15._Attachment_D-PAST_PERFORMANCE_QUESTIONNAIRE.docx
DOCX document 19 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Microwave Tower Inspections Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- DE-SOL-0010067
About this file
ATTACHMENT D PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| DE-SOL-0010067.pdf | ||
| 11c._2016_WD2005-2057_CA.pdf | ||
| 05._ATTACHMENT_A_for_FBO.pdf | ||
| 2016_WD_05-2027_AZ.txt | TXT text file | |
| 10a._Tower_inspection_maps_DSW_and_RMR.pdf | ||
| 11h.__2016_WD05-2317_Montana.pdf | ||
| 11e._2016_WD15-5419_CO.pdf | ||
| 11f._2016_WD05-2333_NV.pdf | ||
| 11i._2016_WD_NM20150039_-NM.txt | TXT text file | |
| 10._Exhibit_3.__Tower_Inspection_Schedule_07-01-2016.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| 11g.__2016_WD05-2587_NE_and_WY.pdf | ||
| 11b._2016_WD2005-2053_CA.pdf | ||
| 2016_WD_05-2025_AZ.txt | TXT text file | |
| 2016_WD_05-2531_UT.txt | TXT text file | |
| 11d._2016_WD2005-2331_AZ-NE.pdf | ||
| 11a._2016_WD2005-2023_AZ.pdf |
Show all 16
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 ENERGY/WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION
DESERT SOUTHWEST REGION (DSW)
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Solicitation # DE-SOL-0010067
SECTION I. CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
| CONTRACTOR NAME: |
| CONTRACT NO: |
CONTRACTOR ADDRESS:
CONTRACT TYPE:
|_| FIRM-FIXED-PRICE
|_| COST REIMBURSEMENT
|_| OTHER: (specify)
|_| ACTIVE |_| COMPLETED
|_| ROUTINE |_| COMPLEX
DATES OF PERFORMANCE:
AWARD AMOUNT: $
TOTAL WITH MODS $
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
SECTION II. AGENCY (CUSTOMER) IDENTIFICATION
AGENCY (CUSTOMER) NAME:
POC NAME/TITLE/PHONE:
SECTION 3 III. PAST PERFORMANCE RATING
| Rating Scale: | E = Excellent. Considerably surpassed requirements/expectations. |
| G = Good. Surpassed requirements/expectations. | |
| S = Satisfactory. Met requirements/expectations | |
| M = Marginal. Met some requirements/expectations |
U = Unsatisfactory. Did not meet requirements/expectations
| 1. QUALITY: |
| (Circle applicable rating) |
| a. Conformance with contract requirements |
| E G S M U |
| b. Quality of workmanship (including subcontractors) |
| E G S M U |
| c. General oversight by project manager and superintendent |
| E G S M U |
| d. Coordination with and control of subcontractors |
| E G S M U |
| e. Compliance with Davis-Bacon or other wage rate and labor usage requirements |
| E G S M U |
| f. Avoidance of accidents/safety violations |
| E G S M U |
2. TIMELINESS:
| a. Adherence to project delivery schedules |
| E G S M U |
| b. Submission of change proposals |
| E G S M U |
| c. Response to technical direction and change orders |
| E G S M U |
| d. Response to correction of identified problems |
| E G S M U |
| e. Submission of timely/accurate/complete billings |
| E G S M U |
| f. Submission of materials/other submittals |
| E G S M U |
3. BUSINESS RELATIONS:
| a. Flexibility and cooperativeness in resolving problems |
| E G S M U |
| b. Tenacity and innovativeness in resolving problems |
| E G S M U |
| c. Relationships with subcontractors, including prompt payment |
| E G S M U |
| d. End user was satisfied with services performed |
| E G S M U |
SECTION IV. COMMENTS FOR M = MARGINAL AND U = UNSATISFACTORY RATINGS
| Item No. |
| Comment |
| PRINTED NAME: ______________________________ |
| DATE:____________ |
SIGNATURE: __________________________________
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .