Attachment L4 - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).docx

DOCX document 39 KB Posted

Attached to
Unaccompanied Housing and Contingency Quarters Preventive Maintenance and Repair
Solicitation number
FA524022R0006
Issued by

About this file

This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a federal contract solicitation. The solicitation is seeking preventative maintenance and repair services for unaccompanied housing dormitories and contingency quarters at Andersen Air Force Base in Guam. Services include emergency, urgent, routine and preventative maintenance for five unaccompanied housing dormitories, four contingency quarters dormitories, and eighty-two contingency quarters housing units. Annual work tasks are estimated at 3,200 with 52,000 man-hours of labor, while preventative maintenance is estimated at 8,000 to 9,000 man-hours. The past performance questionnaire is being sent to previous customers and is due by May 9th, 2022. It collects information on the contractor's performance on factors such as technical performance, schedule, management and any contract terminations. The information received will be used in evaluating proposals for this solicitation.

View the file

Other files

Show all 22

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

Controlled Unclassified Information When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

Section L Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) The 36th Contracting Squadron is in the process of competitively selecting a source for services necessary to perform interior and exterior maintenance and repair services to include change of occupancy maintenance (COM) and preventive maintenance (PM) inspections for five (5) unaccompanied housing (UH) dormitories, four (4) contingency quarters (CQ) dormitories, and eighty two (82) CQ Housing units at Andersen Air Force Base Guam in accordance with (IAW) all local, territory, federal laws, regulations in a manner that shall ensure continuous and safe habitation.

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.

Our areas of interest regarding the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. In order to meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than 9 May 2022.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to lee_michael.rosario@us.af.mil and stephen.pastore@us.af.mil. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this Source Selection.

Stephen M. Pastore Contracting Officer

Attachment:

1. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Company/Division name:

B. Product/Service:

C. Contracting Agency/Customer:

D. Contract Number:

E. Contract Dollar Value:

F. Period of Performance:

G. Verified, up-to-date name, mailing and e-mail addresses, and telephone number of the contracting officer (Point-of-Contact)

H. Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

I. Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions.

J. Include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance and identify aspects (scope, magnitude of effort, and complexity) of the contracts deemed relevant and how they relate to the proposed effort.

Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of services 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 number / fax number / e-mail address:

D. Respondent’s position (e.g., Program Manager, PCO/ACO, etc.):

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

F. Other suggested points of contact:

Section 4: Performance Information

In the tables 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.

Technical Performance
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the project?

COMMENTS:

Schedule/Timeliness
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

How well did the contractor adhere to the schedule?

Management
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

How well did the contractor integrate and coordinate activities to execute the project?

Government Contracts Only: Was this contract partially or completely terminated for default or convenience, or are there any pending terminations?

☐ Yes ☐ Default ☐ Convenience ☐ Pending Terminations ☐ No

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules).

SECTION 5: GENERAL COMMENT

Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what they promised in their proposal, I [ click and select an item ] award to them today given that I had a choice.

REMARKS:

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return to: lee_michael.rosario@us.af.mil / stephen.pastore@us.af.mil Controlled Unclassified Information Page 1 of 4

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