B08_Attachment_8_Contractor_Reference_Form.doc
DOC document 64 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 140P3022R0016
About this file
This document contains a customer rating questionnaire template for evaluating contractor past performance on a federal contract. The questionnaire requests ratings on a scale of 1 to 5 in key areas such as quality control, schedule adherence, management and safety. It also includes open fields for additional comments. Upon completion, the form is to be returned via email to the point of contact listed for consideration in source selection for Solicitation 140P3022R0016 concerning rehabilitation of the East Potomac Maintenance Yard Fuel Station for the National Park Service. Specific areas of evaluation cover quality program responsiveness, procedure completeness, timeliness, management and personnel capabilities, flexibility in meeting requirements, safety compliance, regulatory compliance, innovation, customer satisfaction and overall performance.
View the file
Other files
Show all 26
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
CUSTOMER RATING QUESTIONNAIRE
140P3022R0016 Reference is provided for: _____________________
Please provide information for the primary individuals completing this survey.
Name: ____________________________________________________________________
Office Identifier: _____________________________________________________________
Telephone Number: __________________________________________________________
Mailing Address: _____________________________________________________________
E-Mail Address: ______________________________________________________________
Contract # and Title, and Relation to Contract: ______________________________________
THE QUESTIONNAIRE SHOULD BE SUBMITTED BY THE FOLLOWING MEANS:
Return via e-mail to brian_dankmeyer@nps.gov.
RATING DESCRIPTIONS: Use the following descriptions as guidance in providing ratings.
| RATING |
| DEFINITION |
| Exceptional = (1) |
| Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Exceeded that required by the contract. |
| Very Good = (2) |
| Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Met All contractual requirements. |
| Satisfactory = (3) |
| Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Met Essentially All contractual requirements. |
| Marginal = (4) |
| Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Met Some of the contractual requirements. However, changes to the contractor’s existing processes may be necessary in order to achieve contract requirements. |
| Unsatisfactory = (5) |
| Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Failed to Meet the minimum Government requirements. |
| Unknown or Not Applicable = (6) |
| The question does not apply. No performance record identifiable within the area of evaluation. |
SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE WHEN COMPLETED
(1) How responsive was the contractor’s quality program in identifying, correcting, and preventing initial and recurring contract discrepancies?
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
REMARKS:
| (2) How complete were the contractor’s quality procedures and how well do employees follow them? |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
REMARKS:
| (3) Rate timeliness in meeting requirements and adhering to contract schedules (delivery/performance). |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
REMARKS:
| (4) Did the contractor provide adequate, competent and qualified, management, key personnel and technical personnel capable of meeting contract requirements throughout the performance period of the contract? |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
REMARKS:
(5) How flexible, cooperative, and reasonable was the contractor in meeting mission
Requirements, particularly when faced with short-notice mission changes?
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
REMARKS:
| (6) How effective was the contractor’s safety program to ensure compliance with federal, state and local regulations? Did the contractor implement and follow their safety plan? Did they run a “safe” jobsite? |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
REMARKS:
| (7) Applicable to Federal Contracts – How well did the contractor comply with applicable Federal Laws and Regulations such as Service Contract Act – timely payrolls and compliance; Drug-Free Workplace; Executive Order 13101? |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
REMARKS:
| (8) How innovative was the contractor in performing the technical aspects of this contract and resolving problems? How well did the contractor respond to and act on customer feedback? (Customer Satisfaction) |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
REMARKS:
| (9) How would you rate the Contractor’s overall performance? |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 6 |
(10) Please Provide Any Additional Information You Feel Is Important Not Covered Elsewhere:
Thank you for your remarks. Be sure to return this document via email to brian_dankmeyer@nps.gov and not to the Contractor whom you are providing reference for.
Signature:____________________________________ Date Completed:___________________________
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .