Attach 4 - Past Performance Questionnaire (26RA001).docx

41 KB Posted

Attached to
CES - Repair Roof B37
Solicitation number
W50S8W26RA001
Issued by

About this file

Written by GovTribe AI ·

This is a Past and Present Performance Questionnaire used to evaluate contractor performance on a completed federal contract. The form is designed to assess Supernatural Eats' performance on contract W50S8W-22-P-0002, a roof repair project (CES - Repair Roof B37) for building 37 at a Department of the Army National Guard facility in Cheyenne, Wyoming. The questionnaire uses a 1-6 rating scale, with 1 representing unsatisfactory performance and 6 representing exceptional performance, requiring narrative explanations for any ratings of 1 or 2.

The form evaluates 24 performance criteria across multiple categories including contractor management and staffing, quality control procedures, schedule adherence, problem resolution, responsiveness to changes, cost accuracy, and overall contractor cooperation. Key assessment areas include the contractor's ability to provide experienced management, maintain qualified personnel, implement effective quality control measures, meet project schedules, resolve deficiencies and warranty issues promptly, manage subcontractor payments, and maintain responsive communication with government personnel. The questionnaire also includes yes/no questions regarding whether the contractor received cure or show cause notices, whether the government would award future contracts to the contractor, and whether the contractor is rated in CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System). Responses should be submitted to benjamin.c.taylor.mil@army.mil.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Site Visit Sign In Roster.pdf PDF
B.07 Pre-Solicitation Conference Site Visit Slides (26-R-A001).pptx PPTX presentation
Solicitation Amendment W50S8W26RA0010001 SF 30.pdf PDF
Attach 6 - RFP Instructions (52.212-1 Ammend 1).pdf PDF
Attach 1 - SOW (W50S8W26RA001 Ammend 1).pdf PDF
B.06 RFIs Answered (26-R-A001).pdf PDF
Attach 1 - SOW (W50S8W26RA001).pdf PDF
Solicitation - W50S8W26RA001.pdf PDF
Attach 3 - Basis for Award (W50S8W26RA001).pdf PDF
Attach 5 - 153AW Form 10 Contractor EAL.pdf PDF
Attach 2 - Drawings (W50S8W26RA001).pdf PDF
Attach 6 - RFP Instructions (52.212-1).pdf PDF
Show all 12

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

A. GENERAL INFORMATION: (Please correct any information below known to be inaccurate)

Contractor’s Name:

Address:

Telephone #:

Point of Contact:

Project Title or Brief Description of Work:

Contract Number and Dollar Amount Provided by Offeror:

Contract Period or Dates of Performance Provided by Offeror:

Contractor performed as the Prime Contractor Sub-Contractor Key Personnel.

B. RESPONDENT INFORMATION:

Name of Respondent: Title:

C. Email COMPLETED SURVEY FORM TO THE GOVERNMENT AT: benjamin.c.taylor.mil@army.mil

D. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the number on the scale of 1 to 6 that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ANY RATINGS OF 1 OR 2.

1
2
3
4
5
6
UNSATISFACTORY/ NO CONFIDENCE
MARGINAL/ LITTLE CONFIDNENCE
SATISFACTOR Y/SATISFACTO RY

CONFIDENCE

VERY GOOD/ SIGNIFICANT CONFIDENCE
EXCEPTIONAL/ HIGH CONFIDENCE
NEUTRAL/ UNKNOWN CONFIDENCE
Performance did not meet most contractual requirements. There were serious problems and the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.
Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. There were problems, some of a serious nature, for which corrective action was only marginally effective.
Performance met contractual requirements.

There were some minor problems and corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded some to the government’s benefit. There were a few minor problems, which the contractor resolved in a timely, effective manner.
Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded many to the government’s benefit.

Problems, if any, were negligible and were resolved in a timely, highly effective manner.

No record of past performance or the record is inconclusive.i

CONTRACTOR’S NAME: Supernatural Eats CONTRACT NUMBER W50S8W-22-P-0002

The contractor:

1.
Provided experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.
1
2
3
4
5
6
2.
Demonstrated ability to hire, maintain, and replace, if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period.
1
2
3
4
5
6
3.
Delegated authority to project managers and supervisors commensurate with contract requirements.
1
2
3
4
5
6
4.
Home office participated in solving significant local problems.
1
2
3
4
5
6
5.
Followed approved quality control plan.
1
2
3
4
5
6
6.
Provided effective quality control and/or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7.
Corrected deficiencies in timely manner and pursuant to their quality control procedures.
1
2
3
4
5
6
8.
Provided timely resolution of contract discrepancies
1
2
3
4
5
6
9.
Identified problems as they occurred.
1
2
3
4
5
6
10.
Suggested alternative approaches to problems.
1
2
3
4
5
6
11.
Displayed initiative to solve problems.
1
2
3
4
5
6
12.
Developed realistic progress schedules.
1
2
3
4
5
6
13.
Met established project schedules.
1
2
3
4
5
6
14.
Provided timely resolution of warranty defects.
1
2
3
4
5
6
15.
Was responsive to contract changes.
1
2
3
4
5
6
16.
Provided adequate project supervision.
1
2
3
4
5
6
17.
Obtained consent of surety for increases in bonding as work-in- progress increased.
1
2
3
4
5
6

CES – Repair Roof (B37) (26RA001) Cheyenne, WY

18.
Paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner.
1
2
3
4
5
6
19.
Provided accurate and complete line item cost proposals including

all aspects of work required for each task.

1
2
3
4
5
6
20.
Cooperated with Government personnel after award.
1
2
3
4
5
6
21.
How would you rate the contractor's overall performance?
1
2
3
4
5
6
22.
Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced

contract? If yes, explain outcome in “remarks.”

YES/NO

23.
Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain in “remarks.”
YES/NO
24.
Is the contractor rated in CPARS?
YES/NO

Additional Remarks: CONTRACTOR’S NAME:

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