Attachment 30 - CE Services PPQ.docx

CUI//SP-SSEL

When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

Section L Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire FA481423R0001 The 6th Contracting Squadron of the Air Force 6 ARW is in the process of competitively selecting a source for the Civil Engineer Base Service Contract program at MacDill AFB, FL (FA481423R0001).. Comment by BELK, STEVEN R CIV USAF AMC 6 CONS/PKM: Use one font style and size throughout all non-chart areas. If chart font is different than elsewhere, the chart font should be the same throughout the charts.

One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offerors' past performance on contracts or other work efforts which reflect the offeror's ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from organizations such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with the offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror's performance on those contracts or work efforts.

The enclosed questionnaire summarizes our areas of interest regarding the offeror’s performance. To meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than 10 calendar days after your receipt of this letter. This schedule will allow us sufficient time to analyze the data prior to the start of negotiations.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, you may complete the questionnaire electronically, sign digitally or manually, and e-mail it to adan.jaime.1@us.af.mil and 6cons.pkm.flight@us.af.mil. Please call Adan Jaime at 813-828-1674 if you have any questions. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records.

We greatly appreciate your assistance and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this Source Selection.

Adan Jaime Contracting Officer

1 Atch Past Performance 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. Program Title:

F. Brief Program Description:

G. Period of Performance

1. Original Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

2. Current Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

3. Reason for difference (if applicable):

H. Contract Dollar Value

1. Original maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

2. Current maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

3. Reasons for difference between original and current contract dollar value (if applicable):

J. Description of work performed:

K. Was this a competitively awarded contract? ☐ Yes ☐ No

L. Contractor’s Role: ☐ Prime Contractor ☐ Subcontractor ☐ Key Personnel

Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of services under this contract (i.e., local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands):

Section 3: 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:

F. Other suggested points of contact:

Section 4: 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 (not required, but very helpful). 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.

T1. How well did the contractor provide operations & maintenance services to your installation?

Did contractor provide these services to at least 150 buildings? If not, please indicate highest number of buildings contractor provided operations & maintenance to.

T2. How was the contractor’s performance with maintaining airfields/runways of at least 10,000 feet along with associated airfield lighting systems.

T3. How adequality/efficiently did the contractor operate/maintain electrical grid and associated switching stations/step-down transformers?

Was voltage at least 13.8kV? If not, please indicate highest voltage contractor worked on.

T4. How adequately/efficiently did the contractor provide maintenance/repair on central utility plant(s)?

Did the central utility plant(s) support facilities over 750K square feet? If not, please indicate the largest square footage that was supported by a central utility plant(s).

T5. How was the quality of the preventative maintenance program?

Did contractor provide preventive maintenance on at least 3,000 pieces of equipment/assets? If not, please indicate the number of assets the contractor performed preventive maintenance.

E1. How effective was performance providing Engineering and Design Support for Military Installations with over $20M annually in design work

E2. How effective was their performance providing Operational Engineering Support for a Military Installation with a least 150 buildings.

E3. How Effective was their Programming Support for a Military Installation with at least 150 buildings.

E4. How effective was their performance providing Construction Management Support for an annual program over $10M.

E5. How successfully was their performance providing Planning Support for a Military Installation with at least 150 buildings

Comment by BELK, STEVEN R CIV USAF AMC 6 CONS/PKM: Remove excess lines unless needed to put next title with it's questions.

EN 1. How effective was their performance completing Compliance submittals/filing for a Military Installation with over 150 buildings.

EN2. How effective was the contractor in completing Real Property records for a Military Installation with over 1500 facilities. Comment by BELK, STEVEN R CIV USAF AMC 6 CONS/PKM: Move to other section

EN 3. How effective was the contractor in their performance completing Cultural Resources Support for a Military Installation.

EN 4. How effective was the contractor in their performance completing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) / Environmental Impact Analysis Process (EIAP) Support for a Military Installation.

EN 5. How effective was the contractor in their performance completing Environmental Management System Support for a Military Installation.

EM1. How effectively was the contractor’s performance in providing Installation Emergency Management (EM) Support for a Military Installation with at least 5 Mission partners and one primary mission

EM2. How effective was the contractor’s performance in providing Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Support for a Military Installation

EM3. How effective was the contractor’s performance in providing Emergency Response Support to an Incident Command System (ICS) Type 1, 2, or 3 incident Comment by BELK, STEVEN R CIV USAF AMC 6 CONS/PKM: DO NOT ADD CERT QUESTION Comment by BELK, STEVEN R CIV USAF AMC 6 CONS/PKM: Add new question for this per KTR suggestion.

EM4. How effective was the contractor performance in providing EM Training Support for a Military Installation meeting AFI requirements.

Supporting Information:

EM5. How effective was the contractor’s performance in completing Unit Deployment Manager duties for a Military squadron.

Comment by BELK, STEVEN R CIV USAF AMC 6 CONS/PKM: Add new questions resulting from 2/14 discussion of contractor's suggested additional questions.

Government Contracts Only: Was this contract partially or completely terminated for default or convenience, or are there any pending terminations? Comment by BELK, STEVEN R CIV USAF AMC 6 CONS/PKM: Recommend removing excess space above this so it's not separated at the bottom of the page where it could easily be overlooked.

☐ Yes ☐ Default ☐ Convenience ☐ Pending Terminations ☐ No

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules). Comment by BELK, STEVEN R CIV USAF AMC 6 CONS/PKM: Put this directly under the question above.

SECTION 5: GENERAL COMMENT

Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I [ click and select an item ] award to him today given that I had a choice.

REMARKS:

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

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

E-Mail to: adan.jaime.1@us.af.mil and 6cons.pkm.flight@us.af.mil Comment by BELK, STEVEN R CIV USAF AMC 6 CONS/PKM: Ensure title bar is at the top of each page after excess lines and spaces are removed throughout.

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 8 of 8