Attachment_4.pdf

EA133F-18-RQ-0078

Attachment 4: Page 1 of 4

Attachment 4: Past Performance Questionnaire

I. Solicitation Data (for the proposed effort)

Solicitation Number EA133F-18-RQ-0078 Project/Requirement Janitorial Services, Pascagoula Laboratories

Customer/Agency National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA), National Marine

Fisheries Service (NMFS), Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC)

Project/Requirement

Description

Contractor support to provide Janitorial services for approximately 49,266 Gross Square Feet of buildings, laboratories and offices.

There are three (3) buildings, the Main Laboratory Building, the Gulf Marine Support Facility, and the Harvesting Systems Building. All facilities are in Pascagoula, Mississippi.

II. Contract Information

CONTRACTOR NAME &

ADDRESS:

Contract No

Type of Contract

Contract Value

Period of

Performance/Delivery

Schedule

Project/Requirement

Description

III. Assessor Information

Assessor Name

Phone Number/Email

Address

Attachment 4: Page 2 of 4

IV. Evaluation Definitions

The following definitions should be used in your assessment of Contractor performance.

OUTSTANDING

The contractor’s past performance information is highly relevant in size and scope to the instant acquisition and customer ratings have been consistently superior. Any identified weaknesses are minor and were resolved by the contractor to the Government’s satisfaction. Based on the past performance record, essentially no doubt exists that the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

GOOD

The contractor’s past performance information is relevant in size and scope to the instant acquisition and customer ratings have been consistently satisfactory or better. Identified weaknesses are relatively minor and were resolved by the contractor to the Government’s satisfaction. Based on the past performance record, there is little doubt that the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

SATISFACTORY

The contractor’s past performance is relevant in size and scope to the instant acquisition and customer ratings typically have been satisfactory.

Identified weaknesses were relatively minor and are not expected to have an impact on the current contract. Based on the past performance record, some doubt exists that the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

MARGINAL

The contractor’s past performance is relevant to the instant acquisition but customer ratings have typically been less than satisfactory. Numerous weaknesses, significant weaknesses and/or deficiencies are identified that were not resolved to the Government’s satisfaction. Based on the past performance record, a high level of doubt exists that the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

UNSATISFACTORY

The contractor’s past performance is relevant to the instant acquisition but customer ratings have typically been less than satisfactory.

Performance did not meet one or more critical contract requirements.

Numerous weaknesses, significant weaknesses and/or deficiencies are identified that were not resolved to the Government’s satisfaction. Based on the past performance record, extreme doubt exists that the contractor will successfully perform the required effort.

NEUTRAL

No current and/or relevant performance record is identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance rating. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the contractor or key team members/subcontractors or their key personnel. This is neither a negative or positive assessment. Unknown risk.

Attachment 4: Page 3 of 4

V. Performance Evaluation

1. Quality

What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet quality requirements?

Outstanding Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

Quality

Please provide rationale for the assigned rating.

2. Timeliness

What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet the schedule in a timely manner?

Outstanding Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

Timeliness

Please provide rationale for the assigned rating.

3. Subcontractor Management

What is your assessment of the Contractor’s effectiveness in managing its subcontractors?

Outstanding Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

Subcontractor

Management

Attachment 4: Page 4 of 4

Please provide rationale for the assigned rating.

4. Communication

What is your assessment of the Contractor’s effectiveness in communication?

Outstanding Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

Communication

Please provide rationale for the assigned rating.

5. Customer Satisfaction

What is your assessment of the Contractor’s commitment to customer satisfaction?

Outstanding Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

Customer

Satisfaction

Please provide rationale for the assigned rating.

Assessor’s Signature Date