Attachment_11_Past_Performance_Questionnaire_Final.doc
DOC document 145 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Shoulder-Launched Multi-Purpose Assault Weapon
- Solicitation number
- M67854-15-R-1000
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
Past Performance Questionnaire
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| M67854-15-R-1000-0002.pdf | ||
| Attachment_17_-_SMAW_Mod_2_Vendor_QA_Combined_021315.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| M67854-15-R-1000-0001.pdf | ||
| Attachment_6_E7901_EO-TK_SL3_Final.pdf | ||
| Attachment_13_Production_Facility_Readiness_Report.Site_Survey_Checklist_Final.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment_8_ICS_Comp_Matrix_Final.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_16_SMAW_Mod_2_Stepladder_Pricing_Matrix.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_10_GFP_List_Part_B_Final.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_9_PTD_Spares_Repair_Parts_List_Template_Final.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_15_MT_SE_Template_Final.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| M67854-15-R-1000.doc | DOC document | |
| Exhibit_1_SMAW_MOD_2_CDRLS_12015.pdf | ||
| Attachment_12_Staffing_Matrix_Final.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_5_GFP_Part_A_Final.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_01_SMAW_MK-153_Mod_2_SOW_1.20.15.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment_7_SOW_Comp_Matrix_PSPEC_Comp_Matrix_Final.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 16
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
Past Performance Questionnaire
M67854-15-R-1000
Past Performance Questionnaire 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 II, complete the questionnaire, and submit to the Contracting Officer. 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 Marine Corps Systems Command, PdM Anti-Armor Systems Contracting Office 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: sheila.ballard@usmc.mil NLT 9 March 2015.
I. Solicitation Data (for the proposed effort)
| Solicitation Number |
| M67854-15-R-1000 |
| Project/Requirement |
| Shoulder-Launched Multipurpose Assault Weapon (SMAW) Mod 2 |
| Customer/Agency |
| Marine Corps Systems Command PdM Anti-Armor Systems |
Project/Requirement Description
II. Current or Historical Contract Information
Assessor: The performance data submitted by the Offeror is FORMCHECKBOX FILLIN \* MERGEFORMAT correct or FORMCHECKBOX 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 |
| FORMCHECKBOX |
PRIME
FORMCHECKBOX
SUBCONTRACTOR
| Termination History |
| FORMCHECKBOX |
Convenience
FORMCHECKBOX
Default
FORMCHECKBOX
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
Contract Logistician
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) Auditor
Other:
IV. Evaluation Definitions The following definitions should be used in your assessment of Contractor performance.
| EXCEPTIONAL |
| Performance EXCEEDS MOST contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns. |
| VERY GOOD |
| Performance EXCEEDS SOME contractual requirements to the Government’s benefit. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns, for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were highly effective. |
| SATISFACTORY |
| Performance MEETS contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed contains minor issues or concerns, for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective. |
| MARGINAL |
| Performance MEETS SOME contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed includes significant problems, issues, or concerns for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were only somewhat effective. |
| UNSATISFACTORY |
| Performance DOES NOT MEET contractual requirement. The performance of the areas being assessed includes serious problems, issues, or concerns for which the Contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective. |
| NOT APPLICABLE (N/A) |
| Performance information not recent or relevant as defined in the Solicitation. Unable to provide assessment. |
V. Performance Evaluation
1. Technical Performance
a. What is your OVERALL assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet the technical requirements?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Technical Performance
Please provide rationale for the assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s technical performance in the following areas.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Fabrication overall
Fabrication to Gov’t TDP
Integration
Software Development
Testing
Training
Documentation
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
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?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Schedule Performance
Please provide rationale for assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s schedule performance in the following areas.
| Schedule Performance |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Hardware
Data Items
Production
Assess the Contractor’s ability to resolve Schedule Problems
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
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?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Management
Please provide rationale for assigned rating.
b. Assess the Contractor’s management performance in the following areas.
| Management |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| 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.
LONG LEAD ITEM MANAGEMENT—Ability to develop mitigation strategies for long lead items in production and sustainment.
SUBCONTRACTING PLAN GOALS – Commitment and participation to achieving goals proposed/planned.
All comments are appreciated; however, at a minimum, rationale must be provided for ratings of exceptional or unsatisfactory.
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.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
VII. General Comments:
Assessor’s Signature
Date
Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104 For Official Use Only
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .