Attachment PPQ.docx
DOCX document 23 KB Posted
- Attached to
- MSPB-HVAC-refresh-for-Computer-server- room
- Solicitation number
- Not on record
- Issued by
- Not on record
About this file
This file is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) template designed for the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) to collect reference information from past clients regarding vendor performance on the HVAC Refresh project for the computer server room.
The questionnaire requests evaluators to rate contractor performance across nine key criteria using a five-point scale: Exceptional (E), Highly Acceptable (HA), Acceptable (A), Marginal (M), and Unacceptable (U). The evaluation categories include on-site management and subcontractor coordination, professional relationships with Government personnel, ability to provide qualified personnel, quality control capabilities, schedule adherence, problem rectification, and overall contract performance. The form also inquires whether the contractor received any corrective actions such as cure notices, show cause letters, payment suspensions, or termination; whether the contractor would be selected for future work; and requests space for evaluator comments and an overall rating. Completed questionnaires are to be submitted via email to Tset Wong at tset.wong@mspb.gov. The form includes fields for contractor information, evaluator contact details, and emphasizes that source selection information remains confidential per FAR regulations.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Questions WITH Answers.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Cover Letter Provisions Instructions.docx | DOCX document | |
| HVAC Spec Sheet.docx | DOCX document | |
| Questions and Answers.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| STATEMENT OF WORK for HVAC.docx | DOCX document |
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 (PPQ)
FOR
SOLICITATION for HVAC Refresh
THIS FORM IS PROVIDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING TO
AND SUBMITTAL BY THE VENDOR REFERENCES
Our company (enter company name) is being considered in a Source Selection by the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) Financial and Administrative Management (FAM), Contract Management Division. It would be appreciated if you would provide comments regarding our past performance. Your comments are considered Source Selection Sensitive; therefore, you are advised that the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) prohibits the release of the names of individuals providing reference information about a Vendors past performance. In order to maintain the integrity of the source selection process, respectfully request that you do not divulge the name of the contractor nor discuss your comments on this questionnaire with any other individuals.
This form shall be sent via e-mailed to: Tset Wong at tset.wong@mspb.gov Past Project Information:
1. Contractor name and address:
2. Contract Number and Project Title:
Evaluator (The following information will assist in the analysis of the data. Information will be kept confidential.)
| 1. | Name of Evaluator: | Date: |
| 2. | Phone Number: | |
| 3. | Address: | |
| 4. | Position held or function in relation to the project: |
RATINGS:
Please evaluate the contractor’s performance using the following ratings:
| (E) | Exceptional | The contractor’s performance greatly exceeded the stated requirements. | |
| (HA) | Highly Acceptable The contractor’s performance exceeded the stated requirements. | ||
| (A) | Acceptable | The contractor’s performance met the stated requirements. | |
| (M) | Marginal | The contractor’s performance met the stated requirements, but with | difficulty. |
| (U) | Unacceptable | The contractor’s performance did not meet the stated requirements. |
Please rate and provide any supporting information for the following: (Use additional sheets as necessary)
1. The contractor’s on-site management and coordination of subcontractors.
2. The contractor’s ability to maintain a professional working relationship with Government personnel.
3. The contractor’s ability to provide qualified personnel to meet performance objectives as outlined in the Performance Work Statement or Statement of Work.
5. The contractor’s quality control ability.
6. The contractor’s ability to meet the performance schedule.
7. Was the contractor provided an opportunity to discuss any negative performance ratings? If so, what were the results?
8. The contractor’s ability to rectify identified problems in a timely fashion without further incident of the same.
9. Has the contractor been given any of the following: Cure notice; show cause, letters of reprimand, suspension of payments, termination? If yes, please explain.
10. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If no, please explain.
11. Was the contractor provided an opportunity to discuss any negative performance ratings? If so, what were the results?
12. The contractor maintained a professional working relationship with Government personnel.
OVERALL RATING: _________________________
Please provide any additional comments.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .