Attachment17_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

PDF 480 KB Posted

Attached to
HOSP EXHIBIT FABRICATION Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
140P2121R0054
Issued by
Department of the Interior National Park Service

About this file

This document contains past performance evaluation forms for a federal contract solicitation. The National Park Service is seeking a contractor to fabricate museum interpretive exhibits for Hot Springs National Park. Offerors must submit completed past performance questionnaires from previous clients as part of their proposals. The forms include eight performance elements rated as outstanding, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory: technical capability, understanding requirements, resource use, timeliness, customer satisfaction, business practices, communication, and cost control. Respondents also indicate whether they would hire the contractor again. Additional comments may be provided.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to HOSP EXHIBIT FABRICATION, newest first.
File Type Posted
Attachment_16_Revised_Cost_Estimate_Form_0001.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Sol_140P2121R0054_Amd_0001.pdf PDF
Attachment11_HOSP_Exhibit_Drawing_Package.pdf PDF
Attachment5_National_Park_Service_Standard_Specifications_for_Planning_Design_Production_and_Installation_of_Electronic_Programs.pdf PDF
Attachment4_Programmatic_Accessibility_Guidelines_for_National_Park_Service_Interpretive_Media.pdf PDF
Attachment3_Architectural_Barriers_Act_(ABA)_Standards.pdf PDF
Attachment7_Component_Inventory_Sample.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment12_HOSP_Reference_Package.pdf PDF
Attachment10_DescriptiveExhibitTourInstallationEquipmentGuide.pdf PDF
Attachment9_Art_Documentation_Form.pdf PDF
Attachment13_HOSP_Graphic_Layout_Package.pdf PDF
Attachment14_HOSP_Content_and_Specifications_Package.pdf PDF
Attachment6_Component_Inventory_Schedule_Form.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment1_Exhibit_Planning_Design_and_Fabrication_Specifications.pdf PDF
Attachment2_Exhibit_Conservation_Guidelines.pdf PDF
Sol_140P2121R0054.pdf PDF
Attachment16_HOSP_Cost_Estimate_Form.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment15_HOSP_Electronic_Equipment_and_LIghting_Cut_Sheets.pdf PDF
Attachment8_AV_Completion_Report.pdf PDF
Show all 19

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Solicitation 140P1121R0054 – Attachment 17

Past Performance Questionnaire

The U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service (NPS) has a requirement for Museum Interpretive Exhibit Fabrication contract . As part of the procurement process, past performance is a source selection factor.

Two forms are provided to complete the evaluation: 1) Performance Rating Form; and 2) Supplemental Comment Form. The offeror is responsible for compiling and submitting completed past performance questionnaires in its proposal, though the Government may contact references to verify the veracity of provided information. References shall not send completed past performance questionnaires to the Government.

The following standards shall be used in arriving at the rating.

Outstanding Contractor’s performance exceeded customer expectations and was technically acceptable, providing significant features or benefits.

Satisfactory Contractor met customer expectations or contract requirements and demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the requirements.

Unsatisfactory Contractor’s performance was either marginal or did not meet customer expectations or contract requirements.

Other If the element is not applicable, indicate with “N/A.” If no data has been obtained or additional comments are provided, please note in this column.

Other If the element is not applicable, indicate with “N/A.” If no data has been obtained or additional comments are provided, please note in this column.

Performance Rating Form

NAME OF COMPANY EVALUATED

ADDRESS OF COMPANY EVALUATED

CONTRACT NUMBER CONTRACT PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT TYPE

CONTRACTING OFFICER/CUSTOMER NAME,

ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND EMAIL ADDRESS

TYPE OF SERVICES PERFORMED (ACTIVITY)

NAME OF EVALUATOR, COMPANY/AGENCY,

ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER AND

EMAIL ADDRESS

DATE EVALUATION PROVIDED/

SIGNATURE OF EVALUATOR

Performance Element Outstanding Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Other

Technical Performance (Quality of Product or Service)

1. QUALITY OF TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

(For example: Were the services comprehensive, complete, and feasible? (Met the needs, performed successfully, and accommodated changing requirements.)

2. UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIREMENTS

(For example: Did the contractor show an understanding of the scope of the requirements and an appreciation of the complexity of the requirements? And did the contractor effectively identify flaws, inconsistencies and other inaccuracies in your technical direction?)

Timeliness of Performance

3. EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES

(For example: Was the contractor able to obtain in a timely manner the amount and type of personnel resources required to support the project, effectively train personnel to perform the work required for the project, and maintain the required workforce throughout the term of the contract?)

4. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE

(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic schedules, monitoring performance, completing work on time, and implementing corrections/changes in a timely manner?)

Quality / Customer Satisfaction

5. QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE/CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

(For example: Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?)

6. BUSINESS BEHAVIOR

(For example: Was the contractor reasonable and cooperative at the corporate and program levels in response to changes in technical direction, correcting errors, poor performance, criticism/rejection of contract deliverables and other quality issues?)

7. COMMUNICATION

(For example: Did the contractor work and communicate well with contracting officers, contracting officer’s representatives, end users, other contractors, subcontractors, and in-house staff?)

Cost Control

8. COST CONTROL

(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic costs, monitoring performance, operating at or below budget, and implementing corrections/changes in a cost effective manner?)

FOR #9, PLEASE ANSWER “Yes” or “No”, as appropriate YES NO

9. Given the choice, would you do business with this contractor again?

Additional Comment Form

Please provide any additional comments regarding your performance element ratings in the space below. Please add additional pages as necessary.

Performance Rating Form
NAME OF COMPANY EVALUATED
Performance Element
3. EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES
FOR #9, PLEASE ANSWER “Yes” or “No”, as appropriate
Text1:
Text2:
Text3:
Text4:
Text5:
Text6:
Text7:
Text8:
Text9:
Text10:
Check Box11: Off
Check Box12: Off
Check Box13: Off
Check Box14: Off
Check Box15: Off
Check Box16: Off
Check Box17: Off
Check Box18: Off
Check Box19: Off
Check Box20: Off
Check Box21: Off
Check Box22: Off
Check Box23: Off
Check Box24: Off
Check Box25: Off
Check Box26: Off
Check Box27: Off
Check Box28: Off
Check Box29: Off
Check Box30: Off
Check Box31: Off
Check Box32: Off
Check Box33: Off
Check Box34: Off
Check Box35: Off
Check Box36: Off
Check Box37: Off
Check Box38: Off
Check Box39: Off
Check Box40: Off
Check Box41: Off
Check Box42: Off
Check Box43: Off
Check Box44: Off
Text45:

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