Attachment 5 - PPQ.docx
DOCX document 44 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Hurlburt Field HVAC MACC Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA441725R0017
About this file
The document is a Past/Present Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for a federal contract opportunity (Solicitation Number: FA441725R0017) related to a Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) at Hurlburt Field, Florida. The PPQ is a standardized evaluation form designed to assess a contractor's performance across six key areas: quality, schedule, management, small business utilization, regulatory compliance, and overall performance. The form uses a rating scale from Exceptional to Unsatisfactory and requires detailed comments for each performance category.
The associated federal contract opportunity is a Total Small Business Set Aside for HVAC repair, alteration, and replacement work, with a five-year ordering period and a total combined contract ceiling of $25,000,000. The Air Force Special Operations Command plans to select approximately five contractors through a trade-off source selection process, with individual task orders ranging from $1,000 to $3,000,000. Eligible contractors must be registered in SAM, have a NAICS code of 238220, meet a $19M size standard, and be located within a 300-mile radius of Hurlburt Field. The solicitation will be available on SAM.gov on or about 25 June 2025, with a minimum bonding requirement of $1,000 (single)/$5,000,000 (aggregate).
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 30
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
FA441725R0017
ATTACHMENT 5
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: |
| Erica Eberle |
| Email: |
| Erica.eberle.1@us.af.mil |
| Contracting Officer: |
| Richard Beaty |
| Email: |
| richard.beaty.3@us.af.mil |
Contracting Officer: Miranda Wiygul .
Email: miranda.wiygul.1@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 4
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .