ATTACHMENT SIX (6) PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRE.pdf

PDF 231 KB Posted

Attached to
Q523--Autologous Transfusion Cell Saver Services
Solicitation number
36C24823Q0150
Issued by

About this file

This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a contractor providing cell saver blood management services. The Bay Pines VA Healthcare System is soliciting references from prior customers of offerors to validate past performance on contracts for similar services. The questionnaire evaluates customer satisfaction, compliance with staffing requirements, and asks whether the reference would hire the contractor again. Respondents are asked to rate performance as outstanding, above average, satisfactory, marginal or unacceptable and provide explanations. The questionnaire requests contact information and signatures and is to be returned by the date advised by the contractor.

The related opportunity is solicitation number 36C24823Q0150 for on-site autologous transfusion cell saver services to support the Bay Pines VA Healthcare System. The tiered small business set-aside RFQ will be issued for these services. The Department of Veterans Affairs VISN 08 Bay Pines Veterans Affairs Healthcare System located in Bay Pines, Florida requires the 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

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Cell Saver Blood Management Services

1. Background: The Bay Pines VA Healthcare System (BPVAHCS) has an ongoing requirement for Cell Saver Blood Management Services. The vendor has identified you as a reference to validate the their past performance. This questionnaire concerns past or current contracts for which you have personal knowledge.

2. Instructions: Please complete this questionnaire based on the following guidance. Please take the time to answer the questions to the best of your knowledge. Circle the responses that best describe the company’s performance, and write in a narrative explanation for your answer. Use a N/A rating to indicate that you have no performance information for that particular area, or if the question does not apply to you. Each question has space for your comments. If more space is needed, please attach additional sheets to the end of the questionnaire and reference the respective question. Handwritten (ink) responses are sufficient.

Please complete the following questionnaire to assist our evaluation of the company’s past performance and return no later than the date that the contractor advises. Please return to Rosetta Quinn email at Rosetta.quinn@va.gov.

Name of Company: __________________________

Title/Description of services provided:

Please evaluate the past performance using only the following ratings without variation. If the rating is Marginal or Unsatisfactory, please provide additional information in the appropriate block or in the remarks section of this form.

“O” = Outstanding = Performance greatly exceeded the contract requirements

“A” = Above Average = Performance exceeded the contract requirements

“S” = Satisfactory = Performance met the contract requirements

“M” = Marginal = Performance met the minimum contract requirements but some material aspects of the company’s performance were less than satisfactory

“U” = Unacceptable = Performance was poor and/or did not satisfy contract requirements

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

mailto:brett.cook@va.gov

1. Company maintained a professional staff.

Outstanding Above Average Satisfactory Marginal Unacceptable

BRIEF EXPLANATION OF RATING GIVEN:

2. Company was responsive to inquiries regarding contract/agreement.

Outstanding Above Average Satisfactory Marginal Unacceptable

BRIEF EXPLANATION OF RATING GIVEN:

3. Company was flexible in responding to urgent requirements.

Outstanding Above Average Satisfactory Marginal Unacceptable

BRIEF EXPLANATION OF RATING GIVEN:

4. Overall customer satisfaction.

Outstanding Above Average Satisfactory Marginal Unacceptable

BRIEF EXPLANATION OF RATING GIVEN:

COMPLIANCE WITH STAFFING REQUIREMENTS

5. Company provided sufficient notice of personnel changes/additions, to ensure adequate time to credential personnel.

Outstanding Above Average Satisfactory Marginal Unacceptable

BRIEF EXPLANATION OF RATING GIVEN:

6. Company consistently provided trained/qualified staff.

Outstanding Above Average Satisfactory Marginal Unacceptable

BRIEF EXPLANATION OF RATING GIVEN:

7. Company ensured staff remained fully qualified/proficient at all times.

Outstanding Above Average Satisfactory Marginal Unacceptable

BRIEF EXPLANATION OF RATING GIVEN:

Additional Comments

8. Was the company ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract/agreement?

If yes, explain in “comments.” Yes / No

Comments:

9. Would you hire this company again?

If no, explain in “comments.” Yes No

BRIEF EXPLANATION OF RATING GIVEN:

Overall Rating: _________________________________

Name of Evaluator: ______________________ E-Mail: ___________________________________

Position Title /Grade:_____________________ Phone Number: ____________________________

Company/City: ________________________Date questionnaire completed: _________________

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

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