M. Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 493 KB Posted
- Attached to
- X1DB - RLP - VA ACC ANNEX | HONOLULU, HI
- Solicitation number
- 36C24W25R0073
- Issued by
-
Department of Veterans Affairs
About this file
This is a VA Past Performance Questionnaire template designed for evaluating contractor performance on federal contracts. The questionnaire requests offerors to provide references for past performance evaluation, with specific application to RLP No. 36C24W26L0073 for the Honolulu, HI ACC Lease project. References must submit completed questionnaires directly to VA's Broker, Teddy Seifert (tseifert@ppwashdc.com), by 5:00 pm ET on January 13, 2026, with the subject line "RLP 36C24W26L0073, [Name of Offeror], Completed Past Performance Questionnaire."
The questionnaire evaluates contractor performance across seven major categories: (1) Quality—including design, workmanship, materials, quality standards compliance, and quality control effectiveness; (2) Schedule/Timeliness—assessing delivery schedule compliance, resource utilization, and responsiveness; (3) Customer Satisfaction—measuring end-user satisfaction, contractor cooperation, and business conduct; (4) Management/Personnel/Labor—evaluating management effectiveness, workforce qualification, subcontractor management, personnel expertise, and ability to manage multiple projects; (5) Cost/Financial Management—addressing price compliance, cost-reducing innovations, accounting systems adequacy, and financial stability; (6) Safety/Security—assessing safety plan adherence and security compliance; and (7) General—evaluating emergency response capability and overall contractual compliance. Ratings use a five-point scale (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory) plus Not Applicable, with detailed definitions provided for each level. The questionnaire also requests a summary recommendation regarding future engagement with the contractor.
View the file
Other files
Show all 26
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
VA PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor/Offeror to complete Blocks 1-4)
1. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR INFORMATION
Past Performance Reference No. (1-5):
Offeror Name:
Address:
Phone Number: DUNs Number:
Contact Name:
Email Address: Contact Phone Number:
2. GENERAL WORK INFORMATION
Work performed as: Offering Entity Predecessor Companies Key Personnel Percent (%) of project work performed by Offering Entity, Predecessor Companies or Key Personnel: List of Major Subcontractor(s) and Role(s):
3. CONTRACT INFORMATION
Contract Number:
Contractor Name Reference Contract Awarded To: Contractor DUNS Awarded: Agency/Customer:
Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):
Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please explain) Contract Title:
Contract Location:
Award Date (mm/dd/yy):
Construction Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):
Awardee Ongoing Services:
Original Contract Price (Award Amount):
Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):
REFERENCE INFORMATION
Past Performance Questionnaire Reference Name & Title:
Phone No.:
Email:
Address:
Contracting Officer (CO) or Individual Responsible for Signing Contract Name & Title:
Phone No.:
Email:
Address:
Resident Engineer/CO’s Technical Representative or Construction Supervisor Name & Title:
Phone No.: Email: Address:
RLP No.: 36C24W26L0073 Honolulu, HI, ACC Lease
ORP Past Performance Questionnaire November 2018
ORP PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (CONTINUED)
4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Type of Work (check all that apply): VA Federal Medical Office Other: Reference Project Key Personnel Assigned as Key to Solicitation Project: Yes No If yes, please provide key personnel names and roles:
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE WORK PERFORMED
EXPLANATION OF RELEVANCY TO SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS
INSTRUCTIONS FOR REFERENCES COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE: VA requests that the reference completes this questionnaire and submits it directly back to VA’s Broker, Teddy Seifert, tseifert@ppwashdc.com no later than 5:00 pm ET on January 13, 2026, with a subject line that reads “RLP 36C24W26L0073, [Name of Offeror], Completed Past Performance Questionnaire”. The government reserves the right to verify all information on this form. To select: click box and fill shape in black.
Use the following adjective ratings and definitions in your evaluation of the Contractor’s performance.
| RATING |
| DEFINITION |
| NOTE |
| (E) Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective. |
| An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. |
| (VG) Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified. |
| (S) Satisfactory |
| Performance meets minimum 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. |
| A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per VA policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract. |
| (M) Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed 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. |
| A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government. |
| (U) 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 serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. |
| (N) Not Applicable |
| No information or did not apply to your contract |
| Rating will be neither positive nor negative. |
TO BE COMPLETED BY PPQ REFERENCE
PPQ REFERENCE
PPQ Reference Point of Contact Information Name:
Title:
Agency/Company:
Phone Number:
Email Address:
Contract No.:
Contract Type:
Contract Title: Contract Location:
Describe your role in the project:
Does the narrative in No. 4, above, accurately describe the scope, complexity, and relevance:
Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):
PPQ Reference’s Signature:
Instructions: Please select the adjective rating that best reflects your evaluation of the contractor’s performance.
| 1. QUALITY: |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
(a) Quality of building design, construction, workmanship, quality of materials used, interior spaces, and overall appearance.
(b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance.
(c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance.
(d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance).
| 2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE: |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
(a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If the schedule was not met, please address below.)
(b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract.
(c) Rate your satisfaction with the contractor’s ability to respond to questions and/or comments in a timely manner.
| 3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION: |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
(a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project?
(b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication).
(c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?
(d) Overall customer satisfaction.
| 4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
(a) Effectiveness of management, including management of subcontractors and/or labor force?
(b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort.
(c) Government Information Property Control.
(d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor key personnel.
(e) Government contract requiring a subcontracting plan (Complete if the contractor was required to submit and adhere to a small business subcontracting plan. Were small business goals met?
(f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines.
(g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes.
(h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the project).
| 5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
(a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?
(b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the PM.
(c) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? (If no, please explain in comment section below.)
| Yes |
| No |
(d) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? (Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.)
Yes
No
(e) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? (If yes, please explain in the comment section below.)
| Yes |
| No |
| 6. SAFETY/SECURITY |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
(a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.).
(b) Contractor complied with all general and IT security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.
| 7. GENERAL |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
| N |
(a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).
(b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (If there were specific issues, please explain in the comments sections below
(c) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.
Honolulu, HI, ACC Lease Lease]
8. SUMMARY
| Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain in the comments section below.) | |
| Yes | No |
COMMENTS SECTION
Please provide responses to the above questions (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Also, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):
image1.png image2.png image3.png image4.png image5.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .