Attach 7_PPQ ERMA23.docx

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

MISSION AND INSTALLATION CONTRACTING COMMAND (MICC)

FORT SAM HOUSTON (FSH)

2205 INFANTRY POST RD

FORT SAM HOUSTON, TX 78234-1361

SUBJECT: Offeror Past Performance Assessment in Support of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. W9124J-22-R-0005

Dear Sir/Ma’am, The U.S. Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command – Fort Sam Houston (MICC-FSH), is currently conducting a competitive source selection to evaluate offerors on the subject RFP. As part of this evaluation, we have requested that the offerors provide information about their past performance on recent and relevant federal, state, or local government or commercial contracts as compared to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 562910, Environmental Remediation Services). You have been identified as the point of contact cited on the enclosure. Your assessment of their performance is extremely valuable to our evaluation.

Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Questions may be directed to the undersigned at (telephone number and/or email address - TBD).

Sincerely, (TBD)

Contracting Officer

Performance Assessment Questionnaire

Please provide your candid responses. The information that you provide will be used in the awarding of federal contracts. Therefore, it is important that your information be as factual, accurate and complete as possible to preclude the need for follow-up by the evaluators.

Rating Definitions:

Substantial Confidence: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements that benefit the end user. Work was accomplished with few, if any, minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. The offeror has been highly successfully in performing the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements that benefit the end user. Work was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. The offeror has successfully performed the required effort.

Limited Confidence: Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. Serious problems with contractor performance were experienced for which the contractor has either not yet identified corrective actions or the corrective actions taken appear only marginally effective. The offeror has had little success performing the required effort.

No Confidence: Performance does not meet most contractual requirements. Serious problems with contractor performance were experienced for which the corrective actions were ineffective. The offeror has not successfully performed the required effort.

PART I. (To be completed by the Offeror)

A. CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

Contractor/Company Name/Division:

Address:

Program Identification/Title:

Contract Number:

Contract Type:

Prime Contractor Name (if different from the contractor name cited above):

Contract Award Date:

Forecasted or Actual Contract Completion Date:

Nature of the Contractual Effort or Items Purchased:

Total Contract Value:

B. IDENTIFICATION OF OFFEROR’S REPRESENTATIVE

Name:

Title:

Date:

Telephone Number:

Address:

E-mail Address:

PART II. EVALUATION (To be completed by Point of Contact – Respondent) *Note: rationale is required for each response.

A. Compliance of Products, Services, Documents, and Related Deliverables to Specification Requirements and Standards of Good Workmanship

· Substantial Confidence

· Satisfactory Confidence

· Limited Confidence

· No Confidence

Rationale: __________________________________________________________

B. Effectiveness of Project Management (to include use and control of subcontractors).

· Limited Confidence

· No Confidence

Rationale: __________________________________________________________

C. Timeliness of Performance for Services and Product Deliverables.

· Limited Confidence

· No Confidence

Rationale: __________________________________________________________

D. Commitment to Customer Satisfaction and Business-like Concern for its Customers’ Interest

· Limited Confidence

· No Confidence

Rationale: __________________________________________________________

E. General Comments. Provide any other relevant performance information.

Comments: _________________________________________________________

F. Other Information Sources. Please provide the following information:

Are you aware of other relevant past efforts by this company?

If yes, please provide the name and telephone number of a point of contact:

Point of Contact (Name): __________________________________________ Telephone Number: ______________________________________________

G. Respondent Identification. Please provide the following information:

Organization:

Name:

Title:

Date:

Telephone Number Address:

E-mail Address:

image1.png image2.jpeg