Attachment14-PPSurvey.doc
DOC document 101 KB Posted
- Attached to
- DeCA Broadband/VSAT
- Solicitation number
- HC1013-08-R-2004
- Issued by
-
Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
Attachment 14-Past Performance Survey
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 54 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
SOLICITATION NO. HC1013-08-T-0001
DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY
DEFENSE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CONTRACTING ORGANIZATION
2300 EAST DRIVE
SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE, ILLINOIS 62225-5406
FROM:
DISA/DITCO-SCOTT
2300 East Drive
Scott AFB IL 62225-5406
SUBJECT: Past Performance Survey for Request for Quote HC1013-08-T-0001
The Defense Information Technology Contracting Organization (DITCO) is in the process of selecting a contractor to provide a turn-key commercial Managed Broadband/Very Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT) network for the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA). The successful contractor will provide DeCA a network that augments the existing terrestrial network and provides data communications to commissaries worldwide.
One of the significant considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offeror’s past performance on contracts, which reflect the offeror’s ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from sources such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with an offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror's performance on those contracts. If information on this particular contractor has been entered into the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), please annotate that on the front of the survey in the appropriate block. We will use this information, as well as the specific information obtained from this survey, to complete our analysis of an offeror’s past performance.
Our areas of interest in the offeror are summarized in the enclosed survey. In order to maintain our schedule we will need your written response no later than 24 Mar 08. This schedule will allow us sufficient time to analyze the data prior to the start of negotiations.
To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the survey may be typed or handwritten and faxed to 618-229-9508 (DSN 779-9508), Attention: Brenda Leonard, or emailed to brenda.leonard@disa.mil . Please call my office at 618-229-9667 prior to transmission or if you have any questions. Your completed survey will become a part of the official records.
Your help is greatly appreciated and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this award.
STEPHEN SPRENGER
Contracting Officer
Attachment:
Survey Attachment 14
PAST PERFORMANCE SURVEY
When Filled In This Document Is Source Selection Sensitive
Information IAW FAR 3.104 & 2.101
A. GENERAL INFORMATION (to be completed by offeror) Contractor’s Name:
Address:
Telephone Number:
Point of Contact:
Project Title and Brief but Detailed Description of Work (including workload estimates):
Contract Number Provided by Offeror:
Dollar Amount: $
Contract Period or Dates of Performance Provided by Offeror:
Contractor Performed as the ( Prime Contractor ( Sub-Contractor B. RESPONDENT INFORMATION (to be completed by respondent)
Name of Respondent:
Title:_______________________________
Address:
Telephone Number:
Fax Number:___________________________ Email Address:
Note: If any of the information in Section A is incorrect, please make necessary changes. Also, if offeror holds or has held other relevant contracts with your agency/organization in the last 3 years, please complete separate evaluation forms for those contracts as well.
C. FAX OR E-MAIL COMPLETED SURVEY FORM TO:
Brenda Leonard- Fax (618) 229-9508 or DSN 779-9508 or E-mail brenda.leonard@disa.mil Is information on this contract contained in the Contractor Performance Reporting System (CPARS)?
Yes
No
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
D. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the number on the scale of 1 to 5 or N/A, that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ALL RATINGS.
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| No Confidence |
| Little Confidence |
| Satisfactory |
Confidence
| Significant Confidence |
| High Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence |
| Performance did not meet most contractual requirements. There were serious problems and the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective. |
| Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. There were problems, some of a serious nature, for which corrective action was only marginally effective. |
| Performance met contract requirements. There were some minor problems and corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. |
| Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded some to the customer’s benefit. There were a few minor problems which the contractor resolved in a timely, effective manner. |
| Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded many to the customer’s benefit. Problems, if any, were negligible and were resolved in a timely, highly effective manner. |
| No record of past performance or the record is inconclusive |
| 1 |
| Quality of Product/Service |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 2 |
| Integrated product with existing systems |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 3 |
| Business relations |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 4 |
| Responsiveness to performance problems |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 5 |
| Satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 6 |
| Response to technical direction |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 7 |
| Schedule/Ability to comply with proposed delivery schedule |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 8 |
| Timeliness of Performance |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 9 |
| Management of Key Personnel |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 10 |
| Effectiveness of Management |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 11 |
| Customer satisfaction |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 12 |
| Initiative in meeting requirements |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 13 |
| Overall Performance |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 14 |
| Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain outcome below. |
| Yes |
| No |
| 15 |
| Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain below. |
| Yes |
| No |
REMARKS: PLEASE PROVIDE A PARAGRAPH SUPPORTING YOUR ABOVE RATINGS. EXPLAIN THE CONTRACTOR’S GREATEST STRENGTHS AND/OR WEAKNESSES AND YOUR RATIONALE FOR WHY YOU WOULD OR WOULD NOT AWARD A FUTURE CONTRACT TO THEM.
Evaluator’s Signature
Date
Attachment 14
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .