Encl 5_PPQ_with Japanese Translation.docx
DOCX document 1 MB Posted
- Attached to
- Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Custodial, Pest Control, and Grounds Maintenance Service Contract at U. S. Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Iwakuni, Japan Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- N4008426R1026
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) template form (PPQ-0) used by NAVFAC and USACE to evaluate contractor performance on previous projects submitted as part of proposal evaluation. The form is designed to be completed jointly by the contractor and the client/government representative, with the contractor providing project details in Blocks 1-4 and the client providing evaluation and verification in Blocks 5-8.
The questionnaire captures essential contract information including contractor firm name, CAGE code, entity identifier, contract number, contract type (Firm Fixed Price, Cost Reimbursement, or Other), contract title, location, award and completion dates, original and final contract prices, and a project description with complexity rating (High, Medium, or Routine). The form requires explanation of any differences between original and final contract prices and award amounts. A critical section requests the contractor to explain how the past project is relevant to the current proposal submission, specifically addressing similar equipment, requirements, and conditions. The client section identifies the project stakeholder, their role, and includes signature and date verification. The form includes rating definitions (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory, and Not Applicable) to standardize performance evaluation across multiple contracts. NAVFAC requests that clients complete and submit questionnaires directly to the offeror for inclusion in proposals, though direct submission to NAVFAC is permitted. The document note emphasizes that the government reserves the right to verify all submitted information and references source selection sensitive information disclosure limitations under FAR 2.101 and 3.104.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| N4008426R1026 AMD 0001.pdf | ||
| Encl 4_Experience Data Sheet AMD 1.pdf | ||
| Request for Information Questions and Responses.pdf | ||
| Solicitation - N4008426R1026.pdf | ||
| Encl 3_Safety.docx | DOCX document | |
| Encl 4_Experience Data Sheet.docx | DOCX document | |
| Encl 7_APPENDIX A-INDIVIDUAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR COMPLIANCE WITH MCASO.pdf | ||
| Encl 11_MCASO 5500.2W MCAS Iwakuni Access Control.pdf | ||
| Encl 6_RFI Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Encl 8_APPENDIX A-JN-INDIVIDUAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR COMPLIANCE WITH MCASO.pdf | ||
| Encl 10_MCASO 5500.2W Appendix.pdf | ||
| Encl 1_PWS_CPG_Iwakuni_w_combined.pdf | ||
| Encl 9_MCASO 3070.2B.pdf | ||
| Encl 2_ELINs Schedule.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 14
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
ENCLOSURE 3
NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0)
CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)
| 1. Contractor Information | |
| Firm Name: | CAGE Code: |
| Address: | Entity Identifier Number: |
Phone Number:
Email Address:
Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:
2. Work Performed as: |_| Prime Contractor |_| Sub Contractor |_| Joint Venture |_| Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:
If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):
3. Contract Information Contract Number:
Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):
Contract Type: |_| Firm Fixed Price |_| Cost Reimbursement |_| Other (Please specify):
Contract Title:
Contract Location:
Award Date (mm/dd/yy):
Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):
Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):
Explain Differences:
Original Contract Price (Award Amount):
Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):
Explain Differences:
4. Project Description:
Complexity of Work |_| High |_| Med |_| Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)
CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)
5. Client Information Name:
Title:
Phone Number:
Email Address:
6. Describe the client’s role in the project:
7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):
8. Client’s Signature:
NOTE: NAVFAC REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO NAVFAC WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON NAVFAC SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO NAVFAC. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR NAVFAC POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.
Rev Jan 2018 1
SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION
DISCLOSURE LIMITATIONS AS OUTLINED IN FAR 2.101 & 3.104 APPLY
ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT
YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE
RATING DEFINITION NOTE
| (E) Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’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. |
仕事が契約内容と合致しており、顧客の希望を 上回る点が多い。修正可能な範囲の軽微な不具 合を含め、契約通りの内容である。修正箇所は 非常に満足な結果である。 An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. 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.
| (VG) Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’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 were effective. |
仕事が契約内容と合致しており、顧客の希望を 多少上回る。修正可能な範囲の若干の不具合を 含め、契約通りの内容である。修正箇所は満足 な結果である。 A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
| (S) Satisfactory |
| Performance meets minimum 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. |
仕事が最低限の契約内容と合致している。修正 可能な若干の不具合を含め、契約通りの内容で ある。修正箇所は特に問題ない結果である。
A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that 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.
| (M) 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. |
仕事が契約内容と合致していない。修正可能な 不具合があるかどうかも把握できておらず、深 刻な状態である。業者から提案される方法は効 果的とは言えない、またはその方法を実行され てもいない。 A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.
| (U) 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 serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
仕事が契約内容にほとんど合致しておらず、不 具合の復旧も迅速ではない。不具合の修正も全 く効果的ではなく、深刻な状態である。 An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.
| (N) Not Applicable |
| No information or did not apply to your contract |
評価材料がない、または該当せず。 Rating will be neither positive nor negative.
Contractor Information (Firm Name): ________________________________________________ Client Information (Name): ________________________________________________________
Revised April 2011
SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION
DISCLOSURE LIMITATIONS AS OUTLINED IN FAR 2.101 & 3.104 APPLY
image1.png image2.png image3.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .