ATTCH 0006_PastPerformanceQuestionnaire.doc
DOC document 69 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N00174-21-R-0012
About this file
This past performance questionnaire requests performance information from agencies that have worked with an offeror for solicitation number N00174-21-R-0012. The solicitation seeks contractor support to perform Close-In Weapon Systems alteration installation and repair work for the U.S. Navy, Army, Coast Guard and foreign militaries at various locations including shipyards, piers and contractors' facilities. The work involves installing ship alterations, change documents and ordnance alterations as well as system repairs for Phalanx, SeaRAM and land-based Phalanx weapon systems. The Navy intends to award an indefinite delivery indefinite quantity contract for one base period of five years. Task orders will be cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price. Completed questionnaires are due prior to the solicitation closing date and must be submitted electronically to the specified Navy contract specialist. Respondents are asked to use a defined rating scale to evaluate the offeror's past performance.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| ATTCH 0003_CIWS - Personnel Quals rev1.docx | DOCX document | |
| ATTCH 0004_Cost Summary Format rev1.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| N0017421R0012_0001.pdf | ||
| ATTCH 0007_Wage Determination Schedules.pdf | ||
| ATTCH 0003_CIWS - Personnel Quals.docx | DOCX document | |
| ATTCH 0005_Past Performance Matrix.doc | DOC document | |
| ATTCH 0001_CIWS - CDRL A001-A009.pdf | ||
| N0017421R0012.pdf | ||
| ATTCH 0004_Cost Summary Format.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| ATTCH 0002_CIWS - DD254.pdf |
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 NUMBER
N00174-21-R-0012
Offeror’s Name:
Name of agency/activity completing questionnaire:
Name and title of the person completing questionnaire:
Contract Number/Period of Performance: _____________________________________________________
Length of time your agency/activity has been involved with the Offeror:
Brief description of the services provided by the Offeror:
SUBMIT ALL ELECTRONIC PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE PRIOR TO THE CLOSING DATE OF THE SOLICITATION TO:
Contract Specialist – Thomas Howes – thomas.howes1@navy.mil
RATING SCALE
Please use the following ratings to answer the questions.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Exceptional: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the customer’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Offeror were highly effective.
Very Good: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the customer’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.
NEUTRAL - The Offeror lacks a relevant past performance record or past performance information is not available or cannot be determined. The Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.
| Exceptional |
| vERY gOOD |
| sATISFACTORY |
| mARGINAL |
| uNSATISFACTORY |
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
The referenced contractor was responsive to the customer’s needs.
The contractor’s personnel were qualified to meet the requirements.
The contractor’s ability to accurately estimate cost.
TIMELINESS
The contractor’s ability to ensure, to the extent of its responsibility, that all tasks were completed within the requested time frame.
TECHNICAL SUCCESS
The contractor had a clear understanding of the tasks detailed in the SOW and/or delivery orders.
The contractor’s ability to complete tasks correctly the first time.
The contractor’s ability to resolve problems.
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
Did the contractor successfully manage its subcontractors?
Was the contractor’s management effective in controlling cost, schedule and performance requirements?
QUALITY
The contractor’s quality and reliability of services delivered.
OVERALL
Please assign an overall rating for the contractor’s work performed.
PLEASE PROVIDE SUBJECTIVE RESPONSES FOR THE FOLLOWING:
1. Would you recommend this contractor for similar contracts? Please explain:
2. Have you experienced special or unique problems with the referenced contractor that the Government should be aware of in making our decision?
PAGE
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION
See FAR 2.101 and 3.104
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .