Attachment D - PPQ.docx

DOCX document 31 KB Posted

Attached to
N4008023R0020 LARGE PROJECTS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC) Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
N4008023R0020
Issued by
Department of the Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command

About this file

This document provides guidance on submitting and evaluating past performance questionnaires for a Department of the Navy solicitation seeking large construction projects under a multiple award construction contract. Offerors must submit completed past performance questionnaires from previous clients or the first page with contact information if a completed questionnaire is not yet available. Questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Navy or through the offeror. The evaluation will rate offerors' past performance on quality, schedule, customer satisfaction, management, cost controls, safety, and other factors using adjectival ratings. This multiple award construction contract will be awarded by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command to provide large construction projects for the Navy.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to N4008023R0020 LARGE PROJECTS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC), newest first.
File Type Posted
N4008023R0020 Amendment 0010.pdf PDF
GI-113_Amend 6.pdf PDF
CS-503_Amend 6 (2).pdf PDF
CU-202_Amend 6 (2).pdf PDF
CU-204_Amend 6 (2).pdf PDF
Additional Site Photos (2).pdf PDF
01 50 00_Amend 6 (2).pdf PDF
GC-005_Amend 6.pdf PDF
Propane Tank Information as shown on V-101.pdf PDF
V-101_Amend 6.pdf PDF
Specifications Table of Content_Amend 6.pdf PDF
GI-111_Amend 6.pdf PDF
E-102_Amend 6.pdf PDF
21-SF-0064_Mod 2 stamped plans_P-3002_ESC_Stage_0 Amend 5.pdf PDF
CG-122_Amend 5.pdf PDF
Flashing Beacon Specification and Details Amend 5.pdf PDF
Site Visit Seed Project Photos (P-3002 HCL).pdf PDF
CG-112_Amend 5.pdf PDF
CG-103A_Amend 5.pdf PDF
CU-103_Amend 5.pdf PDF
Bird Protection Netting Spec Amend 5.pdf PDF
Grade Crossing Active Control Device Specification and Details Amend 5.pdf PDF
L-104_Amend 5.pdf PDF
Pre-proposal and Site Visit Attendee Presentation.pdf PDF
Pre-proposal and Site Visit Attendee Log.pdf PDF
P-3002 HCP Price Schedule_BLANK 4-5-23 AMEND 4.pdf PDF
CG-102A_AMEND 4.pdf PDF
CS-102_REV_AMEND 4.pdf PDF
GI-115_AMEND 4.pdf PDF
CT-501 AMEND 4.pdf PDF
Additional Information on Batch Plant Site AMEND 4.pdf PDF
33 10 00 Water Piping Structures and Appurtenances_AMEND 4.pdf PDF
MDE 18-SF-0054 JADOC BORROW PITS SIGNED DWGS_1 of 3 AMEND 4.pdf PDF
CG-503_AMEND 4.pdf PDF
CG-403_AMEND 4.pdf PDF
CD-101_AMEND 4.pdf PDF
04___Soil Lab Test Results AMEND 4.pdf PDF
GI-102_REV.pdf PDF
Attachment P-3002 Price Proposal Form 3-22-23.pdf PDF
CS-503_REV.pdf PDF
P-3002 IFC PLANS_REV_signed_Part 3 of 7.pdf PDF
Attachment H - Base Access Form 4973-16FEB2023.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
P-3002 IFC PLANS_REV_signed_Part 6 of 7.pdf PDF
P-3002 IFC PLANS_REV_signed_Part 5 of 7.pdf PDF
N4008023R0020 Amendment 0001.pdf PDF
2022.09.26 P-3002 IFC PLANS_N4008023R0020 INSTRUCTIONS.docx DOCX document
Attachment C - CONSTRUCTION DESIGN EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET.docx DOCX document
N40080-23-R-0020 LARGE PROJECTS MACC.pdf PDF
Attachment A- PIEE Vendor Access Instructions.pdf PDF
P-3002 HCP Price Schedule_BLANK 3-1-23.pdf PDF
Show all 50

N4008023R0020 LARGE PROJECTS MULTIPLE AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (MACC) has more files on GovTribe.

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 D

1. The NAVFAC Form PPQ shall be utilized for all evaluations that require a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).

2. Solicitation Submittal Requirements: IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE, IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1, Experience. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment C), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Kennett A. Morris, via email at kennett.a.morris.civ@us.navy.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.”

NOTE: NAVFAC REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO NAVFAC WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON NAVFAC SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO NAVFAC. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR NAVFAC POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

Rev. November 2022 1

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION

DISCLOSURE LIMITATIONS AS OUTLINED IN FAR 2.101 & 3.104 APPLY

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.
An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.
(VG) Very Good
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
(S) Satisfactory
Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.
(M) Marginal
Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.
A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.
(U) Unsatisfactory
Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.
(N) Not Applicable
No information or did not apply to your contract
Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

Rev November 2022 4

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION

DISCLOSURE LIMITATIONS AS OUTLINED IN FAR 2.101 & 3.104 APPLY

Contractor Information (Firm Name): ________________________________________________ Client Information (Name): ________________________________________________________

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts
E VG S M U N
b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance
E VG S M U N
c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance
E VG S M U N
d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)
E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)
E VG S M U N
b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract
E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project?
E VG S M U N
b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)
E VG S M U N
c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?
E VG S M U N
d) Overall customer satisfaction
E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?
E VG S M U N
b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort
E VG S M U N
c) Government Property Control
E VG S M U N
d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel
E VG S M U N
e) Utilization of Small Business concerns
E VG S M U N
f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines
E VG S M U N
g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes
E VG S M U N
h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)
E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?
E VG S M U N

Contractor Information (Firm Name): ________________________________________________ Client Information (Name): ________________________________________________________

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client
E VG S M U N
c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)
E VG S M U N
d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.
Yes No
e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.
Yes No
f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.
Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)
E VG S M U N
b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.
E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).
E VG S M U N
b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues)
E VG S M U N
c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below)
Yes No
d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.
E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):

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