Attachment_II_Past_Performance_Quest.pdf
PDF 50 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Light Tactical All-Terrain Vehicle (LTATV)
- Solicitation number
- ID04190104
About this file
This document includes a past performance questionnaire and federal contract opportunity notice for rotary wing transportation services in Afghanistan. The past performance questionnaire is seeking input on a contractor's performance on a prior contract and includes questions about quality, management controls, customer service, and overall performance. Responses are requested by November 15, 2019 to be considered for the rotary wing transportation support requirement. The federal contract opportunity involves the acquisition of light tactical all-terrain vehicles for Special Operations Forces. The solicitation will request proposals by November 15, 2019 for an indefinite delivery indefinite quantity contract from March 2020 to March 2027, incorporating firm-fixed-price and time and materials pricing. Evaluation will utilize a best value tradeoff process between technical, past performance, and price factors to make a single award.
Attachment II Past Performance Questionnaire
View the file
Other files
Show all 30
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
Contract # Being Evaluated ___________________ Attachment – Past Performance Questionnaire
LTATV 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): ______________________________________________
G. Location (countries) where service was performed under this contract:__________________________________
H. Contractor being evaluated performed as the: _____ Prime or ______ Subcontractor (Mark one)
SECTION 2: RESPONDENT INFORMATION
INSTRUCTIONS: The remaining sections are to be filled out by Respondent. Questionnaires must be returned no later than XX XX 2019, to GSA 4QFACC via E-mail: sonia.hammons@gsa.gov and philip.thompson@socom.mil.
Please indicate “Performance Survey” in the subject.
A. Customer or agency name: _____________________________________________________________________
B. Respondent's name: __________________________________________________________________________
C. Respondent's title: ____________________________________________________________________________
D. Respondent's phone number: ________________________________________________________________
E. Respondent’s Email: __________________________________________________________________________
F. Contract Performance Data assessed in Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS):
________Yes or ________No
G. Description of work performed under this contract:_________________________________________________
SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
INSTRUCTIONS: This section is to be filled out by the contractor requesting information and sent to the respondent.
mailto:sonia.hammons@gsa.gov mailto:philip.thompson@socom.mil
SECTION 3: PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
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 USCENTCOM Rotary Wing Transportation Support Requirement in Afghanistan. In responding to the survey, please justify and explain Marginal or 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 (E) - Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded many to your company’s (or agency’s) benefit. Problems, if any, were negligible and were resolved in a timely, highly effective manner.
Very Good (VG) - 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.
Satisfactory (S) - Performance met contract requirements. There were some minor problems and corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.
Marginal (M) - Performance did not meet some contractual requirements. There were problems, some of a serious nature, for which corrective action was only marginally effective or was not fully implemented.
Unsatisfactory (US) - Performance did not meet most contractual requirements. There were serious problems and the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.
Unknown (U) - No record of past performance or the record is inconclusive.
NOTE: PPIRS may be reviewed for the contractors 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.
1. Quality of Product or Service
US M S VG E U
A Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance B Compliance with contractual terms and conditions.
C Did the contractor show an understanding of the scope of the requirements and an appreciation of the complexity of the requirements?
D Were the services comprehensive, complete, and feasible (Met the needs, performed successfully, and accommodated changing requirements.)?
E Quality/integrity of Technical Manuals or Commercial Manuals F Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements G Timely recognition and notification of administrative, engineering, production, problems affecting the program:
H Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations.
I Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements
2. Management Controls
A Effectiveness of overall contract management (ability to lead, manage and control program).
B Effectiveness management control, including subcontractors. rt
C Effectiveness of acquisition management.
D
Effectiveness of material management.
E Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance.
F Ability to hire/retain a qualified workforce on this effort
4. CUSTOMER SERVICE
A Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?
B Did the contractor work and communicate well with contracting officers, contracting officer’s technical representatives, end users, other contractors, program staff, and subcontractors?
C Commitment to customer satisfaction and business-like concern for its customers’ interests.
5. OVERALL PERFORMANCE
A Effective program/contract management.
B Overall performance of the contractor.
SECTION 4: NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION
1. Please discuss each and every response for which you indicated Marginal or Unsatisfactory in response to the questions above (use additional sheets, if necessary).
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.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .