Attachment 1 - Past Performace Questionnaire (PPQ).docx

Attachment 1 - Past Performance Questionnaire

Instructions:

◊ Sections I through III to be completed by the Offeror/Major Subcontractor and provided to the assessor (Government personnel who had experience with the Offeror/Major Subcontractor on a previous relevant contract). The assessor, in turn, to verify Sections I through III, complete the questionnaire, and submit to the Contracting Office. The Offeror should also submit with its proposal (by the closing date of the Solicitation) copies of Sections I and II of all questionnaires as provided to assessors.

◊ Section II to be validated by the assessor. If any information is incorrect herein, please annotate and provide the correct information accordingly.

◊ Sections III through VII to be completed in their entirety by the assessor.

Message to the assessor: Your assistance is requested by the Department of Veterans Affairs to assist with establishing the performance history for the Contractor named below. In efforts to expedite receipt of the requested information, the Contracting Office respectfully requests that you do not mail hard copies. Instead, please e-mail the completed questionnaire(s) to: maurice.christian@va.gov and julian.thrash@va.gov NO LATER THAN 2:00 pm EDT July 6, 2020.

I. Solicitation Data (for the proposed effort)

Project/Requirement Description The VHA Environmental Programs Service, Asheville, NC, has a requirement of a follow-on an enterprise-wide BPA. RMW is also referred to as infectious waste, potentially infectious medical waste, biohazardous waste, and includes any waste material or article that harbors, or may be reasonably expected to harbor pathogens that might be expected to produce disease in healthy individuals. This category may include stock cultures, pathological wastes, human and blood products, used sharps, animal wastes and isolation wastes.

Currently, many facilities do not have capabilities for treating RMW on-site and are contracting directly for transportation and disposal as the primary method used. VHA is seeking potential contractors to provide on-site, steam autoclave, RMW treatment equipment and services nationwide at multiple VAMCs and Community Based Outpatient Clinic (CBOC) throughout the VA Healthcare system. This equipment and services may include, site preparation, installation, the development of standard operating procedures and practices, procedures for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, environmental sustainability, and repair for each ordering facility. This equipment will be self-contained, state-of-the-art, automated equipment capable of rendering material innocuous.

Subsequently, this equipment will provide the capability to shred internally or externally, compact, and recycle or provide waste to fuel technology. The NAICS Code is within the focus area, 562211 (Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal)/$41.5 Million; PSC 4540. This requirement will be issued as a multiple-award, Enterprise-wide Indefinite Delivery, Indefinitely Quantity (IDIQ) vehicle.

II. Current or Historical Contract Information Assessor: The performance data submitted by Quoter is correct or incorrect.

CONTRACTOR NAME &

ADDRESS:

Contract No

Type of Contract

Contract Value

Period of Performance/Delivery Schedule

Project/Requirement Description

Please select from the following as it applies to this contract:

III. Assessor Information Assessor Name

Title

Phone Number/Email Address

Identify your role in the contract award or administration and the period of your involvement.

Role

Period of Involvement

Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)

Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)

Contract Specialist

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

Technical Project Lead/Project Officer

Quality Assurance Specialist

Other:

IV. Evaluation Definitions The following definitions should be used in your assessment of Contractor performance.

EXCEPTIONAL

Performance EXCEEDED MOST contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns.

VERY GOOD

Performance EXCEEDED SOME contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns, for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were highly effective.

SATISFACTORY

Performance MET contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed contain minor issues or concerns, for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

MARGINAL

Performance MET SOME contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed includes significant problems, issues, or concerns for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were only somewhat effective.

UNSATISFACTORY

Performance DID NOT MEET contractual requirement. The performance of the areas being assessed includes serious problems, issues, or concerns for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.

V. Performance Evaluation

1. Quality of Performance

a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the quality of the contractor’s performance?

Quality of Performance

Please provide rationale for the assigned rating.

b. Assess the Contractor’s quality of performance in the following areas.

Conformance to Contract Requirements

Conformance to Specifications

Standards of Good Workmanship (technical, professional, environmental, safety, etc.)

All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.

c. Did the Government contribute in any way to problems associated with quality as identified in the above assessment? Please explain.

2. Schedule Performance

a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet the schedule?

Schedule

Please provide rationale for assigned rating.

b. Assess the Contractor’s Schedule Performance in the following areas.

Schedule Performance

Timeliness in Completion of Contract/Task Order/Delivery Schedule

Timeliness in Meeting Milestones

Timeliness in Submitting Deliverables

All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.

c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the Schedule problems identified in the above assessment? Please explain.

3. Management Performance

a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s management performance?

Management

b. Assess the Contractor’s management performance in the following areas.

Good

MANAGEMENT RESPONSIVENESS— (timeliness, completeness, and quality of problem identification, proposal submittal, history of cooperative behavior, effective business relations, teamwork AND customer satisfaction)

All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.

c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the management problems identified in the above assessment? Please explain.

Page 1 of

4. Cost Control

a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to forecast, manage, and control costs?

Cost Control

b. Assess the Contractor’s cost performance in the following areas.

Good

COST/PRICE

ESTIMATES— (ability to meet proposed costs and whether actual costs/rates realized reflect negotiated costs/rates)

COST EFFICIENCIES—

(realization of any in accomplishing SOW)

INVOICING—accuracy and timeliness of submission

FORECASTING/MANAGE

MENT/COST CONTROL

All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.

VI. Overall Rating of Contractor’s performance (technical, schedule, management, and cost) on contract being assessed.

VII. General Comments:

Assessor’s Signature