Attachment 3 - Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf
PDF 432 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA462125Q0027
About this file
This Past Performance Questionnaire is a document for an Aboveground/Underground Storage Tank (AST/UST) Maintenance Services contract at McConnell Air Force Base in Kansas, solicitation number FA4621-25-Q-0027. The questionnaire is designed to collect detailed performance feedback from previous clients, with a comprehensive evaluation matrix rating contractor performance across 17 different performance criteria including personnel management, problem-solving, quality control, regulatory compliance, schedule adherence, and overall project cooperation.
The document is source selection sensitive and requires the recipient to rate the contractor's performance using a six-point scale ranging from Exceptional (E) to Neutral (N), with specific definitions for each rating level. The completed questionnaire is to be emailed to two Air Force points of contact: Lindsay Manning and Jacob Sandy, who are managing this 100% Small Business set-aside procurement for the Department of the Air Force Air Mobility Command. The evaluation covers aspects such as hiring practices, quality control procedures, responsiveness to changes, problem identification, and willingness to recommend the contractor for future contracts.
View the file
Other files
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
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
AST/UST Maintenance Services McConnell AFB Kansas
FA4621-25-Q-0027
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE AND COVER LETTER
PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
When Filled In This Document Is Source Selection Sensitive in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 2.101 and FAR 3.104
SUBJECT: Request for Past Performance Evaluation
TO:
You have been identified as a point of contact for a past performance evaluation of the firm listed on the attached questionnaire. This firm is currently being considered for the Aboveground / Underground (AST/UST) Maintenance Service contract at McConnell
AFB, KS.
Your prompt attention to this questionnaire will be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions concerning this request, please contact Mrs. Lindsay Manning at commercial phone: 316-759-5659; email: lindsay.manning.1@us.af.mil or SSgt Jacob Sandy at commercial phone: 316-759-2297; email: jacob.sandy@us.af.mil.
CARL J. BRANTINGHAM, MSgt, USAF Contracting Officer
Attachment:
1. Past and Present Performance Questionnaire mailto:mohammad.eftekhari@us.af.mil mailto:jacob.sandy@us.af.mil
FA4621-25-Q-0027
A. GENERAL INFORMATION: Please correct any information below known to be inaccurate:
Contractor’s Name:
Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
Point of Contact:
Project Title or Brief Description of Work:
Contract Number: Dollar Amount: per
Contract Period or Dates of Performance Provided by Offeror:
*Note: If offeror holds or has held other contracts with your agency/organization in the last 5 years, please complete separate evaluation forms for those contracts as well.
Contractor performed as the Prime Contractor Sub-Contractor Key Personnel.
B. RESPONDENT INFORMATION:
Name of Respondent:
Title:
Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
Email Address:
C. EMAIL COMPLETED SURVEY FORM TO THE GOVERNMENT:
Send copies of completed surveys directly to the Government at the following email addresses:
lindsay.manning.1@us.af.mil jacob.sandy@us.af.mil mailto:jennifer.marrs.3@us.af.mil mailto:mohammad.eftekhari@us.af.mil
FA4621-25-Q-0027
D. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the appropriate letter on the scale (E, G, S, M, U, and N) that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ANY RATINGS OF M or U.
E G S M U N
Exceptional Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Neutral
Performance meets/met contractual requirements with many exceeded to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with no more than a few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
Performance meets/met contractual requirements with some exceeded to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with no more than some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
Performance meets/met contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.
Performance does not meet/did 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 or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.
Performance does not meet/did 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.
Performance was not observed or not applicable to the current effort being reported against.
CONTRACTOR’S NAME: CONTRACT N0.
Place an “X” in the appropriate column using the definitions matrix above.
The contractor: E G S M UC
1. Demonstrated ability to hire, maintain, and replace, if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period.
2. Home office participated in solving significant local problems.
3. Provided effective quality control and/or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements.
4. Complied with all federal, state and local laws and regulations to include appropriate licensing.
5. Complied with all USAF regulations.
FA4621-25-Q-0027
6. Corrected deficiencies in timely manner and pursuant to their quality control procedures.
7. Identified problems as they occurred.
8. Suggested alternative approaches to problems.
9. Displayed initiative to solve problems.
10. Met established contract schedules.
11. Was responsive to contract changes.
12. Provided adequate project supervision.
13. Cooperated with Government personnel after award.
14. How would you rate the contractor's overall performance?
15. Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain outcome in “remarks.” YES/NO
16. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain in “remarks.”
YES/NO
17. Is this contract rated in CPARS? YES/NO
Remarks:
FA4621-25-Q-0027
Signature of Reviewer Date
| PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE AND COVER LETTER PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE |
| Place an “X” in the appropriate column using the definitions matrix above. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .