Attachment 3 - Past Performance Evaluation Form.pdf

National Science Foundation Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support 2415 Eisenhower Ave.

Alexandria, Virginia 22314-4684

31 January 2022

MEMORANDUM FOR PROSPECTIVE EVALUATORS

FROM: NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

SUBJECT: Solicitation No: 49100422R0003, Title: NTEW Bridge Survey, Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3)

1. The National Science Foundation (NSF) is conducting a quotation evaluation for subject solicitation. Under the solicitation NSF is including past performance as part of the evaluation.

The contractor listed in Section A of the attached questionnaire has identified your office as a source to evaluate their past performance. All responses should be based on progress meetings, objective criteria, Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), or correspondence. There should be no unexpected responses or surprises to the contractor. All negative responses should be understood /resolved prior to our final receipt.

2. The individual most knowledgeable of the contractor’s day-to-day operations and overall performance should complete the survey. However, the contracting officer must review the completed survey for accuracy and completeness.

3. Complete the questionnaire by indicating your ratings and providing comments wherever applicable. For any rating of U or M, request you provide an explanatory narrative and attach to your response a copy of CDR’s and contractors corrective measures. The narratives need not be lengthy, but should be detailed and descriptive. If the contractor is having you evaluate more than one contract/order, use separate evaluation forms for each contract/order being evaluated.

4. Your time and effort in providing this information is greatly appreciated. The requested information is critical to our evaluation. NSF contracts may be awarded after review of your survey. Please allow sufficient time to complete this survey and return the completed package as quickly as possible but not later than April 1, 2022 by 11:59 pm. Please email your inputs to Jonathan Schmeelk at jschmeel@nsf.gov.

5. If you have any questions, please contact Jonathan Schmeelk at the above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation and expeditious response to this request.

Jonathan Schmeelk, Contracting Officer

PAST PERFORMANCE

EVALUATION

QUESTIONNAIRE Solicitation 49100422R0003

Source Selection Sensitive Page 1 Attachment #2

SECTION A: CONTRACTOR Information (to be completed by the contractor requesting evaluation prior to mailing) A. Contractor’s name and address:

B. Point of Contact:

C. Phone Number (with area code):

D. Contract number:

E. Project Title or Description of Work performed under this project:

F. Contract Type: Firm-Fixed-Price Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite Quantity Task Order Cost-Reimbursement

G. Project Award Date: Scheduled Completion Date:

Current/Final Completion Date:

H. Project Award Amount: Current/Final Project Amount:

I. Contractor being evaluated performed as the Prime Contractor Subcontractor Supplier on this contract/order.

J. Authorization is hereby granted to provide the information requested in SECTION B of this Questionnaire.

(Signature)

(Name and Title of Authorizing Official) (Date)

SECTION B: RESPONDENT INFORMATION (to be completed by respondent.)

EVALUATED BY:

(Signature) (Date)

Address:

(Typed or Printed Name)

(Title)

Phone Number: ( ) NOTE: The identify of individual(s) providing reference information shall not be disclosed.

PAST PERFORMANCE, Continued

EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Solicitation 49100422R0003

Source Selection Sensitive

← Less Favorable More Favorable → U M N S E

Unacceptable Marginal Neutral Satisfactory Exceptional (Strongly Disagree)

(Wouldn't recommend) (Unsatisfactory)

(Below expectations) (Poor performer)

(Not Applicable: No past performance available)

(Agree) (Acceptable)

(Would recommend)

(Strongly Agree) (Very Good)

EVALUATION AREAS

1. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

Customer would have no reservations in awarding another contract to the Contractor.

U M N S E

2. QUALITY:

aa

Contractor provided effective quality control and inspection procedures which resulted in a quality finished project.

U M N S E bb

Contractor developed and submitted realistic progress schedule(s). U M N S E cc

Contractor provided well researched and clearly identified submittals that matched contract requirements.

U M N S E dd

Contractor completed all work with good workmanship and in conformance with the specifications, resulting in minor, if any, punch list items.

U M N S E

3. TIMELINESS:

aa

Contractor met established project schedules to complete the project on time, as scheduled..

U M N S E bb

Contractor performed all work without the issuance of a CURE NOTICE or a SHOW CAUSE LETTER (If a notice was issued, please describe the circumstances on a separate sheet of paper and identify if Liquidated Damages were assessed)

U M N S E cc

Contractor provided timely cost/design proposals. U M N S E dd

Contractor submitted the progress schedule and interim progress reports as required.

U M N S E ee

Contractor provided on-time submittals as required. U M N S E ff

Contractor provided payrolls for both their firm and their subcontractors’ employees as required and scheduled..

U M N S E gg

Contractor provided timely resolution of all punch list items. U M N S E

4 RESPONSIVENESS:

aa

Contractor acted promptly to resolve problems, ensuring compliance with contract requirements and safety regulations.

U M N S E bb

Contractor was reasonable and cooperated to resolve problems, attended meetings as needed, and maintained communication with the government to keep the project on schedule or minimize the delay.

U M N S E cc

Contractor identified problems as they occurred; suggested realistic approaches to problems; displayed initiative to solve problems; and performed as a “Team Member”.

U M N S E

PAST PERFORMANCE, Continued

EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Solicitation 49100422R0003

Source Selection Sensitive dd

Contractor realigned performance schedules to meet customer needs when changes occurred.

U M N S E ee

Contractor responded to warranty issues within the timeframes specified in the contract.

U M N S E

5 SUBCONTRACTS AND MANAGEMENT:

aa

Contractor provided experienced/qualified managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.

U M N S E bb

Contractor hired quality subcontractors and effectively managed and coordinated their work.

U M N S E cc

Contractor hired, maintained, and replaced as necessary, qualified personnel and subcontractors/suppliers.

U M N S E dd

Contractor ensured the site manager had sufficient authority to make decisions and take actions during project performance to keep the project on schedule.

U M N S E ee

Contractor ensured the site manager was consistently present on site when work was performed.

U M N S E ff

Contractor paid employees/subcontractors/suppliers as required. U M N S E

6. COST:

aa

Contractor provided complete, supportable, accurate, and reasonable cost proposals that met the requirements of the project or modification.

They were not over-inflated nor were they underestimated.

U M N S E bb

Contractor demonstrated the ability to control costs and/or design projects or modifications within the magnitude specified.

U M N S E

COMMENTS: