About this file

This is a Past Performance Form 2 template used to evaluate contractor performance for the Idaho, Montana, and Surrounding Areas Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC). The form includes a comprehensive rating system with five evaluation levels: Unsatisfactory, Marginal, Satisfactory, Very Good, and Exceptional, with detailed definitions for each rating level.

The evaluation criteria cover four main areas: Technical (quality of workmanship, environmental sensitivity, equipment/materials), Cost Control, Schedule/Timeliness, and Management (QC program, specification compliance, problem resolution, regulatory compliance). Additional evaluation areas include Small Business Contracting goals and participation requirements. The form also includes yes/no questions regarding customer satisfaction and safety commitment. Evaluators must provide explanations in the remarks section for any Unsatisfactory or Marginal ratings. The form is structured as a standardized template with rating scales for each performance category but contains no actual performance data.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
QA_1-24-2025.pdf PDF
QA_1-22-2025_2.pdf PDF
QA_1-22-2025.pdf PDF
Amendment A003.pdf PDF
QA_1-16-2025.pdf PDF
QA_1-13-2025.pdf PDF
QA_1-10-2025.pdf PDF
QA_1-7-2025.pdf PDF
QA_1-6-2025.pdf PDF
Amendment A002.pdf PDF
Amendment A001.pdf PDF
J.4 Sample Project_MT NP GLAC HQ(3).pdf PDF
RFP_69056724R000007_ID MT MATOC_Final.pdf PDF
J.2 Technical Information Form 1.pdf PDF
J.1 Master Subcontracting Plan.pdf PDF
J.4 Sample Project Plans.pdf PDF
Show all 16

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

Attachment J.3 Past Performance Form 2

Past Performance Form 2

Subject Line “Source Selection Information: Idaho, Montana, and Surrounding Areas

Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC)

Project: Idaho, Montana and Surrounding Areas IDIQ MATOC

Evaluation Factor Rating System. Please provide ratings and comments regarding the Contractor’s performance in each area below using the following ratings:

N/A=Not Applicable U=Unsatisfactory M=Marginal S=Satisfactory VG=Very Good E=Exceptional

• Unsatisfactory - Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

• Marginal - Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

• Satisfactory - Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

• Very Good - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the

Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

• Exceptional – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the

Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

For ratings of “unsatisfactory” and “Marginal” please provide a brief explanation in the remarks section.

Company Name:

Project Name:

Submitted by:

Name

Phone:

Email:

Agency:

Technical (quality of product or service)

How would you rate the contractor’s quality of workmanship for work performed?

N/A U M S VG E

How would you rate the ability of the contractor to work within an environmentally sensitive area?

N/A U M S VG E

How would you rate the ability of the contractor to provide the right equipment and material to perform the required work?

N/A U M S VG E

Cost control (not applicable for firm-fixed-price or fixed-price with economic price adjustment arrangements).

How would you rate the contractor’s ability to control costs within the confine of the contract?

N/A U M S VG E

Schedule/Timeliness

How would you rate the contractor’s adherence to the approved schedule? N/A U M S VG E

Management

Did the contractor’s QC program effectively monitor all work?

N/A U M S VG E

Did the contractor complete work in accordance with the specifications?

N/A U M S VG E

How would you rate the contractor’s ability to promptly resolve problems?

N/A

U

M

S

VG

E

Did the contractor comply with all known laws and regulations?

N/A

U

M

S

VG

E

Small Business Contracting

Demonstrated a good faith effort to meet all of the negotiated subcontracting goals in the various socio-economic categories?

N/A U M S VG E

Utilized Small Business Concerns and met any other small business participation requirements included in the contract/order?

N/A U M S VG E

Other:

Customer Satisfaction: Was the

Contractor committed to customer satisfaction?

Yes No

Safety: Was the Contractor committed to running a safe operation?

Yes No

Remarks:

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