PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE Template.docx
DOCX document 23 KB Posted
- Attached to
- MAHG231024 Repair Foster Manor HVAC, B6965
- Solicitation number
- FA301026R0004
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire template designed for contractors responding to Air Force solicitation FA3010XXXXXXX for window and door replacement at the Elliott Key Visitor Center in Biscayne National Park. The questionnaire requests that references complete an evaluation of the contractor's prior performance on a related contract with their agency or company. Responses must be submitted by 04:00 PM EST on May 27, 2024, directly to the Contracting Specialist from a corporate or government email account.
The questionnaire evaluates contractor performance across five key categories: Quality of Work, Schedule/Timeliness, Management, Regulatory Compliance, and Overall Performance Rating. For each category, references must rate the contractor using a five-point scale (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory) or mark as Not Applicable. The template requires detailed information about the referenced contract, including contract number, value, period of performance, and a brief description of work. References must provide specific, explanatory narratives with supporting details for their assessments. The questionnaire includes evaluation definitions to guide consistent rating standards, and respondents should identify an alternate point of contact if unavailable for contractor verification on the due date.
View the file
Other files
Show all 19
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
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Solicitation No. FA3010XXXXXXX
Please complete this questionnaire and email to: contract.specialist@us.af.mil
We are currently preparing our proposal for the 81st Contracting Squadron, Keesler AFB, MS, Solicitation Number: FA3010XXXXXXX for replacing the windows and doors at the Elliott Key Visitor Center located within Biscayne National Park. As part of our proposal, we have listed you as a reference on our performance for this type of service with your agency or company under the previous or ongoing contract listed below. Your input on our performance is therefore requested.
This Questionnaire is due to Contracting Specialist Name no later than 04:00 PM EST on May 27, 2024. The Questionnaire must be submitted directly to the Contracting Officer from a corporate or government email account.
If you will be unavailable on May 27, 2024, for verification (if necessary) of this past performance evaluation, please indicate another point of contact (POC) for the Contracting Officer to contact.
Thank you.
POC/Alternate POC Name:
POC/Alternate POC Phone Number:
POC/Alternate POC Email Address:
Name of Offeror:
Phone Number:
Email Address:
CONTRACT REFERENCED
Contract Number (including Task Order number if applicable):
Contract Value (including all modifications):
Period of Performance:
Name of Person Completing Questionnaire:
Agency/Company:
Title:
Phone:
Email:
Brief Description of Work Required in the Referenced Contract:
EVALUATION
Please rate the contractor utilizing the guide below. Explanatory narratives giving specific details would be appreciated. Attach additional pages if more space is needed. Evaluation Definitions: The following definitions should be used in assessing Contractor performance.
| Exceptional: |
| Performance EXCEEDS MANY contractual requirements. Performance being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good: |
| Performance EXCEEDS SOME contractual requirements. Performance being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory: |
| Performance MEETS contractual requirements. Performance being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal: |
| Performance MEETS SOME contractual requirements. Performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginal effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory: |
| Performance DOES NOT MEET contractual requirements. Performance contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| Not Applicable (N/A): |
| Performance information is not recent or relevant as defined in the solicitation. Unable to provide assessment. |
PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
QUALITY
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet work requirements and the overall quality of the work?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Quality of Work
Comments:
SCHEDULE
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to provide end-products timely?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Timeliness
Ability to Resolve Timeliness Problems
Comments:
MANAGEMENT
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to manage all aspects of the work?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Managing Work Aspects
Comments:
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet all regulatory requirements? Examples would include safety regulations, Davis-Bacon Act and other labor standards.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Complying with Regulations
Comments:
OVERALL RATING OF CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE
What is your overall rating of the Contractor’s performance on the contract being assessed.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
General Comments:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .