Attachment II Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf
PDF 747 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Recycling of Spent Light Bulbs Services
- Solicitation number
- M67400-24-Q-0051
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire for Solicitation #M67400-24-Q-0051, which is a request for recycling services for spent light bulbs. The government is seeking information on the past performance of offerors for this contract opportunity.
The key details include: the solicitation number, description of the required services (collection, recycling, and/or disposal of light bulbs), the deadline for submitting the completed questionnaire (August 5, 2024 by 3:00 PM JST), and the agency issuing the solicitation (United States Marine Corps). The questionnaire covers various performance areas such as quality of service, timeliness, business relations, management of key personnel, and environmental/safety compliance. Respondents are asked to provide an overall assessment of the contractor's past performance and indicate if they would hire the contractor again. The information gathered will be used by the government in the source selection process.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Amendment 0002 M6740024Q0051.pdf | ||
| Bulb Recyling Collection Bin Example.pdf | ||
| EXAMPLE of Analysis Report.pdf | ||
| M6740024Q0051-0001.pdf | ||
| Appendix A - Bulb Recycling Sites.pdf | ||
| Combined Synopsis-M6740024Q0051.pdf | ||
| Attachment III Question Form.pdf | ||
| Appendix B - DD1348-1A.xls.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| Attachment I - Past Performance Information List.pdf | ||
| Appendix C - Contact Personnel Listing.xlsx.xls | XLS spreadsheet |
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
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
FOR
SOLICITATION #: M67400-24-Q-0051
The government is increasing the emphasis on “past performance” as a source selection evaluation factor in its acquisitions. MCIPAC Regional Contracting Office would appreciate your valuable and reliable information regarding the offeror’s past performance so that the Government can make a fair assessment of the proposal. In accordance with FAR 15.306(e)(4), the names of individuals providing reference information about an offeror’s past performance shall not be disclosed.
このたび米国海兵隊リージョナル契約事務所では、入札における落札業者を選定する上で各入札業者の
過去の仕事の実績と遂行状況を調査しております。別紙に示した業者から提出された実績報告書に貴社
名・貴組織名がありましたので、ぜひ貴社・貴組織から当契約部が公正な業者選定を行うにあたり、信
頼の置ける情報を提供頂きたく存じ上げます。なお提供された全情報は当契約部に保管され、第三者に
漏らされる事はありません。 --FAR 15.306 (e)(4)
Upon completion of this survey, please submit your response to us via e-mail no later than 5 August 2024, 15:00 hrs (JST). All submitted information will be kept within RCO and shall not be disclosed to any other third party not involved in the evaluation of the proposal.
お忙しい中恐縮ではございますが、以下の質問にお答え頂き(日本語でも結構です)令和 6 年 8 月 05 日、15:00 時迄に E-メールにて、 へご返送下さるよう、ご協力をお願い申し上げます。
MCIPAC Regional Contracting Office (RCO) ATTN: Ms. Shoko Tsukayama Bldg# 355 Camp Foster, Okinawa E-mail Address: shoko.tsukayama.ln@usmc.mil
The individual with knowledge of the contractor’s day-to-day operations and overall performance should complete this questionnaire. However, that individual is encouraged to supplement their own knowledge of the contractor’s performance with the judgment of others within their organization as applicable.
この質問書の回答は、該当する現場に熟知している方に限らせてい頂きます。ただし、回答以外に該当
業者について知っている方がいる場合、その方の意見も合わせてご記入下さい。
In the event of inconsistency between the English language and its translation into Japanese, the English language meaning shall control.
万一、このアンケートで英文と日本文の間に矛盾する個所がある場合には、英文の方を優先させて頂き
ます。
If you have any questions about this survey, please call Shoko Tsukayama at 098-970-1504 (Commercial)/ 645- 1504 (DSN) or email shoko.tsukayama.ln@usmc.mil. Thank you very much for your time and effort in providing this vital information.
このアンケート用紙についてのお問い合わせは、購買担当:津嘉山祥子(ツカヤマ ショウコ)宛に 098- 970-1504(外線)、645-1504(内線)もしくは電子メール(shoko.tsukayama.ln@usmc.mil)にてご連絡下さ
い。ご協力有難う御座います。
Questionnaire for Offeror’s Past Performance (入札業者の過去及び現在の仕事に関するアンケート)
The below-listed contractor is currently providing or previously provided services for our company/agency:
下記の請負業者(米軍入札参加業者)は当社にたいして現在サービスを提供している、もしくは過去に
提供したことがあるものです。
Please indicate the information regarding the offeror that you are providing this questionnaire.
このアンケート対象業者の情報をご記入下さい。
1. CONTRACT INFORMATION (契約情報) :
A. Contractor(請負業者): ________________________________________________________
B. Contractor’s Address (請負業者住所): __________________________________________
C. Point of Contact(連絡先): __________________________________________________
D. Contract Number(契約番号): ________________________
E. Period of Performance (Basic year and all option years)(契約期間): _____________________________
F. Contract Type(契約の種類):該当する項目を√マークを記入してして下さい。
a) Fixed Price(定額請負契約)
b) Cost Reimbursement (実費精算契約)
c) Other(その他)
G. Contract Amount (Base year and all option years) (総契約金額) ¥_________________ 該当する契約の合計金額を($または ¥ にて、記入ください。
H. Prime Contractor(主業者):該当する項目を√マークを記入してして下さい。
YES(はい) NO(いいえ)
I. Descriptions of services provided/are currently rendered(提供された/現在提供されている業務内容):
2. RESPONDENT INFORMATION (アンケート回答者の情報)
Please provide the information requested below to assist MCIPAC Regional Contracting Office in tracking responses and resolving conflicts. You may be contacted for additional information pertaining to past or present performance of the contractor identified in section 1 above. This information will be kept confidential.
下記にて求められた情報を米国海兵隊リージョナル契約事務所に提供をお願い致します。上記に示され
た業者の過去或いは現在の実績に関する追加情報を得るために連絡を受ける場合もあります。尚、この
書類に関する情報は当契約事務所にて秘密保持されますので、ご理解の皆お願い致します。
Please provide the information regarding the respondent who is providing this questionnaire.
あなたのお名前、職種及び役職、職場の電話番号、職場のファックス番号をご記入下さい。
A. Name of Respondent (アンケート回答者の氏名) : ______________
B. Position and Title(職種及び役職名) : ______________
C. Office Telephone Number(職場の電話番号): _____________
D. Office FAX number(職場のファックス番号): ______________
E. Office Address(職場の住所): ______________
F. Relationship and Time Involved with the Contractor(請負業者との関係および関係期間):
G. Date Questionnaire was completed (アンケート用紙の回答日): 1
3. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: The definitions for the adjectival rating categories are provided below.
評価の記号及び内容は下記の通りです。
3. Definition of Rating (評価度の定義)
Definition of Rating (評価度の定義):
RATING DEFINITION
(1) EXCEPTIONAL
(優秀)
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’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 were highly effective. (当該業者は作業内容をよく理解し、全てにおいてその作業内
容はすべにおいて基準値を超えている。)
(2) VERY GOOD
(より満足)
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’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. (当該業者は作業内容を理解し、いくつかの項目において基
準値を超えている。契約の主な内容及び関連事項に対する遂行の評価に於いて、小
規模な問題は幾らかあったものの、効果的な方法で対処され達成に至った。)
(3) SATISFACTORY
(満足)
Performance meets 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. (当該業者は作業内容を理解し、平均値を満たし
ている。小規模な問題は幾らかあったものの、対処され達成に至った。)
(4) MARGINAL
(普通 / 改善の余地あり)
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. (当該業者はかろうじて
契約要求を遂行した。契約の主な内容及び関連事項に対する遂行の評価に於いて、
未だ対処方法が確定していなかったり、或いは一部分だけに効果のある対処や完全
に対処されなかった重大な問題が生じた。しかし、当該業者は問題が生じた個所を
適切に処理する能力を持っている。)
(5) UNSATISFACTORY
(不満足)
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 a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
(当該業者は幾つかの契約要求を遂行出来なかった。契約の主な内容及び関連事項
に対する遂行の評価に於いて、重大な問題が生じ、その問題の対処方法も効果がな
かった。 当該業者は適切に問題を処理する能力がなく作業の基準値を大幅に下回
る。) Not Applicable (該当なし)
There is no applicable portion.
(該当せず。)
When responding to the questions listed, please choose the rating on the scale of (1) to (5) that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. For any marginal (4) or unsatisfactory (5) rating, please provide explanatory narratives in the remarks block. These narratives need not be lengthy, just detailed. If a question is not applicable, choose N/A. If you choose a Yes/No answer that is marked with an asterisk (*), please provide a corresponding explanation in the remarks block. If more space is needed, use the back of the questionnaire or attach additional page. Handwritten responses to this questionnaire are acceptable. However, if responses are handwritten, please print legibly.
下記の設問は、“はい・いいえ”と 5 段階評価の 2 種類からなりたっています。“はい・いいえ”の設問で
は、“はい”とお答えになった場合、その理由も合わせて記入下さい。5 段階評価の設問はもっとも、当て
はまるものを丸でお囲み下さい。いずれにも該当しない場合は“該当なし”とお答え下さい。
4. PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (過去の実績に対する設問):
4.1 QUALITY OF SERVICE (作業の品質):
a. Contractor’s ability to meet minimum quality standards specified for performance.
指定された作業の最低基準を満たせる能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable (優秀) (より満足) (満足) (普通) (不満足) (該当なし)
b. Contractor’s ability to effectively control the quality of services provided.
サービスの品質を効果的に管理できる能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
c. Contractor’s compliance with contractual terms and conditions.
契約条項に従う能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
4.2 TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE (作業工程):
a. Contractor’s ability to meet specific response times and scheduled time frames for completion of specific tasks.
特定の時間内に対応する、また 工程表の特定の作業を完成させる能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
b. Contractor’s responsiveness/timeliness for providing administrative reports/documents required by the contract.
契約で要求されている管理報告書や書類を提出する際の応答、または時宜にかなった対応の仕方。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable c.
Contractor’s timeliness in responding to emergency service requirements.
非常用サービスの必要に添った迅速な対応能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
d. Provided timely resolution of contract discrepancies.
契約の矛盾点に対して時宜にかなった解決策を提出した。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
4.3 BUSINESS RELATIONS(ビジネス関係):
a. Suggested alternative approaches to problems.
問題に対して代替案を提供した。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
b. Displayed initiative to solve problems.
問題を解決しようとする積極的な姿勢がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
c. Contractor’s ability to identify problems and potential problems, and promptly notify the Contracting Officer/QAP.
問題点あるいは問題となりそうな点を見つけ、契約官、もしくは検査官へ告知する能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
d. Contractor’s ability to correct problems and prevent or mitigate potential problems in timely manner.
問題の解決策および問題となりそうな点をあげ、それを迅速に予防したり、軽減したりする能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
e. Contractor’s willingness to improve and correct noncompliance issues or concerns.
進んで不備な点や誤りを改善したり、正したりする能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
f. Contractor’s ability to use effective approaches and provide technical expertise and resources to solve contract problems.
契約に関する問題を解決するために技術的な助言および手段を提供したり、効果的なアプローチを利用す
る事の出来る能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
g. Contractor’s flexibility in satisfying the requirements of its customers.
契約先の要求を満たす事の出来る寛容さがある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
h. Extent to which the contractor provided prompt and courteous service when responding to customer complaints.
契約先からの苦情に対応する場合の迅速で丁寧なサービスを提供する能力がある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
i. Ability to use effective approaches and provide technical expertise and resources to solve contract problems.
契約に関する問題を解決するために技術的な助言を提供したり、効果的なアプローチを利用する事の出来
る能力。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
4.4 MANAGEMENT OF KEY PERSONNEL (現場監督の管理):
a. Working relationship with the quality assurance personnel, and customers.
作業を遂行する上で品質管理者、検査官、そして契約先との人間関係。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
b. Extent key personnel were knowledgeable about contractual requirements.
現場監督が契約内容について精通している。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
c. Contractor’s ability to meet appropriate staffing levels with qualified personnel in order to provide required services.
契約業務に見合った資格のある従業員を採用するがある。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
4.5 COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL, SAFETY, HEALTH, AND SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
(安全衛生、健康管理、および安全保障の尊守):
a. Contractor’s compliance with safety requirements.
安全作業法の尊守。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
b. Contractor’s compliance with security requirements.
安全保障を厳守している。
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
c. Has the contractor ever received any Notice of Violations for noncompliance with environmental laws or regulations?
環境保護法や規則に違反して警告を受けた事がある。もし、“はい”と答え
たならば理由を説明して下さい。
YES*
(はい)
NO
(いいえ)
Remarks (備考):
BASED ON ABOVE, WHAT IS YOUR OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF THE PAST PERFORMANCE FOR
THIS CONTRACTOR?
上記の評価に基づいて、全体的に、どのように請負業者を評価しますか?
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not Applicable
5. CONTRACTUAL CONSIDERATIONS(契約関係):
a. Has an election ever been made not to exercise an option or continue relations due to contractor’s poor performance? If yes, explain.
契約不履行のため契約更新をしない事を決定されたことがある。もし,“は い” と答えたならば説明して下さい。
YES*
(はい)
NO
(いいえ)
Remarks (備考): ________________________________________________________________
b. Has a Contract Discrepancy Report ever been issued? If yes, explain.
契約の不備に関する書類が発行された事がある。もし,“はい”と答えたな
らば説明して下さい。
YES*
(はい)
NO
(いいえ)
Remarks (備考): ________________________________________________________________
c. Was the contract partially or completely terminated for default or convenience? If yes, explain (e.g. inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules).
契約不履行や都合によって契約が部分的、又は全体的に解約となった事が
ある。もし,“はい”と答えたならば説明して下さい。
YES*
(はい)
NO
(いいえ)
Remarks (備考): ________________________________________________________________
6. CONCLUSION(結論):
a. Based on this contractor’s overall performance, would you hire this contractor again? If no, explain.
全体的な作業実績に基づいて、この業者を又利用したいと思いますか?
もし、 “いいえ” ならば、説明して下さい。
YES
(はい)
NO*
(いいえ)
Remarks (備考): ________________________________________________________________
The undersigned hereby confirms that the information provided in this document is correct as written. Should any corrections be required, the undersigned shall contact the Contract Specialist at +81-98-970-1504(Commercial) / 645-1504 (DSN) not later than 4 calendar days after the date of the signature below. This confirmation shall allow the USMC Regional Contracting Office (RCO), Far East to use the information contained herein as source selection information.
上記の情報に関して、相違ありません。業者を選択する上で、米国海兵隊リージョナル契約事務所がこ
の情報を使用する事を許可します。もし、この情報に関して訂正が必要な場合、下記の署名日から 4 日
以内に電話番号 098-970-1504(直通)の方に連絡します。
Signature (署名) Date (日付)
We’d highly appreciate your cooperation in this matter.
(ご協力頂き誠にありがとうございました。)
| toggle_1: Off |
| toggle_2: Off |
| toggle_3: Off |
| undefined: Off |
| undefined_2: Off |
| toggle_6: Off |
| toggle_7: Off |
| fill_1: |
| fill_2: |
| fill_3: |
| undefined_3: |
| undefined_4: |
| fill_3_2: |
| fill_4: |
| undefined_5: |
| Exceptional: Off |
| Very Good: Off |
| Satisfactory: Off |
| Marginal: Off |
| Unsatisfactory: Off |
| Not Applicable: Off |
| Exceptional_2: Off |
| Very Good_2: Off |
| Satisfactory_2: Off |
| Marginal_2: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_2: Off |
| Not Applicable_2: Off |
| Exceptional_3: Off |
| Very Good_3: Off |
| Satisfactory_3: Off |
| Marginal_3: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_3: Off |
| Not Applicable_3: Off |
| Exceptional_4: Off |
| Very Good_4: Off |
| Satisfactory_4: Off |
| Marginal_4: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_4: Off |
| Not Applicable_4: Off |
| Exceptional_5: Off |
| Very Good_5: Off |
| Satisfactory_5: Off |
| Marginal_5: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_5: Off |
| Not Applicable_5: Off |
| Exceptional_6: Off |
| Very Good_6: Off |
| Satisfactory_6: Off |
| Marginal_6: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_6: Off |
| Not Applicable_6: Off |
| Exceptional_7: Off |
| Very Good_7: Off |
| Satisfactory_7: Off |
| Marginal_7: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_7: Off |
| Not Applicable_7: Off |
| Exceptional_8: Off |
| Very Good_8: Off |
| Satisfactory_8: Off |
| Marginal_8: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_8: Off |
| Not Applicable_8: Off |
| Exceptional_9: Off |
| Very Good_9: Off |
| Satisfactory_9: Off |
| Marginal_9: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_9: Off |
| Not Applicable_9: Off |
| Exceptional_10: Off |
| Very Good_10: Off |
| Satisfactory_10: Off |
| Marginal_10: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_10: Off |
| Not Applicable_10: Off |
| Exceptional_11: Off |
| Very Good_11: Off |
| Satisfactory_11: Off |
| Marginal_11: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_11: Off |
| Not Applicable_11: Off |
| Exceptional_12: Off |
| Very Good_12: Off |
| Satisfactory_12: Off |
| Marginal_12: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_12: Off |
| Not Applicable_12: Off |
| Exceptional_13: Off |
| Very Good_13: Off |
| Satisfactory_13: Off |
| Marginal_13: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_13: Off |
| Not Applicable_13: Off |
| Exceptional_14: Off |
| Very Good_14: Off |
| Satisfactory_14: Off |
| Marginal_14: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_14: Off |
| Not Applicable_14: Off |
| Exceptional_15: Off |
| Very Good_15: Off |
| Satisfactory_15: Off |
| Marginal_15: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_15: Off |
| Not Applicable_15: Off |
| Exceptional_16: Off |
| Very Good_16: Off |
| Satisfactory_16: Off |
| Marginal_16: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_16: Off |
| Not Applicable_16: Off |
| Exceptional_17: Off |
| Very Good_17: Off |
| Satisfactory_17: Off |
| Marginal_17: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_17: Off |
| Not Applicable_17: Off |
| Exceptional_18: Off |
| Very Good_18: Off |
| Satisfactory_18: Off |
| Marginal_18: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_18: Off |
| Not Applicable_18: Off |
| Exceptional_19: Off |
| Very Good_19: Off |
| Satisfactory_19: Off |
| Marginal_19: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_19: Off |
| Not Applicable_19: Off |
| Exceptional_20: Off |
| Very Good_20: Off |
| Satisfactory_20: Off |
| Marginal_20: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_20: Off |
| Not Applicable_20: Off |
| Exceptional_21: Off |
| Very Good_21: Off |
| Satisfactory_21: Off |
| Marginal_21: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_21: Off |
| Not Applicable_21: Off |
| group_8: Off |
| Remarks 1: |
| Remarks 2: |
| Exceptional_22: Off |
| Very Good_22: Off |
| Satisfactory_22: Off |
| Marginal_22: Off |
| Unsatisfactory_22: Off |
| Not Applicable_22: Off |
| group_1: Off |
| fill_1_3: |
| Remarks: |
| group_2: Off |
| fill_3_3: |
| Remarks_2: |
| group_3: Off |
| fill_5: |
| Remarks_3: |
| group_4: Off |
| fill_7: |
| Remarks_4: |
| Text1: |
| Text2: |
| Text3: |
| Text4: |
| Text5: |
| Text6: |
| Text7: |
| Text8: |
| Date9_af_date: |
| Date1_af_date: |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .