Attachment_30_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

PDF 364 KB Posted

Attached to
HAFC EISE DESIGN BUILD VC EXHIBITS Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
140P2124R0049
Issued by
Department of the Interior National Park Service

About this file

This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire that is part of the procurement process for a federal contract opportunity. The questionnaire is intended to evaluate the past performance of a contractor under consideration. It includes a Performance Rating Form that assesses the contractor's technical performance, timeliness, quality/customer satisfaction, and cost control. The questionnaire asks the evaluator to rate the contractor's performance as Outstanding, Satisfactory, or Unsatisfactory across several criteria. The contractor is responsible for compiling and submitting the completed questionnaires in their proposal, though the government may contact references to verify the information. The related federal contract opportunity is for Exhibit Planning, Design, Fabrication, and Installation for the Eisenhower National Historic Site, issued by the Department of the Interior National Park Service.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to HAFC EISE DESIGN BUILD VC EXHIBITS, newest first.
File Type Posted
Sol_140P2124R0049_Amd_0001.pdf PDF
Attachment_06_Standard_Specifications_for_Planning_Design_Production_and_Installation_of_Electronic_Programs.pdf PDF
Attachment_15_DescriptiveExhibitTourInstallationEquipmentGuide.pdf PDF
Attachment_17_NPS_Individual_Release_Form.pdf PDF
Attachment_22_EISE_Long_Range_Interpretative_Plan.pdf PDF
Attachment_25_EISE_DD2_Comprehensive_Plan.pdf PDF
Attachment_28_EISE_DD2_Comp_Plan_COMMENTS.docx DOCX document
Attachment_01_Exhibit_Planning_Design_and_Fabrication_Specifications.pdf PDF
Attachment_03_Exhibit_Conservation_Guidelines.pdf PDF
Attachment_09_Sample_Use_Rights_Letter.docx DOCX document
Attachment_19_File_Naming_Conventions_for_AV_Programs.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_21_EISE_FoundationDocument.pdf PDF
Attachment_27_EISE_DD2_Drawings_Graphics_COMMENTS.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_04_Architectural_Barriers_Act_(ABA)_Standards.pdf PDF
Attachment_07_Content_Management_Data_Fields_Guidelines.pdf PDF
Attachment_13_Art_Documentation_Form.pdf PDF
Attachment_14_AV_Completion_Report.doc DOC document
Attachment_16_Folder_Structure_for_AV_Programs.docx DOCX document
Attachment_18_Specifications_for_AV_Deliverables.docx DOCX document
Attachment_23_NPS_Standard_Specs_for_AV_2024.pdf PDF
Attachment_29_Cost_Estimate_Form.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_26_EISE_DD2_Graphic_Layouts.pdf PDF
Sol_140P2124R0049.pdf PDF
Attachment_02_HFC_Editorial_Style_Guide_2018.pdf PDF
Attachment_05_Programmatic_Accessibility_Guidelines_for_National_Park_Service_Interpretive_Media.pdf PDF
Attachment_08_Intellectual_Property_Guidelines_for_Harpers_Ferry_Center_Interpretive_Media.pdf PDF
Attachment_10_Museum_Exhibit_Planner_template.pdf PDF
Attachment_11_Component_Inventory_Schedule_Form.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_12_Component_Inventory_Sample.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_20_EISE_Space_Allocation_Plan.pdf PDF
Attachment_24_EISE_DD2_Drawings.pdf PDF
Show all 31

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

A 30 Past Performance Questionnaire

The U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service (NPS) has a requirement for E Eisenhower N Historic . s part of the procurement process, past performance is a source selection factor.

Two forms are provided to complete the evaluation: 1) Performance Rating Form; and 2) Supplemental Comment Form. The offeror is responsible for compiling and submitting completed past performance questionnaires in its proposal, though the Government may contact references to verify the veracity of provided information. References shall not send completed past performance questionnaires to the Government.

The following standards shall be used in arriving at the rating.

Outstanding Contractor’s performance exceeded customer expectations and was technically acceptable, providing significant features or benefits.

Satisfactory Contractor met customer expectations or contract requirements and demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the requirements.

Unsatisfactory Contractor’s performance was either marginal or did not meet customer expectations or Other contract requirements.

If the element is not applicable, indicate with “N/A.” If no data has been obtained or additional comments are provided, please note in this column.

Other If the element is not applicable, indicate with “N/A.” If no data has been obtained or additional comments are provided, please note in this column.

Performance Rating Form

NAME OF COMPANY EVALUATED

ADDRESS OF COMPANY EVALUATED

CONTRACT NUMBER CONTRACT PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT TYPE

CONTRACTING OFFICER NAME,

ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND EMAIL ADDRESS

TYPE OF SERVICES PERFORMED (ACTIVITY)

NAME OF EVALUATOR, COMPANY/AGENCY,

ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER AND

EMAIL ADDRESS

DATE EVALUATION PROVIDED

Performance Element Outstanding Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Other

Technical Performance (Quality of Product or Service)

1. QUALITY OF TECHNICAL

(For example: Were the services comprehensive, complete, and feasible? (Met the needs, performed successfully, and accommodated changing requirements.)

2. UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIREMENTS

(For example: Did the contractor show an understanding of the scope of the requirements and an appreciation of the complexity of the requirements? And did the contractor effectively identify flaws, inconsistencies and other inaccuracies in your technical direction?)

Timeliness of Performance

3. EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES

(For example: Was the contractor able to obtain in a timely manner the amount and type of personnel resources required to support the project, effectively train personnel to perform the work required for the project, and maintain the required workforce throughout the term of the contract?)

4. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE

(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic schedules, monitoring performance, completing work on time, and implementing corrections/changes in a timely manner?)

Quality / Customer Satisfaction

5. QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE/CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

(For example: Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?)

6. BUSINESS BEHAVIOR

(For example: Was the contractor reasonable and cooperative at the corporate and program levels in response to changes in technical direction, correcting errors, poor performance, criticism/rejection of contract deliverables and other quality issues?)

7. COMMUNICATION

(For example: Did the contractor work and communicate well with contracting officers, contracting officer’s representatives, end users, other contractors, subcontractors, and in-house staff?)

Cost Control

8. COST CONTROL

(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic costs, monitoring performance, operating at or below budget, and implementing corrections/changes in a cost effective manner?)

FOR #9, PLEASE ANSWER “Yes” or “No”, as appropriate YES NO

9. Given the choice, would you do business with this contractor again?

Additional Comment Form

Please provide any additional comments regarding your performance element ratings in the space below. Please add additional pages as necessary.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .