The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Radiation Portal Monitor Replacement Program
RFP HSHQDN-17-R-0002
Attachment 9
MAINTENANCE SERVICES PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE CUSTOMER SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Please complete the following questionnaire and return it via your organization email system to the attention of the individual(s) named below, no later than Month Day, 2016 12:00 PM Eastern Time (ET):
The Subject line for the return email shall clearly indicate “DNDO RPM Maintenance Services Past Performance Questionnaire Submission for [fill in name of Offeror]”
Tisha Blue, Contracting Officer tisha.blue@hq.dhs.gov or 202-254-6751
This survey pertains to: __________________________________________________________ Department/Component: _________________________________________________________ Solicitation Number: ____________________________________________________________ Date of Survey: ________________________________________________________________ Name of Person Completing Survey: _______________________________________________ Signature of Person Completing Survey: _____________________________________________ Your Company/Agency: _________________________________________________________ Your Role in this Contract: _______________________________________________________ Survey Period of Performance: ____________________________________________________ General description of products/services required under the contract: ______________________
RATINGS
For each of the six (6) criteria listed below, the rater must choose one (1) Adjectival Rating by checking the applicable box. At a minimum, for any rating that is checked Marginal or unsatisfactory, please submit additional comments to substantiate the rating. For any rating that is checked Not Applicable, please explain why it does not apply.
1. QUALITY OF SERVICE
| Rating |
| Adjectival Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appeared satisfactory or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated contains a serious problem or problems for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear ineffective or were ineffective. |
Not Applicable
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
2. SCHEDULE
| Rating |
| Adjectival Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appeared satisfactory or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated contains a serious problem or problems for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear ineffective or were ineffective. |
Not Applicable
3. COST CONTROL
| Rating |
| Adjectival Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appeared satisfactory or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated contains a serious problem or problems for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear ineffective or were ineffective. |
Not Applicable
4. BUSINESS RELATIONS
| Rating |
| Adjectival Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appeared satisfactory or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated contains a serious problem or problems for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear ineffective or were ineffective. |
Not Applicable
5. MANAGEMENT OF KEY PERSONNEL
| Rating |
| Adjectival Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appeared satisfactory or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated contains a serious problem or problems for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear ineffective or were ineffective. |
Not Applicable
6. UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS
| Rating |
| Adjectival Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Exceeded all statutory goals or goals as negotiated. Had exceptional success with initiatives to assist, promote, and utilize small business (SB), small disadvantaged business (SDB), women-owned small business (WOSB), HUBZone small business, veteran-owned small business (VOSB), and service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB). Complied with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns. Exceeded any other small business participation requirements incorporated in the contract/order, including the use of small business in mission-critical aspects of the program. Went above and beyond the required elements of the subcontracting plan and other small business requirements of the contract/order. Completed and submitted Individual Subcontract Reports (ISR) and/or Summary Subcontract Reports (SSR) in an accurate and timely manner. |
| Very Good |
| Met all statutory goals or goals as negotiated. Had significant success with initiatives to assist, promote, and utilize SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB. Complied with FAR 52.219-8. Met or exceeded any other small business participation requirements incorporated in the contract/order, including the use of small business in mission-critical aspects of the program. Endeavored to go above and beyond the required elements of the subcontracting plan. Completed and submitted ISRs and/or SSRs in an accurate and timely manner. |
| Satisfactory |
| Demonstrated a good faith effort to meet all negotiated subcontract goals in the various socio-economic categories for the current period. Complied with FAR 52.219-8. Met any other SB participation requirements included in the contract/order. Completed and submitted ISRs and/or SSRs in an accurate and timely manner. |
| Marginal |
| Deficient in meeting key subcontracting plan elements. Deficient in complying with FAR 52.219-8, and any other SB participation requirements included in the contract/order. Did not submitISRs and/or Summary Subcontract reports in an accurate and timely manner. Failed to satisfy one or more requirements of a corrective action plan currently in place; however, does show an interest in bringing performance to a satisfactory level, and has demonstrated a commitment to apply the necessary resources to do so. Required a corrective action plan. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Noncompliant with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9, and any other SB participation requirements in the contract/order. Did not submit ISRs and/or SSRs in an accurate and timely manner. Showed little interest in bringing performance to a satisfactory level or is generally uncooperative. Required a corrective action plan. |
Not Applicable
PROVIDE APPROPRIATE CONTRACT/TASK/DELIVERY ORDER NUMBER(S):
