Attachment V Past Performance Questionnaire.doc
DOC document 77 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 70Z02322R09230001
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire and a solicitation for exhibition design and fabrication services. The United States Coast Guard is seeking proposals for an indefinite delivery indefinite quantity contract to provide exhibition design and fabrication services in support of the agency's museum. Offerors are required to submit past performance information that will be evaluated using a rating scale of superior, satisfactory, marginal, unsatisfactory or no rating. Proposals are due by September 23, 2022 and the solicitation is issued under NAICS code 712110 with a size standard of $30 million. Questions regarding the solicitation should be directed to the named contracting officer and contract specialist by five business days before the response date.
View the file
Other files
Show all 24
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 V
RFP 70Z02322R09230001
Exhibition Design & Fabrication
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRRE
Exhibition Design & Fabrication Past Performance Evaluation Worksheet
Offeror Being Evaluated
Company Completing Questionnaire
Contract Number
Delivery Order/Task Order Number
Evaluator Point of Contact
Length of Involvement with Offeror (NTE 6 Years)
Deliverable / Service Description
EVALUATION INSTRUCTIONS
The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) has a requirement for the acquisition of museum exhibit design and fabrication services. This questionnaire will be used by the Contract Specialist to obtain past performance information from a reference listed in the Offeror’s proposal.
Please provide your assessment of the company’s level of past performance on the contract for which you are a reference. Mark the appropriate block, indicating whether the contractor’s/sub-contractor’s past performance was superior, satisfactory, marginal, unsatisfactory, or no rating using the following rating guidelines. Space is provided for comments.
Submit completed Cover Sheet and Questionnaire five (5) days prior to the proposal due date by e-mail to:
SUBJECT LINE: Past Performance Questionnaire RFP 70Z02322R09230001 EMAIL: Micha.A.Wisniewski@uscg.mil
RATING SCALE
Please use the following ratings to answer the questions. If you are unable to rate an item because it was not a requirement, never an issue, or you have no knowledge of the item in question, then you should mark “NA”.
EVALUATION CRITERIA RATING SCALE
Superior - The offeror’s performance was consistently superior. The contractual performance was accomplished with only minor problems for which corrective action taken by the contractor was highly effective.
Satisfactory - The offeror’s performance was better than average, and you would willingly do business with the offeror again. The contractual performance was accomplished with minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
Marginal - The offeror’s performance was satisfactory and consideration would take part in awarding a contract to the offeror again. The contractual performance reflects a problem for which the contractor has not yet implemented corrective actions.
Unsatisfactory - The offeror’s performance was entirely unsatisfactory and you would not do business with the offeror again under any circumstances. The contractual performance being assessed contains problems for which the contractor‘s corrective actions appear to be or were ineffective.
Neutral - No relevant past performance is available for this offeror (please explain).
| questions |
| Superior |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| No Rating |
QUALITY OF PRODUCT
The Contractor provided a product or service that conformed to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship.
PRICE CONTROL
The Contractor performed the effort within the estimated price.
The Contractor submitted accurate invoices on a timely basis.
TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE
The tasks required under this effort were performed in a timely manner and in accordance with the period of performance of the contract.
The Contractor was responsive to technical and/or contractual direction.
| Questions |
| Superior |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| No Rating |
BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS
The Contractor demonstrated effective management over the effort performed.
The Contractor maintained an open line of communication so that the Contracting Officer (KO) and/or Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COR) were apprised of technical, pricing, and schedule issues.
The Contractor presented information and correspondence in a clear, concise, and businesslike manner.
The Contractor promptly notified the KO and COTR in a timely manner regarding urgent issues.
The Contractor cooperated with the Client in providing flexible, proactive, and effective recommended solutions to critical program issues.
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
The products/services provided adequately met the needs of the program.
The Contractor was able to perform with minimal or no direction from the KO or the COR.
I am satisfied with the performance of the Contractor under this effort.
COMMENTS:
PAGE
Source Selection Sensitive – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .