B03 140P5120R0021 PPQ MALU Landscaping.pdf
PDF 175 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Provide Landscape Service Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 140P5120R0021
About this file
This document includes a past performance questionnaire and details of a federal contract opportunity for landscaping services. The National Park Service is seeking proposals for landscaping services at the Martin Luther King Jr National Historic Site in Atlanta, Georgia. The requirement is set aside for small businesses with a size standard of $8 million. Offerors must have a DUNS number and SAM registration. Insurance of at least $200,000 per person and $500,000 per occurrence is required. The fixed price contract will be awarded using best value procedures to an eligible and responsible source. Site visits are available and prospective offerors are encouraged to visit before proposing. Proposals are due by the date specified.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sol_140P5120R0021_Amd_0002.pdf | ||
| A04 0040504729 Revised SOW MALU Landscaping_0002.pdf | ||
| Sol_140P5120R0021_Amd_0001.pdf | ||
| B08 140P5120R0021 RFP Q and A MALU Landscaping_0001.pdf | ||
| B08 140P5120R0021 RFP Price Sheet MALU Landscaping_0001.pdf | ||
| Sol_140P5120R0021.pdf | ||
| B03 140P5120R0021 Site Visit Info MALU Landscaping.pdf | ||
| Sol_140P5120R0021.pdf | ||
| A04 0040504729 SOW MALU Landscaping.pdf | ||
| B03 140P5120R0021 WDOL WD MALU Landscaping.pdf |
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
Attachment 0003 – RFP 140P5120R0021
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Solicitation# 140P5120R0021 Please complete this Questionnaire and e-mail to
We are currently in the process of preparing our proposal/quote for the National Park Service, Interior Region 2 South Atlantic Gulf, Solicitation Number: 140P5120R0021. As part of our proposal/quote, we have listed you as a reference on our performance for this type of service with your agency under the previous/current contract listed below. Your input on our performance is therefore requested.
Please complete this Questionnaire and e-mail to Contracting Officer, e-mail: edward_dingle@nps.gov
Questionnaire is due to: Before or On the due date of proposal receipt. Questionnaire must be submitted directly to the Contracting Officer from a corporate email account.
Alternate POC name:
Alternate POC phone number:
Alternate POC e-mail address:
Thank you.
NAME OF OFFEROR:
Phone: ________________________ Fax: _____________________
E-Mail: _______________________
I. Current or Historical Contract Information
CONTRACT REFERENCED:
1. Contract or Identifying Number:
2. Contract Value:
3. Period of Performance:
4. Brief description of items provided:
5. Name of Person Completing Questionnaire:
Agency/Company:
Title: Phone:
E-mail:
mailto:Please%20complete%20this%20Questionnaire%20and%20e-mail%20to%20edward_dingle@nps.gov mailto:Please%20complete%20this%20Questionnaire%20and%20e-mail%20to%20Contracting%20Officer,%20e-mail:%20edward_dingle@nps.gov
II. EVALUATION. Please rate the Contractor utilizing the guide below. Explanatory narratives for as many responses as possible would be appreciated. These narratives need not be lengthy, just detailed. Attach additional pages if more space is needed.
Evaluation Definitions –
The following definitions should be used in the assessment of Contractor performance.
EXCEPTIONAL
Performance EXCEEDS MOST contractual requirements. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns.
VERY GOOD
Performance EXCEEDS SOME contractual requirements. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns, for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were highly effective.
SATISFACTORY
Performance MEETS contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed contains minor issues or concerns, for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.
MARGINAL
Performance MEETS SOME contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed includes significant problems, issues, or concerns for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were only somewhat effective.
UNSATISFACTORY
Performance DOES NOT MEET contractual requirement. The performance of the areas being assessed includes serious problems, issues, or concerns for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.
NOT APPLICABLE (N/A) Performance information not recent or relevant as defined in the Solicitation. Unable to provide assessment.
Past Performance Evaluation
Question 1. Performance
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet your requirements?
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A
Performance
Comments, if any.
Questions 2 and 3. Timeliness
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to provide products in a timely manner?
Timeliness
Ability to Resolve Timeliness Problems
Question 4. Quality of Work
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet requirements of tasks and the overall quality of the work?
Quality of Shipments
Question 5. Overall Rating of Contractor’s performance
What is your overall rating of Contractor’s performance (requirements, schedule, and price) on contract being assessed?
Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
General Comments:
| PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE |
| I. Current or Historical Contract Information CONTRACT REFERENCED: |
| II. EVALUATION. Please rate the Contractor utilizing the guide below. Explanatory narratives for as many responses as possible would be appreciated. These narratives need not be lengthy, just detailed. Attach additional pages if more space is needed. |
| Past Performance Evaluation Question 1. Performance |
| Questions 2 and 3. Timeliness |
| Question 4. Quality of Work |
| Question 5. Overall Rating of Contractor’s performance |
| General Comments: |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .