7_Past Performance Reference Sheet.docx

DOCX document 42 KB Posted

Attached to
DSN/CSN Demo Dorm 631 Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
FA4626-25-R-0001
Issued by
Department of the Air Force Global Strike Command

About this file

This is a Past Performance Reference Sheet template (Attachment 7) for solicitation FA4626-25-R-0001, which offerors must complete as part of Volume III - Past Performance submissions due by January 23, 2025 at 2:00 p.m. MST. The template allows contractors to submit up to five recent (within last 5 years) and relevant (identical scope and valued at ≥$250,000) past performance references.

The form includes two main sections: basic contract information (contract number, dates, value, customer details, role) and a detailed performance evaluation table with 22 rated criteria using a scale from Exceptional to Unsatisfactory. Key evaluation areas include technical/management capabilities, quality control, problem resolution, schedule adherence, and small business goals. The template also includes yes/no questions about cure notices and willingness to award future contracts. This is a standard evaluation form template that does not contain any specific details about completed work.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to DSN/CSN Demo Dorm 631, newest first.
File Type Posted
Solicitation Amendment - FA462625R00010005.pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment FA462625R00010005 SF 30.pdf PDF
3_1991 Concrete Duct Bank.pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment - FA462625R00010004.pdf PDF
3_2009 Peaked Roof Plan.pdf PDF
10_Dorm 631 Photos.pdf PDF
9_QA Demo Dorm 631 (Revised 15Jan25).pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment FA462625R00010004 SF 30.pdf PDF
8_WD MT20250066 (03Jan25).pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment FA462625R00010003 SF 30.pdf PDF
9_QA Demo Dorm 631 (14Jan25).pdf PDF
6_Sections L and M (Revised 14Jan25).pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment - FA462625R00010003.pdf PDF
2_Design Build SOW (Revised 14Jan25).pdf PDF
7_Past Performance Reference Sheet (Revised 14Jan25).docx DOCX document
Solicitation Amendment - FA462625R00010002.pdf PDF
2_Design Build SOW (Revised 19Dec24).pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment FA462625R00010002 SF 30.pdf PDF
3_Bldg 631 Utility Site Plan (Revised 19Dec24).pdf PDF
3_Bldg 631 Site Plan Map (Revised 19Dec24).pdf PDF
Site Visit Sign in_18Dec24.pdf PDF
9_QA Demo Dorm 631 (17Dec24).pdf PDF
9_QA Demo Dorm 631 (12Dec24).pdf PDF
9_QA Demo Dorm 631 (09Dec24).pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment - FA462625R00010001.pdf PDF
Solicitation Amendment FA462625R00010001 SF 30.pdf PDF
7_Past Performance Reference Sheet (Revised 09Dec24).docx DOCX document
9_QA Demo Dorm 631.pdf PDF
9_QA Demo Dorm 631.pdf PDF
6_Sections L and M (Revised 02Dec24).pdf PDF
Newest CEAL CES 21 Oct 2024.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
3_1975 Plans.pdf PDF
8_WD MT20240066 (01Nov24).pdf PDF
Solicitation - FA462625R0001.pdf PDF
2_Design Build SOW.pdf PDF
1_Combined Specifications.docx DOCX document
7_Past Performance Reference Sheet.docx DOCX document
4_Submittal Schedule.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
3_2005 Plans.pdf PDF
3_Bldg 631 Site Plan Map.pdf PDF
3_Bldg 631 Utility Site Plan.pdf PDF
5_ACM LBP Reports.pdf PDF
3_1996 Reno As Builts.pdf PDF
6_Sections L and M.pdf PDF
Show all 44

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

Attachment 7 Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) FA4626-25-R-0001 When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

Past Performance Reference Sheet In accordance with (IAW) paragraph 5 of Section L of this solicitation, please provide up to five (5) recent and relevant past performance references. As a reminder, “recent” is defined as “completed or ongoing projects within the last five (5) years from the date of the release of this solicitation”, and “relevant” is defined as “a project with a scope identical to the requirements of the solicitation and valued greater than or equal to $250,000.00.” Include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance.

One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offerors past performance on contracts or other work efforts, which reflect the offeror's ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from organizations such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with the offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror's performance on those contracts or work efforts.

Past performance references must be provided within Volume III – Past Performance of your company’s proposal, which is to be submitted and received no later than 23 January 2025 at 2:00 p.m. Mountain Standard Time (MST).

Section 1: Past Performance Reference:

a. Contract/Task Order Number:

b. Dates of Performance:

c. Contract Dollar Value

d. Name of Customer.

e. Name and contact information of customer POC.

f. Was this a competitively awarded contract? ☐ Yes ☐ No

g. Contractor’s Role: ☐ Prime Contractor ☐ Subcontractor ☐ Key Personnel

h. All subcontractors, teaming arrangements, and/or joint venture partners.

i. Description of work performed:

Section 2: 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 EXCEPTIONAL – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

V VERY GOOD – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

S SATISFACTORY – Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

M MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed 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.

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

N/A NOT APPLICABLE – Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect, performance was not observed, or information was not available. Do not know.

Note: The following are SAMPLE questions. Past Performance evaluation teams MUST construct a simple and concise Past Performance Questionnaire, tailored to seek out key information tied to the significant aspects of the planned acquisition. Avoid questions that can be answered with a “yes” or “no” but instead include probing and direct questions to draw out the required information desired.

E
V
S
M
U
N/A

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.

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

4. Home office participated in solving significant local problems.

5. Followed approved quality control plan.

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

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

8. Provided timely resolution of contract discrepancies.

9. Identified problems as they occurred.

10. Suggested alternative approaches to problems.

11. Displayed initiative to solve problems.

12. Developed realistic progress schedules.

13. Met established project schedules.

14. Provided timely resolution of warranty defects.

15. Was responsive to contract changes.

16. Provided adequate project supervision.

17. Obtained consent of surety for increases in bonding as work-in-progress increased.

18. Paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner.

19. Provided accurate and complete line item cost proposals including all aspects of work required for each task.

20. Cooperated with Government personnel after award.

21. Met or exceeded small business and small disadvantaged business goals set forth in the approved subcontracting plan.

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

23. Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain.

EXPLANATION:

☐ Yes ☐ No

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

EXPLANATION:

☐ Yes ☐ No

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Page 2 of 7

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .