Attachment 3 Assessor Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 66 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- M00264-26-R-0009
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
This is an Assessor Past Performance Questionnaire template used to evaluate contractor performance on previous relevant contracts. The document serves as the evaluation instrument for assessing offerors competing for RFP M00264-26-R-0009, a USMC Training and Education Command (TECOM) Human Performance Branch development and support contract.
The questionnaire is divided into seven sections with specific completion responsibilities. Sections I and II, containing solicitation data and current or historical contract information, are completed by the offeror or major subcontractor and provided to the assessor for verification. The offeror must submit copies of these sections with its quotation by the solicitation closing date. Sections III through VII are completed entirely by the assessor, who must be government personnel with prior experience administering the relevant contract. Assessors identify their role (Procuring Contracting Officer, Administrative Contracting Officer, Contract Specialist, Contracting Officer's Representative, Technical Project Lead, Quality Assurance Specialist, DCAA Auditor, or other), and submit the completed questionnaire via email to the contracting office rather than by hard copy. The evaluation criteria encompass five performance categories: Quality of Performance (including conformance to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of workmanship); Schedule Performance (completion of contract deliverables, milestone achievement, and timeliness); Management Performance (responsiveness, subcontract management, program management, personnel management, and integrated product team participation); Cost Control; and an overall performance rating. Each element uses a standardized five-level rating scale (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory) with defined criteria aligned to the Department of Defense Contractor Performance Assessment and Reporting System (CPARS) standards.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Solicitation Amendment M0026426R00090002 SF 30.pdf | ||
| M00264- 26-R-0009_Amend 0001_Attachment 1.pdf | ||
| M00264- 26-R-0009_Amend 0001.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 Past Performance Questionnaire.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1 PWS for HPB 03312026.docx | DOCX document | |
| M00264-26-R-0009.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 M00264-26-R-0009 Pricing Sheet TECOM HPB.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
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
RFP M00264-26-R-0009 Attachment #3
ASSESOR PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE TEMPLATE
Instructions:
· Sections I through II are to be completed by the Offeror/Major Subcontractor and provided to the assessor (Government personnel who had experience with the Offeror/Major Subcontractor on a previous relevant contract). The assessor, in turn, to verify Sections I through II, complete the questionnaire, and submit to the Contracting Office. The Offeror should also submit with its quotation (by the closing date of the Solicitation) copies of Sections I and II of all questionnaires as provided to assessors.
· Section II to be validated by the assessor. If any information is incorrect herein, please annotate and provide the correct information accordingly.
· Sections III through VII are to be completed in their entirety by the assessor.
Message to the assessor: Your assistance is requested by the USMC to assist with establishing the performance history for the Contractor named below. In efforts to expedite receipt of the requested information, the Contracting Office respectfully requests that you do not mail hard copies. Instead, please e-mail the completed questionnaire(s) to: christa.eggleston-sc@usmc.mil and shaye.nelson@usmc.mil.
I. Solicitation Data (for the proposed effort)
| Solicitation Number |
| M00264-26-R-0009 |
| Customer/Agency |
| Training and Education Command (TECOM) |
| Project/Requirement Description |
| TECOM HPB Development and Support |
II. Current or Historical Contract Information
Assessor: The information listed below is |_| Correct |_| Incorrect.
CONTRACTOR
NAME & ADDRESS:
Contract Number
Type of Contract
| Initial |
| Final |
Contract Value
Performance Period Delivery Schedule
Project/Requirement Description
Please select from the following as it applies to this contract:
| Contracting Role |
| |_| PRIME |
| |_| SUBCONTRACTOR |
| Termination History |
| |_| Convenience |
| |_| Default |
| |_| N/A |
III. Assessor Information
Assessor Name
Title
Phone Number/Email Address
Identify your role in the contract award or administration and the period of your involvement.
| Role |
| Period of Involvement |
Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)
Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)
Contract Specialist
Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)
Technical Project Lead/Project Officer
Quality Assurance Specialist
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) Auditor
Other (Specify)
IV. Evaluation Definitions
Use the following definitions in your assessment of contractor performance.
| EXCEPTIONAL |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| VERY GOOD |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| 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. |
| MARGINAL |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed 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. |
| 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. |
[The above evaluation levels and rating definitions are the same as prescribed in Attachment 2 of the Department of Defense’s Guidance for the Contractor Performance Assessment and Reporting System (CPARS) for use within CPARS.]
V. Performance Evaluation
[Insert within this section and the tables below all applicable elements and sub-elements relating to past performance (e.g., Quality of Product or Service, Schedule Performance, Management Performance, Cost Control, etc.) and explain what these elements and sub-elements encompass.]
1. Quality of Performance
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the quality of the contractor’s performance?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Quality of Performance
Please provide the rationale for your assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s quality of performance in the following areas.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Conformance to Contract Requirements
Conformance to Specifications
Standards of Workmanship *
* Standards of Workmanship: Technical, professional, environmental, safety, etc.
While all comments are appreciated, please explain below your rationale for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to problems associated with quality as identified in the above assessment? If yes, please explain.
2. Schedule Performance (Timeliness)
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet the schedule?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Schedule Performance
Please provide your rationale for the assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s Schedule Performance in the following areas.
| Schedule Performance |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Completion of Contract/Task Order/Delivery Schedule
Meeting Milestones and Schedules
Submitting Deliverables
While all comments are appreciated, please explain below your rationale for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any Schedule problems identified in the above assessment? If yes, please explain.
3. Management Performance
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s management performance?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Management Performance
Please provide rationale for assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s management performance in the following areas.
| Management Performance |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Management Responsiveness
Subcontract
Program Management
Management Of Personnel
Integrated Product Team Management
Management Responsiveness: Timeliness, completeness, and quality of problem identification, proposal submittal, history of cooperative behavior, effective business relations, teamwork AND customer satisfaction.
Subcontract Management: Timely award and management of subcontracts and meeting subcontracting goals for small business, small disadvantaged business, etc.
Program Management: Effectiveness of integration and coordination of all activities required to execute the contract, use of resources, assignment of responsibility, internal coordination and communication, and risk management practices Management Of Personnel: Ability to select, retain, support, and replace personnel with the experience and expertise necessary to accomplish the Government’s requirements within schedule and budget Integrated Product Team Management: Commitment and participation in the Integrated Product Team process
While all comments are appreciated, please explain below your rationale for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the management problems identified in the above assessment? If yes, please explain.
VI. Overall Rating of Contractor’s performance (technical, schedule, management, and cost) on contract being assessed.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
VII. General Comments:
| _________________________________ | ____________________ | |
| Assessor’s Signature | Date |
DISTRIBUTION: DoD COMMUNITY ONLY
DISTRIBUTION: DoD COMMUNITY ONLY
Page 1 of 6DISTRIBUTION: DoD COMMUNITY ONLY
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .