Attachment_1_-_PBS_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.docx

DOCX document 24 KB Posted

Attached to
General Construction Services for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) - Phase 2 Mobility Design Lab Project
Solicitation number
GS-11P-15-YM-C-0030
Issued by

About this file

Attachment 1 - Past Performance Questionnaire

View the file

Other files

Show all 17

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

ATTACHMENT 1: FIRM’S PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Your assistance is requested in support of a source selection.

Please complete this Questionnaire and send by electronic mail to: [donna.bogle@gsa.gov] or U.S. mail to:

Denise K. Avery-Craft, Contracting Officer, GSA, NCR 7th and D Streets, SW; Room 2021 Washington, DC 20407 Desired Response Date:

April 27, 2015 Solicitation Number: GS-11P-15-YM-C-0030

When complete, the information on this form is SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION (41 U.S.C. 423) and shall be protected accordingly.

TO BE COMPLETED BY D-B CONTRACTOR OFFEROR for Potomac Annex Project for the Department of State in Washington, DC

1. CONTRACTOR’S (CM MEMBER’S) NAME & ADDRESS:

4. CONTRACT NO.:

5. CONTRACT INITIATION DATE:

6. COMPLETION DATE:

2. OWNER’S NAME AND ADDRESS

7. CONTRACT VALUE $

8. TYPE OF CONTRACT:

3. PROJECT NAME:

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/ COR/ Other) AND ORGANIZATION:

b. EVALUATOR'S PHONE NUMBER: c. MONTHS PERFORMANCE MONITORED BY EVALUATOR:

Please circle the response code for each topic that best reflects your experience with this Contractor.

EX = Exceptional VG = Very Good

S = Satisfactory MG = Marginal

US = Unsatisfactory N/O = Not Observed

A. Quality of Products and Services - Assess the Contractor’s conformance to contract requirements.

EX VG S MG US N/O

B. Overall Performance – Assess the Contractor’s overall performance as the Bridging Design Builder or Architect/Engineer (as appropriate) for the project.

EX VG S MG US N/O

C. Schedule – Assess the timeliness of the Contractor against the design or construction schedule of activities (as appropriate).

EX VG S MG US N/O

D. Technical Requirements – Assess the Contractor’s ability and capacity to fulfill the technical requirements of the contract.

EX VG S MG US N/O

E. Cost Control – Assess the Contractor’s willingness and ability to manage the contract budget and control costs.

EX VG S MG US N/O

F. Customer Satisfaction – Assess the Contractor’s responsiveness to customer concerns and “user friendliness” in ROUTINE matters.

EX VG S MG US N/O

G. Customer Satisfaction – Assess the Contractor’s responsiveness to customer concerns and “user friendliness” in UNEXPECTED DIFFICULTIES.

EX VG S MG US N/O

H. Repeat Business -- Assess the likelihood that you would want this contractor to perform another contract for you in the near future.

EX VG S MG US N/O

I. List Contractor’s Weak Points:

J. List the Contractor’s Strong Points:

K. List any other projects this contractor has completed for you:

Evaluators Please Note: Those items marked with an asterisk below are considered negative responses. To be considered satisfactory, the client must not provide a negative response.

Was the contractor the prime contractor? ________(yes) ________(no)

Quality of Services/Timeliness of Performance:

1. Was the Contractor cooperative?

Extremely cooperative( )
Satisfactorily cooperative( )
Minimally cooperative( )
Rarely cooperative( )*

2. How cooperative was the Contractor in working with other contractors to solve problems?

Extremely cooperative( )
Satisfactorily cooperative( )
Minimally cooperative( )
Rarely cooperative( )*

2. Was the Contractor a problem solver or problem generator?

Problem solver( )
Problem solver/generator( )
Problem generator( )*

3. Were the Contractor’s recommended solutions effective?

Extremely effective( )
Generally effective( )
Generally ineffective( )*
Extremely ineffective( )*

4. How would you rate the firm’s responsiveness to your basic requirements and/or minor changes in the requirements?

Always responsive( )
Usually responsive( )
Rarely responsive( )
Unresponsive( )*

5. How would you rate the firm’s responsiveness to emergency situations?

Extremely responsive( )
Responsive( )
Somewhat responsive( )
Rarely responsive( )*

6. Did you issue any poor performance or cure notices to the Contractor during the contract period?

Yes ( )* No ( )

If the answer to questions 6 is yes, could you describe the nature of the problem?

7. Did the company satisfactorily respond to the deficiencies cited?

Satisfactorily( )
Somewhat satisfactorily( )
Unsatisfactorily( )*

8. Were there any significant or recurring problems?

Yes ( )* No ( )

If the answer to question 8 is yes, could you describe

COST CONTROL:

9. Did the Contractor exhibit a propensity to submit unnecessary contract change proposals with cost or price increases?

Constant requests for changes orders/cost increases( )*
Moderate requests for cost increases via change order( )
Request increases as appropriate( )

10. To what extent did the Contractor meet proposed cost estimates?

Less than estimated cost( )
Comparatively equal to the estimated cost( )
Exceeded the estimated cost( )
Considerably surpassed the estimated cost( )*

11. To what extent were the cost estimates prepared by the contractor accurate?

Reasonably Accurate( )
Occasionally inaccurate( )
Often Inaccurate( )*

BUSINESS RELATIONS:

12. Was the Contractor responsive to the administrative issues of the contract?

Always responsive( )
Generally responsive( )
Rarely responsive( )
Unresponsive( )*

13. Did the Contractor commit adequate resources in a timely fashion to the contract to meet the minimum requirements and successfully solve any problems?

Provided adequate resources( )
Provided sufficient resources( )
Provided minimal resources( )
Provided insufficient resources( )*

14. Did the Contractor’s employees have adequate knowledge of the required software systems and general technical knowledge as required by their specific job classification?

More than adequate( )
Adequate( )
Less than adequate( )*

15. Would you contract with this firm again for the same services? Why or Why not?

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