EMC KEY PERSONNEL PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE.docx

KEY PERSONNEL PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

TO BE COMPLETED BY FIRM OFFEROR for the EISENHOWER MEMORIAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT

1. INDIVIDUAL’S NAME AND FIRM (EMPLOYER) NAME:

4. CONTRACT NO. (if applicable):

5. CONTRACT START DATE / COMPLETION DATE:

6. CONTRACT VALUE AT AWARD / FINAL VALUE:

2. CLIENT’S NAME AND ADDRESS:

7. TYPE OF CONTRACT:

8. PROJECT DELIVERY METHOD:

3. PROJECT NAME / LOCATION:

9. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT’S KEY CHARACTERISTICS:

Please add a continuation page if additional space is necessary.

TO BE COMPLETED BY EVALUATING ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVE (REFERENCE)

10. EVALUATION: a. EVALUATOR'S NAME, POSITION DURING PROJECT EXECUTION ( Project Manager/ Other) AND ORGANIZATION:

b. EVALUATOR'S PHONE NUMBER: c. EVALUATOR’S FAX NUMBER:

d. EVALUATOR'S E-MAIL ADDRESS: e. MONTHS PERFORMANCE MONITORED BY EVALUATOR:

Did the construction project have any of the following characteristics?

The project was for new construction, which included foundation excavation and underground utility construction.

The project site was in a congested city-center location with limitations on site access and deliveries, had restricted staging of materials, and required maintaining pedestrian and traffic flow around the site.

The project included the installation of artwork and major decorative stonework (not including pavers), the cost of which was at least $5 million.

The scope of the artwork and major decorative stonework was included within the General Contractor’s contract and not procured and installed under separate contract by others not under the General Contractor’s control.

The project scope included components/finishes requiring coordination of multiple highly-skilled crafts and trades, such as stone masons, stone carvers, decorative ironworkers, artisans, or sculptors.

The project was constructed to meet or exceed a high standard of quality and reflects that goal.

The project included extensive landscape and hardscape construction, such as a park, plaza, or public square, covering at least two (2) acres.

The project included the planting of mature specimen trees with a caliper size greater than ten inches (10”).

Questions:

Experience:

1. How long was this individual involved with this project?

2. What were his/her duties on this project?

3. Did this individual demonstrate adequate knowledge and expertise for this project?

4. Was this person responsive to your requirements? How proactive was this individual in the management of the project?

5. Describe the degree of difficulty or complicated aspects of the project and the person’s performance with difficult and complicated aspects of the project.

6. Were there any notable problems with this person’s performance?

7. Would you want to work with this person again? Why or why not?

8. Using the following scale, please rate the individual’s overall performance:

SCALE:

EX- Excellent: Exceeded all requirements - The person significantly exceeded, in all aspects, the requirements in the contract; entirely favorable and represents a low risk.

VG- Very Good: Exceeded most requirements - The person met and, in some cases, exceeded the contract requirements; more favorable than unfavorable and represents slight risk.

G- Good: Met only minimum requirements - The person met the requirements in the contract; neither favorable nor unfavorable and represents neutral risk.

M- Marginal: Failed to meet some of the requirements in the contract; more unfavorable than favorable and represents some risk.

U- Unacceptable: Failed to meet some or all of the requirements in the contract; entirely unfavorable and represents high risk.

NO- Not Observed

Attachment 2- KEY PERSONNEL PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

TO BE COMPLETED BY FIRM OFFEROR for the EISENHOWER MEMORIAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT

1. INDIVIDUAL’S NAME AND FIRM (EMPLOYER) NAME:

4. CONTRACT NO. (if applicable):

5. CONTRACT START DATE / COMPLETION DATE:

6. CONTRACT VALUE AT AWARD / FINAL VALUE:

2. CLIENT’S NAME AND ADDRESS:

7. TYPE OF CONTRACT:

8. PROJECT DELIVERY METHOD:

3. PROJECT NAME / LOCATION:

9. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT’S KEY CHARACTERISTICS:

Please add a continuation page if additional space is necessary.

TO BE COMPLETED BY EVALUATING ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVE (REFERENCE)

10. EVALUATION: a. EVALUATOR'S NAME, POSITION DURING PROJECT EXECUTION ( Project Manager/ Other) AND ORGANIZATION:

b. EVALUATOR'S PHONE NUMBER: c. EVALUATOR’S FAX NUMBER:

d. EVALUATOR'S E-MAIL ADDRESS: e. MONTHS PERFORMANCE MONITORED BY EVALUATOR:

Did the construction project have any of the following characteristics?

The project was for new construction, which included foundation excavation and underground utility construction.

The project site was in a congested city-center location with limitations on site access and deliveries, had restricted staging of materials, and required maintaining pedestrian and traffic flow around the site.

The project included the installation of artwork and major decorative stonework (not including pavers), the cost of which was at least $5 million.

The scope of the artwork and major decorative stonework was included within the General Contractor’s contract and not procured and installed under separate contract by others not under the General Contractor’s control.

The project scope included components/finishes requiring coordination of multiple highly-skilled crafts and trades, such as stone masons, stone carvers, decorative ironworkers, artisans, or sculptors.

The project was constructed to meet or exceed a high standard of quality and reflects that goal.

The project included extensive landscape and hardscape construction, such as a park, plaza, or public square, covering at least two (2) acres.

The project included the planting of mature specimen trees with a caliper size greater than ten inches (10”).

Questions:

Experience:

1. How long was this individual involved with this project?

2. What were his/her duties on this project?

9. Did this individual demonstrate adequate knowledge and expertise for this project?

10. Was this person responsive to your requirements? How proactive was this individual in the management of the project?

11. Describe the degree of difficulty or complicated aspects of the project and the person’s performance with difficult and complicated aspects of the project.

12. Were there any notable problems with this person’s performance?

13. Would you want to work with this person again? Why or why not?

14. Using the following scale, please rate the individual’s overall performance:

SCALE:

EX- Excellent: Exceeded all requirements - The person significantly exceeded, in all aspects, the requirements in the contract; entirely favorable and represents a low risk.

VG- Very Good: Exceeded most requirements - The person met and, in some cases, exceeded the contract requirements; more favorable than unfavorable and represents slight risk.

G- Good: Met only minimum requirements - The person met the requirements in the contract; neither favorable nor unfavorable and represents neutral risk.

M- Marginal: Failed to meet some of the requirements in the contract; more unfavorable than favorable and represents some risk.

U- Unacceptable: Failed to meet some or all of the requirements in the contract; entirely unfavorable and represents high risk.

NO- Not Observed

Sol. GS-11P12MKC0005, Construct Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial Page 3 of 3