Attachment 6 Past Performance Questionaire FORM.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

509TH CONTRACTING SQUADRON (AFGSC)

WHITEMAN AIR FORCE BASE, MISSOURI

14 Mar 2024

1. The 509th Contracting Squadron, Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri is in the process of competitively selecting a source for a four-year and 6-month service contract for Firing Range Cleaning services. The Contractor shall provide all personnel, tools, equipment, materials, supervision, and other items and services necessary to provide uninterrupted industrial cleaning in Building 1235 in accordance with the Performance Work Statement

(PWS).

2. One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offeror’s past and present performance on contracts, which reflect the offeror’s ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from agencies such as yours, which have had firsthand experience with an offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror’s performance on those contracts.

3. Our areas of interest in the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. In order to meet acquisition milestones, we need your written response no later than solicitation due date posted on SAM.gov

4. To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out by hand and emailed to jessica.king.6@us.af.mil and morgan.mcguckin@us.af.mil

5. Please contact Jessica King at (660) 687-2911 or Morgan McGuckin at (660) 687-2489 if you have any questions. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records.

6. Your prompt attention to this questionnaire will be greatly appreciate and will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this source selection.

For Official Use Only

Past Performance Questionnaire

Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Contractor (Company/Division):

B. Contractor Cage Code:

C. Contract Number:

D. Contract Type (e.g., FFP, FPIF, CPIF, CPFF, etc.):

E. Contract Title:

F. Brief Contract Description:

G. Period of Performance:

H. Contract Dollar Value

1. Original maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

2. Current maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

3. Reasons for difference between original and current contract dollar value (if applicable):

I. Description of work performed:

J. Was this a competitively awarded contract? Yes No

K. Contractor’s Role: Prime Contractor Subcontractor Key Personnel Note: If offeror holds or has held other contracts with your agency/organization in the last five (5) years, please complete separate Past Performance Questionnaire forms for those contracts as well.

Past Performance Questionnaire

Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of work performed under this contract (i.e., local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands):

Section 3: Respondent Identification A. Respondent’s name:

B. Respondent’s title:

C. Respondent’s phone/fax number/e-mail address:

D. Length of time (number of years/months) respondent worked on subject contract and description of responsibility/position/role:

E. Other suggested points of contact:

Past Performance Questionnaire

Section 4: Performance Information In the table below, indicate your rating for the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block to the right of each question. Provide supporting information for each response in the space provided. Attach additional pages if more space is needed. The performance rating scale is defined as follows:

CODE PERFORMANCE RATING

E

G

S

M

U

N

EXCEPTIONAL - The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many (requirements) to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

GOOD- The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some (requirements) to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

SATISFACTORY – The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements.

The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or was satisfactory.

MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

NEUTRAL – Performance was not observed or not applicable to the current effort being reported against.

The Contractor: E G S M U N

1 Provided experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

2 Demonstrated the ability to hire, maintain, and replace, if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

3 Delegated authority to project managers and supervisors commensurate with contract requirements.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

4 Home office participated in solving significant local problems.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

5 Provided effective quality control and/or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

6 Corrected deficiencies in timely manner and pursuant to their quality control procedures.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

7 Provided timely resolution of contract discrepancies.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

The Contractor: E G S M U N

8 Identified problems as they occurred.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

9 Met established performance schedules.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

10 Was responsive to contract changes.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

11 Provided adequate contract supervision.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

12 Cooperated with Government personnel after award.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

13 How would you rate the contractor's overall performance on this contract?

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

The Contractor: Yes No

14 Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract?

If yes, explain.

EXPLANATION:

15 Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain.

EXPLANATION:

COMMENTS/NARRATIVE/ADDITONAL REMARKS :

Respondent’s Signature

Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

E-Mail to: jessica.king.6@us.af.mil and morgan.mcguckin@us.af.mil

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!