Attachment 2 Past Performance Questionnaire - fillable.pdf

PDF 827 KB Posted

Attached to
Innovation and Technology Ecosystems Workshops Requirement Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
49100424Q0029
Issued by
National Science Foundation Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support

About this file

This document contains a past performance questionnaire template and information about an upcoming National Science Foundation solicitation.

The past performance questionnaire template requests information about a contractor's performance on a previous task order or contract. It includes tables to rate a contractor's quality, schedule, management, and regulatory compliance on factors such as meeting requirements, problem resolution, and adhering to regulations. The solicitation is for Ideas Lab workshop services. Ideas Labs are interactive events where participants collaborate on solutions to specific problems or challenges. The National Science Foundation Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support will host workshops to develop meaningful solutions in an intensive 3 to 5 day virtual or in-person setting. Responses are due by the quotation date listed in the solicitation.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Innovation and Technology Ecosystems Workshops Requirement, newest first.
File Type Posted
Amendment 0003 Date for Quotations.pdf PDF
49100424Q0029 0003.pdf PDF
Consolidated Questions IdeaLabs Workshops responses.pdf PDF
49100424Q0029 0002.pdf PDF
Amendment 0002 Date for Quotations.pdf PDF
49100424Q0029 0001.pdf PDF
Amend 1 Attachment 1 SOW for Innovation and Technology Ecosystems Workshops.pdf PDF
Amendment 0001 Date for Quotations.pdf PDF
49100424Q0029.pdf PDF
Attachment 1 SOW for Innovation and Technology Ecosystems Workshops.pdf 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

Attachment 2 Past Performance Questionnaire

RFQ: 49100424Q0029

Please provide your assessment of the prospective quoter's level of past performance on a task order/contract for which you were the reference. Please fill in the below tables and choose the appropriate rating from the drop-down list using the definitions on page two and provide justification for that rating. Submit the questionnaire by the quotation due date to: Bethany Stutler at bstutler@nsf.gov and Jonathan Schmeelk at jschmeel@nsf.gov

Contractor Being Evaluated Company/Government Agency Completing the Questionnaire Period of Performance Being Assessed Contract Award Date Contract Number & Order Number (if applicable) Contract Completion Date Evaluator Name and Agency

Evaluator Email and Phone Total Dollar Value (includes unexercised options; ceiling amount for IDIQ) Current Dollar Value (current obligated amount) Project Title Contract Effort Description (Identify the key requirements and/or type of effort. The description should be detailed enough so that it can be used in determining the relevance of this program or project. Address the complexity of the contract/order effort and the overall technical risk associated with accomplishing the effort. Ensure acronyms are identified. Provide a complete description of the contract/order effort that identifies key technologies, components, subsystems, and requirements. For indefinite delivery vechicles, state the number of orders issued during the period, the number of orders completed during the period, and the number of orders that remain active.

Would you recommend this company for selection?

RFQ: 49100423Q0060

Rating Definition Justification Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

RFQ: 49100423Q0060

Category and Description Rating (drop down) Justification Quality of Product or Service Contractor’s conformance to contract/order requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship.

Choose a Rating

Schedule. Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements.

Choose a Rating

Management. Assess the integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract/order, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification of issues in controversy), customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts.

Choose a Rating

Regulatory Compliance Consider failure to report in accordance with contract terms and conditions, late or nonpayment to subcontractors, trafficking violations, tax delinquency, defective cost or pricing data, terminations, suspension and debarments.

Assess compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order relating to applicable regulations and codes, Consider aspects of performance such as compliance with financial, environmental, safety, and labor regulations as well as any other reporting requirements in the contract terms and conditions.

Choose a Rating

Choose A Rating

Choose A Rating

Choose A Rating

Choose A Rating

Choose a Recommendation Given what I know today, I would recommend the company for this requirement.

Contractor Being Evaluated:
ICFEvaluator Email and Phone:
JustificationChoose A Rating:
JustificationChoose A Rating_2:
JustificationChoose A Rating_3:
JustificationChoose A Rating_4:
JustificationGiven what I know today I recommend them for similar requirements Choose a Recommendation:
Dropdown1: [ ]
Dropdown2: [ ]
Dropdown3: [ ]
Dropdown4: [ ]
Contract Award Date:
Contract Number Order Number if applicable:
Period of Performance Being Assessed:
CompanyGovernment Agency Completing the Questionnaire:
Contract Completion Date:
Evaluator Name and Agency:
Total Dollar Value includes unexercised options ceiling amount for IDIQ: $
Project Title:
Current Dollar Value current obligated amount: $
Contract Effort Description Identify the key requirements andor type of effort The description should be detailed enough so that it can be used in determining the relevance of this program or project Address the complexity of the contractorder effort and the overall technical risk associated with accomplishing the effort Ensure acronyms are identified Provide a complete description of the contractorder effort that identifies key technologies components subsystems and requirements For indefinite delivery vechicles state the number of orders issued during the period the number of orders completed during the period and the number of orders that remain active:
Would you recommend this company for selection:
Additional Notes::

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .