ATTACHMENT 3B PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE W9127Q24R0024.pdf
PDF 252 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Technical Instructor Services for News Media Training for Narcotics Commanders and Law Enforcement Leaders
- Solicitation number
- W9127124R0024
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire related to a federal contract opportunity for Technical Instructional Services for News Media Training for Narcotics Commanders and Law Enforcement Leaders, Solicitation #W9127Q-24-R-0024.
The questionnaire is to be completed by the evaluating organization representative for a past contract performed by the offeror. It requests information on the offeror's performance in areas such as quality of product/service, schedule, business relations, and management of key personnel. The evaluator is asked to rate the offeror's performance on a scale from Exceptional to Unsatisfactory and provide narrative comments. The completed questionnaire is considered source selection sensitive information. The related federal contract opportunity is a commercial services solicitation being issued as a Request for Proposals (RFP) by the Mississippi Army National Guard. It is a one-year Firm Fixed Price contract for Technical Instructional Services, with an option period. The NAICS code is 611699 with a size standard of $16.5M. Proposals are due August 23, 2024.
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
ATTACHMENT #3B Page 1 of 4
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Solicitation #: W9127Q-24-R-0024, News Media Training for Narcotics Commanders and Law Enforcement Leaders Technical Instructional Services RCTA-MS
Your assistance is requested in support of a Source Selection. IMPORTANT: Offeror MUST NOT review the completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) before submission. All completed PPQs must be submitted by the reference directly to the USPFO-MS Contracting Office via email:
Mississippi Army National Guard Office of the U.S. Property & Fiscal Officer for MS Flowood, MS, 39232 ATTN: Mr. Brian Fortune, Contract Specialist Email: brian.p.fortune.mil@army.mil
When completed, the information on this form becomes SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION (41 U.S.C. 423) and shall be protected, accordingly.
TO BE COMPLETED BY OFFEROR SUBMITTING PROPOSAL
1. Offeror Name & Complete Address: Offeror must complete blocks 2 -7 to identify the contract between the offeror and the evaluating organization. NOTE:
contract must be relevant (similar scope, complexity, target audience) to the RFP.
2. Contract No:
3. Contract Initiation Date:
4. Contract Completion Date:
5. Contract Value (including options): $
6. Type of Contract (i.e., Firm-Fixed Price (FFP), Cost, Time & Material):
7. Description of Service(s)/Course(s) provided under referenced contract. (Include enough detail to determine relevance to requested training. Please add a continuation sheet if more space is required):
TO BE COMPLETED BY EVALUATING ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVE
8. EVALUATION:
a) Evaluator’s Name, Position:
b) Evaluator’s Phone #:
c) Evaluator’s Email:
d) Duration of Business Relations with Offeror’s Firm:
Page 2 of 4 ATTACHMENT
Please select the response code which best reflects your experience with this contractor.
EX = Exceptional – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
VG = Very Good - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some. The element 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 element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
MG = Marginal - Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions.
US = Unsatisfactory - Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner.
The element being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’ corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
N/O = Not Observed – Performance in this element or sub-element was not observed.
(Please provide narrative comments below each factor to identify specific strengths/weakness relative to that factor.)
A. Quality of Product/Service
Course Design & Development EX VG S MG US N/O
Course Curriculum / Agenda EX VG S MG US N/O
Quality of Instruction EX VG S MG US N/O
Course Materials / Handouts EX VG S MG US N/O
Course Benefit in Workplace EX VG S MG US N/O
B. Schedule Adherence to Schedule EX VG S MG US N/O
Flexibility in Scheduling EX VG S MG US N/O
C. Business Relations Business/Contracting Relations EX VG S MG US N/O
Page 3 of 4 ATTACHMENT
Problem Resolution EX VG S MG US N/O
Process Improvement EX VG S MG US N/O
Lesson Learned Incorporation EX VG S MG US N/O
Cooperative Behavior EX VG S MG US N/O
Commitment to Customer Satisfaction EX VG S MG US N/O
Responsiveness EX VG S MG US N/O
D. Management of Key Personnel (Instructors) Technical Knowledge in Course Subject Matter EX VG S MG US N/O
Thoroughness EX VG S MG US N/O
Accuracy EX VG S MG US N/O
E. Overall Assessment of Contractor EX VG S MG US N/O
Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT
9. For any elements identified above that were rated Marginal or Unsatisfactory, has unsatisfactory performance been shared with the contractor?
( ) Yes ( ) No If Yes, communications with the contractor were ( ) written / ( ) verbal.
10. PLEASE PROVIDE NARRATIVE COMMENTS TO IDENTIFY (please add continuation page for additional comments):
a) Two or three of the offeror’s best corporate traits or observed skills.
b) Areas where the offeror has the most room for improvement.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .