Attch_D,_PPQ_Hanger_68.pdf
PDF 126 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Renovate Hangar 68 Fire Suppression
- Solicitation number
- FA282320R0001
About this file
This document includes a past performance questionnaire and details of a federal contract opportunity to renovate the fire suppression system in Hangar 68 at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida. The opportunity is an unrestricted full and open competition solicitation to upgrade the fire suppression and removal system, address lead abatement, complete fire protection work, and conduct roofing, interior partitioning and finishing, HVAC, plumbing, restroom, power, and lighting renovations. The North American Industry Classification System code for the requirement is 236220. The performance period is 365 days after notice to proceed. Prospective contractors must register in the System for Award Management database and download the solicitation and attachments from the Federal Business Opportunities website. Questions regarding the solicitation are due by the date specified in Section L, with responses posted within three days thereafter.
PPQ
View the file
Other files
Show all 23
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
Source Selection Information -- See FAR 2.101 and 3.104
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Request for Proposal: FA2823-20-R-0001
Renovate Hangar 68, Eglin AFB, FL
1. Name of Contractor:
Contract or Identifying Number:
Title/Description of Contract:
2. Brief description of scope of work:
EVALUATION: Please rate the Contractor utilizing the guide below. Explanatory narratives for as many responses as possible would be appreciated. These narratives need not be lengthy, just detailed.
Attach additional pages if more space is needed.
A. Did the contractor have any non-conformance issues? If so, what kind?
B. Did the contractor have adequate resources to complete the required performance?
C. Were there issues with the subcontractor’s testing lab and/or material suppliers?
D. Did the contractor submit required documents on time and answer questions in a timely manner?
Assessment Definition Substantial Confidence (SC)
Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, this customer has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort for us again.
Satisfactory Confidence
(SAT)
Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, this customer has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort for us again.
Limited Confidence
(LC)
Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, this customer has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort for us again.
No Confidence
(NC)
Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, this customer has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort for us again.
Unknown Confidence (Neutral) (UC)
No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.
Based upon the assessment definitions above, indicate your assessment of the contractor’s performance on your contract described. Your assessment should consider the contractor’s performance in accordance with the contractual requirements. Circle all that apply.
CONTRACTOR’S NAME: __________________________ CONTRACT NO.: _______________________
01 Contractor developed realistic progress schedules & completed the project within the established schedule.
SC SAT LC NC UC
02 Contractor provided submittals in a timely manner. Submittals were well researched and clearly identified the proposed item.
SC SAT LC NC UC
03 Contractor provided timely and accurate payrolls with no known labor violations (Davis-Bacon Act) or labor claims.
SC SAT LC NC UC
04 Contractor provided experienced managers and supervisors, with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.
SC SAT LC NC UC
05 Contractor hired quality subcontractors and effectively managed them.
SC SAT LC NC UC
06 Contractor identified problems as they occurred. Suggested approaches to problems. Displayed initiative and cooperation to solve problems. Provided adequate information and pricing for change orders and negotiated them in good faith.
SC SAT LC NC UC
07 Contractor provided effective quality control, which resulted in a quality-finished product.
SC SAT LC NC UC
08 Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain in comments section, SC SAT LC NC UC
09 Would you hire this contractor again? If no, explain in comments section
SC SAT LC NC UC
OVERALL RATING: ______________________________
BRIEF EXPLANATION OF OVERALL RATING GIVEN:
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Name of Person Completing Evaluation:
Base/Company: ____________________ Date:
Position Title/Grade: ________________ Phone:
Email: ___________________________Fax:
| 1 Name of Contractor: |
| undefined: |
| Contract or Identifying Number: |
| 2 Brief description of scope of work: |
| Did the contractor have any nonconformance issues If so what kind 1: |
| Did the contractor have any nonconformance issues If so what kind 2: |
| Did the contractor have any nonconformance issues If so what kind 3: |
| Did the contractor have adequate resources to complete the required performance 1: |
| Did the contractor have adequate resources to complete the required performance 2: |
| Did the contractor have adequate resources to complete the required performance 3: |
| Were there issues with the subcontractors testing lab andor material suppliers 1: |
| Were there issues with the subcontractors testing lab andor material suppliers 2: |
| Were there issues with the subcontractors testing lab andor material suppliers 3: |
| Did the contractor submit required documents on time and answer questions in a timely manner 1: |
| Did the contractor submit required documents on time and answer questions in a timely manner 2: |
| Did the contractor submit required documents on time and answer questions in a timely manner 3: |
| Substantial Confidence SC: |
| Satisfactory Confidence SAT: |
| Limited Confidence LC: |
| No Confidence NC: |
| CONTRACTORS NAME: |
| CONTRACT NO: |
| 01: |
| SC: |
| SAT: |
| LC: |
| NC: |
| UC: |
| 02: |
| SC_2: |
| SAT_2: |
| LC_2: |
| NC_2: |
| UC_2: |
| 03: |
| SC_3: |
| SAT_3: |
| LC_3: |
| NC_3: |
| UC_3: |
| 04: |
| SC_4: |
| SAT_4: |
| LC_4: |
| NC_4: |
| UC_4: |
| 05: |
| SC_5: |
| SAT_5: |
| LC_5: |
| NC_5: |
| UC_5: |
| 06: |
| SC_6: |
| SAT_6: |
| LC_6: |
| NC_6: |
| UC_6: |
| 07: |
| SC_7: |
| SAT_7: |
| LC_7: |
| NC_7: |
| UC_7: |
| 08: |
| SC_8: |
| SAT_8: |
| LC_8: |
| NC_8: |
| UC_8: |
| 09: |
| SC_9: |
| SAT_9: |
| LC_9: |
| NC_9: |
| UC_9: |
| OVERALL RATING: |
| BRIEF EXPLANATION OF OVERALL RATING GIVEN 1: |
| BRIEF EXPLANATION OF OVERALL RATING GIVEN 2: |
| BRIEF EXPLANATION OF OVERALL RATING GIVEN 3: |
| BRIEF EXPLANATION OF OVERALL RATING GIVEN 4: |
| ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 1: |
| ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 2: |
| ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 3: |
| Name of Person Completing Evaluation: |
| Date: |
| Phone: |
| Fax: |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .