Attachment_10_-_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

Solicitation No.: FA4608-13-R-0005

Attachment 10

5 June 2013

MEMORANDUM FOR PROSPECTIVE EVALUATORS

FROM: 2 CONS/LGCB

41 Vandenberg Age Barksdale AFB LA 71110-

SUBJECT: Solicitation FA4608-13-R-0005, REPAIR BASE FACILITY ROOFS, Past Performance Questionnaire

1. The 2d Contracting Squadron is conducting a proposal evaluation for subject solicitation at Barksdale AFB, LA. Under the solicitation, the Air Force will perform a Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT) evaluation. The contractor listed in Section A of the attached questionnaire has identified your office as a source to evaluate the contractor’s past performance and it also authorizes release of this information to our office.

2. The individual most knowledgeable of the contractor’s day-to-day operations and overall condition of performance rendered should complete the survey. However, that individual is encouraged to supplement their own knowledge with the judgment of others in their organization.

3. Please complete the questionnaire as thoroughly as possible by indicating your ratings and providing comments wherever applicable. For any rating of E or F, request you provide an explanatory narrative and attach to your response. The narratives need not be lengthy, but should be detailed and descriptive.

Use separate evaluation forms for each contract/order being evaluated.

4. Your time and effort in providing this information is greatly appreciated. The requested information is critical to our evaluation. Please complete and return the completed package as quickly as possible but not later than 12:00 NOON CST, 19 July 2013. You may email a scanned copy to regina.blue@us.af.mil, FAX it to 318-456-3294, or mail it to the following address:

2d Contracting Squadron Attn: Regina Blue 41 Vandenberg Ave Barksdale AFB LA 71110

5. If you have any questions, please call Regina Blue at (318) 456-4841. Thank you for your cooperation and quick response to this request.

MARLA J. POIRIER

Contracting Officer

Solicitation FA4608-13-R-0005 Attachment 9

Past Performance Questionnaire

SECTION A: Contractor Information (to be completed by the contractor requesting evaluation prior to mailing)

A. Contractor’s name and address:

B. Point of Contact:

C. Phone/Fax Numbers (with area code) & E-mail Address:

D. Contract number:

E. Project Title or Description of Work performed under this project:

F. Contract Type: Firm-Fixed-Price Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite Quantity Task Order Cost-Reimbursement

G. Project Award Date: Scheduled Completion Date:

Current/Final Completion Date:

H. Project Award Amount: Current/Final Project Amount:

I. Contractor being evaluated performed as the Prime Contractor Subcontractor Supplier on this contract/order.

J. Authorization is hereby granted to provide the information requested in SECTION B of this Questionnaire.

(Signature)

(Name and Title of Authorizing Official) (Date)

SECTION B: RESPONDENT INFORMATION (to be completed by respondent.)

EVALUATED BY:

(Signature) (Date)

Address:

(Typed or Printed Name)

(Title)

Phone/Fax Numbers (with area code) & E-mail Address

NOTE: The identity of individual(s) providing reference information shall not be disclosed.

Performance Evaluation Instructions

• When responding to the descriptive statements, select the letter, which most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. If the contractor has no record of past performance relevant to a particular question, select “Unknown Confidence.”

Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence: Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, and

Unknown Confidence: No performance record is identifiable or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

A B C D E Substantial Confidence

Satisfactory Confidence

Limited Confidence No Confidence Unknown Confidence

PLEASE ELABORATE ON WHAT PERCENTAGE OF WORK COMPLETED IS ROOFING WORK.

Please rate the contractor in this area. All thework is roofing

75% or more is roofing

50% is Roofing

25% or less is roofing

None of the work is Related to Roofing

Comments:

EVALUATION AREAS

I. QUALITY CONTROL: A B C D E

1. Contractor provided effective quality control and inspection procedures that resulted in a quality-finished project.

2. Contractor developed and submitted realistic progress schedule(s).

3. Contractor provided well researched and clearly identified submittals that matched contract requirements.

4. Contractor completed all work with good workmanship and in conformance with the specifications, resulting in minor, if any, punchlist items.

5. Contractor designs were all concise, accurate and captured all details of the site visit.

6. Contractor thoroughly reviewed design package proposals for accuracy, completeness and compliance with contract requirements

II. TIMELY PERFORMANCE: A B C D E

1. Contractor met established project schedules to complete the project on time, as scheduled.

2. Contractor performed all work without the issuance of a CURE NOTICE or a SHOW CAUSE LETTER (If a notice was issued, please describe the circumstances on a separate sheet of paper and identify if Liquidated Damages were assessed)

3. Contractor provided timely cost/design proposals.

4. Contractor submitted the progress schedule and interim progress reports as required in a timely manner and the schedule was approved prior to actual construction.

5. Contractor provided on-time submittals as required.

6. Contractor provided payrolls for both their firm and their subcontractors’ employees as required and scheduled.

7. Contractor provided timely resolution of all punchlist items.

III. MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS: A B C D E

1. Contractor provided experienced/qualified managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.

2. Contractor hired quality subcontractors and effectively managed and coordinated their work.

3. Contractor hired, maintained, and replaced as necessary, qualified personnel and subcontractors/suppliers.

4. Contractor ensured the site manager had sufficient authority to make decisions and take actions during project performance to keep the project on schedule.

5. Contractor ensured the site manager was consistently present on site when work was performed.

6. Contractor provided timely and satisfactory response to warranty issues after project completion.

7. Contractor paid employees/subcontractors/suppliers as required.

8. The contractor cooperated to resolve problems, attended meetings and maintained communication to assure satisfactory resolution.

IV. PRICING: A B C D E

1. The contractor submits proposals that accurately represent the work required.

2. The contractor’s supporting price/cost information for modifications is accurate, complete and reasonable (not over inflated or under estimated).

3. How would you rate the contractor’s overall Pricing performance.

V. MANAGEMENT/SUPERINTENDENCE: A B C D E

1. Site Manager ensured compliance to contact requirements and safety regulations.

2. Site Manager acted promptly to resolve problems and ensure work quality.

3. Site Manager had sufficient authority to make decisions or take actions during project performance.

4. Site Manager consistently present on site when work was performed.

VI. COMPLIANCE WITH LABOR STANDARDS: A B C D E

1. Submitted payrolls in a timely manner.

2. Payrolls were complete and correct.

3. Compliance with labor laws and regulations with specific attention to the Davis-Bacon Act.

VII. COMPLIANCE WITH SAFETY STANDARDS: A B C D E

1. Adequacy of Safety Plan.

2. Implementation of Safety Plan.

VIII. OVERALL PERFORMANCE:

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR'S OVERALL PERFORMANCE. (EXAMPLE:

WOULD YOU REHIRE THIS CONTRACTOR?)

Please rate the contractor in this area. A B C D E

THE FOLLOWING ARE THE 16 AREAS OF COMPETENCY.

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON SUCCESSFULLY MANAGING MULTIPLE

PROJECTS/TASK ORDERS IN THE FOLLOWING MAGNITUDES: SMALL (UNDER

$50,000), MEDIUM ($50,001 TO $250,000, AND LARGE ($250,001 TO $750,000)

AT ANY GIVEN TIME AND IF SO, PLEASE LIST THE NUMBER OF PROJECTS AND

BRIEFLY DESCRIBE.

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE ON PROJECTS/TASK ORDERS.

(EXAMPLE: WERE ANY NOT ACCEPTED DUE TO THE QUALITY OF WORKMANSHIP?)

(If yes, please briefly explain circumstances in comments section below)

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HOW WELL THEY COMPLIED WITH THE

SPECIFICATIONS.

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON FOD (FOREIGN OBJECT DAMAGE) AND THE

CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSE TO FOD ISSUES.

(If yes, please briefly explain circumstances in comments section below)

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HOW WELL THEY ADHERE TO BASE STANDARDS

FOR CONSTRUCTION SITES. (EXAMPLE: SITE CLEANED UP)

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HOW WELL THEY CONDUCT AND DOCUMENT DAILY

SELF-INSPECTIONS.

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HOW WELL THE COMPLY WITH SUBMITTAL

REQUIREMENTS. (EXAMPLE: DOES THE CONTRACTOR INSTALL/USE THE MATERIALS

THAT WERE SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL OR DO THEY SUBSTITUTE "OTHER MATERIALS"

NOT APPROVED BY THE GOVERNMENT WITHOUT NOTICE?)

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON "MAJOR DIFFERING SITE CONDITIONS" AND HOW

THEY ROUTINELY IMPLEMENT/NEGOTIATE CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS.

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON THE VOLUME OF CHANGE ORDERS AND IF THEY

ARE ROUTINELY REQUESTED/INITIATED BY THE CONTRACTOR.

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HOW WELL THEY WORK WITH BASE DRAFTING TO

PROVIDE FINAL AS-BUILT DRAWINGS IN BASE STANDARD ELECTRONIC FORMAT IN

ADDITION TO HARDCOPIES.

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HOW QUICKLY THEY RESPOND TO WARRANTY

REPAIR CLAIMS.

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HOW WELL THEY ROUTINELY FIND MORE

COST/EFFECTIVE CONSTRUCTION METHODS (EXAMPLE: LADDERS INSTEAD OF

SCAFFOLDING, FRONT END LOADER INSTEAD OF BULLDOZER, ETC.) DURING

NEGOTIATIONS.

WHEN THE GOVERNMENT CLAIMS SALVAGE OF MATERIALS TO BE REMOVED, PLEASE

RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HOW THEY TAKE CARE TO REMOVE THEM IN AN

UNDAMAGED CONDITION AND PROMPTLY DELIVER THEM TO THE GOVERNMENT.

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HOW WELL THEY ADEQUATELY REVIEW THE

GOVERNMENT STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW) AND NOTE ANY DEFICIENCIES AND/OR

CONCEPT DESIGN ERRORS. ADDITIONALLY, IF THE CONTRACTOR NOTES ANY

DEFICIENCIES AND/OR CONCEPT DESIGN ERRORS, HOW WELL DO THEY COORDINATE AND

WORK WITH GOVERNMENT TO IDENTIFY SOLUTIONS PRIOR TO THEIR SUBMISSION OF

INITIAL STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW) PROPOSAL PACKAGES?

PLEASE RATE THE CONTRACTOR'S TASK ORDER PROPOSALS ON HOW THEY

ROUTINELY INCLUDE COSTS, DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN DESIGN PROPOSAL OF SUFFICIENT

DETAIL FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO EASILY PERFORM A TECHNICAL EVALUATION AND

VERIFY:

- PROJECT REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE MET

- ANY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND/OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS WERE

INCORPORATED (ASBESTOS ABATEMENT, STORM WATER PERMITS, ETC.)

- "QUANTITIES" OF LINE ITEM COSTS WERE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROPOSED

CONSTRUCTION

- IDENTIFIED ANY DEVIATIONS FROM GOVERNMENT SOW AND REASON

- DRAWINGS (INITIAL) ARE ADEQUATE TO SUPPORT GOVERNMENT INSPECTOR'S

EVALUATION OF CONSTRUCTION

HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IN REGARDS TO

COMPLIANCE WITH EPA RULES AND REGULATIONS.

HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CONTRACTOR ON HIS/HER OVERALL ROOFING RELATED

PERFORMANCE.

IX. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:

Please provide any other considerations.

Performance Evaluation Instructions