@us.af.mil, eddie.pelkey@us.af.mil, and jianna.gutierrez_dejesus@us.af.mil. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records. Please title the email: PPQ – FA524025R0003 – Contractor Name Your assistance is greatly appreciated, and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this Source Selection.

Katrina J. Pangelinan Contracting Officer

Attachments:

1. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Contractor (Company/Division):

B. Contractor Cage Code:

C. Contract Number and/or Task Order 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. *Please describe design requirements and any facets of construction associated with the project, if possible:

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

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

Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of services 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 number / fax number / e-mail address:

D. Respondent’s position (e.g., Program Manager, PCO/ACO, etc.):

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

F. Other suggested points of contact:

Section 4: Performance Information

In the tables 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.

How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the project?

COMMENTS:

How well did the contractor adhere to the schedule?

How well did the contractor integrate and coordinate activities to execute the project?

Government Contracts Only: Was this contract 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).

SECTION 5: GENERAL COMMENT

Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what they promised in their proposal, I [ click and select an item ] award to them today given that I had a choice.

REMARKS:

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return to: jianna.gutierrez_dejesus@us.af.mil, eddie.pelkey@us.af.mil, katrina.pangelinan@us.af.mil

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 4 of 4