Attachment Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 90 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- HQ003423R0049
- Issued by
-
DOD Washington Headquarters Service
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a contractor proposing to provide preventive maintenance and repairs of emergency vehicles for the Washington Headquarters Services Acquisition Directorate. The solicitation seeks automotive repair services including preventive maintenance, Department of Transportation inspections, and repairs for emergency vehicles at a government facility located in Adams County, Pennsylvania. Responses to the past performance questionnaire are due by December 30, 2022 and should be emailed to the contracting points of contact listed within. The questionnaire includes ratings for various performance metrics such as adherence to delivery schedules, accuracy of reports, problem solving ability, and overall contract performance. Definitions of the performance ratings are also provided.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing Spreadsheet Fleet Maintenance Amnd 0001.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| HQ003423R0049 Amendment 0001.pdf | ||
| Pricing Spreadsheet HQ003423R0049.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| HQ003423R0049 Fleet Mgt PM Srv.pdf | ||
| Non-Disclosure Agreement HQ003423R0049.docx | DOCX document |
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
Instructions:
The company that has provided this form to you is proposing to submit an offer to a Washington Headquarters Services, Acquisition Directorate (WHS/AD) solicitation to provide preventive maintenance and repairs of emergency vehicles.
Past Performance is an extremely important part of the evaluation criteria for this acquisition; therefore, your input is extremely important. The questionnaire should be filled out and emailed to the contracting staff indicated below before December 30, 2022 at:
• Ms. Safiyyah Vasquez | safiyyah.i.vasquez.civ@mail.mil
• Ms. Allison J. Polizzi | allison.j.polizzi.civ@mail.mil
This information will not be disclosed to the offeror (the company). However, a portion may be used for clarifications. If you have any questions, please email the contracting staff.
Offeror’s Company Name & CAGE Code or DUNS:
Contract Number:
Period of Performance:
| Contract Value: |
| Complexity: |
| Contract Role (Prime, Subktr, Team Mmbr): |
| Program Name: |
Description of the Work Performed Under the Contract (Please be specific about tasks performed.)
Past Performance Questionnaire 2023
Performance Survey:
| No. | ||
| Performance Questions | ||
| E=Excellent | G=Good | |
| S=Satisfactory | M=Marginal |
U=Unacceptable N/A= Not Applicable
| Ratings (Mark an “X” in the appropriate selection) |
| E |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
| 1. |
| To what extent did the contractor adhere to contract delivery schedules? |
| 2. |
| To what extent were the contractor's reports and documentation accurate and complete? |
| 3. |
| To what extent was the contractor able to solve contract performance problems without extensive guidance from government counterparts? |
| 4.a. |
| To what extent did the contractor display initiative in meeting requirements? |
| 4.b. |
| Contractor’s ownership of problems and actively working to resolve them? |
| 5. |
| Did contractor commit adequate resources, in a timely fashion, to the contract to meet the requirements and to successfully solve problems? |
| 6. |
| How easy was the contractor’s ordering website to use? |
| 7. |
| Communicating schedules, delays, and expectations and interfacing with Government employees? |
| 8. |
| Overall Responsiveness to Government requests? |
| 9. |
| Overall Contract Performance Rating? |
Additional Rater Comments About Contract Performance
Please list any other areas of concern or issues with the contractor.
Definitions:
Excellent: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Customer's benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
Good: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the customer's benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
Satisfactory: Performance meets contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
Marginal: Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified or taken satisfactory corrective action.
Unsatisfactory: Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery did not occur or is not likely to occur in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective action appear or were ineffective.
Not applicable: Does not apply to the acquisition.
Rater Information
| Name |
| Title |
| Agency/Company |
| Phone: |
| Email: |
Signature (Digital or Ink)
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .