Attachment A- 08_PAP_Form.doc
DOC document 48 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N4008524R2608
About this file
This document is a Performance Assessment Plan (PAP) for a federal contract opportunity. The PAP outlines the evaluation factors and criteria that will be used to assess the contractor's performance on a monthly basis. The key evaluation factors include experience of personnel, working relationships, quality control, timely performance, effectiveness of management, compliance with labor and safety standards, and additional factors to be developed during partnering.
The related federal contract opportunity is for a Design-Build (DB) project to repair and seal the exterior walls and windows at Naval Station, Norfolk, Virginia. The solicitation is restricted to MACC holders under the Design-Build/Design-Bid-Build, Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) 8(a) Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC) for the Hampton Roads Area of Responsibility, Virginia. The agency involved is the Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command.
View the file
Other files
Show all 18
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
Project Title
Work Order Number
Project location, City, State
Performance Assessment Plan
MONTHLY EVALUATION
MONTH: __________YEAR:______
| Evaluation Factor |
| Yes |
| No |
| N/A |
| Comments |
Experience of Personnel
1. Did the team identified in the proposal actively participate in the project?
2. If personnel substitutions were needed, was the degree of technical competence maintained?
Working Relationships
1. Did the Construction team participate in the design process (i.e. attend meetings, provide insight, etc.)? Were the coordination meetings between Construction and Design team personnel documented?
2. Did the Design team participate in the construction process (i.e. attend CQC meetings, perform field oversight, etc.)? Were coordination meetings between Construction and Design team personnel documented?
3. Did the collaboration between the Construction and Design Team deliver a high value innovative facility?
- Were Total Operating Cost minimized
- What LEED points can be obtained
- Was energy efficiency optimized, and the energy goals exceeded.
4. Was the budget management process clear; was an estimate submitted on time with each design submittal. Was the estimate updated to reflect the changes in the design submittal?
5. Did the Contractor's team effectively manage the project budget and the User's requirements to meet the customer's needs? Was project budget and emphasis in cost control exhibited in the estimate? (Contractor to document in comments block materials/systems innovations and provision of higher quality than required in the RFP Part 4)
Additional factors to be developed during Partnering.
Quality Control
1. Were re-submittals of design deliverables or construction rework required this month?
2. Were as built redlines updated this month?
Timely Performance
1. Is the Contractor on schedule?
2. Is the Contractor maintaining the schedule? (Can the Government confirm the project is on schedule?)
3. Is the Contractor following his schedule?
Effectiveness of Management
1. Did the Government need to intercede in resolving a subcontractor issue?
Compliance with Labor Standards
1. Did payrolls have to be resubmitted this month due to inaccuracies or errors?
Compliance with Safety Standards
1. Were there any lost time accidents this month?
GENERAL PERFORMANCE COMMENTS THIS MONTH:
Concurrence:
CM/ROICC Representative ______________Date______.
Project Manager ______________________Date_______.
Contractor Representative ______________Date______.
RFP PART 6 – Performance Assessment Plan Page 1
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .