L-1_Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 24 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Joint Terminal Control Training and Rehearsal System (JTC TRS) Program Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8621-20-R-0003-DRAFT
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a federal contract opportunity related to the Joint Terminal Control Training and Rehearsal System (JTC TRS) Program. The past performance questionnaire requests information about a contractor's performance on a prior contract, including ratings in quality of product or service, schedule, cost control, and management. The contractor must provide details to substantiate the ratings. The federal contract opportunity is for the JTC TRS Program and will procure upgradeable mission simulation systems for joint training of personnel in all services. For day-to-day operations, contractors will operate systems for training events and perform maintenance at some sites, while government personnel will conduct training and maintenance at other sites. Contractors must provide spare parts, repair support, and system updates to meet performance requirements.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 30
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
FA8621-20-R-0003
Attachment L-1
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION-SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104
ATTACHMENT L-1:
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
I. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATIVE DATA (To be completed by the Offeror) Offeror Name:
Offeror Role in Past Performance Contract:
Contract Title:
Contract Number/Task Order:
Contract Type:
Procuring Agency:
Description of Product or Service:
Period of Performance:
Dollar Value of Contract: $ Current Dollar Value of Effort: $
Administrative Place of Contract:
Cage Code:
DUNS:
Customer:
Contracting Agency:
II. POINT OF CONTACT (POC) Data (To be completed by the Offeror) Name:
Position or role:
Agency:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Other:
III. INFORMATION TO THE PPQ POC
Your assistance is requested in support of a source selection. Please complete the assessment below and send all pages of this questionnaire to: pamela.randall.1@us.af.mil by ______________2020.
Assessment: (To be completed by the PPQ POC)
Instructions to complete the assessment: Please provide responses to items 1 through 6 that are listed below. Utilizing the Rating System Table place an “X” in the rating that best assesses the offeror’s performance in the areas listed below. Then provide examples to substantiate your rating based on the ratings in the Rating System Table. For example, if you provide a rating of ‘Exceptional’, list the “many” contractual requirements that were exceeded “to the government’s benefit”.
Rating System Table:
A common five level assessment rating system is used to evaluate a contractor's performance. Ratings range from Unsatisfactory to Exceptional. Here's a breakdown of each category:
| Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government's benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government's benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
1. PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS
Please provide a short description of the effort and the offeror’s role in its performance:
2. Quality of Product or Service:
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
List the positive and negative examples that substantiate rating IAW the ratings from the Ratings System Table above:
Negative:
Positive:
3. Schedule:
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
List the positive and negative examples that substantiate rating IAW the ratings from the Ratings System Table above:
4. Cost Control:
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
List the positive and negative examples that substantiate rating IAW the ratings from the Ratings System Table above:
5. Management (Program Management, Subcontract Management, and Cooperation with Customer):
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
List the positive and negative examples that substantiate rating IAW the ratings from the Ratings System Table above:
6. Given what I know today about the contractor's ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I WOULD or WOULD NOT award to this contractor today given that I had a choice.
Signature: Date:
Electronic signatures are acceptable. An e-mail from the originator of this document will suffice. Signatures (electronic or hand written) verify that the signatory completed this form and agrees with the information.
SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION-SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION-SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .