2. Copy of 06.1.2 Exhibit 1b Past Performance Evaluation - Construction Contractor.xls

XLS spreadsheet 28 KB Posted

Attached to
Fleet Space Renovations
Solicitation number
GS-10P-10-XJ-C-0017
Issued by

About this file

From the source

Past Performance Evaluation Document

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
2008006.04-g_mod.dwg DWG drawing
General Decision Number 4-9-10.doc DOC document
GenerateSF30 Amendment 0004.pdf PDF
RESP TO Q1 - Q5.doc DOC document
200800604A4r1.pdf PDF
General Decision Number 3-19-10.doc DOC document
GenerateSF30 Amendment 0003.pdf PDF
200800604A7r1.pdf PDF
Post - columns detail.pdf PDF
SKA1.pdf PDF
GENERAL DECISION 3-12-10.doc DOC document
GenerateSF30 amendment 0002.pdf PDF
GenerateSF30 Amendment 0001.pdf PDF
1. cover sheet for solicitation with evaluation information.doc DOC document
5. 6705 Fed Bldg Hazmat Rpt Final Rev 3-09.pdf PDF
3. GenerateSF1442 and clauses.pdf PDF
7. GSA Fleet furniture cut sheet.pdf PDF
6. Fleet Furniture inventory.pdf PDF
9. Submittal List.xls XLS spreadsheet
11. DB Mod 32 02-12-10.pdf PDF
10. Submittals and RFIs.pdf PDF
8. FLEET SERVICES DRAWINGS.pdf PDF
3a. 00700.10 FAR 52.204-9 Supplement HSPD-12 Security Doc wo ARRA verbiage.doc DOC document
4. FLEET SERVICES BID SPECS PRINT DOUBLE SIDED 3-4-10.pdf PDF
Show all 24

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Sheet1

EXHIBIT 1b: PAST PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR Construction Firm
(EVALUATED BY OWNER OR OWNER REPRESENTATIVE)
Evaluating Organization or Company:
Evaluator (Name and Title):
Evaluator Phone and e-mail:
Name of Contractor Being Evaluated:
Project Title and Brief Description:
QUALITY OF PRODUCT OR SERVICE
0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; 5=OutstandingN/A012345
Thorough Understanding of Project
Quality of site investigation/analysis
Quality of programming
Incorporation of scope of work
Quality control procedures and execution
Quality of deliverables
Coordination of all documentation and among all disciplines
Quality review of contract documents (shop drawings, reports, minutes, etc)
Quality of Inspections
Constructability of contract documents
Quality of supplemental documents (i.e. ASI, RFIs, etc)
Comments for Quality of Product of Service
COST CONTROL
0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; 5=OutstandingN/A012345
Cost Estimating Services
Costs within budget (DD & CD Phases)
Accuracy of final estimate with actual bid
Comments for Cost Control
COMPLIANCE WITH PERFORMANCE SCHEDULES
0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; 5=OutstandingN/A012345
Timeliness with Performance
Responsiveness to review comments
Resolution of Delays (if applicable)
Comments for Timeliness of Performance
EFFECTIVENESS OF MANAGEMENT/BUSINESS RELATIONS
0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; 5=OutstandingN/A012345
Key personnel effectiveness
Coordination of Consultants
Interaction of Team Members (gov't, customer, tenant, consultants)
Effectiveness of the interaction with 3rd parties (i.e. tenants, city, vendors, utilities):
Coordination with external review agencies//utilities
Professional Conduct:
Comments for Effectiveness of Management/Business Relations
SECURITY
0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; 5=OutstandingN/A012345
Compliance with security classification and handling
Comments for Security
OVERALL RATING
0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; 5=OutstandingN/A012345
Overall Rating:

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