L-6 Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 31 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Naval Introductory Flight Evaluation (NIFE) Solicitation Amendment 0002 - Revised PWS and Updated Section L and M language Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- N6134024R0024
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) to be completed by a Point of Contact (POC) for a previous contract performed by the offeror. The PPQ requests information on the offeror's role, contract details, and an assessment of the offeror's performance in the areas of quality and management. The POC is asked to provide a rating from Unsatisfactory to Exceptional and examples to substantiate the rating. Additionally, the POC is asked whether they would or would not award to the offeror today based on their performance.
The related federal contract opportunity is for the Naval Introductory Flight Evaluation (NIFE) program, which requires a contractor to provide certified flight instructors, aircraft, training aids, and other services to support flight screening and training for Student Naval Aviators, Student Air Vehicle Pilots, and Student Naval Flight Officers. The solicitation is being issued by the Department of the Navy Naval Air Systems Command, and responses are due by a specific date that is not provided in the information given.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 26
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
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION-SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104
NATTC COMS SOURCE SELECTION PLAN
L-6 Past Performance Questionnaire
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
I. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATIVE DATA (To be completed by the Offeror)
Offeror Name:
Offeror Role in Past Performance Contract:
Contract Title:
Contract Number/Task Order:
Contract Type:
Procuring Agency:
Description of Product or Service:
Period of Performance:
Dollar Value of Contract:
Current Dollar Value of Effort:
Administrative Place of Contract:
Cage Code:
DUNS:
Customer:
Contracting Agency:
II. POINT OF CONTACT (POC) Data (To be completed by the Offeror)
Name:
Position or role:
Agency:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Other:
III. INFORMATION TO THE PPQ POC
Your assistance is requested in support of a source selection. Please complete the assessment below and send all pages of this questionnaire to: krista.a.scott3.civ@us.navy.mil with a copy to virginia.l.marquez.civ@us.navy.mil by _______, 2024.
Assessment: (To be completed by the PPQ POC)
Instructions to complete the assessment: Please provide responses to 1 through 3 that are listed below the assessment Rating System Table. Place an “X” in the rating that best assesses the offeror’s performance in the areas listed below. Then provide examples to substantiate your rating based on the ratings in the Rating System Table. For example, if you provide a rating of ‘Exceptional’, list the “many” contractual requirements that were exceeded.
Rating System Table:
A common five level assessment rating system is used to evaluate a contractor's performance. Ratings range from Unsatisfactory to Exceptional. Here's a breakdown of each category:
| Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many. 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 contractual requirements and exceeds some. 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 appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor 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 appear or were ineffective. |
1. Given what I know today about the contractor's ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I WOULD £ or WOULD NOT £ award to him today given that I had a choice.
2. Quality of Product or Service:
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
List the positive and negative examples that substantiate rating IAW the ratings from the Ratings System Table above:
2. Management:
Exceptional
Very Good
Satisfactory
Marginal
Unsatisfactory
N/A
List the positive and negative examples that substantiate rating IAW the ratings from the Ratings System Table above:
Signature ______________________________ Date _____________ Electronic signatures are acceptable. An e-mail from the originator of this document will suffice. Signatures (electronic or handwritten) verify that the signatory completed this form and agrees with the information.
SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .