Attachment 5 PPQ.docx
DOCX document 32 KB Posted
- Attached to
- eMentor Course Delivery and Management Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA330020R0013
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a federal contract solicitation. The solicitation seeks eMentor course delivery and management services to provide synchronous online foreign language courses via a virtual school for the Air Force. Key requirements include instruction for 95 languages listed plus additional languages within 90 days of notification, scheduling courses for the top 20 languages on day one and all others within 90 days, and support from a helpdesk team monitoring all classes. The contractor must recruit, train and manage eMentor instructors to provide language instruction from ILR levels 0 through 3+ and employ algorithms to match students with instructors based on availability. The virtual school platform must have low lag time and redundancy to prevent downtime. The contractor will also design curricula and assessments for each language and proficiency level according to government guidelines.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Revised Questions and Answers.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1 52.212-1 Addenda - Amended.docx | DOCX document | |
| Questions and Answers.docx | DOCX document | |
| Solicitation Amendment FA330020R00130001.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 52.212-2 Addenda - Amended.docx | DOCX document | |
| Solicitation - FA330020R0013.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 52.212-2 Addenda.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 7 Sample Client Authorization Letter.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 1 52.212-1 Addenda.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 6 Subcontractor Consent Letter.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 3 eMentor PWS.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 4 PPI.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 12
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
RFP FA330020R0013
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
SUBJECT: Request for Current and Past Performance Evaluation
TO:
You have been identified as a point of contact for a past and/or present performance evaluation from ______________________________. This firm is currently being considered for a contract with the Government for providing eMentor service for the Air University on Maxwell Air Force Base, AL.
A member of the Past Performance team will be contacting you to telephonically complete the attached questionnaire. If you have any questions concerning this request contact MSgt Ryan Schnepf at 334-953-6776 or Kimberly Knott at 953-8552.
Thank you,
| KIMBERLY A. KNOTT | |
| Contracting Officer | |
| 42d Contracting Squadron |
WHEN FILLED IN, THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION
SENSITIVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH FAR 2.101 and 3.104
PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
A. GENERAL INFORMATION: Please correct any information below known to be inaccurate:
Contractor’s Name: ____________________ Telephone Number: ____________________
Point of Contact: ______________________
Project Title/Description of Work: __________________________________________________
Contract Number Provided by Offeror: ______________________________________________
Total Dollar Amount:___________________ Annual Dollar Amount: __________________
Contract Period or Dates of Performance Provided by Offeror: ___________________________
Contractor performed as the Prime Contractor Sub-Contractor
B. RESPONDENT INFORMATION: Respondent will be contacted telephonically to complete.
Respondent: __________________________________ Title: ____________________________
Telephone Number: ___________________ Email Address: _____________________________
C. QUESTIONNAIRE COMPLETION CONTACT:
PP Team Member: _________________________________Date: ________________________
D. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the appropriate letter on the scale (E, VG, S, M, U, and N) that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. You will be asked to provide a brief explanation for any ratings of M or U.
E
VG
S
M
U
N
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
Neutral/Not Appicable
| Performance exceeded many of the element(s) of the requirement. |
| Performance exceeded some of the element(s) of the requirement. |
| Performance meets the element(s) of the requirement. |
| Performance does not meet some element(s) of the requirement. |
Performance does not meet most element(s) of the requirement.
Performance was not observed or not applicable.
Place an “X” in the appropriate column using the definitions matrix above.
| The Contractor: |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
| 1. |
| What was the overall quality of the contractor’s software platform |
| 2. |
| Was the contractor’s site easy to access and navigate? |
| 3. |
| Could you log on to and use the contractor’s site with a variety of internet-enabled devices? (desktop, laptop, PC, MAC, hand-held device) |
| 4. |
| What was the overall quality of the contractor’s virtual classroom? |
| 5. |
| What was the overall quality of the classroom’s support of international fonts (e.g., Chinese characters)? |
| 6. |
| How was the classrooms’ support of a wide range of tools? (Video, text files, audio files, internet sites, writing space, chat area, etc) |
| 7. |
| What was the overall quality of the contractor’s helpdesk for any software platform issues? |
| 8. |
| Was the helpdesk able to remotely access the user’s computer to fix the problem? |
| 9. |
| How was the contractor’s system redundancy in the case that the primary system should fail? |
| 10. |
| What was the overall quality of the contractor’s record’s maintenance? |
| 11. |
| Was the contractor able to successfully schedule courses for those requiring classes? |
| 12. |
| How was the contractor’s ability to find a diverse array of native-speaking language instructor’s? (This would include any and all languages found on the Department of Defense’s Strategic Language List) |
| 13. |
| How was the overall quality of language instruction? |
| 14. |
| How was the overall quality of language curriculum? |
| 15. |
| How was the overall quality of language assessment? |
| 16. |
| Did the contractor operate and maintain a Virtual School which permits both wired and wireless internet connections and can be accessed by computers, laptops, and tablet devices running either Windows or Mac operating systems Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor operate and maintain the virtual school. |
| 17. |
| Did the contractor operate and maintain classrooms in the Virtual School environment that support High-Definition Video, PowerPoint, Word, Excel, PDF sharing, chat features, and international fonts and keyboard inputs; allow for shared audio, video, and shared web browser; and contain a fully collaborative whiteboard for live annotations Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor operate and maintain classrooms in the Virtual School Environment? |
| 18. |
| Did the contractor operate and maintain class management systems within the Virtual School to include class, participant and eMentor tracking, and scheduling and attendance tracking annotations __Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor operate and maintain class management systems within the Virtual School? |
| 19. |
| Did the contractor generate reports such as attendance and record keeping Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor generate reports such as attendance and record keeping. |
| 20. |
| Did the contractor maintain a virtual Resource Library or similar operation that allowed participants to upload, download, review and search for resources and materials Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor maintain the virtual resource library? |
| 21 |
| Was the contractor responsible for finding, vetting, and hiring qualified Language instructors (eMentors) IAW the PWS Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor find, vet, and hire qualified language instructors (eMentors). |
| 22 |
| Was the contractor responsible for providing system training and ensuring professional development training for language Instructors (eMentors) IAW the PWS Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor ensure that system training and professional development training was provided to Language Instructors (eMentors)? |
| 23 |
| Was the contractor responsible for designing and delivering robust, relevant curriculum and assessments tailored to each specific language and proficiency level based on Government requirements and guidelines IAW the PWS Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor provide these services IAW the PWS? |
| 24 |
| Did contractor provide instruction for at least 50 different languages Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor provide language instruction? |
| 25 |
| Did the contractor provide instruction for at least 1,000 students per year___Yes No? If yes, how well did the contractor instruction for the students? |
Explanations/Remarks:__________________________________________________________________
WHEN FILLED IN, THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION
SENSITIVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH FAR 2.101 and 3.104
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .