PPQ--ATTACHMENT.docx
DOCX document 33 KB Posted
- Attached to
- ALTERNATION CLOTHING Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- M00264-13-T-0043
- Issued by
- United States Marine Corps
About this file
Past Performance Questionnaire
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| ALTERNATION_MOD.doc | DOC document | |
| ALTERATION_SOL.doc | DOC 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
ATTACHMENT 4: PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Instructions:
· Sections I and II to be completed by the Quoter/Major Subcontractor and provided to the assessor (Government personnel that had experience with the Quoter/Major Subcontractor on a previous relevant contract). The assessor, in turn, to verify Sections I through III, complete the questionnaire, and submit to the Contracting Office. The Quoter should also submit with its quotation (by the closing date of the Solicitation) copies of Sections I and II of all questionnaires as provided to assessors.
· Section II to be validated by the assessor. If any information is incorrect herein, please annotate and provide the correct information accordingly.
· Sections III through VII to be completed in their entirety by the assessor.
Message to the assessor: Your assistance is requested by the USMC Regional Contracting Office (RCO) to assist with establishing the performance history for the Contractor named below. In efforts to expedite receipt of the requested information, the Contracting Office respectfully requests that you do not mail hard copies. Instead, please e-mail the completed questionnaire(s) with your signature to: christa.eggleston-sc@usmc.mil or fax to 703-784-5908.
I. Solicitation Data (for the proposed effort)
| Solicitation Number |
| M00264-13-T-0133 |
| Project/Requirement |
| CLOTHING ALTERNATION |
| Customer/Agency |
| MARINE CORPS SERVICES |
| Project/Requirement Description |
| UNIFORM CLOTHING AT THE MILITARY CLOTHING SALES STORE |
II. Current or Historical Contract Information
Assessor: The performance data submitted by the Quoter is |_| correct or |_| incorrect.
CONTRACTOR NAME & ADDRESS:
Contract No
Type of Contract
| Initial |
| Final |
Contract Value
Period of Performance/Delivery Schedule
Project/Requirement Description
Please select from the following as it applies to this contract:
| Contracting Role |
| |_| PRIME |
| |_| SUBCONTRACTOR |
| Termination History |
| |_| Convenience |
| |_| Default |
| |_| N/A |
III. Assessor Information
Assessor Name
Title
Phone Number/Email Address
Identify your role in the contract award or administration and the period of your involvement.
| Role |
| Period of Involvement |
Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)
Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)
Contract Specialist
Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)
Technical Project Lead/Project Officer
Quality Assurance Specialist
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) Auditor
Other:
IV. Past Performance Evaluation and Definitions
Past Performance Evaluates Two Aspect as follows:
1. Evaluates how relevant a recent effort was accomplished by the Quoter.
2. Evaluates how well the contractor performed on the contracts.
The following definitions should be used in your assessment of Contractor performance.
1. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings
Table 1. Past Performance Relevancy Rating
| Rating |
| Descriptions |
| Very Relevant |
| Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
| Relevant |
| Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
| Somewhat Relevant |
| Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
| Not Relevant |
| Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
2. Performance Confidence Ratings
Table 2. Performance Confidence Assessment
| Rating |
| Descriptions |
| Substantial Confidence |
| Based on the Quoter’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort. |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Based on the Quoter’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort. |
| Limited Confidence |
| Based on the Quoter’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort. |
| No Confidence |
| Based on the Quoter’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectations that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort. |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Quoter’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. |
V. Relevant Performance
1. Summary of this Requirement:
a. Based on the information provided under Section II, and the provided summary of this requirement, what is your OVERALL relevant rating of the Contractor’s work performance for your organization/business/agency and this requirement?
| Very Relevant |
| Relevant |
| Somewhat Relevant |
| Not Relevant |
Relevant Rating
VI. Performance Evaluation
1. Technical Performance
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet the technical requirements?
| Substantial Confidence |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Limited Confidence |
| No Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| N/A |
Technical Performance
Please provide rationale for the assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s technical performance in the following areas.
| Substantial Confidence |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Limited Confidence |
| No Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| N/A |
Design
Fabrication
Integration
Software Development
Testing
Training
Documentation
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of ‘Substantial Confidence’ or ‘No Confidence.’
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the technical problems identified in the above assessment? Please explain.
2. Schedule Performance
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet the schedule?
| Substantial Confidence |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Limited Confidence |
| No Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| N/A |
Schedule Performance
Please provide rationale for assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s schedule performance in the following areas.
| Schedule Performance |
| Substantial Confidence |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Limited Confidence |
| No Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| N/A |
Hardware
Software
Data Items
Assess the Contractor’s ability to resolve Schedule Problems
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of ‘Substantial Confidence’ or ‘No Confidence.’
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the technical problems identified in the above assessment? Please explain.
3. Management
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s management performance?
| Substantial Confidence |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Limited Confidence |
| No Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| N/A |
Management
Please provide rationale for assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s management performance in the following areas.
| Management |
| Substantial Confidence |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Limited Confidence |
| No Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| N/A |
MANAGEMENT RESPONSIVENESS—Timeliness, completeness, and quality of problem identification, quotation submittal, history of cooperative behavior, effective business relations, teamwork AND Customer satisfaction.
SUBCONTRACT MANAGEMENT—Timely award and management of subcontracts and meeting subcontracting goals for small business, small disadvantaged business, etc.
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT—Effectiveness of integration and coordination of all activities required to execute the contract, use of resources, assignment of responsibility, internal coordination and communication, and risk management practices.
MANAGEMENT OF PERSONNEL—Ability to select, retain, support, and replace personnel with the experience and expertise necessary to accomplish the Government’s requirements within schedule and budget.
INTEGRATED PRODUCT TEAM MANAGEMENT—Commitment and participation to the IPT process.
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of ‘Substantial Confidence’ or ‘No Confidence.’
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the technical problems identified in the above assessment? Please explain.
VI. Overall Rating of Contractor’s performance (technical, schedule, and management) on contract being assessed.
| Substantial Confidence |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Limited Confidence |
| No Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
VII. General Comments:
| _________________________________ | ____________________ | |
| Assessor’s Signature | Date |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .