Section_L_Attachment_4_--_Past_Performance_Questionaire.pdf

ATTACHMENT 4

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRE

PART I. SPECIFIC PROGRAM INFORMATION (to be filled out by the contractor)

Contractor Name: ____________________________________ CAGE Code: ____________

Program Title (RFP Contract Title): ________________________________________________ Brief Description (Narrative from RFP Contract Intro): _________________________________

Role in the Program/Work Performed As: Prime Subcontractor Vendor/Supplier

Contract Number:

Contract Type(s):

PART II. GENERAL PROGRAM INFORMATION (to be filled out by the evaluator/respondent)

Instructions to Evaluator: Please assist our source selection team as we evaluate sources for our solicitation. Expand the document as needed to fit answers. Lines are a placeholder (delete as necessary).

NOTICE: WHEN COMPLETED, THIS QUESTIONNAIRE WILL BE CONSIDERED

SENSITIVE AND SHALL NOT BE RELEASED TO THE OFFEROR

Return your completed questionnaire electronically BY COB XX XXX 19 to leslie.trice@us.af.mil and cc tiffany.gardner.1@us.af.mil

If you have questions regarding this Questionnaire, please contact the Contracting Officer:

Leslie Trice Leslie.Trice@us.af.mil 801-775-6906

Evaluator Name: _______________________________________ Phone: _________________ Company: _____________________________________________E-mail:_________________

Period of Performance:

Number of Years: Basic: Option:

1. Original Schedule (assuming all options exercised): Beginning Date through

2. Current Schedule (assuming all options exercised): Beginning Date through mailto:leslie.trice@us.af.mil mailto:tiffany.gardner.1@us.af.mil mailto:Leslie.Trice@us.af.mil

3. Reason for difference (if applicable)

Contract Dollar Value:

1. Original MAX Contract $ Value (assuming all options are exercised:

2. Current MAX $ Value (assuming all options exercised):

3. Primary Causes of Changes:

PART III. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS

Please check the appropriate rating for each of the following questions (see definitions on page 5):

E = Exceptional VG = Very Good S = Satisfactory M = Marginal US = Unsatisfactory NA = Not Applicable

E VG S M US NA

1. Extent to which the Contractor’s products and/or services met the specification /performance requirements

Supporting Information:

2. Customer’s satisfaction with corrective actions on non-conforming product

3. Timely recognition and notification of administrative, engineering, production, problems affecting the program

4. Contractor performed independently without significant customer direction/oversight

5. Meet program schedules and critical milestones

6. Contractor’s ability to manufacture part(s) from non-stress relieved aluminum forging (e.g. 7050-T74 forging)

7. Contractor’s ability to design and manufacture tooling required to meet requirements

8. Contractor’s ability to interpret point-to-point loft data and 2D drawings and their approach to mitigate 2D drawing interpretation errors

9. Contractor’s ability to manage critical safety items and the associated requirements (i.e. products requiring added traceability, qualification, certification, inspection, etc)

10. Contractor’s ability to control and manage subcontractors (supply chain management)

11. Has action been initiated to cancel or terminate the contract for default? If yes, explain.

12. Have there been any disputes/claims relative to the contract? If yes, explain.

QUESTIONNAIRE RATING SYSTEM

CONTRACT PERFORMANCE

Rating Description

Exceptional

During the contract period, contractor performance outstanding, meeting all contract requirements and consistently exceeded many.

Very few, if any, minor problems encountered. Contractor took immediate and effective corrective action.

Very Good During the contract period, contractor performance very good, meeting all contract requirements and consistently exceeded some. Some minor problems encountered. Contractor took timely corrective action.

Satisfactory During the contract period, contractor performance acceptable, meeting all contract requirements. For any problems encountered, contractor took effective corrective action.

Marginal

During the contract period, contractor performance less than acceptable, not meeting some contract requirements. For problems encountered, corrective action appeared only marginally effective, not effective, or not fully implemented. Government involvement was required.

Unsatisfactory

During the contract period, contractor performance unacceptable, failing to meet most contract requirements. Serious problems encountered.

Corrective actions were either ineffective or non-existent. Extensive government oversight and involvement was required.

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRE