ATTACHMENT G - PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE - NX EQ HOUSEKEEPING CARTS.docx

DOCX document 27 KB Posted

Attached to
7240--NX EQ Housekeeping Carts (VA-26-00014798)
Solicitation number
36C10X26Q0102
Issued by

About this file

This is a Past Performance Questionnaire template for use by the Department of Veterans Affairs Strategic Acquisition Center (SAC) in evaluating offerors responding to Solicitation No. 36C10X26Q0102 for NX EQ Housekeeping Carts (brand name Rubbermaid or equal). The questionnaire is to be completed by past customers or contract references of bidding companies and must be submitted by April 14, 2026, at 10:00 AM EST to Jalima Jones (Jalima.Jones@va.gov) and Sara Vickroy (Sara.Vickroy@va.gov).

The questionnaire requests references from the past three years (maximum of five references per offeror) and collects detailed information about each reference's experience with the offeror, including contract period, total contract value, options exercised, and service descriptions. References are asked to rate offerors on four evaluation criteria using a three-point scale (1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Satisfactory, 3=Excellent): Quality of Service (compliance with requirements, accuracy of reports, personnel effectiveness, technical excellence); Cost Control (cost management efficiency, invoice timeliness and accuracy); Timeliness of Performance (milestone achievement, reliability, responsiveness, schedule adherence); and Business Relations (contract management, cooperation, responsiveness to requirements and inquiries, problem resolution). The template also includes a yes/no question regarding overall satisfaction and willingness to work with the offeror again. References must disclose whether any show cause orders, stop work orders, or terminations for convenience, cause, or default were issued on the referenced contract.

View the file

Other files

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

Attachment G Past Performance Questionnaire

SOLICITATION NO.: 36C10X26Q0102

DESCRIPTION: NX EQ HOUSEKEEPING CARTS– Brand Name Rubbermaid® or Equal

Offerors: Please Send Each Reference Cited in Submitted Quote (Maximum of Five References from Past Three Years)

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS (VA)

STRATEGIC ACQUISITION CENTER (SAC)

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

TO: Jalima Jones and Sara Vickroy E-MAIL: Jalima.Jones@va.gov and Sara.Vickroy@va.gov

VA SAC is currently in the process of awarding a contract for the solicitation described above. The offeror identified below has provided your organization’s name as a reference under the contract described below:

Offeror Name:

(Insert Offeror’s Name Here)

Contract Number:
(Insert Applicable Contract Number Here)

Please rate the offeror in each of the categories on this questionnaire. See “Rating Guidelines” section for detailed description of categories and ratings. There is room for comments where you deem remarks would be helpful to our evaluation (see ‘Comment from Reference’ under “Offeror Evaluation.” Please note that the past performance evaluators for this solicitation may contact you for further details in making a fair assessment of this offeror’s past performance. Thank you for your organization’s assistance in fairly evaluating offeror proposals for this solicitation.

Please E-mail Questionnaire to: Jalima.Jones@va.gov and Sara.Vickroy@va.gov by April 14, 2026, at 10:00 AM EST.

Name of Reference:
(Reference Complete These Sections)

Title of Reference:

Phone Number:

E-Mail Address:

Name of Organization:

Contract Period of Performance (Month/Day/Year Begin and End):

Total Contract Value (Base and All Option Years):

Options Exercised on Contract (Yes/No)?

Brief Description of Services/Commodity Provided by Offeror:

Show Cause Order Issued on Contract (Yes/No)?

Stop Work Order Issued on Contract (Yes/No)?

Termination for Convenience, Cause, or Default Issued on Contract (Yes/No)?

Rating Guidelines:

Rating
Quality of Service
Cost Control
Timeliness of Performance
Business Relations
1: Unsatisfactory
Offeror is not in compliance and has jeopardized achievement of contract objectives
Offeror is unable to manage costs effectively
Offeror delays have jeopardized performance
Responses to inquiries and issues are not effective
2: Satisfactory
Minor inefficiencies and errors have been identified
Offeror is usually effective in managing costs
Offeror is usually effective in meeting milestones and delivery schedule
Responses to inquiries and issues is usually effective
3: Excellent
Offeror is in compliance with contract requirements and delivers quality services
Offeror is effective in managing costs and submits proper invoices
Offeror is effective in meeting and exceeding milestones and delivery schedule
Responses to inquiries have been effective and/or exceeded expectations and established deadlines

Offeror Evaluation:

Rating (List Number Based on Rating Guidelines Above)
Category
Description
Quality of Service
In compliance with contract requirements, submits accurate reports/deliverables, has effective personnel, and has achieved/maintained technical excellence:

Comment from Reference: _______________________

Cost Control
Has achieved efficiencies in costs, managed costs effectively, and has submitted timely/accurate invoices with supporting documentation:
Timeliness of Performance
Has met milestones, is reliable, is responsive to technical direction, and has completed milestones on-time or ahead of schedule:
Business Relations
Has maintained effective management of contract, has exhibited reasonable/cooperative behavior, is responsive to contract requirements, is responsive to inquiries/issues, and is proactive about resolving problems:
|_| YES |_| NO
Overall Satisfaction
Would you (reference) choose to work with this offeror again?
Name of Reference:
(Reference Complete These Sections)

Title of Reference:

Phone Number:

E-Mail Address:

Name of Organization:

Contract Period of Performance (Month/Day/Year Begin and End):

Total Contract Value (Base and All Option Years):

Options Exercised on Contract (Yes/No)?

Brief Description of Services/Commodity Provided by Offeror:

Show Cause Order Issued on Contract (Yes/No)?

Stop Work Order Issued on Contract (Yes/No)?

Termination for Convenience, Cause, or Default Issued on Contract (Yes/No)?

Rating
Quality of Service
Cost Control
Timeliness of Performance
Business Relations
1: Unsatisfactory
Offeror is not in compliance and has jeopardized achievement of contract objectives
Offeror is unable to manage costs effectively
Offeror delays have jeopardized performance
Responses to inquiries and issues are not effective
2: Satisfactory
Minor inefficiencies and errors have been identified
Offeror is usually effective in managing costs
Offeror is usually effective in meeting milestones and delivery schedule
Responses to inquiries and issues is usually effective
3: Excellent
Offeror is in compliance with contract requirements and delivers quality services
Offeror is effective in managing costs and submits proper invoices
Offeror is effective in meeting and exceeding milestones and delivery schedule
Responses to inquiries have been effective and/or exceeded expectations and established deadlines
Rating (List Number Based on Rating Guidelines Above)
Category
Description
Quality of Service
In compliance with contract requirements, submits accurate reports/deliverables, has effective personnel, and has achieved/maintained technical excellence:
Cost Control
Has achieved efficiencies in costs, managed costs effectively, and has submitted timely/accurate invoices with supporting documentation:
Timeliness of Performance
Has met milestones, is reliable, is responsive to technical direction, and has completed milestones on-time or ahead of schedule:
Business Relations
Has maintained effective management of contract, has exhibited reasonable/cooperative behavior, is responsive to contract requirements, is responsive to inquiries/issues, and is proactive about resolving problems:
|_| YES |_| NO
Overall Satisfaction
Would you (reference) choose to work with this offeror again?
Name of Reference:
(Reference Complete These Sections)

Title of Reference:

Phone Number:

E-Mail Address:

Name of Organization:

Contract Period of Performance (Month/Day/Year Begin and End):

Total Contract Value (Base and All Option Years):

Options Exercised on Contract (Yes/No)?

Brief Description of Services/Commodity Provided by Offeror:

Show Cause Order Issued on Contract (Yes/No)?

Stop Work Order Issued on Contract (Yes/No)?

Termination for Convenience, Cause, or Default Issued on Contract (Yes/No)?

Rating
Quality of Service
Cost Control
Timeliness of Performance
Business Relations
1: Unsatisfactory
Offeror is not in compliance and has jeopardized achievement of contract objectives
Offeror is unable to manage costs effectively
Offeror delays have jeopardized performance
Responses to inquiries and issues are not effective
2: Satisfactory
Minor inefficiencies and errors have been identified
Offeror is usually effective in managing costs
Offeror is usually effective in meeting milestones and delivery schedule
Responses to inquiries and issues is usually effective
3: Excellent
Offeror is in compliance with contract requirements and delivers quality services
Offeror is effective in managing costs and submits proper invoices
Offeror is effective in meeting and exceeding milestones and delivery schedule
Responses to inquiries have been effective and/or exceeded expectations and established deadlines
Rating (List Number Based on Rating Guidelines Above)
Category
Description
Quality of Service
In compliance with contract requirements, submits accurate reports/deliverables, has effective personnel, and has achieved/maintained technical excellence:
Cost Control
Has achieved efficiencies in costs, managed costs effectively, and has submitted timely/accurate invoices with supporting documentation:
Timeliness of Performance
Has met milestones, is reliable, is responsive to technical direction, and has completed milestones on-time or ahead of schedule:
Business Relations
Has maintained effective management of contract, has exhibited reasonable/cooperative behavior, is responsive to contract requirements, is responsive to inquiries/issues, and is proactive about resolving problems:
|_| YES |_| NO
Overall Satisfaction
Would you (reference) choose to work with this offeror again?

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