B08_PEFO_267538_Atch_5_Solit_PSP_Vol_1.pdf
PDF 441 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Source Sought Notice Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 140P2024R0113
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire related to Solicitation No. 140P2024R0113 for the Rehabilitate Painted Desert Community Complex project at Petrified Forest National Park in Arizona.
The questionnaire requests the contractor's past performance information, including project details, ratings in areas such as quality, schedule, cost control, and management, and an overall recommendation. The solicitation requires offerors to submit project experience that addresses specific elements outlined in the solicitation. The document also includes a Project Experience Questionnaire that asks the offeror to provide details on a referenced project, including the work performed, any changes to price or schedule, problems encountered and how they were resolved, successful means and methods, and other relevant information. Additionally, the document contains instructions for completing resumes of key personnel proposed for the contract.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 34
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
For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in
Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later.
Get Adobe Reader Now!
http://www.adobe.com/go/reader
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
SOLICITATION NO. 140P2024R0113
INSTRUCTIONS: Offeror to complete Sections A and B and transmit questionnaire to reference.
Reference to complete Sections C and D and transmit back to Contracting Officer listed in section E.
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.
A. OFFEROR INFORMATION
Company Name Company
Street Address Address
City City
State State
Zip Code XXXXX
Unique Entity Identifier
(UEI) Number / SAM
XXXXXXX
Point of Contact Name, Email, Phone
B. CONTRACT INFORMATION FOR PAST PROJECT (PROJECT SUBMITTED UNDER PROJECT
EXPERIENCE)
Project Title Title
Contract Number XXXXXXXXXX
Contract Type Firm Fixed Price / Time & Materials / Cost Reimbursable / Other
Awarded Contract Price $X,XXX,XXX
Current / Final Price $X,XXX,XXX
Contract Award Date XX/XX/XXXX
Contract Completion Date XX/XX/XXXX
Period of Performance XX/XX/XXX – XX/XX/XXX
Project Location Park or Street address, City, State
Client / Owner Company
Brief description of the contract & work effort:
Scope of work description
C. REFERENCE:
Name First, Last
Position / Title Title
Organization Agency or Company
Phone Number XXX-XXX-XXXX
Email Address Email
Signature Signature
Date XX/XX/XXXX
D. EVALUATION
Rating Definition
Exceptional
Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded many to the owner’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
Very Good
Performance met contractual requirements and exceeded some to the owner’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
Satisfactory Performance met contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
Marginal Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions.
Unsatisfactory
Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
Evaluation Area Rating
Quality
Quality of workmanship (including subcontractors)? Choose an item.
Quality of and adherence to quality control plan? Choose an item.
Quality of informational and technical submittals? Choose an item.
Overall Quality Rating Choose an item.
Comments (Please provide comments supporting the above ratings. Comments supporting ratings of excellent, marginal, & unsatisfactory are especially helpful.):
Schedule (& Time Management)
Met project schedule milestones? Choose an item.
Responded to owner requests in a timely manner? Choose an item.
Informational and technical submittals submitted timely? Choose an item.
Promptly addressed scheduling issues? Choose an item.
Overall Schedule (& Time Management) Rating Choose an item.
Cost Control
Addressed differing & unforeseen site conditions so as to minimize additional costs? Choose an item.
Provided fair and reasonable pricing for contract modifications? Choose an item.
Submitted accurate and complete invoices? Choose an item.
Promptly paid subcontractors and suppliers? Choose an item.
Overall Cost Control Rating Choose an item.
Comments (Please provide comments supporting the above ratings. Comments supporting ratings of excellent, marginal, & unsatisfactory are especially helpful.):
Management
General oversight by project manager and superintendent? Choose an item.
Coordination with and control of subcontractors? Choose an item.
Avoidance of accidents & safety violations? Choose an item.
Addressed location factors (especially remote locations)? Choose an item.
Maintained good working relationship with owner representatives? Choose an item.
Demonstrated flexibility, innovativeness and cooperation in resolving potential problems? Choose an item.
Overall Management Rating Choose an item.
Small Business Subcontracting (& Labor Standards)
Met regulatory and contractual labor standards? Choose an item.
Successfully contracted with small and socio-economically disadvantaged businesses? Choose an item.
Quality and adherence to applicable subcontracting plans? Choose an item.
Overall Small Business Subcontracting (& Labor Standards) Rating Choose an item.
Comments (Please provide comments supporting the above ratings. Comments supporting ratings of excellent, marginal, & unsatisfactory are especially helpful.):
Regulatory Compliance
Met building and life safety codes? Choose an item.
Overall Regulatory Compliance Rating Choose an item.
Overall Recommendation:
Given what I know today about the contractor's ability to perform in accordance with the contract’s most significant requirements, I would recommend them for similar contracts: Choose an item.
Overall Comments:
E. RETURN:
Return by Time / Date
Name CO or CS name
Title Contracting Officer / Contract Specialist
Organization National Park Service – Denver Service Center
Email First_Last@nps.gov
ATTACHMENT 5
RESUMES OF KEY PERSONNEL PROPOSED FOR THIS CONTRACT
COMPLETE ONE FOR EACH KEY PERSON
1. NAME 2. ROLE IN THIS CONTRACT 3. YEARS EXPERIENCE
a. TOTAL b. W ITH CURRENT COMPANY
4. COMPANY NAME AND LOCATION (City and State)
5. EDUCATION (DEGREE AND SPECIALIZATION)
6. OTHER QUALIFICATIONS (SAFETY, QC TRAINING, AW ARDS, ETC.)
7. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
a.
(1) TITLE AND LOCATION (City and State) (2) DATES OF PROJECT
START DATE END DATE
(3) BRIEF DESCRIPTION (Brief scope, size, cost, etc. of the project)
(4) SPECIFIC DUTIES PERFORMED:
(5) SPECIFIC ROLE (6) EMPLOYER (7) PHONE NUMBER
b.
c.
Project Experience Questionnaire Solicitation: 140P20204R0113
Submit responses to the questions below that address experience relative to the elements noted under the Project Experience evaluation subfactor in solicitation section L. Limit submittals to the quantity of projects and timeframes required in the solicitation. Expand the response sections shown below as needed to adequately address each question (this questionnaire may be expanded to multiple pages if needed).
Offeror Company Name
REFERENCED PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title Rehabilitate Painted Desert Community Complex
Project Location Petrified Forest, Arizona
Brief Project Description
This project is for the construction and rehabilitation of the painted desert community complex at Petrified Forest National Park, AZ
Project Owner Company Name POC: First & Last Name Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
CONTRACTOR LIST
List Contractor(s) whose experience on the referenced project is being submitted for evaluation on this proposed project. If more than one contractor is listed (i.e. prime and subcontractors), provide information specific to that contractor.
Contractor Name
Role on Referenced
Project (Prime or Sub)
Trade
Price (list for each contractor’s specific work)
Performance Period
(calendar days) (list for each contractor’s specific work) Original Final Original Final
Sparky’s Electrical Company Prime Prime $XXX,XXX $X,XXX,XXX XX XX
ABC Plumbing & Heating, Co Subcontractor Plumbing & Mechanical
$X,XXX,XXX $X,XXX,XXX XXX XXX
Subcontractor
PROJECT EXPERIENCE QUESTIONS
1. Describe the project work performed by all contractors listed above.
Response
2. Identify which Project Experience elements listed in section L of the solicitation each contractor’s work addresses.
3. Describe & provide reasons for any changes to the original price for the work described in question 2 above.
4. Describe and provide reasons for any changes to the original schedule for the work described in question 2 above.
5. Describe problems, associated with the work described in question 2 above, which were encountered and how they were resolved. Describe how the offeror’s proposal accounts for similar issues.
6. Describe the means and methods, associated with the work described in question 2 above, which were successful. Would you implement the same means and methods on the proposed project? Why or why not?
7. Provide any other additional project information you believe should be presented.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .