Attachment 3 - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) - AF COOL.docx
DOCX document 50 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- Not on record
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) template for the Air Force COOL (Credentialing Opportunities On-Line) program solicitation FA330026R0043. The form is designed to be completed by references provided by offerors and submitted directly to the Contracting Officer (Mark Restad) and Contract Specialist (Samantha Millington) by the RFP closing date of 12:00 PM CST on October 8, 2026. Offerors must submit separate questionnaires for each contract reference they wish the government to consider, and references are encouraged to submit completed forms prior to the closing date.
The questionnaire evaluates contractor performance across multiple dimensions using a six-point rating scale (E=Exceptional, VG=Very Good, S=Satisfactory, M=Marginal, U=Unsatisfactory, N=Neutral/Not Applicable). Evaluation areas include: Technical Expertise and Project Manager capabilities (4 criteria); Home Office/On-Site/Government Interaction (4 criteria); Service Quality (4 criteria); and Schedule performance (2 criteria). Additional yes/no questions address contractor financial stability, subcontractor payment disputes, cure or show cause notices, and willingness to award future contracts. Respondents must provide narrative explanations for any ratings of Marginal or Unsatisfactory. The form concludes with an overall assessment rating on a 1-6 scale and a remarks section for additional comments.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Finalized Questions and Answers.docx | DOCX document | |
| Amended Attachment 2 - Past_Performance_Information (AF COOL).docx | DOCX document | |
| Solicitation Amendment FA330026R00430001 SF 30.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS).docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS).docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 4 - Subcontractor_Consent_Letter.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - Past_Performance_Information (AF COOL).docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 7 - Addendum to 52.212-2.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 6 - Addendum to 52.212-1.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 5 - Wage Determination 2015-4607_Rev 30 _20 August 2026.pdf | ||
| Solicitation - FA330026R0043.pdf |
Show all 11
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
Solicitation – FA330026R0043
Attachment 3
PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
A. GENERAL INFORMATION:
Offerors shall forward this attachment for completion to each contract reference the offeror wants the government to consider. Offerors shall ensure each respondent submits a completed questionnaire directly to Samantha Millington, Contract Specialist (CS), samantha.millington.1@us.af.mil and Mark Restad, Contracting Officer (CO), mark.restad.1@us.af.mil by the closing date of the RFP. Offerors are encouraged to have respondents submit the information prior to the closing date 12:00PM CST, 08 Oct 2026.
| Contractor’s Name: | Project Title: | Contract Number Assigned to the Contractor: |
| Contract Award Amount: $ | Contract Final Amount: $ |
* Note: If offeror holds or has held other contracts with your agency/organization in the last 3 years, please complete separate evaluation forms for those contracts as well.
B. AGENCY INFORMATION:
| Name of Respondent: | Title: | |
| Address: | Telephone Number: |
Email Address:
C. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION:
Respondent shall include information below regarding the work performed. Use the Confident Rating table to complete this section.
Were you the prime contractor? Subcontractor? Joint Venture?
D. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the appropriate letter on the scale (E, VG, 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
VG
S
M
U
N
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
Neutral/Not Applicable
Performance meets 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 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 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 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 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.
| Technical Expertise and Project Manager |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| NA |
| 1 |
| Contractor provided experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements. |
| 2 |
| Contractor consistently hired and retained qualified personnel and ensured no gap in service under the contract. |
| 3 |
| Contractor delegated authority to contract managers and supervisors commensurate with contract requirements. Contract manager’s role was clear. |
| 4 |
| Provided on-site contract manager/supervisor at all times, or as otherwise required by the specific contract. |
Home Office/On-Site/Government Interaction
| 5 |
| Identified risks/problems as they occurred and offered constructive and/or viable solution/alternatives. |
| 6 |
| Contractor was responsive and reasonable to contract changes from the standpoint of timeliness, suggested solutions, and price. |
| 7 |
| Contractor displayed a cooperative attitude with company/government personnel before and after award. |
| 8 |
| Contractor’s on-site contract manager/supervisor displayed initiative to resolve problems on-site. |
Service Quality
| 9 |
| Contractor provided and followed effective quality control plan and/or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements. |
| 10 |
| Contractor’s emphasis on delivering a quality service was apparent in day-to-day operations. |
| 11 |
| Contractor corrected deficiencies in a timely manner and pursuant to their quality control procedures. |
| 12 |
| Contractor maintained a quality workforce and subcontractors through project completion. |
Schedule
| 13 |
| Developed realistic progress schedules and met established project milestones. |
| 14 |
| Contractor provided the required Reports/Documentation as required in the contract. |
Other
Did the contractor maintain financial capital to successfully perform services throughout the duration of the contract.
| YES |
| NO |
Were there any claims by subcontractors/suppliers for non- payment. If yes, please explain outcome in “Remarks”
| YES |
| NO |
Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain outcome in "Remarks."
| YES |
| NO |
Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain in "Remarks."
| YES |
| NO |
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
| Overall, on the scale of 1 – 6, how would you rate the contractor being surveyed |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
Remarks____________________________________________________________________________
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .