J-13-PastPerfQuestionaire(2022.11.22).docx
DOCX document 2 MB Posted
- Attached to
- USNS William McLean MTA 2025 Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- N3220525R4043
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire from the Military Sealift Command (MSC) for solicitation N3220525R4043 regarding the USNS William McLean (T-AKE 12) Maintenance and Technical Availability (MTA) for Fiscal Year 2025. The questionnaire is designed to collect performance evaluations from previous contractors, requesting detailed ratings across multiple factors including technical quality, schedule/timeliness, management relations, and small business subcontracting.
The document instructs reference contacts to complete the questionnaire and submit it via email to Christina Guevara by 10 April 2025 at 2:00 PM Eastern. Respondents are asked to rate performance using a five-tier scale (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory) and indicate whether they would rehire the contractor. The completed questionnaire will be used to assess the contractor's past performance capabilities for the upcoming solicitation, with particular emphasis on providing explanatory comments for exceptional or unsatisfactory ratings.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| J-11 MSC Dry Dock Eval Form.pdf | ||
| J-9-DisclosureofLobbyingActivities(1997.07).pdf | ||
| J-10 Interport Differential.docx | DOCX document | |
| J-14-TechnicalNDA(2023.07.07).docx | DOCX document | |
| J-3-Cat-B(2023.11.03).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| J-2-Cat-A(2022.11.22).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| J-7 MSC Ship Repair Facility Survey.docx | DOCX document | |
| J-12 Past Perf Data.docx | DOCX document | |
| J-8-RFC(2022.12.28).docx | DOCX document |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
ATTACHMENT J-13
TO: EMAIL:
PHONE:
INFORMATION REQUEST
Military Sealift Command (MSC) is currently in the process of soliciting offers for a contract.
___________________ has provided your name and organization as a reference regarding their record of past performance under contract number ___________________. Specifically, we are looking for performance information in the following areas:
In order for our team to compile its evaluation, we request that you complete the attached questionnaire and email it, and any other pertinent information, by BEFORE THE CLOSING DATE OF THIS SOLICITATION (10 April 2025 at 1400 hours, 2:00 PM Eastern) to Christina Guevara at christina.a.guevara.civ@us.navy.mil . Any relevant information you have would be vital in our assessment of the aforementioned Contractor.
| Thank you, |
| Christina Guevara |
| Contracting Officer |
CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
CONTRACTOR NAME: CONTRACT NUMBER:
EVALUATION PERIOD: DELIVERY ORDER NO.:
1. Please describe the service/supply provided by the Contractor for your organiation. ______________________
2. Please provide ratings and comments regarding the Contractor’s performance in each area below using the following ratings: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory. See next page for definition of ratings. For ratings of “Exceptional” or “Unsatisfactory,” please provide a brief explanation.
| FACTOR |
| EXCEPTIONAL |
| VERY GOOD |
| SATISFACTORY |
| MARGINAL |
| UNSATISFACTORY |
TECHNICAL (QUALITY OF PRODUCT OR SERVICE)
SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS
MANAGEMENT OR BUSINESS RELATIONS
SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING
OTHER (AS APPLICABLE)
3. Would you hire this Contractor to provide supplies/services for your organization in the future? Yes |_| No |_| Please provide comments using additional pages if desired.
Signed: __________________________________ Title: ____________________________________ Organization: _____________________________
DEFINITION OF RATINGS FOR PAST PERFORMANCE
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets/met contractual requirements and exceeds/exceeded many to the customer’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets/met contractual requirements and exceeds/exceeded some to the Customer’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets/met contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear to be or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not/did not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet or did not identify corrective actions. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not/did not meet most contractual requirements and if currently being performed, recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .