Attachment_L-2,_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

PDF 69 KB Posted

Attached to
Wind Tunnel Compressor Rotor Blades
Solicitation number
FA9101-17-R-1000
Issued by

About this file

Atch L-2 - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
FA9101-17-R-1000_award_notice_amendment.pdf PDF
Answers_to_Industry_Questions_16_May_2017.pdf PDF
Atch_L-3,_PPQ_Cover_Letter_-_revised.pdf PDF
Amendment_0003.pdf PDF
Amendment_0002_-_FBO.pdf PDF
Attachment_3_-_Revised_Section_L.pdf PDF
Industry_Day_2_Slides_-_scan.pdf PDF
Current_Spacer_Seal_Configuration.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Industry_Day_2_Attendees.pdf PDF
CFD_Condition_Chart_Blade_RFP.pdf PDF
Amendment_0001.pdf PDF
AEDC_Blade_Load_Test_Rig.pdf PDF
Revised_Atch_1_16T_C1_Compressor_Blades_SOW.pdf PDF
Slides_Industry_Day_12_April_17_-_FBO.pdf PDF
Revised_Atch_2_16T_C1_Compressor_Blades_Equipment_Specification.pdf PDF
Amendment_0001_Answers_to_Industry_Questions.pdf PDF
Attachment_L-6,__Relevancy_Matrix.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_L-7,_Cross_Reference_Matrix.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_L-8,_Cross_Reference_Matrix_for_Phase_2.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
AEDC_Map.pdf PDF
Industry_Day_12_April_17_Agenda.pdf PDF
Flying_into_Nashville_and_Driving_to_AEDC.pdf PDF
Map_to_GLC.pdf PDF
SKRO6199.pdf PDF
Attachment_L-8,_Cross_Reference_Matrix_for_Phase_2.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
run01_r1_pressure.csv CSV file
run02_r3_pressure.csv CSV file
Attachment_1_-_14424-17-004_16T_C1_Compressor_Blades_SOW.pdf PDF
run06_r1_pressure.csv CSV file
run01_r2_pressure.csv CSV file
run04_r2_pressure.csv CSV file
run02_r2_pressure.csv CSV file
run03_r3_pressure.csv CSV file
run03_r1_pressure.csv CSV file
FA9101-17-R-1000.pdf PDF
Attachment_3_-_Section_L.pdf PDF
run06_r3_pressure.csv CSV file
Attachment_4_-_Section_L_Phase_2.pdf PDF
Attachment_L-4,_Client_Authorization_Letter.pdf PDF
run07_r2_pressure.csv CSV file
Attachment_5__-_Section_M.pdf PDF
run02_r1_pressure.csv CSV file
run01_r3_pressure.csv CSV file
Attachment_L-7,_Cross_Reference_Matrix.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_L-6,__Relevancy_Matrix.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_L-3,_PPQ_Cover_Letter.pdf PDF
run04_r1_pressure.csv CSV file
run05_r2_pressure.csv CSV file
run06_r2_pressure.csv CSV file
Attachment_6__-_Section_M_Phase_2.pdf PDF
Show 40 more

Latest 50 of 116 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.

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

Compressor Rotor Blades

FA9101-17-R-1000

Attachment 3

ATTACHMENT L-2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ)

WHEN FILLED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION IAW FAR 2.101 & 3.104

I. CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION : Please correct any information below known to be inaccurate :

A. Contractor (Company / Division):

B. Point of Contact (Program Manager and Contracting Officer):

C. Telephone Number:

D. Cage Code: ________________

E. Contract Number:

F. Dollar Amount:

G. Contract Type (e.g., FFP, FPIF, CPIF, CPFF, CPAF):

H. Contract Period of Performance:

I. Program Title:

J. Brief Program Description:

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

L. Contractor Performed as the Prime Contractor Joint Venture Partner Subcontractor (If Joint Venture Partner, specifically identify the managing partner and other partners; if Subcontractor, identify Prime Contractor).

II. RESPONDENT(S) TO QUESTIONNAIRE

A. Name(s):

B. Address:

Atch 3.2

C. Phone Number(s):

D. Fax Number:

E. Email Address:

F. Position (e.g., Program Manager, PCO / ACO):

G. Other suggested points of contact:

III. GENERAL COMMENTS

IV. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Please indicate your performance rating for the Contractor’s by placing an “X” over the appropriate code using the performance evaluation scale below. Ratings are defined as follows:

CODE PERFORMANCE RATING

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/A WHITE / NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect. Do not know.

Respondents should explain their rating in the remarks section for any rating of Yellow or Red and ratings that might contradict official Past Performance documentation (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs)). If more space is needed, remarks may be continued on separate pages. Please identify question number.

A. TECHNICAL AND COST / PRICE FACTORS – Please rate the Contractor’s performance for the following:

1. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS B P G Y R N/A

A) How well did the contractor provide a methodology that demonstrated design requirements

B) How well did the contractor provide a methodology that demonstrated analysis requirements

C) How well did the contractor ensure sufficient technical resources and facilities were available to design and analyze the product to meet SOW requirements

2. TESTING APPROACH: B P G Y R N/A

A) How well did the Contractor’s understand testing capabilities required to ensure the product met design requirements in the SOW

B) How well did the Contractor provide a methodology to analyze test results

3. MANUFACTURING CAPABILITY: B P G Y R N/A

A) Contractor provided a manufacturing concept for the product that demonstrated their manufacturing capabilities

B) How well did the contractor procure required materials to manufacture product

C) How well did the contractor’s manufactured product meet statement of work (SOW) requirements

D) Contractor provided on-time deliverables as required

E) Contractor provided quality deliverables as required

4. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT B P G Y R N/A

A) Contractor met critical milestones and accelerated work as necessary to minimize impact to operations

B) How well did the Contractor provide effective configuration control to meet SOW requirements

C) How well did the Contractor provide effective quality control to meet SOW requirements

D) How well did the contractor adequately identify risks and proposed risk mitigations

E) Contractor was reasonable and cooperated to resolve problems, ensuring compliance with contract requirements

F) Contractor identified problems as they occurred; suggested approaches to the problems, and displayed initiative to solve problems

C) Contractor was able to respond to accelerations and / or compressions in schedule based on unforeseen changes in customer requirements

D) Contractor effectively managed and coordinated their work

G) Contractor quickly reported schedule, design, and other changes as necessary to ensure successful contract performance

5. CHANGE / COST CONTROL B P G Y R N/A

A) Contractor responsive to contract changes and provided accurate, reasonable, and supportable cost proposals

B) Contractor demonstrated the ability to control costs and / or modifications

C) Contractor validated subcontractor cost proposals prior to submission to the Government

1. During execution of this project, did you encounter any design deficiencies or oversights? If so, were you satisfied with the Contractor’s resolution?

2. Please provide the following information regarding price:

(1) Original Contract Price $_____________________

(2) Value of Negotiated Contract Changes $_____________________

B. NARRATIVE SUMMARY

1. Please discuss each and every response for which you indicated Y / M (Yellow / Marginal) or R / U (Red / Unsatisfactory) in response to the questions above (use additional sheets, if necessary).

2. What were the contractor’s greatest strengths in the performance of the contract?

3. What were the contractor’s greatest weaknesses in the performance of the contract?

C. GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS ONLY:

1. Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract?

Yes ______ No ______

If yes, please provide explanation___________________________________________________

2. Was this contract partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations?

Yes_____ Default_____ Convenience_______ Pending Termination______

No_____

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules).

D. GENERAL COMMENT (Choose one of the following and explain your choice in the remarks)

Given what I know today about the Contractor’s ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I definitely would_____ probably would _____ might or might not _____ probably would not _____ definitely would not _____ award to him today given that I had a choice.

REMARKS:

Evaluator’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please email this completed questionnaire to: vincent.pitts@us.af.mil

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