Attachment 1 - Past Perf Questionaire SPED Heidelberg.docx
DOCX document 32 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- HE1280-11-R-0010
- Issued by
-
Department of Defense Education Activity
About this file
Attachment 1 - Past Performance Questionaire SPED Heidelberg
View the file
Other files
Show all 28
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
HE1280-11-R-0001 Attachment 1
Past Performance Questionnaire DEPARTMENT of DEFENSE DEPENDENTS SCHOOLS (DoDDS) EUROPE Heidelberg District Special Education Student Transportation Services
Instructions to Offerors: Offerors shall complete Blocks 1 through 5 below and send this Questionnaire to the corresponding references for each contract and subcontract identified in the listing submitted with the Past Performance Proposal. It is strongly recommended that offerors coordinate closely with references receiving this form, both private industry and government alike, to ensure correct and sufficient completion and submission to the offeror prior to the proposal due date. Specific instructions for submission of the completed evaluation form by the reference to the Government are provided on Page 2.
Block 1
Name of Reference (Business Name or Contracting Activity):
Block 2
Contract Number:
Block 3
Contract Type:
Block 4
Contract Period of Performance:
Block 5
Total Contract Value (including options):
Block 6
Description of Services or Supplies:
Instructions to Recipient References: References should complete Blocks 6 through 10 below and return the completed form to the attention of Gina Romano, Contract Specialist, gina.romano@eu.dodea.edu and Bernadette Honish, Contracting Officer, Bernadette.Honish@eu.dodea.edu. It is imperative that persons completing this form provide clear, concise and sufficient written narrative to adequately support the ratings they have assigned; and to submit the completed form prior to the proposal due date. If more space is needed to complete a written narrative, please attach additional pages as necessary. Definitions for the rating standards (e.g., Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, etc.) are provided on Page 4.
Block 6
Quality of Service Rating ____________________ Written Narrative to Support Rating:
Block 7
Timeliness of Performance Rating ____________________
Block 8
Cost Control Rating ____________________
Block 9
Business Relations Rating ____________________
Past Performance Rating Standards (Adjectival) Exceptional - The company has demonstrated an exceptional record of performance and has provided or continues to provide services with the highest standard of quality at very low to no risk to the Government.
Very Good - The company has demonstrated a very good record of performance and has provided or continues to provide services with a high standard of quality at low risk to the Government.
Satisfactory - The company has demonstrated a satisfactory record of performance and has provided or continues to provide services with a satisfactory standard of quality at moderate risk to the Government.
Unacceptable - The company has demonstrated an unacceptable record of performance and has provided or continues to provide services with an unacceptable standard of quality at high risk to the Government.
Neutral - The company has no record of past performance or for whom information on relevant past performance is not available.
Performance Factor Rating Definitions
| Very Low Risk |
| Essentially no doubt exists that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. |
| Low Risk |
| Little doubt exists that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. |
| Moderate Risk |
| Some doubt exists that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. |
| High Risk |
| Significant doubt exists that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. |
| Neutral |
| The Offeror has little/no relevant past performance upon which to base a meaningful performance risk prediction. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .