B08_Solicitation_(140P6023Q0032_Past_Performance_Questionnaire).pdf
PDF 208 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Administrative History, HEHO Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 140P6023Q0032
About this file
This document is a past performance questionnaire template for the solicitation 140P6023Q0032 issued by the Department of the Interior National Park Service Midwest Region. The solicitation is for administrative history services at Historic Environment, History, and Heritage (HEHO) sites. Offerors must provide references from previous similar contracts, who will then complete the questionnaire evaluating the offeror's past performance. The questionnaire includes ratings on a scale from outstanding to unacceptable for criteria such as relationship with client, quality control, schedule adherence, and an overall rating. Responses are due by the date specified in the solicitation.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sol_140P6023Q0032_Amd_0002.pdf | ||
| Sol_140P6023Q0032_Amd_0001.pdf | ||
| A04_SOW.pdf | ||
| Sol_140P6023Q0032.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
Department of Interior Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service is considering the company listed below in Section A for a project opportunity - Your comments would be appreciated regarding this company’s past performance.
Instructions:
1) The quoter is to complete only the information in Section A, then send the PPQ to project owner/ evaluator for completion.
2) The project owner/evaluator (or reference) is to complete Section B, then send the PPQ back to the offeror to be provided with their complete quote package, which will then be reviewed for evaluation.
3) The PPQ must be received by the contracting point of contact by the date and time specified in the solicitation (or any amendments). Please note that for electronic submissions, offerors should consider and account for potential delays in transmissions between when an electronic submission is submitted and when an electronic submission is received. Late past performance questionnaires will not be accepted.
4) One PPQ is to be used for each project provided in the Technical Questionnaire for question #1.
Section A (Completed by the offeror) Project Title:
Location:
Description:
Company Name: Unique Entity ID/Cage Code:
Owner/Project Manager Name: Email Address:
Start Date: Completion Date:
Initial Amount: Final Amount:
Section B (Completed by the project evaluator/reference)
Evaluator Name: Company/Agency Name:
Address: POC Email:
Position Held or Function in Relation to Project:
Ratings Overview
Rating: If the rating is Marginal or Unacceptable, please provide additional information in the appropriate block or in the remarks section of this form.
“O” Outstanding Performance greatly exceeded the contract requirements.
“A” Above Average Performance exceeded the contract requirements.
“S” Satisfactory Performance met the contract requirements.
“M” Marginal Performance met the minimum contract requirements but
Some material aspects of the contractor’s performance were less than satisfactory.
“U” Unacceptable Performance was poor and/or did not satisfy contract requirements.
Questionnaire Please select the appropriate rating and provide supporting information for the following questions.
1. The relationship between the company and client’s/customer’s contract team:
O A S M U
2. Overall corporate management, integrity, reasonableness, and cooperative conduct:
O A S M U
3. Quality control: O A S M U
4. Ability to meet the performance schedule: O A S M U
5. Have any cure notices, show cause letters, letter of reprimand, suspension of payment, or termination been issued? If yes, please explain:
Yes No
6. Would you award another contract to the company being evaluated? If no, please explain: Yes No
7. Was the customer satisfied with the final product and services? If no, please explain: Yes No
8. Has the firm being evaluated been provided an opportunity to discuss or respond to any negative comments or performance ratings? If so, what were the results?
Yes No
9. Overall Rating O A S M U
10. Comments
Evaluator Signature and Date Name Date:
| Project Title: |
| Location: |
| Description: |
| Company Name: |
| Unique Entity IDCage Code: |
| OwnerProject Manager Name: |
| Email Address: |
| Start Date: |
| Completion Date: |
| Initial Amount: |
| Final Amount: |
| Evaluator Name: |
| CompanyAgency Name: |
| Address: |
| POC Email: |
| Position Held or Function in Relation to Project: |
| 8 Has the firm being evaluated been provided an opportunity to discuss or respond to any negative comments or performance ratings If so what were the results: |
| 9 Overall Rating: |
| 10 Comments: |
| Date: |
| Text1: |
| Text2: |
| Text3: |
| Check Box4: Off |
| Check Box5: Off |
| Check Box6: Off |
| Check Box7: Off |
| Check Box8: Off |
| Check Box9: Off |
| Check Box10: Off |
| Check Box11: Off |
| Check Box12: Off |
| Check Box13: Off |
| Check Box14: Off |
| Check Box15: Off |
| Check Box16: Off |
| Check Box17: Off |
| Check Box18: Off |
| Check Box19: Off |
| Check Box20: Off |
| Check Box21: Off |
| Check Box22: Off |
| Check Box23: Off |
| Check Box24: Off |
| Check Box25: Off |
| Check Box26: Off |
| Check Box27: Off |
| Check Box28: Off |
| Check Box29: Off |
| Check Box30: Off |
| Check Box31: Off |
| Check Box32: Off |
| Check Box33: Off |
| Check Box34: Off |
| Check Box35: Off |
| Check Box36: Off |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .