Attachment_L3_-_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 31 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Controlled Improvised Explosive Device Electronic Warfare (CREW) Product Support Integrator Services
- Solicitation number
- M67854-14-R-2517
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
Past Performance Questionnaire- M67854-14-R-2517 (PSI)
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| M67854-14-R-2517_Amendment_0003.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J2_CVRJ_Spare_Parts_-_FINAL_20_March_14_Amendment_0003.pdf | ||
| CREW_RFP_Questions_20_March_14.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J3_THOR_Spare_Part_FINAL.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J4_MODI_Spare_Parts_-_FINAL.pdf | ||
| CDRL_A012_RJK.docx | DOCX document | |
| FINAL_M67854-14-R-2517_Q_A_Document_18_March_14.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| CDRL_A010_RJK.docx | DOCX document | |
| J.1_DD_254.pdf | ||
| M67854-14-R-2517-0002.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J2_CVRJ_Spare_Parts_-_FINAL.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| M67854-14-R-2517-0001.doc | DOC document | |
| J3_Thor_Parts_List_Clb.pdf | ||
| J4_Modi_Spares_Requirement_CLB.pdf | ||
| M67854-14-R-2517.pdf | ||
| Attachment__L1_-_Statement_Of_Objectives.docx | DOCX document | |
| J2_CVRJ_Spare_Parts.pdf | ||
| J5_Attachment_5_CDRLs_A001-A0021.pdf | ||
| Attachment_L2-_Past_Perf_Reference_Form.docx | DOCX document | |
| J1_DD_254.pdf |
Show all 20
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
SECTION L: Attachment L3 - PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE for M67854-14-R-2517
1. Instructions - To assess potential vendors under the CREW PSI procurement, Marine Corps Systems Command (MCSC) contracting office is obtaining past performance information with respect to each Offeror. This acquisition being conducted by MCSC and your support is sincerely appreciated.
a. Offeror : Complete sections A and B prior to issuing this questionnaire to the Evaluator.
b. Evaluator: Complete section C. The completed Questionnaire shall be forwarded via email to Jessica.l.bursey@usmc.mil and ginger.cyganiewicz@usmc.mil by the due date established in block 9 of the solicitation. The message shall originate from the Evaluator’s corporate or government email system. The “subject” line in the submission email shall clearly indicate: “PSI – M67854-14-R-2517”. In addition to this questionnaire, you may receive a follow-up phone call to confirm or clarify information.
A. REFERENCE ORGANIZATION/AGENCY INFORMATION
Name & Title
Organization Name
Street Address
State
Zip Code
Phone Number
Fax Number
Email address
Signature
Date
B. CONTRACT INDENTIFICATION
Contract/Task Order Number
Period of Performance
Contract Type (Negotiated, Sealed, etc)
Pricing Type (Fixed Price, cost reimbursable, etc.
Contract Award Date
Contract Completion Date
Contract Value
Description of Services Provided
C. GENERAL INFORMATION
| # |
| Question |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Was the offeror the prime contractor or a subcontractor on your contract? |
(check the appropriate response block):
|_| Primary |_| Subcontractor
| 2 |
| Was the offeror committed to customer satisfaction? |
| |_| Yes |
|_| No
| 3 |
| Performance of Production and support services: |
· Compliance with Performance Specifications
· Compliance with Statement of Work
· Technical excellence
For quality of product or service, please check the most appropriate response below that reflects the contractor’s performance:
1. |_| Non conformances are jeopardizing the achievement of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources
2. |_| Overall compliance requires major Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements
3. |_| Overall compliance requires minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements
4. |_| Overall compliance does not impact achievement of contract requirements |_| There are no quality problems |_| Exceeded expectations
| 4 |
| Description of the types of personnel (skill and expertise) the offeror used to complete this contract. |
| 5 |
| Rate the overall quality of the offeror’s team |
| |_| Exceptional |
|_| Very Good
5. |_| Satisfactory
6. |_| Marginal
7. |_| Unsatisfactory
| 6 |
| Did the offeror appear to use personnel with the appropriate skills and expertise? |
| |_| Yes |
|_| No
| 7 |
| Did the offeror appear to apply sufficient resources (personnel and facilities) to the effort? |
| |_| Yes |
|_| No
| 8 |
| What was the offeror’s strong points or what did you like best? |
| 9 |
| What was the offeror’s weak points or what did you like least? |
| 10 |
| If a problem surfaced, what the Government and offeror do to remedy the issue? |
COMMENTS:
| 11 |
| Management tasks: |
· Cost/Price Control
· Current, accurate and complete billings
For cost control, please check the most appropriate response below that reflects the contractor’s performance:
1. |_| Ability to manage cost/price issues is jeopardizing performance of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources
2. |_| Ability to manage cost/price issues requires major Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements
3. |_| Ability to control cost/price issues requires minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements
4. |_| Management of cost/price issues does not impact achievement of contract requirements |_| There are no cost/price management issues
COMMENTS:
Timeliness/Delivery:
· Met delivery schedules
· Properly shipped items
· Reliability
· Responsive to technical direction
For timeliness of performance, please check the most appropriate response below that reflects the contractor’s performance:
|_| Delays are jeopardizing performance of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources |_| Delays require major Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements
1. |_| Delays require minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements
2. |_| Delays do not impact achievement of contract requirements |_| There are no delays
COMMENTS:
| 13 |
| Business relations include: |
· Effective management, including subcontracts
· Responsive to contract requirements
· Pro-active vs. reactive
· Flexibility
· Notification of problems
· Reasonable/cooperative behavior
· Relationship with Contracting Officer,COTR For business relations, please check the most appropriate response below that reflects the contractor’s performance:
1. |_| Response to inquiries or issues is not effective
2. |_| Response to inquiries or issues is marginally effective
3. |_| Response to inquiries or issues is somewhat effective
4. |_| Response to inquiries or issues is usually effective
5. |_| Response to inquiries or issues is always effective
| 14 |
| Was the offeror was cooperative in resolving issues? |
| |_| Yes |
|_| No
| 15 |
| How well did the prime manage the subcontractors? |
| 16 |
| Did the subcontractors perform the bulk of the effort or just add depth on particular technical areas? |
| 17 |
| What were those areas and why were they accomplished by the subcontractors rather than the prime? |
COMMENTS:
| 18 |
| Did you complete a written past performance evaluation on this contract? Are you able to provide a copy of the evaluation? |
|_| Yes |_| No
| 19 |
| Has the contractor been given a cure notice, show cause notice, suspension of progress payments, etc. If yes, explain: |
| 20 |
| Has the contract been partially or completely terminated? If yes, explain and identify type of termination (default, convenience). |
| 21 |
| Is there anything you think we should know about the offeror or that you’d like to add? |
| 22 |
| Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I (definitely would not, probably would not, might or might not, probably would or definitely would) award to him today given that I had a choice: |
|_| definitely would |_| probably would |_| might or might not |_| probably would not |_| definitely would not
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .