Attachment 2_Past Performance Survey_Sol 75H70726Q00092.docx
DOCX document 398 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- Solicitation_75H70726Q00092
About this file
This is a Past Performance Survey template for the Department of Health and Human Services Indian Health Service (IHS) Solicitation No. 75H70726Q00092, concerning Preventive Maintenance Services for Optometry Equipment at Zuni Comprehensive Community Health Center. The template is designed to collect references and past performance evaluations from previous clients of contractors bidding on this solicitation.
The survey requests detailed information about previous contracts, including overall contract type, end products, patient populations served, contractor planning and staffing capabilities, and timeline adherence. Evaluators must assign ratings across five performance categories: Quality of Service (measuring compliance, accuracy, personnel effectiveness, technical excellence, specification conformance, and nationwide service capability); Cost Control (assessing cost forecasting, billing accuracy, cost negotiation relationships, and efficiencies); Timeliness of Performance (evaluating milestone achievement, reliability, responsiveness to technical direction, on-time completion, and liquidated damages); Business Relations (covering management effectiveness, cooperative behavior, problem notification, flexibility, and small business subcontracting); and Customer Satisfaction (addressing commitment to satisfaction and recommendation for future selection). Each category uses a five-point rating scale from Excellent to Unacceptable, with Excellent indicating no performance problems and demonstrated initiative to exceed requirements, and Unacceptable indicating non-conformances that compromise contract achievement despite substantive government intervention. The survey includes space for client information, project details, government and commercial project manager contacts, and additional comments to support ratings.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 4_QA.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1_Equipment list PM service.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Sol_75H70726Q00092 terms and conditions.pdf |
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
Section 14
| DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES | |
| Indian Health Service |
Past Performance Survey Solicitation No.: 75H70726Q00092 PM SERVICE OPTOMETRY EQUIPMENT
Contractor Name: CLIENT INFORMATION
Commercial Client Federal Client Client Name:
Client Address:
City State Zip Code Project Name:
Contract Number(s): Total Contract Value: Performance Period: Teaming Partner(s):
Government or Commercial Project Manager Contact
Alternate Government or Commercial Project Manager Contact
Name: Name: Title: Title: Phone number: Phone number: Fax number: Fax number: E-mail address: __ E-mail address:
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
Instructions: This part consists of open-ended questions to determine the scope, complexity, and relevance of the contract to the current requirements. Please answer the questions concisely and to the best of your knowledge.
1. Describe the overall contract type the contractor provided.
2. Describe the end goal/end product and result.
3. Describe the general background type of the patients served in performing this task.
4. Describe the level of planning and staffing contractor was required to perform and if they met the contracts exceptions.
5. Describe the average timeline involved in completing this contract and if contractor met that timeline within reason.
SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Past Performance Survey
PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS
Please answer each of the following questions with a rating that is based on objective measurable performance indicators to the maximum extent possible. Comments to support ratings may be noted on last page. The Government will assess an overall past performance rating for each reference contacted. The overall ratings of each reference will then be combined to arrive at a final past performance rating that will be assigned points based upon the following rating scheme:
RATINGS ARE DEFINED AS FOLLOWS:
Definition Description
Excellent The Contractor demonstrates an excellent performance level in all categories. There have been no performance problems and the Contractor has demonstrated initiative to enhance/exceed contractual requirements and objectives. The Contractor also has maintained an excellent Contractor/Government relationship throughout contract performance
Good There are no quality-of-service problems; no cost/price issues; and no delays. Responses to inquiries and technical/service administrative issues are consistently effective and responsive. Non-conformance does not impact achievement of contract requirements.
Acceptable Non-conformances are minor and have little impact in achievement of contract requirements, requires minor intervention by Government personnel to resolve issues.
Marginal Non-conformances are impacting achievement of contract requirements, requires substantial intervention by Government personnel to resolve issues.
Unacceptable Non-conformances are compromising the achievement of contract requirements, despite substantive intervention by Government personnel.
SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
PART 1: GENERAL PERFORMANCE
INSTRUCTIONS: PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE RATING
| Quality of Service |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal |
| Unacceptable |
| N/A |
1. Compliance with contract requirements
2. Accuracy of Reports
3. Effectiveness of Personnel
4. Technical Excellence
5. Record of conforming to specifications and standards of good workmanship
6. Ability to provide services nationwide, including small and rural communities
| Cost Control |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal |
| Unacceptable |
| N/A |
1. Record of forecasting and controlling target costs
2. Current, accurate, and complete billings
3. Relationship of negotiated costs to actual
4. Cost efficiencies
| Timeliness of Performance |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal |
| Unacceptable |
| N/A |
1. Met interim milestones
2. Reliability
3. Responsive to technical direction
4. Completed on time including wrap up
5. Met delivery schedules
6. Amount of Liquidated Damages
Past Performance Survey
SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
(Excellent=Low or None, Unacceptable= High)
| Business Relations |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal |
| Unacceptable |
| N/A |
1. Effective Management, including subcontracts
2. Reasonable/cooperative behavior
3. Responsive to contract requirements
4. Notification of problems
5. Flexibility
6. Pro-active vs. Reactive
7. Effective small/small disadvantage business subcontracting program
8. History of staff turnover
| Customer Satisfaction |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal |
| Unacceptable |
| N/A |
1. Commitment to customer satisfaction
2. Would you recommend selection of this firm again?
3. Overall Rating of Contractor
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .