Attachment 2 Past Performance Questionnaire (2).docx
DOCX document 36 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Video Wall Equipment Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) and Support Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 70US0926R70093555
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire for a federal contract opportunity related to Video Wall Equipment and Support Services. The questionnaire is designed for potential contractors to have their past performance evaluated across 12 key performance areas, including issue mitigation, technical document preparation, project management, innovation, cost control, communication, and personnel resources. Respondents are asked to rate performance on a scale from Excellent to Unsatisfactory for each category, with space for supporting comments.
The associated federal contract opportunity is a small business set-aside solicitation (70US0926R70093555) issued by the US Secret Service, seeking multiple five-year Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts for video wall equipment and support services. The NAICS code is 334310, with an anticipated performance period from February 26, 2026 to February 25, 2031. Completed questionnaires must be emailed to Keisha Pender at Keisha.Pender@usss.dhs.gov by January 2, 2026 at 1:00 pm EDT, and will be used to assess potential contractor performance and risk.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Amendment 2-Attachment 2 Past Performance Questionnaire-date update(2).docx | DOCX document | |
| Amendment 2-70US0926R70093555-RFP-Video Wall 01.12.2026.pdf | ||
| Amendment 2-Additional Questions 01.12.2026.pdf | ||
| Amendment 2-Attachment 3-Video Wall Large Event SOW 01.12.2026.pdf | ||
| Amendment 1-70US0926R70093555-RFP-Video Wall-Final 01.06.2026 .pdf | ||
| Amendment 1-Attachment 2 Past Performance Questionnaire-date update(2).docx | DOCX document | |
| Amendment 1-QA Responses-Final 01.06.2026.pdf | ||
| Amendment 1-Attachment 3-Video Wall Large Event SOW-Final.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 Solicitation Clarification Question Request Form (1).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 3-Video Wall Large Event SOW.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1-Video Wall Ceiling Price Worksheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 70US0926R70093555-RFP-Video Wall .pdf |
Show all 12
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
ATTACHMENT 2 – CORPORATE EXPERIENCE/PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
70US0926R70093555
OFFEROR’S NAME:_____________________________________
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Offeror’s Name:
Client/Agency/Company Name:
Questionnaire Respondent Name & Title:
Respondent’s Phone Number:
E-mail Address:
Contract Number: (Required)
Contracting Officer’s (CO) Name:
Contract Total Amount:
CO’s Phone Number:
E-Mail Address:
Contract Period of Performance: (Required)
Contract Type:
EVALUATION
Below are listed specific questions relating to the Contractor’s performance in the areas of quality, timeliness, cost control, business relations and customer satisfaction. Please rate the Contractor for each question on a scale from Excellent to Unsatisfactory. Indicate your rating by shading/highlighting your selected rating for each question. A “Comment” section is provided below each question. Please type response in the “Comment” section to support the rating given. Please email the completed questionnaire to the United States Secret Service Procurement Office, Keisha Pender, Keisha.Pender@usss.dhs.gov no later than January 2, 2026 at 1:00 pm. EDT.
Excellent– Highly relevant past/present performance record, managing contracts/task orders. Little or no potential risk exists for disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance based on the Offeror’s past performance.
Good – Relevant past/present performance record managing contracts/task orders. Minimal potential risk exists for disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance based on the Offeror’s past performance.
Satisfactory – Relevant past/present performance record managing contracts/task orders. Moderate potential risk exists for disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance based on the Offeror’s past performance.
Unsatisfactory – Highly relevant or relevant past/present performance may exist; however, significant potential risk exists for disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance based on the Offeror’s past performance.
Neutral – No record of relevant past/present performance exists or relevant past/present performance history is not available. There is no expectation of either successful or unsuccessful performance based on the Offeror’s past performance record. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.
1. How well did the Contractor identify and mitigate issues timely and accurately to make informed, proactive and corrective decisions?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
2. How well did the contractor prepare technical documents and reports within budget, schedule, and in accordance with project requirements?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
3. How well did the contractor perform with minimal Government oversight?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
4. How well did the Contract manage multiple projects within your contract?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
5. How well did the Contract utilize innovative technologies in the performance of this work effort?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
6. How well did the Contractor manage cost and schedule when changes in system requirements occurred?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
7. How well did the Contractor provide clear visibility into cost, schedule, performance, and risks?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
8. How well did the contractor successfully deal with stakeholders and effectively mitigate stakeholder concerns and conflicts?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
9. How would you rate the Contractor’s ability to provide sufficient personnel resources for this effort?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
10. How well did the Contractor provide the right labor mix and skill level of people to meet your requirement?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
11. Did the Contractor have clear and concise lines of communication with all parties?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
12. How well did the contractor effectively manage its subcontractors?
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Neutral |
Comments:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .