Attachment 9 - Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf

NFsNC Ditch Culverts & Road Rehabilitation Project

The USDA Forest Service is soliciting proposals for Solicitation No. 122445226Q0047 - FY26 Pisgah North Ranger District Ditch Culvert Replacements and Road Rehabilitation. As part of the procurement process, an emphasis is being placed on past performance as a source selection factor. In order to accurately evaluate the offeror’s past performance, your assistance is requested in obtaining and verifying the past performance history of this offeror.

Return completed questionnaire to the Contractor, or directly to the government. Questionnaire submitted directly to the government may email the completed form to the Contract Specialist, Andrew Cranford, at Andrew.Cranford@usda.gov. Please make the subject line of the email read “122445226Q0047 - PSGNorthCulvRep - RFQ – [Insert Evaluated Company’s Name]”. If submitting to the government directly, please respond by September 4, 2026, at 2:00 PM EST.

PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

When Filled In This Document Is Source Selection Sensitive IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104

A. GENERAL INFORMATION: Please correct any information below known to be inaccurate:

Contractor’s Name: _____________________ Telephone Number: ______________________

Address: ________________________________________

Project Title or Brief Description of Work: _____________________________________________

Contract Number Provided by Offeror: __________________Dollar Amount: $ _____________________ Contract Period or Dates of Performance Provided by Offeror: ___________________________

Contractor performed as the Prime Contractor Sub-Contractor Key Personnel.

B. RESPONDENT INFORMATION:

Name of Respondent: ___________________Title: _________________________________________

Telephone Number: _______________________________ Email Address: _______________________________

NFsNC Ditch Culverts & Road Rehabilitation Project

C. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the number on the scale of 1 to 6 that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE

EXPLANATION FOR ANY RATINGS OF 1 OR 2.

1. Provided experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.

1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

2. Home office participated in solving significant local problems. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

3. Followed approved quality control plan. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

4. Provided effective quality control and/or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements.

1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

5. Corrected deficiencies in timely manner and pursuant to their quality control procedures.

1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

7. Identified problems as they occurred. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

8. Suggested alternative approaches to problems. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

9. Displayed initiative to solve problems. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

10. Developed realistic progress schedules. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

11. Met established project schedules. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

12. Was responsive to contract changes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

13. Provided adequate project supervision. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

14. Obtained consent of surety for increases in bonding as work-in-progress increased.

1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

15. Paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

16. Provided accurate and complete line item cost proposals including all aspects of work required for each task.

1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

17. Cooperated with Government personnel after award. 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

18. How would you rate the contractor's overall performance? 1 2 3 4 5 6 N/A

19. Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract?

If yes, explain outcome in “remarks.”

YES/NO

20. Is the contractor rated in CPARS? YES/NO

21. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain in “remarks.” YES/NO

CONTRACTOR’S NAME: _ _CONTRACT NUMBER

Remarks: ________________________________________________________________________________

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNSATISFACTORY MARGINAL SATISFACTORY VERY GOOD EXCEPTIONAL NEUTRAL

Performance did not meet most contractual requirements. There were serious problems and the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.

Performance did not meet some contractual requirements.

There were problems, some of a serious nature, for which corrective action was only marginally effective.

Performance met contractual requirements.

There were some minor problems and corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded some to the government’s benefit. There were a few minor problems, which the contractor resolved in a timely, effective manner.

Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded many to the government’s benefit.

Problems, if any, were negligible and were resolved in a timely, highly effective manner.

No record of past performance or the record is inconclusive.i