Attachment 9 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 33 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Defense Freight Transportation Services (DFTS) II - Solicitation Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- HTC71123RR009
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire template for the Defense Freight Transportation Services (DFTS) II solicitation issued by the Department of Defense United States Transportation Command. The past performance questionnaire requests information on a contractor's performance on areas such as subcontractor management, transportation services, information technology, small business subcontracting utilization, and overall performance on previous contracts. Respondents are asked to provide ratings in these areas as exceptional, very good, satisfactory, marginal, or unsatisfactory. Narrative responses are also requested to further explain any marginal or unsatisfactory ratings, describe strengths and weaknesses, note any partial or complete contract terminations, and provide any additional comments on the contractor's performance.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 34
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 9
HTC711-23-R-R009
SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
INSTRUCTIONS: This section is to be filled out by the contractor or subcontractor requesting information and sent to the respondent.
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
A. Contractor Name:
B. Contract Number:
C. Contract Type:
D. Period of Performance:
E. Brief Description of Work Performed:
F. Average Number of Shipments Processed Per Month:
G. Dollar Value (include per year cost and life cycle cost):
H. Location (states where service was performed under this contract, or “nationwide”):
I. Contractor being evaluated performed as the: _____ Prime or _____ Subcontractor (Mark one)
SECTION 2: RESPONDENT INFORMATION
INSTRUCTIONS: The remaining sections are to be filled out by Respondent. Once completed, respondent sends to USTRANSCOM Acquisition Office via E-mail to: amy.g.burk.civ@mail.mil, cassandra.a.range.civ@mail.mil, and christopher.t.frost4.civ@mail.mil.
A. Customer or Agency Name:
B. Respondent's Name:
C. Respondent's Title:
D. Respondent's Phone/Fax Number:
E. Respondent’s Email:
F. Contract Performance Data assessed in Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS):
YES________ NO________
SECTION 3: PERFORMANCE INFORMATION FOR OFFERORS
INSTRUCTIONS: Choose the term that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation.
The results of this survey will aid the Government in determining whether there is a reasonable expectation the contractor will successfully perform the required effort under the Global Privately-Owned Vehicle Contract (GPC) V acquisition. In responding to the survey, please justify and explain Marginal or Unsatisfactory ratings. Respondent may be contacted to clarify comments or ratings. In order for the Government to review and assess the contractor’s past performance rating, please use the following ratings to describe the offeror’s performance on your contract or project:
Exceptional - Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded many to your company’s (or agency’s) benefit. Regarding the element or sub-element being rated, there should have been multiple significant events that were of benefit to your company (or agency). A singular benefit could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
Very Good - Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded some to your company’s (or agency’s) benefit. There were a few minor problems that the contractor resolved in a timely, effective manner. Regarding the element or sub-element being rating, there should have been a significant event that was of benefit to your company (or agency). There should have been no significant weaknesses.
Satisfactory - Performance met contract requirements. There were some minor problems, and corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. There should only be minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered without impact to the contract. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
Marginal - Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. There were problems, some of a serious nature, for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective action, or for which corrective action was only marginally effective or was not fully implemented.
Unsatisfactory - Performance did not meet most contractual requirements, and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. There were serious problems, and the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
Unknown - No record of past performance or the record is inconclusive.
NOTE 1: If you have rated this contractor on this particular contract or project in CPARS, or some other evaluation system accessible to the Government, submission of a questionnaire is still requested to ensure the performance areas cited below are addressed.
NOTE 2: Plus or minus signs may be used to indicate an improving (+) or worsening (-) trend insufficient to change the evaluation status.
| 1. SUBCONTRACTOR MANAGEMENT |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| A |
| Contractor provided management/coordination of subcontractors to pickup and deliver shipments between multiple destinations within delivery dates required. |
| B |
| Contractor maintained a subcontractor network capable of ensuring low volume/low frequency sites met on-time metrics. |
| C |
| Contractor maintained a subcontractor network with appropriate driver qualifications/credentialing to ensure drivers had access to delivery sites and authorizations to move requested material. |
| D |
| Contractor took corrective actions when subcontractor safety and performance issues arose during contract performance. |
| 2. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| A |
| Contractor provided on-time pickup of shipments. |
| B |
| Contractor provided on-time delivery of shipments. |
| C |
| Contractor provided transportation coordination services without loss or damage to freight. |
| D |
| Contractor had available equipment, including specialized equipment, to ship required freight. |
| E |
| Contractor provided timely claims processing. |
| 3. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| A |
| Contractor maintained a secure, web-based Transportation Management System (TMS) that interfaced with customer systems. |
| B |
| Contractor’s TMS provided track and trace capability of shipments in-transit. |
| C |
| Contractor’s TMS was capable of accessorial charge authorization and reporting. |
| D |
| Contractor’s TMS was capable of claims management and performance reporting. |
| 4. SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING UTILIZATION |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| A |
| Contractor maintained compliance with requirements of the clause at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns. |
| B |
| Contractor maintained compliance with requirements of the clause at FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. |
| C |
| Contractor met small business subcontracting goals as established in the contract. |
| 5. OVERALL PERFORMANCE |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| A |
| Commitment to customer satisfaction and business-like concern for its customers’ interests. |
| B |
| Timeliness of performance for services and product deliverables, including the administrative aspects of performance. |
| C |
| Compliance of products, services, documents, and related deliverables to specification requirements and standards of good workmanship. |
| D |
| Effective contract management. |
| E |
| Overall capability of the contractor's team. Did the contractor's personnel demonstrate the appropriate education, relevant experience, levels of skill, and expertise for the tasks required? |
SECTION 4: NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
NOTE: Answer length is not limited – text boxes below may be expanded as needed.
1. Please discuss each and every response for which you provided a Marginal or Unsatisfactory in response to the questions above.
2. Government Contracts Only: Has this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience, or are there any pending terminations? YES________ NO________
If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules, etc.)
3. Explain the contractor’s greatest strengths and/or weaknesses and your rationale for why you would or would not award a future contract to them.
4. Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?
5. Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 (When Filled-in, this Document becomes CUI//SP-SSEL)
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .