Attachment 2 - Past Performance Questionare.docx
DOCX document 27 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W9124G_CEAD_FY24
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire cover letter related to a federal contract opportunity for Concept Development and Experimentation Support.
The letter is requesting that the recipient provide information on the contractor's past performance, including details on the contract number, type, period of performance, initial and final contract costs, and description of services provided. The questionnaire covers technical performance, program management, transition/phase-in, employee retention, small business participation, and cost performance. The recipient is asked to provide narrative responses, particularly for any areas rated as unsatisfactory. The completed questionnaire is requested by 12 April 2024 to be included in the evaluation of the offeror's past performance for the referenced contract opportunity, Solicitation Number W9124G_CEAD_FY24, which is a non-personnel services contract to provide subject matter expertise and operational support for concept development and experimentation processes for the Aviation Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate.
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
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE COVER LETTER
W9124G24R0004 CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT AND EXPERIMENTATION SUPPORT
FORT NOVOSEL AL.
20 MARCH 2024
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Mission and Installation Contracting Command – Fort Novosel is in the process of selecting a contractor to provide non-personal support required to assist Aviation Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate (A-CDID), Concepts, Experimentation and Analysis Division (CEAD) with planning and executing Aviation-related experimentation, reviewing and updating Army and Joint concepts, CBA/TBAs, and documenting Aviation requirements in Joint, Army, Functional and Special/Directed Concepts.
One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offerors' past and present performance on contracts, which reflect the offeror's ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from agencies such as yours, which have had firsthand experience with an offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror's performance on those contracts.
Our areas of interest in the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. Your written response is required no later than (NLT) 12 APRIL 2024 in order for your input to be included in the evaluation of the offeror’s past performance.
Please email completed questionnaire responses and/or any questions related to this request to Laura Blackmon at laura.j.blackmon2.civ@army.mil CC: Christopher Martin chritopher.w.martin24.civ@army/.mil (Subject: W9124G24R0004 Past Performance Questionnaire).
Your help is greatly appreciated and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this Source Selection.
ATTACHMENT 2
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
WHEN FILLED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION IAW FAR 3.104
SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
1. Contractor: _______________________________________________________________________________
1. Cage Code: _________________________________
1. Contract number: _______________________________________
1. Contract type: ______________________________
1. Was this a competitive contract? Yes _____ No _____
1. Period of performance: _________________________________________________________
1. Initial contract cost: $____________________________
1. Current/final contract cost: $_______________________________
1. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs:
1. Description of service provided: ______________________________________________________________
SECTION 2: CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION
1. Customer or agency name: _______________________________________________________________________________________
1. Customer or agency description (if applicable): _______________________________________________________________________________________
1. Geographic description of services under this contract, i.e. local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands:
SECTION 3: EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION
1. Evaluator's name: ______________________________________________________________________________________
1. Evaluator's title: ______________________________________________________________________________________
1. Evaluator's phone/fax number: ______________________________________________________________________________________
1. Number of years evaluator worked on subject contract:
SECTION 4: EVALUATION
Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:
CODE PERFORMANCE LEVEL
S SATISFACTORY – The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
US UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
NA NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score.
The questions shown below should be tailored to the Factors/Subfactors of the instant acquisition.
| Technical Performance |
| S |
| US |
| NA |
T1. Quality & repeatability of operations & maintenance.
T2. Quality of technical system testing and certification efforts
T3. Quality/integrity of technical data/report preparation efforts
T4. Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements
T5. Ability to implement current standard practices for computer hardware design, operation, maintenance, upgrades and configuration control
T6. Ability to implement current standard practices for computer software design, operation, maintenance, upgrades and configuration control
T7. Adequacy/effectiveness of environmental safety procedures
| Program Management |
| S |
| US |
| NA |
P1. Effectiveness of overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)
P2. Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)
P3. Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance
P4. Understand/complied with customer objectives and technical requirements
P5. Successfully responded to emergency and/or surge situations
P6. Quality/effectiveness of sub-contracted efforts
P7. Effectiveness of material management (including Government Furnished Property or Material)
P8. Effectiveness of acquisition management
P9. Contractor proposed alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the customer
P10. Contractor implemented responsive/flexible processes to improve quality and timeliness of support.
| Transition/phase-in |
| S |
| US |
| NA |
T1. Contractor ability to smoothly transition resources and personnel.
T2. Contractor effectiveness on maintaining continuity of mission support while transitioning/phasing in resources and personnel to support other efforts.
| Employee Retention/Attraction |
| S |
| US |
| NA |
E1. Ability to hire/apply a qualified workforce to this effort.
E2. Ability to retain a qualified workforce on this effort.
E3. Effectiveness of employee compensation towards quality of work.
| Small and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation |
| S |
| US |
| NA |
S1. Ability to meet or exceed small business and small disadvantaged business goals set forth in the approved subcontracting plan
S2. Ability to effectively manage small business participation to meet technical performance.
| Cost Performance |
| S |
| US |
| NA |
C1. Accuracy in forecasting contract costs
C2. Ability to meet forecasted costs and perform within contract costs
C3. Ability to alert Government of unforeseen costs before they occur
C4. Sufficiency and timeliness of cost reporting
1. Please discuss each and every response for which you indicated US (Unsatisfactory) in response to the questions above (use additional sheets, if necessary).
2. Government Contracts Only: Has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations?
| Yes____ | Default____ | Convenience____ | Pending Terminations____ |
| No ____ |
If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules, etc).
SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY
Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?
Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.
Evaluator’s Signature Date
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
Please return this completed questionnaire to:
E-mail to: laura.j.blackmon2.civ@army.mil CC: christopher.w.martin24.civ@army.mil
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .