J6 Attachment - Past Performance Questionnaire.doc.docx
DOCX document 42 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Library of Congress - Braille Transcription IDIQ
- Solicitation number
- 030ADV25R0052
- Issued by
-
Library of Congress
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire for a Braille Transcription Services contract with the Library of Congress's National Library Service for the Blind and Print Disabled. The solicitation (030ADV25R0052) seeks a contractor to provide braille transcription services, with proposals due by January 6, 2026 at 12:00 PM EST. The evaluation will use a Best Value Trade-off (BVTO) method, with past performance being of considerable importance. The questionnaire is designed to gather detailed performance feedback from previous clients, assessing the contractor's performance across ten key areas including overall management, product quality, project management, timeliness, communication, and cost performance. Ratings range from Outstanding to Unsatisfactory, with opportunities to provide narrative explanations for lower-rated categories.
The solicitation supports the National Library Service's mission of providing reading materials in audio and braille formats to U.S. residents and citizens abroad who cannot use conventional print materials due to visual or physical limitations. The library currently maintains over 170,000 audio and braille titles and adds approximately 5,000 new titles annually. The procurement will be conducted using FAR 13.5 procedures, with offeror questions originally due by December 5, 2025. Potential contractors will be evaluated on their ability to support the library's critical service of providing accessible reading materials to individuals with visual and physical disabilities.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| J7 Attachment - Responses to Offeror Questions - 12-10-2025 - 5 pages.pdf | ||
| 030ADV25R0052 0001.pdf | ||
| J5 Attachment - Evaluation Pricing and Capacity - 12-4-2025 - 3 pages.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Solicitation 030ADV25R0052.pdf | ||
| J2 Attachment - SPEC 806.pdf | ||
| J5 Attachment - Evaluation Pricing and Capacity.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| J4 Attachment - Definitions.pdf | ||
| J1 Attachment - SPEC 800.pdf | ||
| J3 Attachment - SPEC 1207.docx | DOCX document |
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 J6 -- 030ADV26R0052 (pp. 2)
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
The purpose of this questionnaire is to gather information on the contractor named below to determine their suitability to provide services for the Library of Congress (Library). Your prompt completion of this questionnaire is sincerely appreciated as it is critical to the completion of the proposal evaluation process.
Contractor: [Name of Contractor]
1. Please complete this questionnaire based on the following guidance:
a) Handwritten responses are acceptable.
b) Using the ratings below, please assess the contractor’s performance on the project identified in the email. The assessment should reflect only performance for which the contractor is/was responsible. The following is a definition of the rating levels:
| RATING |
| DEFINITION |
| Outstanding |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government's benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government'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 contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor did not/has not yet identified corrective actions. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions were ineffective. |
2. Please provide narrative explanations for any Marginal, Unsatisfactory or N/A ratings and supplement your evaluation of the contractor’s performance with judgement of others in your organization.
3. The Contractor submitted a proposal to the Library for the provision of BRAILLE TRANSCRIPTION SERVICES. Past performance is of considerable importance to this acquisition. Therefore, input from current or previous customers of the contractor is very important.
We greatly appreciate you taking the time to complete this form. Please provide an honest assessment and return via email to Lianne Carroll at lcarroll@loc.gov with a copy to Jennifer Zwahlen at jzwa@loc.gov no later than noon (12:00 PM – Eastern) January 6, 2026.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Please provide the following information for your company:
Name:
Point of Contact Name and Title:
Telephone Number.
Contract Number if applicable:
Contract Type:
Period of Performance:
Approximate dollar value for the contract:
Contract Description:
QUESTIONS
The following correspond with the following descriptive values provided on the questionnaire cover page:
| O |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N/A |
| Outstanding |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| O |
| G |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| NA |
1. How would you rate the overall management of the contract?
2. How would you rate the quality of the products and services provided by the contractor?
3. How effective was the contractor in managing all phases the project?
4. How would you rate the Contractor’s timeliness and compliance with the project schedule?
5. How timely was the contractor in submitting required reports?
6. How would you rate the Quality/effectiveness of sub-contracted efforts? (If applicable)
7. How competent were key personnel and personnel provided for the project?
8. How well did key personnel communicate with Government/company personnel?
9. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to perform the services within contract costs?
10. Were any major contract requirements been terminated or rescheduled as a result of the contractor’s inability to perform? If yes, please explain.
Comments:
4/14/17
11/18/2026 1
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .