B08_Attch_2_PAST_PERFORMANCE_QUESTIONNAIRE.pdf
PDF 258 KB Posted
- Attached to
- NR-ARD-269 IMPROVE OPS & FILTER ANALYSIS
- Solicitation number
- 140P2126R0005
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire template for Solicitation 140P2125R0009, issued by the U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service (NPS) for a Socioeconomic Research Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. The questionnaire serves as a source selection evaluation tool and consists of two primary forms: a Performance Rating Form and a Supplemental Comment Form. Offerors are responsible for compiling and submitting completed questionnaires within their proposals, though the Government may contact references independently to verify provided information. References are explicitly prohibited from sending completed questionnaires directly to the Government.
The Performance Rating Form evaluates contractors across eight performance elements using a four-tier rating scale: Outstanding (performance exceeded customer expectations with significant features or benefits), Satisfactory (met customer expectations and demonstrated acceptable understanding of requirements), Unsatisfactory (marginal or failed to meet expectations), and Other (for N/A or no data obtained). The evaluated elements span Technical Performance (quality of technical approach and understanding of requirements), Timeliness of Performance (effective resource use and schedule adherence), Quality and Customer Satisfaction (quality of performance, business behavior, and communication), and Cost Control (budget planning and cost-effective management). The form requires identifiers for the evaluated company, contract details, contracting officer contact information, and evaluator credentials. A final yes/no question asks whether the evaluator would do business with the contractor again. The questionnaire includes a Notice to Contractor restricting use of performance information for promotional or endorsement purposes.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sol_140P2126R0005_Amd_0001.pdf | ||
| B08_140P2126R0005_Amnd_1_0001.pdf | ||
| Sol_140P2126R0005.pdf | ||
| B08_Attachment_1_Price_Schedule.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| B08_Solicitation_FINAL218_docx.pdf |
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
Solicitation 140P2125R0009 – Attachment 4
Past Performance Questionnaire
The U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service (NPS) has a requirement for a Socioeconomic Research Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. As part of the procurement process, past performance is a source selection factor.
Two forms are provided to complete the evaluation: 1) Performance Rating Form; and 2) Supplemental Comment Form. The offeror is responsible for compiling and submitting completed past performance questionnaires in its proposal, though the Government may contact references to verify the veracity of provided information. References shall not send completed past performance questionnaires to the Government.
The following standards shall be used in arriving at the rating.
Outstanding Contractor’s performance exceeded customer expectations and was technically acceptable, providing significant features or benefits.
Satisfactory Contractor met customer expectations or contract requirements and demonstrated an acceptable understanding of the requirements.
Unsatisfactory Contractor’s performance was either marginal or did not meet customer expectations or contract requirements.
Other If the element is not applicable, indicate with “N/A.” If no data has been obtained or additional comments are provided, please note in this column.
Other If the element is not applicable, indicate with “N/A.” If no data has been obtained or additional comments are provided, please note in this column.
Performance Rating Form
NAME OF COMPANY EVALUATED
ADDRESS OF COMPANY EVALUATED
CONTRACT NUMBER CONTRACT PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE
CONTRACT VALUE CONTRACT TYPE
CONTRACTING OFFICER/CUSTOMER NAME,
ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND EMAIL ADDRESS
TYPE OF SERVICES PERFORMED (ACTIVITY)
NAME OF EVALUATOR, COMPANY/AGENCY,
ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER AND
EMAIL ADDRESS
DATE EVALUATION PROVIDED/
SIGNATURE OF EVALUATOR
Performance Element Outstanding Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Other
Technical Performance (Quality of Product or Service)
1. QUALITY OF TECHNICAL APPROACH
(For example: Were the services comprehensive, complete, and feasible? (Met the needs, performed successfully, and accommodated changing requirements.)
2. UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIREMENTS
(For example: Did the contractor show an understanding of the scope of the requirements and an appreciation of the complexity of the requirements? And did the contractor effectively identify flaws, inconsistencies and other inaccuracies in your technical direction?)
Timeliness of Performance
3. EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES
(For example: Was the contractor able to obtain in a timely manner the amount and type of personnel resources required to support the project, effectively train personnel to perform the work required for the project, and maintain the required workforce throughout the term of the contract?)
4. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE
(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic schedules, monitoring performance, completing work on time, and implementing corrections/changes in a timely manner?)
Quality / Customer Satisfaction
5. QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE/CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
(For example: Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?)
6. BUSINESS BEHAVIOR
(For example: Was the contractor reasonable and cooperative at the corporate and program levels in response to changes in technical direction, correcting errors, poor performance, criticism/rejection of contract deliverables and other quality issues?)
7. COMMUNICATION
(For example: Did the contractor work and communicate well with contracting officers, contracting officer’s technical representatives, end users, other contractors, subcontractors, and in-house staff?)
Cost Control
8. COST CONTROL
(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic costs, monitoring performance, operating at or below budget, and implementing corrections/changes in a cost effective manner?)
FOR #9, PLEASE ANSWER “Yes” or “No”, as appropriate YES NO
9. Given the choice, would you do business with this contractor again?
Additional Comment Form
Please provide any additional comments regarding your performance element ratings in the space below. Please add additional pages as necessary.
Notice to Contractor
Information provided in this questionnaire is intended for use as source selection information and as such is deemed Source Selection Sensitive. Statements or comments provided in the questionnaire do not signify an express or implied endorsement of any product, supply, service, or enterprise.
This information shall not be construed as an endorsement by the Government or its employee(s) of the contractor for advertising purposes or in a manner that implies the contractor, its products, or services, are approved, endorsed, or considered by the Government to be superior to other products or services.
The contractor shall not be permitted to use any information provided in this questionnaire to publicize, or otherwise circulate, promotional materials that state or imply Governmental, organizational, group, expert, or individual endorsement or consumer testimonial of a product, service, or position which the contractor represents.
| The U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service (NPS) has a requirement for a Socioeconomic Research Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. As part of the procurement process, past performance is a source selection factor. |
| The following standards shall be used in arriving at the rating. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .