Attachment 2 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 32 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- HT941026Q2018
- Issued by
-
Defense Health Agency
About this file
This file is a Past Performance Questionnaire template for use by the Defense Health Agency (DHA), Healthcare Contracting Division-West, to evaluate contractor performance on pest management services contracts. The questionnaire is designed to be completed by government representatives who have previously worked with pest management service providers and submitted to John Lam Ho and Karen Cusson for evaluation purposes.
The questionnaire requests detailed information about the contractor's past performance across four key areas: adherence to contract terms and conditions for pest management services, provision of qualified and certified technicians, quality control and assurance measures, and records and documentation practices. Responses are rated using a five-point scale (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory) with a Not Applicable option, allowing evaluators to provide detailed feedback on contractor performance. The template also includes sections for respondent and contractor information, contract details, market segment magnitude data, and a performance summary requiring yes/no responses regarding contract award recommendation and any contract termination for default or cause. This questionnaire template serves to standardize past performance evaluation criteria for the Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson pest management services solicitation (HT941026Q2018) and does not contain specific service requirements or solicitation details.
View the file
Other files
Show all 13
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 (PPQ)
Defense Health Agency Contracting Activity (DHACA) Healthcare Contracting Division-West (HCD-W) requests responses from qualified sources capable of providing the following: Pest Management Services (base + 4 option periods) for the Joint Base Elmendorf Richardson, Alaska Military Treatment Facility (MTF).
Please complete the following questionnaire to assist our evaluation of the Contractor’s past performance and email to John Lam Ho (ho.j.lam.civ@health.mil) and Karen Cusson (karen.r.cusson.civ@health.mil).
RESPONDENT INFORMATION:
Contracting Activity/Customer:
Point of Contact (POC):
Title of POC:
Telephone:
Email:
OFFEROR’S REFERENCE INFORMATION:
Contractor Name:
Point of Contact (POC):
Telephone Number:
Email:
CONTRACT INFORMATION:
Contract Number:
Task Order Number:
Type of Contract:
Performance Period: (Base plus any options):
Description of Services:
MARKET SEGMENT
MAGNITUDE
Annual Contract Value:
Total Contract Dollar Value:
Facility Type:
Contractor performed on this contract as:
| Prime |
| Subcontractor |
| Teaming Partner |
| Joint Venture |
Please refer to the following assessment definitions to assess the Contractor’s performance in each of the areas listed in this questionnaire:
(E) Exceptional - The Contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many (requirements) to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective.
(V) Very Good - The Contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some (requirements) to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.
(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 resolved satisfactorily.
(M) Marginal - Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance 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 contains serious problem(s) for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
(N) Not Applicable – Unable to assess the area.
Contractor Performance
| Assess how the Contractor: |
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| NA |
Provided pest management IAW the terms and conditions of the contract.
Ensured that qualified and certified technicians provided pest management services IAW the terms and conditions of the contract.
Provided quality control and assurance for pest management services.
Provided records and documentation for the provided pest management services.
If other than “Satisfactory,” explain how the performance exceeds or does not meet contractual requirements:
| PERFORMANCE SUMMARY |
| Yes |
| No |
Would you award this firm another contract:
If you answered “No” provide an explanation:
Was the contract terminated for default or cause:
If you answered “Yes” provide an explanation:
Additional Comments:
Signature: _________________________________________ Date: __________________
Print Name: ________________________________________
Title: ______________________________________________
Telephone: _________________________________________
Thank you for your participation in providing a detailed and accurate history of past performance for this offeror.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .