Attachment 5 - Past Performance Questionnairre.docx

DOCX document 54 KB Posted

Attached to
Lackland Laundry and Linen
Solicitation number
HT940826QE029
Issued by

About this file

This is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) template for use in responding to Defense Health Agency Solicitation HT9408-26-Q-E029 for Lackland Laundry and Linen Services. The PPQ serves as an alternative to CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System) evaluations and requires offerors to submit completed questionnaires for each project summary sheet included in their proposal.

The questionnaire is structured in five sections: Section 1 contains an authorization letter template for offerors to send to past clients requesting their participation in the performance assessment; Section 2 requires offerors to provide client engagement profile information including contractor name, contract type, period of performance, services summary, geographic coverage, and project complexity; Section 3 collects client point of contact identification and verification of accuracy of Section 2 data; Section 4 contains the evaluation criteria where the client rates the contractor's performance across three dimensions—Quality of Service, Schedule, and Management—using a five-point scale (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory) with provisions for narrative comments; and Section 5 requests an overall performance rating using the same five-point scale plus a likelihood-to-rehire scale (1-5). Completed questionnaires must be signed by the client POC and returned to matthew.j.brinkmann.civ@health.mil and joe.d.wells3.civ@health.mil. The document is marked as CUI Source Selection Information.

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

SOLICITATION HT9408-26-Q-E029

Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

This PPQ is in support of the Solicitation HT9408-26-Q-E029.

NOTE: For each Project Summary Sheet submitted, the Offeror must submit either a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation or this Past Performance Questionnaire. If CPARS evaluation is available, it must be used and this PPQ should not be submitted.

PAST PERFORMANCE PROJECT IDENTIFICATION (To be filled out by the Offeror):

Offeror Name:
Click here to enter text.
Contract Number:
Click here to enter text.
Order Number (if applicable):
Click here to enter text.
Project Title:
Click here to enter text.
Total Period of Performance, Including Options: MM/YYYY - MM/YYYY or MM/YYYY - Present
Click here to enter text.

PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCE INFORMATION (To be filled out by the Rater):

Name:
Click here to enter text.
Title:
Click here to enter text.
Agency or Customer Organization:
Click here to enter text.
Phone:
Click here to enter text.
E-mail:
Click here to enter text.
Signature of Rater[footnoteRef:2]: [2: Past Performance Rating must be provided by a Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer’s Representative, Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative or Corporate Officer/Official with knowledge about the project]

Any questions concerning completion of this form should be addressed to matthew.j.brinkmann.civ@health.mil and joe.d.wells3.civ@health.mil.

INSTRUCTIONS

This questionnaire is to be completed as indicated below. For purposes of these evaluations, the term “client engagement” is intended to mean “contract”. This package consists of the following:

Section
Description
Who completes
Who verifies
Section 1
Authorization Letter
Offeror
N/A
Section 2
Client Engagement Profile
Offeror
Client Point of Contact
Section 3
Client Identification
Client Point of Contact
None
Section 4
Evaluation
Client Point of Contact
None
Section 5
Past Performance Summary
Client Point of Contact
None

SECTION 1: AUTHORIZATION LETTER

(To be completed by the Offeror)

Past Performance Form Letter Example (This form letter is provided for Offerors to use in transmitting the Past Performance questionnaire to past or current clients)

[Date of Letter] [Name and Address of Offeror’s client] Attention: [Name and Designation of Client’s Contract Manager or Appropriate Contact]

Dear [Contact Name]:

We are currently responding to the Defense Health Agencies (DHA) Solicitation HT9408-26-Q-E029. DHA is requesting organizations or companies responding to the solicitation to submit evidence of past performance. Through this letter we are requesting your participation to provide an assessment of our firm’s performance. If you are contacted for information on work our firm has performed outside of this written assessment, you are hereby authorized to respond to those inquiries. Your firm’s cooperation with this effort is greatly appreciated. Please direct any questions to [Insert Name and Phone Number for Offeror].

For your reference, we have included a description of the work our firm performed/is performing for your organization. A Past Performance Questionnaire is also enclosed for you to complete. Please verify the accuracy of the data in Sections 2 and 3 of the enclosed evaluation. Then, please complete Sections 4 and 5 and return the signed, completed document by DATE /TIME to [insert].

Sincerely, [Name of Signer] [Designation of Signer]

Past Performance Questionnaire

Solicitation HT9408-26-Q-E029

When completed, this document contains procurement sensitive information.

SECTION 2: CLIENT ENGAGEMENT PROFILE

(To be completed by the Offeror and verified by the Client Point of Contact (POC)) Client Organization Name

U.S. Federal Government Department and Agency (if applicable)

Contractor Name:

Subcontractors and Partners (if any):

Contract Type:

(e.g., Time and Materials, Fixed Price, Unit-based, Asset-based, etc. or Combination/Hybrid) Please explain fully.

Was this a Competitive Contract?
Yes

No

Total period of performance, including options: (MM/YYYY - MM/YYYY or MM/YYYY – Present)

Summary Description of Services Provided:

Geographic Coverage of Services for This Contract:

(e.g., Local, National, Global)

Project size:

(e.g., number and type of geographic locations supported concurrently)

Project complexity (e.g., number FTE’s)

SECTION 3: CLIENT IDENTIFICATION

(To be completed by the Client POC) POC Name:

Client POC Title/Position:

Client POC Email Address:

Client POC Phone Number:

Number of years the Client POC was associated with this engagement:

Is Section 2 of this questionnaire accurate?

If No, please explain:

Yes/No

SECTION 4: EVALUATION

Evaluation — Please indicate your satisfaction with the service provider’s performance by placing a “X” in the appropriate block using the rating scales to the right of each dimension. Additionally, if desired, please provide a narrative explanation to support your ratings. At a minimum, for any Marginal or Unsatisfactory rating, please submit additional comments to substantiate the rating. For any rating that is checked Not Applicable, please explain why it does not apply.

1. QUALITY OF SERVICE

Customer should place an “X” on the appropriate qualitative rating. Comments are optional.

Quality
__ Exceptional

__ Very Good __ Satisfactory __ Marginal __ Unsatisfactory __ Not Applicable

Comment:

General Comments (General compliments, problems, and/or corrective actions taken to address the quality of services):

Click here to enter text.

2. SCHEDULE

Customer should place an “X” on the appropriate qualitative rating. Comments are optional.

Schedule
__ Exceptional

__ Very Good __ Satisfactory __ Marginal __ Unsatisfactory

General Comments (General compliments, problems, and/or corrective actions taken to address schedule):

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS (General compliments, problems, and/or corrective actions taken to address schedule):

Click here to enter text.

3. MANAGEMENT

Customer should place an “X” on the appropriate qualitative rating. Comments are optional.

Management
__ Exceptional

__ Very Good __ Satisfactory __ Marginal __ Unsatisfactory

General Comments (General compliments, problems, and/or corrective actions taken to address the management services):

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

Click here to enter text.

SECTION 5: PAST PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Provide an overall rating for the Contractor using the evaluation rating scale below.

Rating
Definition
☐
Exceptional
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s/our organization’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
☐
Very Good
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/our organization’s benefit. The contractual performance being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
☐
Satisfactory
Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
☐
Marginal
Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance 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.
☐
Unsatisfactory
Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

On a scale of 1 to 5, how likely would you be to use the Contractor again?

12345
Not atSlightlyModeratelyVeryExtremely
all LikelyLikelyLikelyLikelyLikely

If you have any further information that was not covered by this questionnaire, but you feel is important, please provide this information

Client POC’s Signature

Date

Please return a scanned copy to:
Matthew.J.Brinkmann.civ@health.mil and joe.d.wells3.civ@health.mil

CUI

Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

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