Attachment_4,_Performance_Survey.doc
DOC document 86 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Multiple Award Construction Contract Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA481419RA001
About this file
This document contains a customer evaluation questionnaire for a multiple award construction contract. The Air Force is soliciting evaluations from past customers of offerors as part of its source selection process. The questionnaire requests ratings on a scale of exceptional to unsatisfactory for offerors' performance in areas such as management, quality control, responsiveness, regulatory compliance, and overall performance. Respondents are asked to provide narrative explanations for any marginal or unsatisfactory ratings. The evaluations will be used to assess offerors' ability to successfully perform under the referenced solicitation for a multiple award construction contract issued by the 6th Contracting Squadron at MacDill Air Force Base. Responses are requested within five days.
Attachment 4 Performance Survey
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Multiple Award Construction Contract has more files on GovTribe.
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
FA4814-14-R-0008
Attachment 4 Multiple Award Construction Contract Customer Evaluations MacDill AFB, Florida
CUSTOMER EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE
Reference: FA4814-19-R-A001, Multiple Award Construction Contract When Filled In This Document Is Source Selection Sensitive Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104
CUSTOMER EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE
When Filled In This Document Is Source Selection Sensitive Information IAW FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104
FROM: 6 CONS/PKM
SUBJECT: Request for Customer Evaluation The 6th Contracting Squadron at MacDill Air Force Base (AFB), FL is in the process of selecting contractors for a Multiple Award Construction Contract. Detailed information regarding this solicitation may be found at www.fbo.gov (refer to RFP FA4814-19-R-A001).
One of the considerations in the proposal evaluation process is the verification of the offeror’s ability to perform the contract successfully. We depend on information received from agencies such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with the offeror, to help determine the offeror’s ability to perform successfully.
Our areas of interest are summarized in the attached questionnaire. Our schedule is extremely tight; therefore, your written response is requested no later than 5 working days from the receipt of this letter. The preferred method of transmission is email.
You may e-mail the completed questionnaire to MSgt Joshua Malyemezian at 6cons.lgcm@us.af.mil. If a confirmation e-mail is not received or you do not have the capability to send the documents electronically, please call MSgt Malyemezian at 813-828-1178 or DSN: 968-1178.
Do not return questionnaires to the Offeror.
Your assistance is greatly appreciated, and a prompt response will be important to the successful and timely completion of this source selection.
PATRICK L. BOYETTE
Procuring Contracting Officer Attachment:
Customer Evaluation Questionnaire
GENERAL INFORMATION: Please correct any information below known to be inaccurate:
Contractor’s Name:
Address: _____________________________________________ Telephone Number: ____________________________________ Fax Number: _________________________________________ Point of Contact: ______________________________________ Project Title or Brief Description of Work:
Contract Number: _____________________ Dollar Amount: $_________________ per _________________ Contract Period or Dates of Performance Provided by Offeror: _______________________ Contractor performed as the:
( Prime Contractor ( Sub-Contractor ( Key Personnel
A. RESPONDENT INFORMATION:
Name of Respondent: __________________________________ Title: _______________________________________________ Company Name/Address: _______________________________ Telephone Number: ____________________________________ Fax Number: _________________________________________ Email Address: ________________________________________ B. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the appropriate letter on the scale (E, G, S, M, U, and N) that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ANY RATINGS OF “M” OR “U”.
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
| EXCEPTIONAL |
| GOOD |
| SATISFACTORY |
| MARGINAL |
| UNSATISFACTORY |
| NEUTRAL |
| Performance meets / met contractual requirements with many exceeded to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with no more than a few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Performance meets / met contractual requirements with some exceeded to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with no more than some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Performance meets / met contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. |
| Performance does not / did not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element 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. |
| Performance does not / did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| Performance was not observed or not applicable to the current effort being reported against. |
CONTRACTOR’S NAME: _____________________________
CONTRACT NUMBER: _______________________________
Place an “X” in the appropriate column using the definitions matrix above.
| 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. |
| 2. |
| Provided adequate project supervision. |
| 3. |
| Demonstrated ability to hire, maintain, and replace, if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period. |
| The contractor: |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
| 4. |
| Home office participated in solving significant local problems. |
| 5. |
| Provided effective quality control and/or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements. |
| 6. |
| Corrected deficiencies in a timely manner and pursuant to their quality control procedures. |
| 7. |
| Identified problems as they occurred. |
| 8. |
| Suggested alternative approaches to problems. |
| 9. |
| Displayed initiative to solve problems. |
| 10. |
| Met established project schedules. |
| 11. |
| Was responsive to contract changes. |
| 12. |
| Complied with all federal, state and local laws and regulations to include appropriate licensing. |
| 13. |
| Complied with all USAF regulations. |
| 14. |
| Cooperated with Government personnel after award. |
| 15. |
| How would you rate the contractor's overall performance? |
| 16. |
| Did this project include work on a flight line? |
| YES / NO |
| 17. |
| Did this project include work on a military installation? |
| YES / NO |
| 18. |
| Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain outcome in “Remarks” section. |
| YES / NO |
| 19. |
| Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain in “Remarks” section. |
| YES / NO |
| 20. |
| Is the contractor rated in CPARS? |
| YES / NO |
Remarks: _______________________________________________________________
Signature of Reviewer
Date
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .