B01 RFP Attachment J05 PPQ.docx
DOCX document 29 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 75H70126R00004
About this file
The document is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) form for a federal solicitation (75H701-26-R-00004) issued by the Indian Health Service (IHS) for the Kyle Health Center HVAC and Roof Replacement project. The form is designed to capture detailed performance evaluations across seven key assessment areas: quality, schedule/timeliness, customer satisfaction, management/personnel, cost/financial management, safety/security, and general performance metrics.
The PPQ provides a comprehensive rating system using adjective ratings ranging from Exceptional (E) to Unsatisfactory (U), allowing clients to evaluate contractors on specific performance dimensions. The form requires detailed input from both the contractor and the client, capturing information such as contract type, project complexity, contract value, and performance across multiple sub-categories. Clients are requested to provide narrative feedback and overall ratings, with the government reserving the right to verify all submitted information. The questionnaire is intended to help assess past performance risk for future contract opportunities.
View the file
Other files
Show all 37
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 J05. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Form PPQ-0
Volume II – Factor 3 – Past Performance
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY, SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION (FAR 3.104)
Response to Solicitation 75H701-26-R-00004
(Cover page not required in submission)
ATTACHMENT J05 SOLICITATION 75H701-26-R00004 PERFORMANCE)
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0)
CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)
| 1. Contractor Information | |
| Firm Name: | CAGE Code: |
| Address: | DUNs Number: |
Phone Number:
Email Address:
Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:
2. Work Performed as: |_| Prime Contractor |_| Sub Contractor |_| Joint Venture |_| Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:
If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):
3. Contract Information Contract Number:
Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):
Contract Type: |_| Firm Fixed Price |_| Cost Reimbursement |_| Other (Please specify):
Contract Title:
Contract Location:
Award Date (mm/dd/yy):
Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):
Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):
Explain Differences:
Original Contract Price (Award Amount):
Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):
Explain Differences:
4. Project Description:
Complexity of Work |_| High |_| Med |_| Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)
CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)
5. Client Information Name:
Title:
Phone Number:
Email Address:
6. Describe the client’s role in the project:
7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):
8. Client’s Signature:
NOTE: IHS DES REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO IHS WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON IHS SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO IHS. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR IHS POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.
ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT
YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE
RATING DEFINITION NOTE
| (E) Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. |
| (VG) Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified. |
| (S) Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order. |
| (M) Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter). |
| (U) Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters). |
| (N) Not Applicable |
| No information or did not apply to your contract |
| Rating will be neither positive nor negative. |
TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT
PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS
YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.
1. QUALITY:
| a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts |
| E VG S M U N |
| b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance |
| E VG S M U N |
| c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance |
| E VG S M U N |
| d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance) |
| E VG S M U N |
2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:
| a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below) |
| E VG S M U N |
| b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract |
| E VG S M U N |
3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:
| a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? |
| E VG S M U N |
| b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication) |
| E VG S M U N |
| c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer? |
| E VG S M U N |
| d) Overall customer satisfaction |
| E VG S M U N |
4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR
| a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force? |
| E VG S M U N |
| b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort |
| E VG S M U N |
| c) Government Property Control |
| E VG S M U N |
| d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel |
| E VG S M U N |
| e) Utilization of Small Business concerns |
| E VG S M U N |
| f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines |
| E VG S M U N |
| g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes |
| E VG S M U N |
| h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program) |
| E VG S M U N |
5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
| a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)? |
| E VG S M U N |
| b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client |
| E VG S M U N |
| c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns) |
| E VG S M U N |
| d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section. |
| Yes No |
| e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below. |
| Yes No |
| f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below. |
| Yes No |
6. SAFETY/SECURITY
| a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.) |
| E VG S M U N |
| b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements. |
| E VG S M U N |
7. GENERAL
| a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues). |
| E VG S M U N |
| b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues) |
| E VG S M U N |
| c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below) |
| Yes No |
| d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor. |
| E VG S M U N |
Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .