Attachment 2 - PPEQ.docx

DOCX document 37 KB Posted

Attached to
FA520520QMG01 - Infection Preventionist Services Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
FA520520QMG01
Issued by
Department of the Air Force Pacific Air Forces

About this file

This document contains a Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire (PPEQ) template for evaluating a contractor's performance on a previous contract. The PPEQ requests information on a contractor's program management, transition and phase-in performance on a prior contract to provide infection preventionist services at Misawa Air Base in Japan. The questionnaire evaluates a contractor's effectiveness in areas such as contract management, resolving problems, understanding requirements, responding to emergencies, and transitioning personnel. Respondents are asked to provide ratings and supporting information on a contractor's performance in these areas using a scale of Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to FA520520QMG01 - Infection Preventionist Services, newest first.
File Type Posted
RFQ FA520520QMG01 Amend 1.pdf PDF
Attachment 1 - Infection Preventionist PWS_Final.pdf PDF
RFQ FA520520QMG01.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

For Official Use Only When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

Past Performance Experience Questionnaire Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Contractor (Company/Division):

B. Contractor Cage Code:

C. Contract Number:

D. Contract Type (e.g., FFP, FPIF, CPIF, CPFF, etc.):

E. Description of work performed:

F. Period of Performance

1. Dates of Performance:

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

Section 2: Respondent Identification

A. Respondent’s name:

B. Respondent’s title:

C. Respondent’s phone number / fax number / e-mail address:

D. Respondent’s position (e.g., Program Manager, PCO/ACO, etc.):

E. Length of time (number of years/months) respondent worked on subject contract and description of responsibility/position/role:

Section 3: Performance Information

In the tables below, indicate your rating for the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block to the right of each question. Provide supporting information for each response in the space provided. Attach additional pages if more space is needed. The performance rating scale is defined as follows:

Code Performance Rating

E EXCEPTIONAL – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

V VERY GOOD – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

S SATISFACTORY – Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

M MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed 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 being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

N/A NOT APPLICABLE – Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect, performance was not observed, or information was not available. Do not know.

Program Management
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

P1. How effective was overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage, control and deliver on-time)?

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

P2. How reasonable and cooperative was the contractor when dealing with program staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)?

P3. How timely and effectively did the contractor resolve contract problems without extensive customer guidance?

P4. How well did the contractor understand/comply with customer objectives and technical requirements?

P5. How successfully did the contractor respond to emergency and/or surge situations?

P6. To what degree did the contractor implement responsive/flexible processes to improve quality and timeliness of support?

P7. Did the contractor provide timely response to any inquiries/requests to perform the best service?

Transition / Phase-in
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

TP1. How smoothly did the contractor transition resources and personnel?

TP2. How effective was the contractor in maintaining continuity of mission support while transitioning/phasing in resources and personnel to support other efforts?

SECTION 4: GENERAL COMMENT

Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired:

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

For Official Use Only Page 1 of 3

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