Attachment A - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 49 KB Posted
- Attached to
- C222--Replace and Upgrade Elevators Buildings 15, 47 and 62 Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 36C24623R0039
About this file
This pre-solicitation notice seeks proposals from architectural and engineering firms for design and construction services related to replacing and upgrading elevators at three buildings at the Charles George VA Medical Center in Asheville, North Carolina. Key details include:
-
Scope of work involves investigative services, design development, and construction period services to replace approximately 12 elevators across three buildings. Services include design, construction documentation, cost estimating, scheduling, and construction support.
-
Proposals are due by February 21, 2023. Interviews will be scheduled with the most highly qualified firms. Award will follow the Brooks Act selection process.
-
The estimated construction cost is between $5-10 million. Design fees are limited to 6% of estimated construction costs by law.
-
The opportunity is a 100% set-aside for verified Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses. Proposals will be evaluated based on professional qualifications, specialized experience, capacity, past performance, and location.
-
The pre-solicitation provides templates for a past performance questionnaire and submission requirements to address the evaluation criteria. Selected firms must meet limitations on subcontracting requirements.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment B - Criterion 2 Format.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 36C24623R0039_1.docx | DOCX document |
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
SOLICITATION ATTACHMENT - PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE AND COVER LETTER
Complete one set of letters and forms for at least three (3) projects identified in your firm’s SF 330 Section F, Example Projects Which Best Illustrate Proposed Team’s Qualifications for This Contract. Additional space or blank sheets may be added to answer any question.Transmittal Letter to Accompany Past Performance Questionnaire
FROM: [Insert Company Official Name, Title, and Company Name] SUBJECT: Past Performance Questionnaire for Contract(s):
[Insert Company Name] is currently responding to VHA Network Contracting Office 6 and the Charles George VA Medical Center, regarding a request for SF 330, Architect- Engineer Qualifications for Project 637-23-101, Replace and Upgrade Elevators Buildings 15, 47, and 62.
This Request for SF 330’s requires respondents to identify customers and solicit their response regarding [Insert Company Name] performance.
[Insert Company Name] is providing past performance data to VHA Network Contracting Office 6 relating to our performance on contract [Insert contract name/number] and have identified [Insert name of reference] as the point of contact for this contract.
The request for SF 330 instructs that respondents provide customers with the attached questionnaire. Please complete the questionnaire (Sections B and C) and return it by no later than 08:00am EST, February 21, 2022. Return the completed questionnaire directly to the Government Contract Specialist Quentin Norvell, via email at Quentin.norvell@va.gov and the Contracting Officer, Keith Hunter, via email at keith.hunter@va.gov
*Do not return this form to the AE firm requesting the reference.*
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
A-E FIRM TO BE EVALUATED:
Firm Name: Address:
DUNS/UEID Number:
Project Title:
Description of Project:
Description of A-E Firms’ Responsibilities:
Contract Number: Dollar Amount:
Contract Period of Performance:
The A-E Firm performed as the Prime Contractor Sub-Contractor/Consultant/Team Member Percent of work performed by A-E Firm:
B. EVALUATOR INFORMATION:
Evaluator’s Company or Agency Name: Company or Agency Address: Evaluator’s Name:
Title of Evaluator:
Telephone:
E-mail:
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the appropriate rating that most accurately describes the A/E’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ALL RATINGS OF Marginal or Unsatisfactory on page 7 under Narrative Summary.
| Exceptional (5) |
| Very Good (4) |
| Satisfactory (3) |
| Marginal (2) |
| Unsatisfactory (1) |
| N/A |
| -Performance meets |
| -Performance meets or |
| -Performance meets |
| -Performance does |
| -Performance does |
| -Not applicable |
| or met contractual |
| met contractual |
| or met contractual |
| or did not meet |
| or did not meet |
| or rater has not |
| requirements and |
| requirements and |
| requirements. The |
| some contractual |
| most contractual |
| observed |
| exceeds or |
| exceeds or exceeded |
| contractual |
| requirements. The |
| requirements and |
| performance in |
| exceeded many of |
| some of your |
| performance reflects |
| contractual |
| recovery is not |
| this area. |
| your company’s |
| company’s |
| or reflected some |
| performance reflects |
| likely or did not |
| expectations. The |
| expectations. The |
| minor problems. |
| or reflected serious |
| occur. The |
| contractual |
| contractual |
| Corrective actions |
| problems(s) for |
| contractual |
| performance |
| performance reflects or |
| being taken by the |
| which the contractor |
| performance |
| reflects or reflected |
| reflected some minor |
| contractor appear to |
| has not yet |
| contains or |
| few minor problems |
| problems and |
| be effective or |
| identified acceptable |
| contained serious |
| and corrective |
| corrective actions |
| Corrective actions |
| corrective actions or |
| problem (s) for |
| actions taken by the |
| being taken by the |
| taken were |
| did not provide |
| which the |
| contractor appear to |
| contractor appear to be |
| effective. |
| acceptable |
| contractor’s |
| be highly effective |
| effective or Corrective |
| corrective actions. |
| corrective actions |
| or corrective actions |
| actions taken were |
appear ineffective
| taken were |
| effective. |
or were ineffective.
effective.
Place an “X” in the appropriate column using the above definitions matrix.
Item
FACTORS TO BE RATED
| Exceptional (5) |
| Very Good (4) |
| Satisfactory (3) |
| Marginal (2) |
| Unsatisfactory (1) |
| N/A |
Design Services:
| 1. |
| Overall skill level and technical competence of A/E’s personnel. |
| 2. |
| A/E’s ability to identify and resolve design issues expeditiously. |
| 3. |
| A/E’s responsiveness to design review questions. |
| 4. |
| A/E’s ability to effectively coordinate, integrate and manage their consultants/subcontractors/team |
| 5. |
| A/E’s effectiveness and responsiveness in interfacing with the Client’s staff |
Item
FACTORS TO BE RATED
| Exceptional (5) |
| Very Good (4) |
| Satisfactory (3) |
| Marginal (2) |
| Unsatisfactory (1) |
| N/A |
| 6. |
| Overall accuracy, completeness and coordination of final design documents. (Quality) |
| 7. |
| A/E’s ability to provide detailed, accurate cost estimates. |
| 8. |
| A/E’s ability to meet contract schedule. |
Follow-On Construction Support Services:
| 9. |
| Thoroughness and timely review of construction submittals. |
| 10. |
| Timely resolution of construction design issues. |
| 11. |
| Overall quality, responsiveness and timeliness of A/E follow- on construction support services. |
LEED (If Applicable):
| 12. |
| Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness and coordination of LEED documentation. |
| 13. |
| A/E’s ability and understanding of the overall LEED process. |
BIM (If Applicable):
| 14. |
| Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness and coordination of BIM documentation. |
| 15. |
| A/E’s ability and understanding of the overall BIM process. |
Owner’s Representative on Design/Build Projects (If applicable):
| 16. |
| Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness and coordination of requirements documents and bridging documents. |
| 17. |
| A/E’s ability, thoroughness, timeliness and support as Owner’s Representative throughout the project. |
Overall:
| 18. |
| How would you rate the A/E’s ability to control cost? |
| 19. |
| How would you rate the A/E’s overall management performance on this contract? |
| 20. |
| How would you rate the A/E’s overall technical/quality performance on this contract? |
| 21. |
| Would you use this A/E again? (If “No”, please comment in the Narrative Summary) |
YES
NO
Number of A/E Design Errors & Omissions on Project: _ Increased Project Cost Due to A/E Design Errors & Omissions:
NARRATIVE SUMMARY REGARDING PERFORMANCE:
| Item |
| COMMENTS |
C. SEND COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE, VIA EMAIL, TO:
Department of Veteran Affairs Nicholas Ruppert, Contracting Officer Email: Nicholas.Ruppert@va.gov Networking Contracting Office (NCO 6)
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .