Attachment 5 - Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf
PDF 125 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Upgrade Monaco System Base Wide Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA301022R0012
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for evaluation of contractor performance on a previous contract and details of a federal contract solicitation for upgrade of the Monaco system at Keesler Air Force Base facilities.
The past performance questionnaire requests ratings of contractor performance on elements such as management and supervision, quality control, scheduling, responsiveness to changes, and payment of subcontractors. It also asks if the contractor was issued any cure notices and whether the respondent would award to the contractor again.
The federal contract solicitation is a set-aside for Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses to upgrade the Monaco system base-wide at Keesler AFB. The estimated value is between $1M-$5M. The North American Industry Classification code is 238210 and size standard is $16.5M. The solicitation and specifications will be posted on SAM.gov. The contract period is 365 days after award. Registration in SAM is required to be eligible for award. The single point of entry is SAM.gov and interested parties must check for amendments.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Solicitation Amendment FA301022R00120002 SF 30.pdf | ||
| Attachment 10 - Prebid Questions and Answers.pdf | ||
| Prebid Questions and Answers- Upgrade Monaco System.pdf | ||
| Solicitation Amendment FA301022R00120001 SF 30.pdf | ||
| Site-Visit Sign In - 22 Jun 22.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - Upgrade Monaco System Base Wide MSS.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 8 - Notice of Compliance.pdf | ||
| Attachment 7 - SF 1444.pdf | ||
| Solicitation - FA301022R0012.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - Upgrade Monaco System Base Wide SOW.pdf | ||
| Attachment 3 - JA Fire Alarm Panels 29Nov 21 REDACTED.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 - Wage Det MS20220050.pdf | ||
| Attachment 6 - Past Performance Reference List.pdf | ||
| Attachment 9 - Submittal Procedures.pdf |
Show all 14
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
Attachment 5
FA301022R0012
PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
A. GENERAL INFORMATION: Please correct any information below known to be inaccurate
Name of Contractor/Key Personnel Requesting Evaluation:
Contractor Telephone Number:
Point of Contact:
Name of Contractor/Key Personnel Being Evaluated, if different from above:
Project Title and Brief Description:
Contract # Dollar Amount:
Contract Period of Performance:
Contractor performed as the Prime Contractor Sub-Contractor Key Personnel
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. RESPONDENT INFORMATION:
Name of Respondent: Title:
Telephone Number: Email Address:
C. SEND COMPLETED SURVEY FORM TO: 81st Contracting Squadron, Keesler AFB, MS Attn: TSgt Andrew Cates Email: 81CONS.LGCB.Construction@us.af.mil
D. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the appropriate letter on the scale (E, VG, S, M, U, or NA) that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. See scale below.
PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ANY RATINGS OF M OR U IN THE REMARKS
SECTION.
mailto:81CONS.LGCB.Construction@us.af.mil
E Exceptional
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s/Customer’s benefit. The contractual performance 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 requirements to the Government’s/Customer’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.
NA
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.
CONTRACTOR’S NAME: CONTRACT #:
Place an “X” in the appropriate column using the definitions matrix above.
The contractor: E VG S M U NA Provided experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.
Demonstrated ability to hire, maintain, and replace, if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period.
Delegated authority to project managers and supervisors commensurate with contract requirements.
Home office participated in solving significant local problems.
Provided effective quality control and/or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements.
Corrected deficiencies in timely manner Identified problems as they occurred.
Suggested alternative approaches to problems.
Displayed initiative to solve problems.
Developed realistic progress schedules.
Met established project schedules.
Was responsive to contract changes.
Provided adequate project supervision.
Obtained consent of surety for increases in bonding as work-in-progress increased.
Paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner.
Cooperated with Government personnel after award.
How would you rate the contractor's overall performance?
Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract?
If yes, explain outcome in Remarks section.
Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain in Remarks section.
Is the contractor rated in CPARS?
CONTRACTOR’S NAME: CONTRACT #:
REMARKS:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .