Att. 2 Past Performance Questionnaire 250505.doc
DOC document 105 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Green Mountain General Roads/Civil Construction IDIQ Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 12445526Q0039
- Issued by
- Department of Agriculture Forest Service
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire template designed for evaluating contractor performance on projects related to the Green Mountain National Forest (GMNF) road and civil construction IDIQ contract.
The questionnaire collects contractor and reference information, including contract/task order number, project title, description, location, award and completion dates, and original versus final contract pricing. It employs a five-point rating scale (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory, or Not Applicable) to assess performance across six categories: Quality of Product or Service, Cost Control, Schedule, Management/Business Relations, Regulatory Compliance, and Overall Rating. Each category contains multiple specific evaluation criteria with space for detailed comments. The Quality of Product or Service section addresses deliverable specifications, workmanship standards, quality control plan implementation and documentation, deficient work identification and correction, and submittal adequacy. Cost Control measures the contractor's ability to meet contractually agreed pricing, invoice accuracy and timeliness, price change proposal reasonableness, and identification of cost-saving alternatives. Schedule performance evaluates initial schedule adequacy, adherence to approved schedules, delay resolution, and timely submission of documentation. Management/Business Relations assesses resource management, key personnel utilization, subcontractor coordination, professional conduct, change order activity, workforce adequacy, responsiveness to corrective actions, and risk identification. Regulatory Compliance examines adherence to contract clauses, reporting requirements, design specifications, labor laws, and safety regulations. The questionnaire concludes with an overall rating and a recommendation section asking whether the reference would recommend the contractor for similar future work.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 22
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Attachment #1 Past Performance Questionnaire
GMNF
Contractor Information:
Contractor Name:
Contractor Point of Contact (POC):
POC Phone Number:
POC Email:
Project Information:
Contract/Task Order Number:
Project Title:
Project Description:
Project Location:
Award Date:
Completion Date:
Actual Completion Date:
Explain Difference:
Original Contract Price:
Final Contract Price:
Explain Difference:
REFERENCE’s Assessment of the Contractor Reference Information:
Business/Organization Name:
Point of Contact for the Reference:
Title:
Phone Number:
Email:
Point of Contact’s Role in the Project:
Date Questionnaire Completed:
Reference Signature:
Rating Scale:
EXCEPTIONAL
(5) Performance EXCEEDS MOST contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with no issues or concerns.
VERY GOOD
(4) Performance EXCEEDS SOME contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns, for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were highly effective.
SATISFACTORY
(3) Performance MEETS contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed contains minor issues or concerns, for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.
MARGINAL
(2) Performance MEETS SOME contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed includes significant problems, issues, or concerns for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were only somewhat effective.
UNSATISFACTORY
(1) Performance DOES NOT MEET contractual requirement. The performance of the areas being assessed includes serious problems, issues, or concerns for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.
NOT APPLICABLE
(NA)
Performance information not recent or relevant as defined in the solicitation. Unable to provide assessment.
Quality of Product or Service:
| N/A |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
Quality of Deliverable (Met Specifications)
Conformance to good standards of workmanship
Adequacy of the QC Plan
Implementation of the QC Plan
Quality of QC Documentation
Identification/Correction of Deficient Work
Adequacy of Submittals
Use of Specified Materials
Comments:
Cost Control:
| N/A |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)
Were invoices current, accurate, and complete
Reasonableness of price change proposals submitted
Proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client
Comments:
Schedule:
| N/A |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
Adequacy of Initial Schedule
Adherence to Approved Schedule
Resolution of Delays
Timely submission of Required Documentation
Timely submission of Updated and Revised Schedules
Comments:
Management / Business Relations:
| N/A |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
Management of Resources/Personnel
Key Personnel were Utilized Appropriately and Effectively
Coordination and Control of Subcontractors
Professional Conduct
Review/Resolution of Subcontractor’s Issues
Change Order Activity (By Contractor)
Maintains an Adequate Work Force
Responsiveness to Corrective Actions
Identifies and Mitigates Risk
Comments:
Regulatory Compliance:
| N/A |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
Complied With Contract Clause Requirements
Complied With Reporting Requirements
Complied With Design Requirements
Compliance With Labor Laws And Regulations
Complied With Safety Laws And Regulations
Correction Of Noted Deficiencies
Comments:
Overall Rating:
| N/A |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
Overall Rating
Comments:
Recommendation
| Given what you know today about the contractor’s ability to perform the work required, would you recommend the selection of this firm for similar requirements in the future? |
| Would |
| Would Not |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .