Attachment J-3 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 44 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 030ADV25R0046
- Issued by
-
Library of Congress
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire for a Library of Congress contract (Solicitation Number: 030ADV25R0046) seeking to upgrade the Mary Pickford Theater's audiovisual systems. The solicitation requires a contractor to remove existing equipment and provide, deliver, and install new audio, video, and lectern equipment while preserving the theater's architectural integrity. Specific requirements include maintaining the two 35mm film projection capabilities, using existing cable paths, and implementing a Q-SYS control system (specifically excluding Crestron or AMX automation systems).
The questionnaire is designed to evaluate potential contractors' past performance across ten key areas, including overall contract management, product/service quality, project effectiveness, timeliness, communication, and cost performance. Respondents are asked to rate performance using a five-tier scale from Outstanding to Unsatisfactory. The completed questionnaire must be submitted via email to Ramon Samuel and Moji Adejuwon by August 27, 2025 at 12:00 PM ET, with past performance being described as "of considerable importance to this acquisition."
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 J-3 --030ADV25R0046
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
The purpose of this questionnaire is to gather information on the contractor named below to determine their suitability to provide services for the Library of Congress (Library). Your prompt completion of this questionnaire is sincerely appreciated as it is critical to the completion of the proposal evaluation process.
Contractor: (Provide Contractor’s Name)
1. Please complete this questionnaire based on the following guidance:
a) Handwritten responses are acceptable.
b) Indicate, using the ratings below, the contractor’s performance on the project identified in the email. Assessments should reflect only performance for which contractor is/was responsible. The following is a definition of the rating levels:
| RATING |
| DEFINITION |
| Outstanding |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government's benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government's benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
2. Please provide narrative explanations for any Marginal, Unsatisfactory or No ratings and supplement your knowledge of the contractor’s performance with judgement of others in your organization.
3. The Contractor submitted a proposal to the Library for the provision of the removal of old equipment, and delivery and installation of new audio, video, lectern equipment. Past performance is of considerable importance to this acquisition. Therefore, input from current or previous customers of the contractor is very important.
We greatly appreciate you taking the time to complete this form. Please provide an honest assessment and return via email to Ramon Samuel at rsamuel@loc.gov with a copy to Moji Adejuwon at moad@loc.gov no later than August 27, 2025 at 12:00pm ET.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Please provide the following information for your company:
Name:
Point of Contact Name and Title:
Telephone Number.
Contract Number if applicable:
Contract Type:
Period of Performance:
Approximate dollar value for the contract:
Contract Description:
QUESTIONS
The following correspond with the following descriptive values provided on the questionnaire cover page:
| O |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
| Outstanding |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| O |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| NA |
1. How would you rate the overall management of the contract?
2. How would you rate the quality of the products and services provided by the contractor?
3. How effective was the contractor in managing all phases the project?
4. How would you rate the Contractor’s timeliness and compliance with the project schedule?
5. How timely was the contractor in submitting required reports?
6. How would you rate the Quality/effectiveness of sub-contracted efforts? If applicable
7. How competent were key personnel and personnel provided for the project?
8. How well did key personnel communicate with Government/company personnel?
9. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to perform the services within contract costs?
10. Were any major contract requirements been terminated or rescheduled as a result of the contractor’s inability to perform? If yes please provide an explanation
Comments:
4/14/17 09/12/2022 2
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .