Attachment 01 Past Performance Information.pdf
PDF 148 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N6817114Q0028
About this file
This document contains an attachment requesting past performance information to be submitted in response to a solicitation. The solicitation is for firefighting training structures and props maintenance services to be provided to the Commander, Navy Region Europe, Africa Central in Naples, Italy. Offerors are asked to provide details of up to three relevant past or present contracts performed for federal, state or local government entities or commercial clients. For each, they should describe the contract type and value, period of performance, work description and whether it was completed on schedule and within budget without issues. They must also assess the relevancy of each past performance example as very relevant, relevant, somewhat relevant or not relevant based on its scope, magnitude and complexity relative to the requirements of this solicitation.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Attachment (1) Past Performance Information Source Selection Information see FAR 3.104
Reference #1 Reference #2 Reference #3 Contract Number(s) and type of contract
Procuring agency and name of reference point(s) of contact (not to exceed 3) and telephone number(s) at the Federal, State, Local Government or commercial entity for which the contract was performed
Euro/Dollar value of the contract
Period of performance
Detailed Description of the work
Clear statements describing whether the contract was completed on time, with a quality product conforming to the contract, without any degradation in performance or customer satisfaction.
Discuss any cost growth if the contract was not completed for the original contract amount
The number, type, frequency, duration and impact of any quality, delivery or cost problems in performing the contract, the corrective action taken, if any, and the effectiveness of the corrective action
Does the contractor consider their past performance to be very relevant and why:
See definitions below relevant and why:
somewhat relevant and why:
Does the contractor consider their past performance to be NOT relevant and why:
The definitions for “Relevant”, ”Not Relevant” “scope”, “size” and “complexity” are as follows:
Past Performance Relevancy Ratings
Adjectival Rating Description Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Scope Defined as having experience in the areas defined in the PWS
Magnitude The measure of the similarity of the dollar value of actually performed work that exists between the PWS and the quoter’s referenced contracts during the stated five-year period established by the solicitation.
Complexity Defined as degree of functions performed
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .