Attch2_-_Past_Performance.doc

Ref: W81K02-20-R-0002

ATTACHMENT 2

PRESENT PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION COLLECTION SHEET

The Joint Base Lewis-McChord Health Contracting Branch is conducting a competitive acquisition for Air Medevac services for Fort Hunter Liggett, CA. The offeror has identified you as a reference to validate the offeror’s past performance.

Please complete the following questionnaire to assist our evaluation of the contractor’s past performance, and return no later than 12:00 pm PST on 10 July 2020 to: Scott Barr, email: scott.a.barr.civ@mail.mil.

Past Performance Questionnaire

Name of Contractor being evaluated:

1. How long has your company had this contract with this contractor?

2. Type of service being provided?

3. Where is the location of this service?

4. What is the approximate total contract amount?

5. Have there been unsatisfactory performance resulting in additional contractual or administrative costs?

Yes _______ No _______

If yes, explain:

7. Schedule Performance – Please rate overall compliance with reliability and timeliness of scheduled performance.

(1) Exceptional (2) Very Good (3) Satisfactory (4) Marginal (5) Unsatisfactory If other than “Satisfactory,” explain how the overall performance exceeds or does not meet contractual requirements:

8. Quality of Service – Please rate overall compliance with contract statement of work requirement.

(1) Exceptional (2) Very Good (3) Satisfactory (4) Marginal (5) Unsatisfactory If other than “Satisfactory,” explain how the overall performance exceeds or does not meet contractual requirements:

9. Business/Customer Relations – Please rate overall effective management; successfully managed services; reasonable/cooperative behavior; flexibility; business-like concern for customer’s interest.

(1) Exceptional (2) Very Good (3) Satisfactory (4) Marginal (5) Unsatisfactory If other than “Satisfactory,” explain how the overall performance exceeds or does not meet contractual requirements:

Rating System:

(1) Exceptional - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the contractor’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken were highly effective.

(2) Very Good - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Contractor’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken were effective.

(3) Satisfactory - Performance meets the contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken appear or were satisfactory.

(4) Marginal - Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

(5) Unsatisfactory - Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element contains serious problem(s) for which corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

Signature: Date: ___________________ Print Name:

Title: Organization/Company:

Telephone:

Thank you for your participation in providing a detailed and accurate history of past performance for this offeror.