CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE DATA SHEET.docx
DOCX document 16 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Rosedale Compound Waterline & Power Upgrade
- Solicitation number
- 1240BH21R0012
About this file
This solicitation requests replacement and upgrade of the existing water system and overhead power lines at the US Forest Service Rosedale Compound in Oregon. The contract will trench and replace approximately 3,200 lineal feet of waterlines with new 6", 4" and 2" PVC pipes, bringing the system up to code and installing required hydrants and valves to supply consistent, pressurized water. It will also replace all overhead power lines and direct buried power lines with approximately 1,305 lineal feet of new 3" PVC conduit installed directly and 4,225 lineal feet installed by others, eliminating faults that occur annually. Additional requirements include a new truck fill water station and yard hydrants. The estimated value of the construction project is between $250,000 and $500,000. The solicitation provides the site address and location details. Offerors must have active SAM registration to be eligible for award.
View the file
Other files
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
CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE DATA SHEET
(Complete one Form for each Reference)
This RFP/RFQ Number:
Contractor Name:
Address:
Contractor’s POC (Person to verify data):
Telephone:
FAX:
CONTRACT PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
Contract Number:
Date Completed:
| Contract Type: |
| FFP___ Cost Reimbursement ___ Other (Specify) ___________ |
Brief Item/Service Description (See Quality (1) below to provide additional detail):
Project Location
Project Size/Period of Performance:
Customer Name:
Customer POC (Person who can verify data):
Address:
Telephone:
FAX:
CONTRACTOR MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING TO BE CONSIDERED RESPONSIVE
QUALITY
| YES |
| NO |
| 1 |
| Were supplies/services similar in nature to this solicitation’s work description? |
| * |
| 2 |
| Was/is any part of this contract terminated for default and/or in litigation? |
| * |
| 3 |
| Was consideration or a monetary withhold for non-conforming supplies/services? |
| * |
| 4 |
| Was any warranty work completed on delivered items or rework of services? |
| * |
| 5 |
| Did you receive any quality awards in the past three years? |
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
| 6 |
| Were the customers completely satisfaction with the completed products & services? |
TIMELINESS
| 7 |
| Were all items (including products, services, reports, etc.) delivered within the original contract schedule? |
| 8 |
| Were liquidated damages or consideration assessed for late delivery |
| * |
BUSINESS RELATIONS
| 9 |
| Did subcontractor get effectively managed where subcontracts were necessary? |
| 10 |
| Was an environment of reasonableness and cooperation nurtured whereby flexibility existed and solutions were recommended? |
| 11 |
| Was there a good working relationship with the Contracting Officer and COR? |
OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
| 12 |
| Describe any corrective action(s) initiated to solve any of the above-described problems/deficiencies on this contract. Discuss the success of the corrective action(s) taken.* |
NOTES:
(1) Answers in columns containing an asterisk (*) require an explanatory narrative attached to this form. Other answers may include narrative response at the offerors election.
(2) The information provided may be used to evaluate the offeror’s past performance in meeting cost, price, technical, and performance objectives. The results may be used in the overall comparative evaluation of the offeror(s) in accordance with Evaluation Factors for Award provisions.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .