Attach 6 - Step 1 PPQ.docx
DOCX document 25 KB Posted
- Attached to
- AOC MACC Onboarding Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- AOCACB25R0006
- Issued by
- Architect of the Capitol
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) template for the AOC Multi-Award Construction Contract IDIQ (AOCACB25R0006). The questionnaire is designed to evaluate contractors' past performance through customer references, with ratings of Outstanding, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory across 17 key performance areas.
The evaluation areas include schedule adherence, quality control, work quality, pricing reasonableness, labor and safety compliance, customer satisfaction, management capabilities, and subcontractor coordination. Completed questionnaires must be submitted to John Lingamfelter (john.lingamfelter@aoc.gov) with a copy to Matthew Hutcherson (matthew.hutcherson@aoc.gov) by the RFP submission deadline. The form requires detailed information about both the contractor being evaluated and the evaluator, including contract numbers, project descriptions, and specific examples of performance, particularly for Outstanding or Unsatisfactory ratings.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 21
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
AOC PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
AOCACB25R0006
MULTI-AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IDIQ
The company listed below is preparing an offer on the above project for the Architect of the Capitol, Washington, DC. Your name has been provided as a customer reference regarding performance under a past contract with your agency/company. Your comments are considered Source Selection Sensitive, therefore, you are advised that your response will be safeguarded to the extent cited in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 42.1503. FAR prohibits the release of past performance evaluations to other than other Government personnel and the company whose performance is being evaluated during the period the information may be used to provide source selection information.
This past performance questionnaire is being submitted by the contractor and you are requested complete it and return it to the Architect of the Capitol in via email to John Lingamfelter at john.lingamfelter@aoc.gov, and copy Matthew Hutcherson at matthew.hutcherson@aoc.gov, on or before the proposal submission due date stated in the RFP. While all elements below may not apply, please complete as much as possible.
Company Requesting Past Project Information:
Company Name:
Past Project Title On Which The Company Is Being Evaluated
Project Title :
Contract Number:
Brief Description of Contract Scope:
Evaluator POC (for verification purposes)
Name: Agency/Company, POC Date:
Phone No.: Fax No.
(SOP 9-1, October 22, 2008)
E-mail Address:
Address:
Position held or function in relation to project:
Ratings: Please evaluate the contractor’s performance using the following ratings:
| “O” Outstanding | The contractor’s performance clearly exceeded the contract requirements. |
| “S” Satisfactory | The contractor’s performance met the contract requirements. |
| “M” Marginal | The contractor’s performance met the minimum contract requirements but with difficulty. | |
| “U” Unsatisfactory | The contractor’s performance was poor and/or did not satisfy contract requirements. |
Please rate and provide supporting information for the following. If the rating is Outstanding or Unsatisfactory, please provide specific contract/job performance areas which were exceeded or not performed in accordance with the contract’s minimum requirements. (Use additional sheets as needed)
1. Performance in meeting delivery/completion schedules: _____________________________
Rating:
2. What did the contractor do to improve or resolve schedule problems, if any?
Rating:
3. The contractor’s quality control (CQC).
Rating:
4. The contractor’s performance in delivering quality work in accordance with the contract:
Rating:
5. The contractor’s ability to provide the required work at a reasonable total price.
Rating:
6. The contractor’s compliance with labor standards, if applicable.
Rating:
7. The contractor’s compliance with safety standards.
Rating:
8. Has the contractor been given any of the following: Cure notice, show cause, letters of reprimand, suspension of payments, termination? If yes, please explain.
Rating:
9. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If no, please state reasons for not recommending this contractor additional work.
Rating:
10. Was the customer satisfied with the end product?
Rating:
11. The relationship between the contractor and owner’s contract team/Contracting Officer/COR/COTR?
Rating:
12. The contractor’s on-site management and coordination of subcontractors.
Rating:
13. The contractor’s overall corporate management, integrity, reasonableness and cooperative conduct.
Rating:
14. Has the contractor filed any modifications?________ How many?
And to what extent?
15. Has the contractor been provided an opportunity to discuss any negative performance ratings?
If so, what were the results?
16. Has the contractor demonstrated the ability to professionally handle unusual and adverse circumstances of the project as they arise?
If so, please describe and what were the results? ____________________________________
17. OVERALL RATING Rating:
18. Please provide any additional comments:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .