Past Perf Questionaire 02-0607.doc

DOC document 54 KB Posted

Attached to
(WMEC) 270 SEWAGE CONTROLLER UPGRADE DOCKSIDE REPAIRS
Solicitation number
HSCG80-12-Q-P45116
Issued by

About this file

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
Solicitation QP45116.doc DOC document
270 WMEC_Sewage controller DS_JMS_12R0.pdf 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

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE -

Project Title:

Contract No:

Performance Period:

Contract Value:

Quality of Product or Service
0
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
1.
Quality of Product or Service – please rate

Comments for Quality of Product or Service

2.
Cost Control – please rate

Comments for Cost Control

Timeliness of Performance

3.
Timeliness of Performance – please rate

Comments for Timeliness of Performance

Business Relations

4.
Business Relations – please rate

Comments for Business Relations

Subcontracts

Were Subcontractors Used? ____Yes _____No

Comments for Subcontracts

Customer Satisfaction

Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction? Yes _____No

Comments for Customer Satisfaction

Past Performance information provided by:

The ratings used on the Contractor Performance Survey shall be used to evaluate Past Performance. See the description of ratings below.

Criteria
Quality of Product or Service
Cost Control
Timeliness of Performance
Business Relations
0 = Unsatisfactory
Contractor is not in compliance and is jeopardizing achievement of contract objectives
Contractor is unable to manage costs effectively
Contractor delays are jeopardizing performance of contract
Response to inquiries, technical, service, administrative issues is not effective
1 = Poor
Major problems have been encountered
Contractor is having major difficulty in managing costs effectively
Contractor is having major difficulty meeting milestones and delivery schedule
Response to inquiries, technical, service, administrative issues is marginally effective
2 = Fair
Some problems have been encountered
Contractor is having some problems in managing costs effectively
Contractor is having some problems meeting milestones and delivery schedule
Response to inquiries, technical, service, administrative issues is somewhat effective
3 = Good
Minor inefficiencies, errors have been identified
Contractor is usually effective in managing costs effectively
Contractor is usually effective in meeting milestones and delivery schedule
Response to inquiries, technical, service, administrative issues is usually effective
4 = Excellent
Contractor is in compliance with contract requirements and or delivers quality products/service
Contractor is effective in managing costs and submits current, accurate, and completed billings
Contractor is effective in meeting milestones and delivery schedule
Response to inquiries, technical, service, administrative issues is effective
5 = Outstanding
The Contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as “Excellent”
The Contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as “Excellent”
The Contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as “Excellent”
The Contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that satisfies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as “Excellent”

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