Attachment 7 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx

DOCX document 38 KB Posted

Attached to
AJJY 23-1024 Renovate Aircraft Equipment MX Facilities B18004 and B18009
Solicitation number
FA524023R0028
Issued by

About this file

This document is a past performance questionnaire for a design-build project to renovate two aircraft equipment maintenance facilities at Andersen Air Force Base in Guam. The project scope involves replacing roll up doors, motors, controls and seals, electrical panels, and interior and exterior painting. The project value is between $1-5 million. Offerors are required to provide references from previous contracts that demonstrate relevant experience. The 36th Contracting Squadron requests completed questionnaires by September 5, 2023 to meet acquisition milestones. The questionnaire collects information on the contractor, contract details, customer references, and performance ratings in technical performance, schedule, management, and any contract terminations. Respondents are asked if they would award to the contractor today given a choice.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
RFI_QandA FA524023R00280003_01Sept23.pdf PDF
RFI_QandA FA524023R00280003_31Aug23.pdf PDF
Attachment 13 - B18004 Electrical Lighting Plan.pdf PDF
Attachment 15 - B18009 Interior Picture 02.pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment - FA524023R00280003 SF1442.pdf PDF
Attachment 12 -B18004 Electrical As-Built Sector B.pdf PDF
Attachment 24 - B18009 Interior Picture 11.pdf PDF
Attachment 21 - B18009 Interior Picture 08.pdf PDF
Attachment 25 - B18009 Interior Picture 12.pdf PDF
Attachment 14 - B18009 Interior Picture 01.pdf PDF
Attachment 11 -B18004 Electrical As-Built Sector A.pdf PDF
Attachment 20 - B18009 Interior Picture 07.pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment FA524023R00280003 SF30.pdf PDF
Attachment 17 - B18009 Interior Picture 04.pdf PDF
Attachment 10 - B18004 Enlarged Floor Plan of SOW Attachment 3.pdf PDF
Attachment 22 - B18009 Interior Picture 09.pdf PDF
Attachment 19 - B18009 Interior Picture 06.pdf PDF
Attachment 18 - B18009 Interior Picture 05.pdf PDF
Attachment 23 - B18009 Interior Picture 10.pdf PDF
Attachment 16 - B18009 Interior Picture 03.pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment FA524023R00280002 SF30.pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment - FA524023R00280002 SF1442.pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment FA524023R00280001 SF1442.pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment FA524023R00280001 SF30.pdf PDF
Attachment 5 - Section M.pdf PDF
Attachment 1 - Statement of Work 09 June 2023.pdf PDF
Attachment 2 - ACBDS.pdf PDF
Attachment 4 - Section L.pdf PDF
Attachment 8 - Site Visit Instructions.pdf PDF
Attachment 6 - Past Performance Fact Sheet.docx DOCX document
Attachment 9 - PIEE Proposal Manager Guide.pdf PDF
Attachment 3 - Wage Determination (GU20220001).pdf PDF
Solicitation - FA524023R0028 SF1442.pdf PDF
Show all 33

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

Controlled Unclassified Information When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

Section L Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) The 36th Contracting Squadron is in the process of competitively selecting a source for a project to Renovate Aircraft Equipment MX (Maintenance) Facilities B18004 and B18009 at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. This is a Design-Build project to design and Renovate Aircraft Equipment MX Facilities B18004 and B18009. This project is intended to renovate by replacing roll up doors with motors, sensors, controls, seals and frames, electrical panels and painting (exterior and interior) of B18004 and interior of B18009 Aircraft Equipment Maintenance Facilities in accordance with all the applicable codes, guidance, policy to include but not limited to Unified Facilities Criteria’s and Andersen Air Force Base Architectural Compatibility and Base Design Standards (ACBDS). The project magnitude is $1,000,000 - $5,000,000.

One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offerors’ past performance on contracts or other work efforts which reflect the offeror’s ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from organizations such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with the offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror’s performance on those contracts or work efforts.

Our areas of interest regarding the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. In order to meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than 05 September 2023.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and emailed to adelino.cabanting@us.af.mil and eddie.pelkey@us.af.mil. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this Source Selection.

Eddie C. Pelkey Contracting Officer

Attachements :

1. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Contractor (Company/Division):

B. Contractor Cage Code:

C. Contract Number:

D. Contract Type (e.g., FFP, FPIF, CPIF, CPFF, etc.):

E. Program Title:

F. Brief Program Description:

G. Program Phase (e.g., Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD)):

H. Period of Performance

1. Original Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

2. Current Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

3. Reason for difference (if applicable):

I. Contract Dollar Value

1. Original maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

2. Current maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

3. Reasons for difference between original and current contract dollar value (if applicable):

J. Description of work performed:

K. Was this a competitively awarded contract? ☐ Yes ☐ No

L. Contractor’s Role: ☐ Prime Contractor ☐ Subcontractor ☐ Key Personnel

Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of services under this contract (i.e., local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands):

Section 3: Respondent Identification

A. Respondent’s name:

B. Respondent’s title:

C. Respondent’s phone number / fax number / e-mail address:

D. Respondent’s position (e.g., Program Manager, PCO/ACO, etc.):

E. Length of time (number of years/months) respondent worked on subject contract and description of responsibility/position/role:

F. Other suggested points of contact:

Section 4: Performance Information

In the tables below, indicate your rating for the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block to the right of each question. Provide supporting information for each response in the space provided. Attach additional pages if more space is needed. The performance rating scale is defined as follows:

Code Performance Rating

E EXCEPTIONAL – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

V VERY GOOD – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’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.

N/A 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.

Technical Performance
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the project?

COMMENTS:

Schedule/Timeliness
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

How well did the contractor adhere to the schedule?

Management
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

How well did the contractor integrate and coordinate activities to execute the project?

Government Contracts Only: Was this contract partially or completely terminated for default or convenience, or are there any pending terminations?

☐ Yes ☐ Default ☐ Convenience ☐ Pending Terminations ☐ No

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules).

SECTION 5: GENERAL COMMENT

Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what they promised in their proposal, I [ click and select an item ] award to them today given that I had a choice.

REMARKS:

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return to: adelino.cabanting@us.af.mil / eddie.pelkey@us.af.mil Controlled Unclassified Information Page 4 of 4

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