MAHG 20-1032 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE.docx
DOCX document 23 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Pressed Cafe Renovation at Keesler AFB
- Solicitation number
- FA301025R0012
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire for a federal contract opportunity to renovate the Pressed Cafe at Keesler Air Force Base in Mississippi. The solicitation (FA301025R0012) is for a non-appropriated funds (NAF) project with a project magnitude between $250,000 and $500,000, and a performance period of 210 days. The renovation project requires contractors to complete work as specified in the statement of work, specifications, and drawings, with an organized site visit scheduled for May 20, 2025, at 9:00 AM CST.
The questionnaire is designed to collect past performance feedback from references, with submissions due by 11:00 AM CST on May 27, 2025. Respondents are asked to evaluate the contractor's performance across five key areas: quality of work, schedule/timeliness, management, regulatory compliance, and overall performance. The evaluation uses a rating scale from Exceptional to Unsatisfactory, with the option to provide narrative comments. The solicitation is being competed as an unrestricted, full and open competition, and contractors are required to submit pricing in Section B of the proposal.
View the file
Other files
Show all 14
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
Solicitation No. FA301025R0012
Please complete this questionnaire and email to: tonny.mabonga@us.af.mil
We are currently preparing our proposal for the 81st Contracting Squadron, Keesler AFB, MS, Solicitation Number: FA301025R0012 for Pressed Café design and Renovation located within Keesler AFB. As part of our proposal, we have listed you as a reference on our performance for this type of service with your agency or company under the previous or ongoing contract listed below. Your input on our performance is therefore requested.
This Questionnaire is due to SrA Tonny Mabonga no later than 11:00 AM CST on May 27, 2025. The Questionnaire must be submitted directly to the Contracting Officer from a corporate or government email account.
If you will be unavailable on May 27, 2025, for verification (if necessary) of this past performance evaluation, please indicate another point of contact (POC) for the Contracting Officer to contact.
Thank you.
POC/Alternate POC Name:
POC/Alternate POC Phone Number:
POC/Alternate POC Email Address:
Name of Offeror:
Phone Number:
Email Address:
CONTRACT REFERENCED
Contract Number (including Task Order number if applicable):
Contract Value (including all modifications):
Period of Performance:
Name of Person Completing Questionnaire:
Agency/Company:
Title:
Phone:
Email:
Brief Description of Work Required in the Referenced Contract:
EVALUATION
Please rate the contractor utilizing the guide below. Explanatory narratives giving specific details would be appreciated. Attach additional pages if more space is needed. Evaluation Definitions: The following definitions should be used in assessing Contractor performance.
| Exceptional: |
| Performance EXCEEDS MANY contractual requirements. Performance being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good: |
| Performance EXCEEDS SOME contractual requirements. Performance being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory: |
| Performance MEETS contractual requirements. Performance being evaluated contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal: |
| Performance MEETS SOME contractual requirements. Performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginal effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory: |
| Performance DOES NOT MEET contractual requirements. Performance contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| Not Applicable (N/A): |
| Performance information is not recent or relevant as defined in the solicitation. Unable to provide assessment. |
PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
QUALITY
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet work requirements and the overall quality of the work?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Quality of Work
Comments:
SCHEDULE
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to provide end-products timely?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Timeliness
Ability to Resolve Timeliness Problems
Comments:
MANAGEMENT
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to manage all aspects of the work?
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Managing Work Aspects
Comments:
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
What is your assessment of the Contractor’s ability to meet all regulatory requirements? Examples would include safety regulations, Davis-Bacon Act and other labor standards.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
Complying with Regulations
Comments:
OVERALL RATING OF CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE
What is your overall rating of the Contractor’s performance on the contract being assessed.
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
General Comments:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .