J.03 contractor performance report form.doc
DOC document 53 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Impact Evaluation Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- MCC-10-0011-RFP
- Issued by
- Millennium Challenge Corporation
About this file
Attachment J.03 Contractor Performance Report (word version)
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Amendment 01.pdf | ||
| Amendment01wordcopy-MCC-10-0011.doc | DOC document | |
| J.04Project Information.docx | DOCX document | |
| MCC-10-0011-RFP.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
PAGE
Standard
Contractor Performance Report Evaluation Type: Interim _ Final _ (check one)
| Evaluating Organization: |
| Reporting Period: From to |
| Contracting Office: |
| Contract Number: |
| Order Number: |
| Contractor Name: |
| Contractor Address: |
| DUNS: |
| City: |
| State: |
Additional or Alternate Contractor Name:
| Zip/Postal Code: |
| Country: |
| TIN: |
| Industrial Code (NAICS): |
| Commodity Code: |
| Contract Type: |
| Contract Award Date: |
| Contract Expiration Date: |
| Contract Value: |
Requirement Description:
Ratings
Summarize contractor performance and check the number which corresponds to the rating for each rating category (See attached Rating Guidelines).
Quality of Product or Service
_0=Unsatisfactory _1=Poor _2=Fair
_3=Good _4=Excellent
_5=Outstanding
Government Comments for Quality of Product or Service (2000 characters maximum):
Cost Control (Rating and Comments for Cost Control are not required if contract type is Fixed-Price)
_0=Unsatisfactory _1=Poor _2=Fair
_3=Good
Government Comments for Cost Control (2000 characters maximum):
Timeliness of Performance
_0=Unsatisfactory _1=Poor _2=Fair
_3=Good
Government Comments for Timeliness of Performance (2000 characters maximum):
Business Relations
_0=Unsatisfactory _1=Poor _2=Fair
_3=Good
Government Comments for Business Relations (2000 characters maximum):
Additional Info
Subcontracts
Are subcontracts involved?
__Yes __No (Check one)
Government Comment on subcontracts (2000 characters maximum):
Contractor Key Personnel
Contractor Manager/Principal Investigator (name):
Government Comment on Contractor Manager/Principal Investigator (2000 characters maximum):
Contractor Key Person (name):
Government Comment on Contractor Key Person (2000 characters maximum):
Contractor Key Person (name):
Government Comment on Contractor Key Person (2000 characters maximum):
Small Business Subcontracting Plan
Did the contractor make a good faith effort to comply with its subcontracting plan consistent with the goals and objectives, reporting and other aspects of the plan?
_Yes _No _N/A (Check one)
If this is a bundled contract, did the contractor meet the goals and objectives for small business participation?
_Yes _No _N/A (Check one)
Government Comments on Small Business Subcontracting Plan (2000 characters maximum):
Small Disadvantaged Business Goals
Did the contractor make a good faith effort to comply with its subcontracting plan consistent with the goals and objectives, for small disadvantaged business (SDB) participation, monetary targets for SDB participation, and required notifications?
_Yes _No _N/A (Check one)
Government Comments on Small Disadvantaged Business Goals (2000 characters maximum):
Customer Satisfaction
Is/was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?
_Yes _No (Check one)
Would you recommend the selection of this firm again?
_Yes _No (Check one) – FINAL REPORT ONLY Government Comments on Customer Satisfaction (2000 characters maximum):
Admin Info
Project Officer/COTR
Name:
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail Address:
Contractor Representative
Name:
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail Address:
Alternate Contractor Representative (Required to insure that at least one person is notified of evaluation) Name:
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail Address:
Contracting Officer:
Name:
Phone:
Fax:
E-mail Address:
Contractor Comments
Quality of Product of Service
___Contractor has elected not to comment
Contractor Comments for Quality of Product of Service (2000 characters maximum):
Cost Control
___Contractor has elected not to comment
Contractor Comments for Quality of Product of Service (2000 characters maximum):
Timeliness of Performance
___Contractor has elected not to comment
Contractor Comments for Timeliness of Performance (2000 characters maximum):
Business Relations
___Contractor has elected not to comment
Contractor Comments for Business Relations (2000 characters maximum):
Overall Comment
___Contractor has elected not to comment
Contractor Comments for Quality of Product of Service (2000 characters maximum):
Rating Guidelines
Quality of Product or Service
0 = Unsatisfactory 1 = Poor 2 = Fair 3 = Good 4 = Excellent 5 = Outstanding
| Unsatisfactory |
| Non-conformances are jeopardizing the achievement of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, it constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards containing similar requirements. |
| Poor |
| Overall compliance requires significant Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements. |
| Fair |
| Overall compliance requires minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements. |
| Good |
| There are no, or very minimal, quality problems, and the Contractor has met the contract requirements. |
| Excellent |
| There are no quality issues, and the Contractor has substantially exceeded the contract performance requirements without commensurate additional costs to the Government. |
| Outstanding |
| The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that was significantly in excess of anticipated achievements and is commendable as an example for others, so that it justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent". |
Cost Control
0 = Unsatisfactory 1 = Poor 2 = Fair 3 = Good 4 = Excellent 5 = Outstanding
| Unsatisfactory |
| Ability to manage cost issues is jeopardizing performance of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, this level of ability to manage cost issues constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards. |
| Poor |
| Ability to manage cost issues requires significant Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements. |
| Fair |
| Ability to control cost issues requires minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements. |
| Good |
| There are no, or very minimal, cost management issues and the Contractor has met the contract requirements. |
| Excellent |
| There are no cost management issues and the Contractor has exceeded the contract requirements, achieving cost savings to the Government. |
| Outstanding |
| The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where the contractor achieved cost savings and performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent". |
Timeliness of Performance
| Unsatisfactory |
| Delays are jeopardizing the achievement of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, it constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards. |
| Poor |
| Delays require significant Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements. |
| Fair |
| Delays require minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements. |
| Good |
| There are no, or minimal, delays that impact achievement of contract requirements. |
| Excellent |
| There are no delays and the contractor has exceeded the agreed upon time schedule. |
| Outstanding |
| The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent". |
Business Relations
| Unsatisfactory |
| Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues is not effective. If not substantially mitigated or corrected it should constitute a significant impediment in considerations for future awards. |
| Poor |
| Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues is marginally effective. |
| Fair |
| Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues is somewhat effective. |
| Good |
| Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues is consistently effective. |
| Excellent |
| Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues exceeds Government expectation. |
| Outstanding |
| The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent". |
PAGE
OMB CLEARANCE NO. 9000-0142
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .