06.2.2b Exhibit 2b A-E Survey Rating Guideline.doc

Exhibit 2b Past Performance Survey A-E & Design Team Rating Guidelines

The contractor listed above is being considered in a Source Selection by the U.S. General Services Administration, Northwest/Artic Region. Auburn, WA. It would be appreciated if you would provide us with comments regarding the contractor’s past performance. Your comments are considered Source Selection Sensitive; therefore, you are advised that the Federal Acquisition Regulation (3.104-5) prohibits the release of the names of individuals providing reference information about an offeror’s past performance. In order to maintain the integrity of the source selection process, respectfully request that you do not divulge the name of the contractor nor discuss your comments on this questionnaire with any other individuals.

Handwritten completion of this questionnaire in ink is acceptable, if legible.

Please include evaluation of contractor’s performance based solely on the performance for which the contractor was/is liable. Please do not let factors beyond the control of the contractor that have resulted in performance delays or other problems bias the evaluation of the contractor’s performance.

Unsatisfactory: Performance does not meet contract requirements. Completion did not occur in a timely or cost effective manner. The evaluated performance element contains a serious problem(s) for which corrective actions were unacceptable or non-responsive.

Poor: Performance marginally meets contract requirements. The evaluation performance element has problems for which proposed or completed corrective actions were marginally satisfactory.

Good: Performance meets contract requirements. The evaluated performance element was accomplished with problems for which proposed or completed corrective actions were satisfactory.

Excellent: Performance meets contract requirements. There were no substantive issues. All corrective actions were completed in a timely and effective manner.

Outstanding: Performance exceeds some contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. Examples include design/construction phase services: completed under budget; ahead of schedule; exceptional security management; quality, completeness and coordination exceeded contract requirements; and exceptional project and design team management. (Note: Rating only given when contractor clearly exceeds “EXCELLENT’ performance level.