Attach 5-Past Performance Questionnaire Sample.docx
DOCX document 52 KB Posted
- Attached to
- A4LR BUSINESS PROCESS ENGINEERING (BPR) SOLICITATION (Amendment 4) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA7014-24-R-0011
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire sample and details of a federal contract solicitation. The Air Force is soliciting proposals for business process engineering support services to develop and deliver integrated policy, training, and management of support equipment, materials, ground transportation, and distribution. Offerors must have a dedicated program manager to coordinate all tasks. The single-award contract will have a one-year base period and four one-year options, beginning in February 2024. This is an 8(a) small business set-aside solicited by the Department of the Air Force Headquarters District Washington. The past performance questionnaire provides a template for respondents to evaluate offerors' performance on previous contracts in key areas such as technical performance, program management, cost performance, and small business participation. Responses are due by January 8, 2024 to assist with proposal evaluations.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 20
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
Controlled Unclassified Information When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.
Section L Attachment: Past Performance/Affiliated Company Experience Questionnaire The District of Washington of the Air Force, AFDW/PKH, is in the process of competitively selecting a source for Air Force A4 Logistics Readiness Services. The mission of this program is to develop and facilitate logistics readiness, policy and program management of supply chain management, support equipment, ground transportation, and distribution management.
One of the considerations in 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. In order to meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than 8 January 2024. This schedule will allow us sufficient time to analyze the data prior to the start of negotiations.
To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to Keisha Teixeira at keisha.teixeira.1.ctr@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 Source Selection.
SHANNON J. WESTON
Contracting Officer
Enclosure:
Past Performance Questionnaire
Section L Attachment: Past Performance/Affiliated Company Experience 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
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.
Note: The following are SAMPLE questions. Past Performance evaluation teams MUST construct a simple and concise Past Performance Questionnaire, tailored to seek out key information tied to the significant aspects of the planned acquisition. Avoid questions that can be answered with a “yes” or “no” but instead include probing and direct questions to draw out the required information desired.
| Technical Performance |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
T1. How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the specification?
SUPPORTING INFORMATION:
T2. How was the quality of technical system operations & maintenance testing and certification efforts?
T3. How was the quality/integrity of technical data/report preparation efforts?
T4. How adequate/effective was the System Engineering Process?
T5. How well did the contractor implement current quality processes, standard practices for computer hardware design, operation, maintenance, upgrades, and configuration control?
T6. How well did the contractor implement current standard practices for computer software design, operation, maintenance, upgrades, and configuration control?
T7. How adequate/effective were the contractor’s environmental safety procedures?
| Program Management |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
P1. How effective was overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage, control and deliver on-time)?
P2. How reasonable and cooperative was the contractor when dealing with program staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)?
P3. How timely and effectively did the contractor resolve contract problems without extensive customer guidance?
P4. How well did the contractor understand/comply with customer objectives and technical requirements?
P5. How successfully did the contractor respond to emergency and/or surge situations?
P6. How well did the contractor manage quality/effectiveness of subcontracted efforts?
P7. How effective was the contractor’s material management (including Government Furnished Property or Material)?
P8. How effective was the contractor’s acquisition management?
P9. Of what benefit to the customer were contractor proposed alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors?
P10. To what degree did the contractor implement responsive/flexible processes to improve quality and timeliness of support?
| Transition/Phase-in |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
TP1. How smoothly did the contractor transition resources and personnel?
TP2. How effective was the contractor in maintaining continuity of mission support while transitioning/phasing in resources and personnel to support other efforts?
| Employee Retention/Attraction |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
E1. How effectively was the contractor able to hire/apply a qualified workforce to this effort?
E2. How effectively was the contractor able to retain a qualified workforce on this effort?
E3. How effective was employee compensation towards quality of work?
SUPPORTING INFORMATION:SUPPORTING INFORMATION:
| Small and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
S1. If the contract included FAR 52.219-9, to what degree was the contractor able to meet or exceed small business and small disadvantaged business goals set forth in the approved subcontracting plan?
(Please state if FAR 52.219-9 was not included in the contract)
S2. If the contract included FAR 52.219-8, how effectively did the contractor manage small business participation to meet technical performance?
(Please state if FAR 52.219-8 was not included in the contract)
| Cost Performance |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
C1. How accurate did the contractor forecast contract costs?
C2. How well did the contractor meet forecasted costs and perform within contract costs?
C3. How successfully did the contractor alert the Government of unforeseen costs before they occurred?
C4. How sufficient and timely was the contractor’s cost reporting?
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 he promised in his proposal, I award to him today given that I had a choice.
REMARKS:
Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.
Respondent’s Signature Date
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
Please return this completed questionnaire to:
E-Mail to: Keisha Teixeira Contractor-Contract Specialist - AFDW/PKH Keisha.teixeira.1.ctr@us.af.mil Controlled Unclassified Information Page 2 of 2
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .