Attachment_L-1_-_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.docx

Source Selection Information - See FAR 3.104 HTC711-13-R-R010 For Official Use Only Source Selection Sensitive When Filled In Attachment L-1

Past Performance Questionnaire

CONTAINER MANAGEMNT STREAMLINING (CMS)

USTRANSCOM

Please provide concise comments regarding your overall assessment of the offeror’s performance on the contract or workload identified below. Your ratings should include comments for any question rated higher or lower than Satisfactory. Rating definitions can be found at the end of the document. Please respond by sending the entire completed questionnaire, including these instructions, via fax or preferably e-mail to the address below.

Scott AFB, IL 62225-5357 Fax: 618-220-7918 E-mail: joepereyra@ustranscom.mil / william.fugate@ustranscom.mil Phone: 618-220-7109/7087

Request response NLT 3:00 pm (CST) 22 May 2013

NOTE for Government Points of Contact: PPIRS may be reviewed for the offerors as well as responses to this questionnaire. Although you may have filed a CPARS for the contract listed, we would appreciate your response to this questionnaire because some of the questions relate to areas not covered by CPARS.

I. WORK PERFORMED IDENTIFICATION

Contractor Name(Company/Division):

Contract Number/Type (Firm Fixed Price, Cost Plus Fixed Fee, etc):

Title of Work Performed:

Brief Description of Work Performed:

Dollar value (include per year cost and life cycle cost):

Period of Performance:

Location (countries) where service was performed under this contract: _____________________________

II. RESPONDENT(S) TO QUESTIONNAIRE

Name: ____________________________________________________________________________ Position/Title/: ______________________________________________________________________ Business Address: ___________________________________________________________________ Relation to Program: _________________________________________________________________ Phone: (DSN)__________________________(Commercial)__________________________________ FAX: (DSN) __________________________(Commercial) __________________________________

Other suggested points of contact:

Give a brief, general description of what the contractor was required to provide/deliver. Please note that if your response indicates a weakness in the contractor’s performance, a notification may be submitted to the contractor, and they may be made aware of the comment. The contractor will not be made aware of the commenter’s name or office.

REMARKS: ___________________________________________________________________________

III. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

NOTE: Remarks may be continued on separate pages. Please identify category and question number.

1. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to provide program management, labor, tools, equipment, supplies, materials and other services necessary for intermodal equipment leasing?

Exceptional______Very Good______Satisfactory______Marginal______Unsatisfactory______N/A______

REMARKS:

2. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to maintain, employ, and upgrade/modify an Internet based information management database that supports program management functions, leasing operations, and provides management and performance report query capabilities.

REMARKS:

3. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to provide third party logistic program management support to include all coordination of delivery, re-delivery, on-hire lift, and off-hire lift for leased equipment to both CONUS and OCONUS locations.

REMARKS:

4. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to meet and maintain a high percentage of Required Delivery/Redelivery Dates at various CONUS and OCONUS locations.

REMARKS:

5. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to utilize Small Business subcontracting:

A. Compliance with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns.

Exceptional______Very Good______Satisfactory______Marginal______Unsatisfactory______Unk______

REMARKS:

B. Compliance with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

REMARKS:

C. Contractor met small business subcontracting goals as established in the contract.

REMARKS:

6. How would you rate the contractor’s overall performance?

REMARKS:

7. Would you award to this contractor in the future?

Yes ___________ No____________ If “no”, why? _____________________________________________________________________________

RATING DEFINITIONS:

(1) Unsatisfactory – Performance did not meet most contractual requirements. There were serious problems and the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.

(2) Marginal – Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. There were problems, some of a serious nature, for which corrective action was only marginally effective.

(3) Satisfactory – Performance met contract requirements. There were some minor problems and corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

(4) Very Good – 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.

(5) Exceptional – 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.

(6) N/A – No record of performance or the record is inconclusive.

Source Selection Information - See FAR 3.104 For Official Use Only Source Selection Sensitive When Filled In