Attachment 4 - PPQ.docx
DOCX document 40 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Replace Munitions Storage Area Lighting Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA441720R0005
About this file
This solicitation is seeking proposals to replace munitions storage area lighting at Hurlburt Field, Florida. The project includes replacing street, perimeter security, and incidental lights, with an estimated value between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000. The work is a 100% small business set-aside under NAICS code 238210. The Air Force Special Operations Command will award a single, firm-fixed-price contract for a 180-day period of performance. Proposals are due via beta.SAM and must include bid bonds. Payment and performance bonds within 10 days will be required for award.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 7 Photometric Drawing .pdf | ||
| Solicitation Amendment FA441720R00050002 SF 30.pdf | ||
| Attachment 8 Site Visit Questions Answers.pdf | ||
| Solicitation Amendment CONFORMED COPY - FA441720R00050002.pdf | ||
| Solicitation Amendment FA441720R00050001 SF 30.pdf | ||
| Pre-Proposal Site Visit Memo.pdf | ||
| FA441720R0005 Sign-in Sheet Redacted.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - FINAL DRAWINGS.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - Specifications_Revised 5 Jul 18.pdf | ||
| Solicitation - FA441720R0005 16JUNE2020.pdf | ||
| Attachment 3 Wage Determination 2-21-2020.pdf | ||
| Attachment 6 - 50 Division Construction Cost Estimate Worksheet.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 5 - Financial Reference Sheet.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 13
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
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
WHEN FILLED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION IAW FAR 2.101 & 3.104 Past/Present Performance Questionnaire
FA441720R0005
ATTACHMENT 4
03 Feb 2020
SECTION A: CONTRACTOR INFORMATION
1. Contractor’s Name and Address:
2. Point of Contact:
3. Phone Number:
4. Contract Number:
Contract Type:
5. Period of Performance:
SECTION B: RESPONDENT INFORMATION (To Be Completed By Evaluation Respondent)
1. Respondent’s Company Name & Address:
2. Respondent’s Name:
3. Phone Number:
Fax Number:
E-Mail:
4. Award Amount:
Final Amount:
5. Project Title:
Project Number:
6. Brief Project Description:
7. Period of Performance:
Start Date:
End Date:
SECTION C: EMAIL COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE FORM TO:
| Contract Specialist: |
| Trenton Taylor |
| Email: |
| Trenton.taylor@us.af.mil |
| Contracting Officer: |
| Richard Beaty |
| Email: |
| richard.beaty.3@us.af.mil |
THIS FORM MUST BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN: The closing date and time of solicitation.
SECTION D: PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose letter on the scale that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ANY UNSATISFACTORY OR MARGINAL RATINGS.
| E |
| V |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
Exceptional (Outstanding) Very Good (Above Average)
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Available |
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with 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 appear, or were, satisfactory. |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. 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
No record of past performance or the record is inconclusive.
1. QUALITY: Access conformance to contract requirements, specifications and standards of Good Workmanship. Provided effective quality control which resulted in a quality finished product.
☐ Exceptional ☐Very Good ☐Satisfactory ☐Marginal ☐Unsatisfactory ☐Not Available
COMMENTS/REMARKS:
2. SCHEDULE: Developed realistic progress schedules and completed the project within the established schedule.
COMMENTS/REMARKS:
3. MANAGEMENT: Provided experienced superintendent, managers, and supervisors, with the technical and administrative abilities to meet requirements. Adequately coordinate and controlled performance of subcontractors. Identified problems as they occurred. Suggested approaches to resolving problems. Displayed initiative and cooperation in solving problems. Provided adequate information and pricing for change orders and negotiated them in good faith. Provided timely resolution of punch list items and closeout documentation. Provided submittals in a timely manner. Submittals were well researched and clearly identified the proposed item.
COMMENTS/REMARKS:
4. UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS: Contractor complied with terms and conditions for Small Business Participation. Achieved Small Business Goals.
COMMENTS/REMARKS:
5. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE: Contractor complied with Financial, Environmental, Safety, and Reporting Requirements. Contractor was compliant with labor standards, posting of EEO, labor rates, minimum wage.
Payrolls were completed properly and received in a timely matter. Paid subcontractors in a timely manner Contractor had an adequate safety plan and it was implemented properly. No safety discrepancies were noted.
COMMENTS/REMARKS:
6. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: Was the contractor assessed liquidated damages? ☐YES ☐NO (If Yes, briefly explain the circumstances)
COMMENTS/REMARKS:
7. Based on the contractor’s overall performance, would you rehire this contractor? ☐YES ☐NO
OVERALL PERFORMANCE RATING:
Signature of Respondent: ________________________________________________________ Date: ________________ FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE – SEE FAR 3.104 Page 2
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .