10_Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).docx

DOCX document 49 KB Posted

Attached to
Repair Floor Drain Spalling, B3548 Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
FA527025R0016
Issued by
Department of the Air Force Pacific Air Forces

About this file

This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for a Design-Build contract to repair floor drain spalling at Building 3548 on Kadena Air Force Base in Okinawa, Japan. The 18th Contracting Squadron is seeking a Firm-Fixed Price contract, with the objective of evaluating potential contractors' past performance through a detailed questionnaire. The project involves repairing concrete floor drain channels, including demolishing damaged areas, replacing concrete and drain pipes, performing lead-based paint abatement, and repainting caution strips, all in compliance with U.S. and Japanese regulations. A site visit is scheduled for 16 May 2025 at 1000hrs JST, with a limit of two representatives per company, and the contract will integrate sustainable design principles according to UFC 1-200-02 guidelines.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

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

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 18th Contracting Squadron is in the process of competitively selecting sources for a Design-Build project for Repair Floor Drain Spalling Building 3548, on Kadena Air Force Base (KAFB), Okinawa Japan. The Government is seeking a Stand-Alone contract for execution, the objective is to award a Firm-Fixed Price contract.

One of the considerations in the 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. To meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than TBD.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to rosita.crawford@us.af.mil . Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records. Please title the email: PPQ – FA527025R0016 – Contractor Name 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.

ROSITA CRAWFORD

Contracting Officer

Attachments :

1. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Contractor (Company/Division):

B. Contractor Cage Code:

C. Contract Number and/or Task Order Number:

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

E. Program Title:

F. Brief Program Description:

G. Program Phase (e.g., Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD)):

H. Period of Performance

1. Original Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date __________ through __________

2. Current Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

3. Reason for difference (if applicable):

I. Contract Dollar Value

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

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

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

J. Description of work performed. *Please describe design requirements and any facets of construction associated with the project, if possible:

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

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

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: joseph.allen.52@us.af.mil & rosita.crawford@us.af.mil

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 4 of 4

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