Attachment 11 - B1643 - Past Perf Questionnaire.pdf
PDF 771 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Repair B1643 Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA667522R0007
About this file
This document contains a solicitation for the renovation of an Air Force maintenance hangar building and a related past performance questionnaire. The solicitation seeks fixed-price proposals to perform phased demolition, construction, and renovation work at Hangar Building 1643 located at Naval Air Station Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base in Texas. A site visit is scheduled for July 12th and requests for information are due by July 21st. Proposals must be submitted by August 1st, with award timing to be determined. The contract is set aside for small businesses and has an estimated value between $5-10 million. The past performance questionnaire is a template for references to provide feedback on an offeror's performance on previous relevant contracts. It requests details of prior work and ratings on various performance factors.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 13 - RFI QA - 07.26.2022.pdf | ||
| Attachment 12 - B1643 - Site Visit Sign In Sheet.pdf | ||
| SF 30 - FA667522R00070001 - Amendment 01.pdf | ||
| Attachment 3 - B1643 - Specs Volume 1.pdf | ||
| Attachment 10 - B1643 - AF 3000.pdf | ||
| Solicitation - FA667522R0007.pdf | ||
| Attachment 9 - B1643 - RFI.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - B1643 - Non-Disclosure Agreement.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 - B1643 - Specs Volume 2.pdf | ||
| Attachment 8 - B1643 - WD TX20220270 02252022.pdf |
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
For Official Use Only When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.
Section L Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire
For Official Use Only Page 1 of 7
The 301st Contracting Flight of the Air Force Reserve Command is in the process of competitively selecting a source for a construction project to renovate a Hangar building at NAS Fort Worth JRB, Texas.
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 the solicitation’s closing date and time. 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 todd.benner@us.af.mil or by hand (Attention: Todd Benner). Please email or call Todd Benner at 817-782-3139 if you have any questions. 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.
Robert J. Walz Contracting Officer
1 Atch Past Performance Questionnaire
For Official Use Only Page 2 of 7
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
Note: If offeror holds or has held other contracts with your agency/organization in the last three (3) years, please complete separate Past Performance Questionnaire forms for those contracts as well.
Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification
A. Customer or agency name:
B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):
For Official Use Only Page 3 of 7
C. Geographic description of work performed 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/fax number/e-mail address:
D. Length of time (number of years/months) respondent worked on subject contract and description of responsibility/position/role:
E. Other suggested points of contact:
Section 4: Performance Information
In the table 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.
For Official Use Only Page 4 of 7
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.
The Contractor: E V S M U N/A
1. Provided experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION:
2. Demonstrated the ability to hire, maintain, and replace, if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period.
3. Delegated authority to project managers and supervisors commensurate with contract requirements.
4. Home office participated in solving significant local problems.
5. Followed approved quality control plan.
6. Provided effective quality control and/or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements.
7. Corrected deficiencies in timely manner and pursuant to their quality control procedures.
8. Provided timely resolution of contract discrepancies.
For Official Use Only Page 5 of 7
The Contractor: E V S M U N/A
9. Identified problems as they occurred.
10. Suggested alternative approaches to problems.
11. Displayed initiative to solve problems.
12. Developed realistic progress schedules.
13. Met established project schedules.
14. Provided timely resolution of warranty defects.
15. Was responsive to contract changes.
16. Provided adequate project supervision.
17. Obtained consent of surety for increases in bonding as work-in-progress increased.
For Official Use Only Page 6 of 7
The Contractor: E V S M U N/A
18. Paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner.
19. Provided accurate and complete line item cost proposals including all aspects of work required for each task.
20. Cooperated with Government personnel after award.
21. Met or exceeded small business and small disadvantaged business goals set forth in the approved subcontracting plan.
22. How would you rate the contractor's overall performance on this contract?
23. Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract?
If yes, explain.
EXPLANATION:
☐ Yes
☐ No
24. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain.
EXPLANATION:
☐ Yes
☐ No
IF THIS WAS A GOVERNMENT CONTRACT:
Did this contract include FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan?
☐ Yes ☐ No
If yes, did the contractor comply with the clause? Please explain.
For Official Use Only Page 7 of 7
Did this contract include FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns?
☐ Yes ☐ No
If yes, did the contractor comply with the clause? Please explain.
Additional remarks:
Respondent’s Signature Date
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
Please return this completed questionnaire to:
Mailing Address:
301 CONF/PK, 1660 Lyons Drive, NAS Fort Worth JRB, TX 76127
E-Mail to: todd.benner@us.af.mil
| 2022-06-14T13:25:31-0500 | |
| WALZ.ROBERT.J.1138684853 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .