Sec_L _Attachment_12_-_PAST_PRESENT_PERFORMANCE_QUESTIONNAIRE-_1_Jun.pdf
PDF 73 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8629-12-R-2400
About this file
Sec L Attachment 12 - Past Present Performance Questionnaire
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) has more files on GovTribe.
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
FA8629-12-R-2400
Section L, Attachment 12
1 Jun 12
PAST/PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
When filled in, this document is source selection sensitive information IAW FAR 3.104
SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
A. Contractor:
B. Cage Code of contractor contract was awarded to:
C. Contract number (and contract name if applicable):
D. Contract type:
E. Was this a competitive contract? Yes _____ No _____
F. Period of performance:
G. Initial contract cost: $
H. Current/final contract cost: $
I. Was a CPAR or other official evaluation completed?
J. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs:
K. Description of product or service provided:
SECTION 2: CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION
A. Customer or agency name:
B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):
C. Geographic description of product or services under this contract, i.e. local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands:
1 Jun 12
SECTION 3: EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION
A. Evaluator's name:
B. Evaluator's title:
C. Evaluator's phone/fax number:
D. Number of year’s evaluator worked on subject contract:
SECTION 4: EVALUATION
Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:
CODE PERFORMANCE LEVEL
B BLUE/EXCEPTIONAL - During the contract period, contractor performance is meeting (or met) all contract requirements and consistently exceeding (or exceeded) many. Very few, if any, minor problems encountered. Contractor took immediate and effective corrective action.
P PURPLE/VERY GOOD- During the contract period, contractor is meeting (or met) all contract requirements and consistently exceeding (or exceeded) some.
Some minor problems encountered. Contractor took timely corrective action.
G GREEN/SATISFACTORY – During the contract period, contractor performance is meeting (or met) all contract requirements. For any problems encountered, contractor took effective corrective action.
Y YELLOW/MARGINAL – During the contract period, contractor performance is not meeting (or did not meet) some contract requirements. For problems encountered, corrective action appeared only marginally effective, not effective, or not fully implemented. Customer involvement was required.
R RED/UNSATISFACTORY – During the contract period, contractor performance is failing (or fail) to meet most contract requirements. Serious problems encountered Corrective actions were either ineffective or non-existent. Extensive Customer oversight and involvement was required.
N NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect. Do not know.
1 Jun 12
SYSTEMS INTEGRATION B P G Y R N
How well did the offeror integrate defense, survivability, force protection, or communication subsystems?
How well did the offeror perform software development for defense, survivability, force protection, and communication subsystems?
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING / PROGRAM
MANAGEMENT
B P G Y R N
How well did the offeror meet contractual requirements for the execution of program schedule?
How well did the offeror meet contractual requirements for system reliability?
How well did the offeror meet small business goals?
TRAINING SYSTEMS B P G Y R N
How well did the offeror maintain concurrency of a training system with its aircraft?
How well did the offeror develop a Weapon System Trainer with full preservation of visual and motion fidelity and crew resource management?
PRODUCT SUPPORT B P G Y R N
How well did the offeror provide logistic support (ICP, CLS, ICS, Provisioning) for fielded systems?
GENERAL
How would you describe the contractor’s overall performance?
Would you award similar contracts to this contractor?
Did the system delivered or services provided meet all security requirements and minimum specification requirements?
Please discuss each and every response for which you indicated Blue/Exceptional, Purple/Very Good, Yellow/Marginal, or Red/Unsatisfactory in response to the questions above (use additional sheets, if necessary).
1 Jun 12
SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY
What were the contractor’s greatest strengths in the performance of the contract?
What were the contractor’s greatest weaknesses in the performance of the contract?
Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?
Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.
Evaluator’s Signature Date
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
Please return this completed questionnaire to:
E-mail:
ATTN: LISA MEYER (CRH SOURCE SELECTION)
E-Mail: CRHPastPerformance@wpafb.af.mil
In the subject block of the e-mail, please include:
“Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104”
OR
Mail: CRH Contracting Officer
ATTN: LISA MEYER (CRH SOURCE SELECTION)
Building 570, Room 101 1755 Eleventh Street Wright Patterson AFB OH 45433-7404
If mailing, the outside envelope must be marked as follows:
NOTE: TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .