Attachment 6 (Past Perf. Questionnaire).docx
DOCX document 22 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Non-Personal Service Augmented Lab Personnel
- Solicitation number
- W81K00-26-R-A032
- Issued by
-
Department of the Army Medical Command
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) form used by the Medical Readiness Contracting Office - West to evaluate contractor past performance for a competitive acquisition supporting augmented lab services. The form is designed to be completed by references who have previously worked with the contractor being evaluated and should be returned to Wayne.v.thompson3.civ@health.mil and james.m.davis1.civ@health.mil by a specified due date.
The PPQ requests specific contract information including the contractor name, contract/order number, type of service provided, service location, and contract amount. Respondents must indicate whether unsatisfactory performance resulted in additional contractual or administrative costs. The form includes two primary evaluation criteria: Quality of Service (assessing overall compliance with the contract Performance Work Statement) and Business/Customer Relations (evaluating effective management, service delivery, contractor cooperation, flexibility, and concern for customer interests). Both categories use a four-point rating scale: Excellent, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory. Narrative explanations are mandatory for any rating other than Satisfactory and must directly support the rating assigned. The questionnaire is used to validate the contractor's capability to support the Department of the Army Medical Command's requirement for augmented lab personnel at Public Health Command-Europe and Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, including Microbiological Analysts, Chemical Analysts, LIMS Administrators, Industrial Hygienists, and related laboratory positions.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Solicitation Amendment W81K0026RA0320001 SF 30.pdf | ||
| Attachment 5 (Compensation Plan).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 4 (Price Worksheet).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Solicitation - W81K0026RA032 Professional Appearance.pdf | ||
| Attachment 7 (Past Perf. Summary Sheet).docx | DOCX document |
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
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ) FORM
Medical Readiness Contracting Office - West is conducting a competitive acquisition for a personal services requirement of Augmented Lab Personnel at William Public Health Command-Europe (PHC-E) and Landstuhl Regional Medical Center (LRMC). The offeror has identified you as a reference to validate past performance. Please complete the following questionnaire to assist with our evaluation of the contractor’s past performance.
Please return completed PPQ form to:
Wayne.v.thompson3.civ@health.mil and james.m.davis1.civ@health.mil
Due Date:
· Identify and provide the name of the Prime Contractor and Subcontractor.
· Specify Prime Contractor/Subcontractor.
Name of Contractor being evaluated:
Contract/Order Number: __________________________________________________________________
1. Type of service being provided?
2. Where is the location of this service?
3. What is the contract amount?
4. Have there been any unsatisfactory performance resulting in additional contractual or administrative costs?
Yes |_| No |_| If “Yes,” explain:
The last two questions will discuss quality of service & customer relations. Please refer to the following:
Rating System:
1. Excellent – Overall performance exceeds contractual requirements and gives extra benefits to the customer. Problems, if any, were promptly corrected without negative impact to the customer.
1. Satisfactory – Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory
1. Marginal - Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractor’s proposed actions to correct any problems appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.
1. Unsatisfactory – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
IMPORTANT NOTE: NARRATIVES MUST BE PROVIDED FOR ANY RATING OTHER THAN SATISFACTORY AND MUST SUPPORT THE RATING GIVEN.
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE, Continued
5. Quality of Service – Please rate overall compliance with the contract Performance Work Statement.
(1) Excellent |_| (2) Satisfactory |_| (3) Marginal |_| (4) Unsatisfactory |_|
If other than “Satisfactory,” a narrative must be provided to explain how the overall performance exceeds or does not meet contractual requirements:
6. Business/Customer Relations – Please rate overall effective management; successfully managed services; reasonable/cooperative behavior; flexibility; business-like concern for customer’s interest.
(1) Excellent |_| (2) Satisfactory |_| (3) Marginal |_| (4) Unsatisfactory |_|
If other than “Satisfactory,” a narrative must be provided to explain how the overall performance exceeds or does not meet contractual requirements:
Signature: Date:
Print Name: Company:
Title: Telephone:
Thank you for your participation in providing a detailed and accurate history of past performance for this offeror!
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .