B08_140P1221R0013_Att_B-_Past_Performance_Survey.docx
DOCX document 24 KB Posted
- Attached to
- LW MABO SABER IDIQ
- Solicitation number
- 140P1221R0013
About this file
This document is a past performance survey questionnaire for a contractor responding to Solicitation Number 140P1221R0013 for the LW MABO SABER IDIQ contract with the Department of the Interior National Park Service Intermountain Region. The survey collects feedback on the contractor's quality of work, timeliness, documentation quality, coordination, general management practices, safety program, budget management, claims and litigation history, and overall customer satisfaction on previous federal contracts. References are asked to rate the contractor's performance in these areas on a scale from excellent to unsatisfactory and provide comments. The completed survey is due back to the point of contact at the specified email address by the date requested by the contractor.
View the file
Other files
Show all 11
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
Simplified Acquisition of Basic Engineering Requirements Contract (SABER)
National Park Service – Interior Regions 6, 7 & 8 Lakewood Major Acquisition Buying Office
LW SABER Contract Solicitation: 140P1221R0013
Past Performance and Experience Survey Questionnaire
The offeror shall complete only the information on Page 2 and submit with Electronic File #2.
The Government reserves the right to contact the listed references to obtain additional Past Performance information detailed on pages 2-8.
Please return this form to the individual(s) identified below, by the date requested by the offeror via electronic means.
Kris O’Neil, National Park Service
Interior Regions 6, 7 & 8
12795 W. Alameda Parkway Lakewood, CO 80225
(970) 227-3366 e-mail: Kris_ONeil@nps.gov
Company Contact Information:
Company / Agency / Organization
Name / Title of Reference
Telephone Number
E-mail Address
Contract / Project Information
Contractor / Company Name
Project Title
Contract Number
Complexity of Work
Location of Work
| Role on Project (circle one) |
| Prime Sub-contractor Mentor Protégé |
| Contract Amount |
| $ |
Date of Award thru completion
| Project Status |
| % Complete |
| Scheduled Completion Date |
| Actual Completion Date |
The Government reserves the right to contact the listed references to obtain additional Past Performance information detailed on the following pages. The offeror shall not complete any information on the following pages.
1. QUALITY OF WORK
Evaluate performance in complying with contract requirements, quality achieved and overall technical expertise demonstrated.
Very Good
Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
Remarks / Comments:
2. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE
To what extent were contract performance requirements met? Consider contract performance period; were submittals provided in a timely manner; timely completion of punch-list items; submission of close out documents, i.e., “as-built drawings”. Timely / satisfactory response to warranty issues, etc.
Completed Substantially Ahead of Schedule
Completed on Schedule with no Significant Time Delays
Completed on Schedule with Minor Delays Under Extenuating Circumstances
Routinely failed to Schedule Perform Requirements
Remarks / Comments:
3. DOCUMENTATION QUALITY
To what extent were reports, submittals and other required documentation accurate, complete, comprehensive, and provided in a timely manner? Consider how often reworking documentation had to occur as well.
Excellent Quality
Above Average Quality
Average Quality
Below Average Quality
Unsuccessful / Extensive Quality Problems
Remarks / Comments:
4. COORDINATION
How well were sub-contractors, consultants, suppliers, and / or the labor force managed and coordinated? Or, if firm was a sub-contractor, how well did they respond to coordination efforts and work with other subs? Were there any problems and, if so, how were they handled and resolved? Was the contractor pleasant to work with, and did they resolve issues timely?
Excellent
Above Average
Average
Below Average
Unsuccessful
Remarks / Comments:
5. GENERAL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
How appropriate and effective were the firm’s general management and business practices? Consider such things as; did they provide quality, experienced managers and supervisors, technical and administrative personnel for the duration of the project; were appropriate personnel promptly available when needed, and responded in a prompt and acceptable manner to resolve problems, did they provide comprehensive, accurate price proposals, etc.
Excellent
Above Average
Average
Below Average
Unsuccessful
Remarks / Comments:
6. OVERALL SAFETY PROGRAM
How well did the contractor manage the construction project as it relates to general safety? Discuss any safety issues that arose during the course of the project.
Excellent
Above Average
Average
Below Average
Unsuccessful
Remarks / Comments:
7. BUDGET MANAGEMENT
How well did the contractor conform to the project budget? Did the contractor initiate unwarranted, unverifiable, change orders or change order requests, etc.?
Excellent
Above Average
Below Average
Unsuccessful
Remarks / Comments:
8. CLAIMS / LITIGATION
Was the contractor involved in any claims or litigation involving the project?
Yes (If “Yes”, please explain in remarks area below)
No
Remarks / Comments:
9. OVERALL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
To what extent were the end users satisfied with: Quality? Cost? Schedule?
| Quality |
| Cost |
| Schedule |
Exceptionally Satisfied
Highly Satisfied
Satisfied
Somewhat Dissatisfied (please explain)
Dissatisfied (please explain)
Remarks / Comments:
10. YOUR RECOMMENDATION
If given the opportunity and the choice, would you work with this contractor again?
Yes
No
Not Sure
Final Remarks / Comments:
11. OTHER REMARKS / COMMENTS
Use the space below to provide other information related to the contractor's performance. This may include selection of sub-contractors / consultants, flexibility in dealing with contract challenges, payment issues, their overall concern for the client's interest (if applicable), project awards received, etc.
Past Performance Survey Questionnaire LW Colo SABER Contract (NPS – IMR) Page 1 of 1
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .