Past_Performance_Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 40 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Research and Innovative Technical Analysis (RITA) Professional Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- M00264-14-R-0005
- 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Q_and_A_M00264-14-R-0005_RITA_-_Version_2_-_5_Feb_2014.docx | DOCX document | |
| M00264-14-R-0005-0003.pdf | ||
| Itemized_Summary_of_Changes_in_Amendment_0003.docx | DOCX document | |
| Q_and_A_M00264-14-R-0005_RITA_-_FINAL.docx | DOCX document | |
| M00264-14-R-0005-0002.pdf | ||
| M00264-14-R-0005-0001.pdf | ||
| M00264-14-R-0005.pdf |
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
Past Performance Questionnaire Your assistance is requested by the Regional Contracting Office-NCR to assist with establishing the performance history for the contractor cited below.
Instructions:
· Sections I and II to be completed by the Offeror/Major Subcontractor and provided to the assessor (Government personnel that had experience with the Offeror/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 Offeror should also submit with its proposal (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 HQMC 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) to:
wayne.cohee@usmc.mil Regional Contracting Office, NCR Attn: Wayne C. Cohee 2010 Henderson Road Marine Corps Base Quantico, VA 22134-5001 Phone: 703-432-8384
I. Solicitation Data (for the proposed effort)
| Solicitation Number |
| M00264-14-R-0005 |
| Project/Requirement |
| Research & Innovative Technical Analysis (RITA) Professional Services – Multiple-Award IDIQ Contract |
| Customer/Agency |
| US Marine Corps / Marine Corps Combat Development Command |
| Project/Requirement Description |
| The primary objective of this acquisition is acquire the services of contractors that are capable of providing current and advanced research and innovative technical analysis (RITA) services to fulfill Marine Corps Studies System requirements as determined by Commanding General, Marine Corps Combat Development Command. Activities will include but not be limited to: Analysis, Model Development, Database Development, Interim Reports, and Final Products |
II. Current or Historical Contract Information
Assessor: The performance data submitted by the Offeror 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 Aspects as follows:
1. Evaluates how relevant a recent effort was accomplished by the offeror.
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 offeror’ s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Based on the offeror’ s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. |
| Limited Confidence |
| Based on the offeror’ s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectations that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. |
| No Confidence |
| Based on the offeror’ s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectations that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’ 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 |
Analysis
Model Development
Database Development
Interim Report Clarity
Final Product Clarity
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of Substantial Confidence and 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 |
Meet Proposal Schedule
Schedule Issue Resolution
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of Substantial Confidence and 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
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, proposal 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.
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of Substantial Confidence and No Confidence.
c. Did the Government contribute in any way to any of the technical problems identified in the above assessment? Please explain.
4. Cost Control
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to forecast, manage, and control costs?
| Substantial Confidence |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Limited Confidence |
| No Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| N/A |
Cost Control
b. Assess the Contractor’s cost performance in the following areas.
| Management |
| Substantial Confidence |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Limited Confidence |
| No Confidence |
| Unknown Confidence (Neutral) |
| N/A |
COST REPORTING—Accuracy and timeliness of the Contractor’s cost reporting data.
NOTIFICATIONS—Timeliness of the Contractor’s notifications of costs as required by the Limitation of Cost/Funds Clauses.
RESOLUTION OF COST PROBLEMS—Commitment to resolve cost issues—may include utilizing principles such as Cost as an Independent Variable (CAIV)
ADHERENCE TO COST TARGETS—Ability to establish and meet the realistic cost targets.
SUBCONTRACT COST MANAGEMENT— Ability to forecast, negotiate, and control subcontract costs
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of Substantial Confidence and No Confidence.
VI. Overall Rating of Contractor’s performance (technical, schedule, management, and cost) 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 .