DTRT57-13-R-20007_A0003_Attachment_4.docx

DOCX document 28 KB Posted

Attached to
8(a) Communications and Operations Research and Analysis (CORA) Support Services
Solicitation number
DTRT57-13-R-20007
Issued by

About this file

DTRT57-13-R-20007 Amendment No. A0003 Attachment 4

View the file

Other files

Show all 11

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

Solicitation No. DTRT57-13-R-20007 8(a) Communications and Operations Research and Analysis (CORA) Support Services

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE

Solicitation No. DTRT57-13-R-20007, Amendment No. A0003 Attachment 4

SECTION J, PART III, ATTACHMENT J.5

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR NON-FEDERAL REFERENCES

(Continued on next page)

DTRT57-13-R-20007

Amendment A0003 Attachment 4

Solicitation No. DTRT57-13-R-20007 8(a) Communications and Operations Research and Analysis (CORA) Support Services

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE

This is a past performance questionnaire for the U.S. Department of Transportation/Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA)/Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe Center) to obtain past performance information on the Contractor/Offeror listed below. You should have received this questionnaire along with a Client Authorization Letter from the Contractor/Offeror identified below asking for your cooperation in completing this questionnaire. Information obtained in this questionnaire is for the sole purpose of evaluating the Contractor/Offeror’s past performance history to assist the Volpe Center in determining the best value for award of a contract and task order resulting from this solicitation. As a reviewer, your participation in this questionnaire is greatly appreciated.

INSTRUCTIONS:

To complete this questionnaire, the Contractor/Offeror should:

1. Complete SECTION 1, CONTRACT DATA on the next page of this questionnaire.

2. Forward this questionnaire along with a Client Authorization Letter, to the reviewer.

To complete this questionnaire, the reviewer should:

1. Review SECTION 1, CONTRACT DATA.

2. Review and complete SECTION 2, CONTACT INFORMATION.

3. Complete SECTION 3, RATINGS by evaluating and assigning a rating as defined below for quality, timeliness of performance, cost control, business relations, and management of key personnel. Include a narrative for each rating if appropriate.

4. Return the questionnaire to the Volpe Center Contracting Officer by email (Alison.Fecht@dot.gov) by 2:00 pm EDT on Tuesday, July 9, 2013.

SECTION 1: CONTRACT DATA

Name and Address of Contractor:

Point of Contact Name:

Point of Contact Phone Number:

DUNS Number:

Contract Title:

Contract Number:

Contract Value:

Contract Type:

Contract Award Date:

Contract Reporting Period (Start):

Contract Reporting Period (End):

Agency/Firm Name:

To be completed only if the questionnaire is being completed for a task order:

Task Order Title:

Task Order Number:

Task Order Value:

Task Order Type:

Task Order Award Date:

Task Order Reporting Period (Start):

Task Order Reporting Period (End):

The remainder of this form is to be completed by the reference and returned to the Volpe Center Contracting Officer as instructed in the Client Authorization Letter.

SECTION 2: CONTACT INFORMATION

Agency/ Firm:

Name:

Title:

E-mail:

Phone:

Mailing Address:

Fax:

The Contractor being evaluated performed as the: |_| Prime Contractor |_| Subcontractor

SECTION 3: RATINGS

*The rating definitions and notes come directly from the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) at http://www.cpars.gov/cparsfiles/pdfs/CPARSQualityChecklist.pdf.

Rating
Definition
Note

5-Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.
To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.
4-Very Good
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.
To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
3-Satisfactory
Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.
2-Marginal
Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed 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.
To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).
1- 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 contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).
N/A
N/A (not applicable) should be used if the rating category does not apply
Please explain all ratings of N/A

Please check the appropriate Rating for each Performance Element:

Exceptional-5
Very Good-4
Satisfactory-3
Marginal-2
Unsatisfactory-1

Quality of Product or Service

Contractors Schedule/ Timeliness

Cost Control

Business Relations/ Management

Utilization of Small Business

Provide remarks on exceptional performance:

(Provide data supporting this observation. You may continue on additional sheets if necessary.)

Provide remarks on unsatisfactory performance:

(Provide data supporting this observation. You may continue on additional sheets if necessary.)

Identify corporate affiliations with the Contractor:

Would you conduct business with this Contractor again?

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .