Attachment 4 Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).docx
DOCX document 50 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Stillwell Fences
- Solicitation number
- FA527025R0044
About this file
The document is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for a federal contract opportunity to install new fencing at Stillwell Housing on Kadena Air Force Base in Okinawa, Japan. The 18th Contracting Squadron is seeking a stand-alone, firm-fixed price contract, with the solicitation number FA527025R0044. The government will evaluate potential contractors based on their past performance, requesting detailed feedback from previous clients on technical performance, schedule adherence, and management capabilities.
The PPQ requires respondents to complete a comprehensive evaluation form by August 8, 2025, rating the contractor's performance across several key areas using a scale from Exceptional to Unsatisfactory. The questionnaire covers contract identification, customer information, and performance metrics, with the goal of assessing the contractor's ability to successfully execute the fencing installation project. Respondents are asked to provide specific comments and ratings on technical requirements, timeliness, and overall project management, which will be used in the source selection process for this Department of the Air Force Pacific Air Forces contract.
View the file
Other files
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 18th Contracting Squadron is in the process of competitively selecting sources to install new fencing for Stillwell Housing 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 8 August 2025.
To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to tyler.sapiens@us.af.mil. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records. Please title the email: PPQ – FA527025R0044 – 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.
TYLER SAPIENS, SrA, USAF 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!
Controlled Unclassified Information Page 4 of 4
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .