Atch 4 Past Performance Questionnaire_MOTCO_Amd 0002 12.27.23.docx
DOCX document 35 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Military Ocean Terminal Concord Rail Maintenance
- Solicitation number
- HTC711-24-R-R002
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a federal contractor providing railroad maintenance and inspection services. The contractor is being evaluated for its performance on contracts with the Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command to maintain approximately 43 miles of railroad track and five locomotives at the Military Ocean Terminal Concord in California. The questionnaire requests information on the contractor's technical capabilities in inspection services, maintenance services, terminal or rail switching services, and supplemental locomotive support. Respondents are asked to rate the contractor's performance as exceptional, very good, satisfactory, marginal, or unsatisfactory in various categories and provide narrative responses. The results will aid the government in determining the contractor's ability to successfully perform required efforts under solicitation number HTC711-24-R-R002 for railroad maintenance at the Military Ocean Terminal Concord.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| HTC71124-R-R002-0003.pdf | ||
| Q and A 24-R-R002.pdf | ||
| Atch 1 PWS MOTCO Rail Mx and Ops II - 12.26.23.pdf | ||
| HTC71124-R-R002-0002.pdf | ||
| Atch 5 Pricing Schedule 12.28.23.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| HTC71124-R-R002 Amnd 1.pdf | ||
| Atch 5 Pricing Schedule_V2_12.12.23.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Atch 7 MOTCO 190-3.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Atch 10 WD 2015-5623 Rev 21 072723.pdf | ||
| Atch 3 PP Reference Submission Sheet.docx | DOCX document | |
| Atch 5 Pricing Schedule 11.28.23.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Atch 1 PWS MOTCO Rail Mx and Ops II - 11.15.23.pdf | ||
| Atch 4 Past Performance Questionnaire_MOTCO.docx | DOCX document | |
| Atch 6 Site Visit Info_Form Instructions.pdf | ||
| Atch 8 NCIC Consent Form.pdf | ||
| HTC711-24-R-R002 MOTCO Rail MX Term Ops II_Final_11.28.23.pdf | ||
| Atch 9 Contractor Plan for Continuation of Essential Contractor Services.docx | DOCX document | |
| Atch 2 RFP Offeror Information Sheet.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 18
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
HTC711-24-R-R002
Attachment 4
SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
INSTRUCTIONS: This section is to be filled out by the contractor requesting information and sent to the respondent.
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
A. Contractor Name: _________________________________________________________________
B. Contract Number: _________________________________________________________________________
C. Contract type: __________________________________________
D. Period of performance: ______________________________________________________________
E. Brief Description of Work Performed: _______________________________________________________________________________
F. Dollar Value (include per year cost and life cycle cost)_______________________________________
K. Location (countries) where service was performed under this contract:
L. Contractor being evaluated performed as the Prime contractor.
SECTION 2: RESPONDENT INFORMATION
INSTRUCTIONS: The remaining sections are to be filled out by Respondent. Once completed, respondent sends to USTRANSCOM Acquisition Office via E-mail to: tashonna.s.gordon.civ@mail.mil and kerry.g.blasingim.civ@mail.mil.
Due date: 5 January 2024 Please indicate “Performance Survey” in the subject.
A. Customer or agency name: ____________________________________________________
B. Respondent's name: __________________________________
C. Respondent's title: ____________________________________
D. Respondent's phone/fax number: ______________________________________
E. Respondent’s Email: ___________________________________
F. Contract Performance Data assessed in Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS): ________Yes or ________No
SECTION 3: PERFORMANCE INFORMATION FOR OFFERORS
INSTRUCTIONS: Choose the term that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation.
The results of this survey will aid the Government in determining whether there is a reasonable expectation that the contractor will successfully perform the required effort under the GPC acquisition. In responding to the survey, please justify and explain Marginal, and Unsatisfactory ratings. Respondent may be contacted to clarify comments or ratings. In order for the government to review and assess the contractor’s past performance rating, please use the following ratings to describe the offeror’s performance on your contract or project:
Exceptional - Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded many to your company’s (or agency’s) benefit. Regarding the element or sub-element being rated there should have been multiple significant events that were of benefit to your company (or agency). A singular benefit could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
Very Good - Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded some to your company’s (agency’s) benefit. There were a few minor problems that the contractor resolved in a timely, effective manner. Regarding the element or sub-element being rating, there should have a significant event that was of benefit to your company (or Agency). There should have been no significant weaknesses.
Satisfactory - Performance met contract requirements. There were some minor problems and corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. There should only be minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered without impact to the contract. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
Marginal - Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. There were problems, some of a serious nature, for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective action, or for which corrective action was only marginally effective or was not fully implemented.
Unsatisfactory - Performance did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. There were serious problems and the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
Unknown - No record of past performance or the record is inconclusive.
NOTE 1: If you have rated this contractor on this particular contract or project in CPARS or some other evaluation system accessible to the Government, you may indicate that past performance information on this contract/project is available in the appropriate system and you may include a copy of that rating in lieu of the following questionnaire.
NOTE 2: Plus or minus signs may be used to indicate an improving (+) or worsening (-) trend insufficient to change the evaluation status.
Note 3: N/A (not applicable) should be used if the ratings are not going to be applied to a particular area for evaluation.
| 1. TECHNICAL CAPABILITY – Railroad Inspection Services |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Unknown |
| A |
| Contractor provided railroad track system inspection services in an accurate and timely fashion. |
| B |
| Contractor provided emergency railroad inspection or expertise in an accurate and timely fashion. |
| C |
| Contractor provided accurate and well-organized documentation and/or inspection reports within prescribed timelines. |
| D |
| Contractor’s rail inspectors had the necessary education, experience, and expertise to inspect rail systems and provide feedback. Railroad inspectors acted and communicated in a professional manner. |
| 2. TECHNICAL CAPAPILITY – Railroad Maintenance Services |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Unknown |
| A. |
| Contractor provided railroad preventive maintenance services that met customer expectations. |
| B |
| Contractor was able to adequately plan all railroad maintenance of way work and then follow through with the plan as approved by the customer. |
| C. |
| Contractor was able to respond to emergency railroad repair needs outside normal business hours. Response was within adequate timeline. |
| D. |
| Contractor completed railroad repairs within adequate time. |
| E. |
| Contractor completed railroad repairs to adequate quality. |
| F. |
| Contractor coordinated and completed repairs in a way that minimized negative impact to customer operations as much as possible. |
| G. |
| Contractor’s rail maintenance/repair personnel had the necessary education, experience and expertise to repair rail systems. Railroad repair personnel acted and communicated in a professional manner. |
| 3. TECHNICAL CAPAPILITY – Terminal or Rail Switching Services |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Unknown |
| A. |
| Contractor provided rail terminal or rail switching services that fulfilled customer requirements and were completed in a timely fashion. |
| B. |
| Contractor provided adequate number of rail crews in a timely fashion. |
| C. |
| Contractor was able to respond to emergency terminal or rail switching needs after normal business hours. Response was within adequate timeline. |
| D. |
| Contractor provided rail terminal or switching operations in the most efficient way possible with the least amount of direction from the customer. |
| E. |
| Contractor demonstrated a good working relationship with Class I commercial rail carriers. |
| F. |
| Contractor’s rail operations personnel had the necessary education/training, experience and expertise to operate locomotives and move railcars throughout a facility/terminal. Railroad operations personnel acted and communicated in a professional manner. |
| 4. TECHNICAL CAPABILITY – Supplemental Locomotive Support |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Unknown |
| A. |
| Contractor provided supplemental locomotives to satisfy customer needs within required timeline. |
| B |
| Contractor-provided locomotive was in good repair, safe condition, and provided reliable services. |
| 5. OVERALL PERFORMANCE |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Unknown |
| A. |
| Commitment to Customer Satisfaction and Business-like Concern for its Customers’ Interests. |
| B. |
| Overall Timeliness of Performance for Services and Product Deliverables, including the Administrative Aspects of Performance. |
| C. |
| Compliance of Products, Services, Documents, and Related Deliverables to Specification Requirements and Standards of Good Workmanship |
| D. |
| Effective Contract Management. |
| E. |
| Overall capability of the Contractor's team. Did the contractor's personnel demonstrate professionalism and the appropriate education, relevant experience, levels of skill, and expertise for the tasks required? |
| F. |
| Contractor was a good steward of any customer-furnished equipment, supplies, and/or facilities. |
| G. |
| Contractor provided responsive customer service function or company point of contact available to assist 24 hours/day and 7 days/week. |
| H. |
| Contractor maintained an adequate quality assurance system that took internal and/or customer feedback and then used it to improve operations and services. |
| I. |
| Contractor’s bid price accurately captured the total and final cost of the services. |
| J. |
| Contractor conducted all work safely and made it a priority to maintain an accident-free workplace. |
SECTION 4: NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION (Note: Answer length is not limited - text boxes below may be expanded as needed)
1. Please discuss each and every response for which you indicated Marginal or Unsatisfactory in response to the questions above.
2. Government Contracts Only: Has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? YES________ NO________
If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules, etc.)
3. Explain the contractor’s greatest strengths and/or weaknesses and your rationale for why you would or would not award a future contract to them.
4. Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?
5. Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .