Attachment_4_-_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.doc
DOC document 41 KB Posted
- Attached to
- USCG Ship Breaking in Ketchikan, Alaska
- Solicitation number
- HSCG23-17-Q-PA4038
About this file
Attachment 4 - Past Performance Questionnaire
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment_2_-_110_Ship_Breaking_in_Ketchikan.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_3_-_Solicitation_Provisions_&_Clauses.pdf | ||
| Attachment_1_-_110_Foot_Ship_Breaking_in_Ketchikan.pdf |
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
RFQ HSCG23-17-Q-PA4038
ATTACHMENT 3
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
| 1. Contractor Name: |
| 2. Contract Number: |
3. Contract Type: ___Firm Fixed Price
___Cost Reimbursement
___ Other (Please Specify)
4. Agency Name:
5. Agency POC:
Phone:
Email:
6. Place of Contract Performance:
7. Period of Performance:
8. Dollar Amount of Award:
Total Dollar Value with Mods:
9. Title of Contract:
10. Description of Contract Service:
11. Complexity of Work: Difficult: ____________ Routine: ____________
NOTE: Please use adjectival ratings from attached sheet.
| 12. Evaluation Factor |
| 13. Comments (Attach additional sheets, if necessary.) |
| 14. Rating |
a. Quality of Work
b. Personnel
c. Subcontractor Mgmt
d. Business Relations
e. Timeliness of Performance
f. Customer Satisfaction
g. Cost/Budget Control
15. Would you select this firm again? Please explain. (Attach additional sheet if necessary.)
| 16. Name & Date: |
| 17. Title: |
PAST PERFORMANCE RATING GUIDELINES
Summarize Contractor Performance in each of the rating areas. Assign each area a rating of Unsatisfactory, Poor, Fair, Good, Excellent. Use the following instructions as guidance in making these evaluations. Note: There is no corresponding guidance for “Customer Satisfaction”. Please use the comments area on the preceding form to justify the rating given “Customer Satisfaction.”
| Ratings |
| Quality of Work/ |
Personnel -Compliance w/contract requirements
-Accuracy of reports
-Appropriateness of personnel
-Technical excellence
Cost/Budget Control
-Within budget
-Current, accurate, complete billings
-Relationship of negotiated costs to actual
-Cost efficiencies
-Change orders issued Timeliness of
Performance
-Met interim milestones
-Reliable
-Responsive to technical direction
-Completed on time Business Relations/Sub Contractor Mgmt -Effective Mgmt
-Businesslike correspondence
-Responsive to contract requirements -Prompt notification of problems
-Reasonable/ cooperative
-Flexible
-Pro-active
-Effective SB/SDB
Subcontract Program
| Unsatisfactory |
| Nonconformances |
are comprising the achievement of contract requirements
| Cost issues are comprising performance |
| Delays are compromising achievement of contract requirements |
| Response is not effective |
| Poor |
| Nonconformances |
require major agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements
| Cost issues require major agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements |
| Delays require major agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements |
| Response is marginally effective |
| Fair |
| Nonconformances require minor agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements |
| Cost issues require minor agency resources to ensure |
achievement of contract requirements
| Delays require minor agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements |
| Response is somewhat effective |
| Good |
| Nonconformances |
do not impact achievement of contract requirements Cost issues do not impact achievement of contract requirements
| Delays do not impact achievement of contract requirements |
| Response is usually effective |
| Excellent |
| There are no quality problems |
| There are no cost issues |
| There are no delays |
| Response is effective |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .