SE4 - Attachment 9 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx

DOCX document 30 KB Posted

Attached to
SPAWAR ASHORE GLOBAL C4ISR INSTALLATIONS CONTRACT Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
N00039-18-R-0060
Issued by
Department of the Navy Information Warfare Systems Command

About this file

This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a contractor bidding on Solicitation Number N00039-18-R-0060 for the SPAWAR Ashore Global C4ISR Installations Contract. The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command is requesting a past performance evaluation of the contractor for quality of product or service, cost control, schedule, management, and customer satisfaction on a previous contract. Respondents are asked to evaluate the contractor in these areas on a scale of exceptional, very good, satisfactory, marginal, or unsatisfactory. Explanations are requested for any exceptional or unsatisfactory ratings. The completed questionnaire should be returned within ten working days to the contracting officer via email.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to SPAWAR ASHORE GLOBAL C4ISR INSTALLATIONS CONTRACT, newest first.
File Type Posted
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 02 MAY 2018.pdf PDF
N00039-18-R-0060-0005.pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 8 - Small Business Participation Data (01MAY2018).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 01 MAY 2018.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 27 APR 2018.pdf PDF
N00039-18-R-0060-0004.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 26 APR 2018.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 20 APR 2018.pdf PDF
N00039-18-R-0060-0003.pdf PDF
SE4 - Exhibit A - DD 1423 (11APR2018).pdf PDF
N00039-18-R-0060-0002.pdf PDF
INDUSTRY DAY II Sign In Sheet 20180402.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 05 APR 2018.pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 5 - QASP (29MAR2018).pdf PDF
GIC SE 4 Industry Day Presentation.pptx PPTX presentation
SE4 - Attachment 3 - Statement of Work (SOW) 11APR2018.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 12 APR 2018_FINAL.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 26 MAR 2018.pdf PDF
N00039-18-R-0060-0001.pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 14 - Price Risk Math Model 26 MAR 2018.pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 13 - CENTCOM Clauses Afghanistan (JAN 2018).pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 5 - QASP (03NOV2017).pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 7 - Reference Information Sheet (RIS).docx DOCX document
SE4 - Attachment 4 - DD 254.pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 8 - Small Business Participation Data (22FEB2018).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
SE4 - Attachment 11 - Proposal Ratings Guide.pdf PDF
N00039-18-R-0060.pdf PDF
SE4 - Exhibit A - DD 1423 (13MAR2018).pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 10 - Proposal Checklist.pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 1B - Final Fee or Profit Determination Formula (09NOV2017).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
SE4 - Attachment 1A - Incentive Plan 24OCT2017.pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 12 - Gate Review Matrix.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
SE4 - ATTACHMENT 6 - Ceiling Distribution Proposal (26JAN2018).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
SE4 - Attachment 3 - Statement of Work (SOW) 09MAR2018.pdf PDF
SE4 - Attachment 2 - Personnel Qualifications (06NOV2017).pdf PDF
Industry_Day_2_Information.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 13 MAR 2018.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 14 FEB 2018.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 14 FEB 2018.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 10 JAN 2018.pdf PDF
Q and A - N00039-18-R-0060 - Shore - 10 JAN 2018.pdf PDF
Show all 41

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

Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command Chris Thompson, Code 2.1A7

SPAWAR CONTRACTS, 4301 PACIFIC HIGHWAY

SAN DIEGO, CA 92110-3127

TO: AGENCY:

FAX: EMAIL:_________________________

INFORMATION REQUEST

PAST PERFORMANCE

This office is currently in the process of awarding a competitive service contract. [CONTRACTOR NAME] has provided your name and organization as a reference regarding [CONTRACTOR’S NAME] record of past performance under Contract No. [CONTRACT NO.]. Specifically, we are looking for past performance information regarding the following areas:

a.) Quality of Product or Service - Conformance to contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship, accuracy of reports, appropriateness of personnel, and technical excellence;

b.) Cost Control - Within budget, current accurate and complete billings, actual cost/rates reflect closely to negotiated cost/rates, cost efficiency measures, adequate budgetary internal controls;

c.) Schedule - Timeliness of performance, met interim milestones, reliable, responsive to technical and contractual direction, completed on time, including wrap-up and contract administration, no liquidated damages assessed;

d.) Management - Effective management, businesslike correspondence, responsive to contract requirements, prompt notification of problems, reasonable/cooperative behavior, flexible, proactive, effective Contractor recommended solutions, timely award and management of subcontracts, effective small/small disadvantaged business subcontracting program;

e.) Customer Satisfaction - Satisfaction of end users with the Contractor’s service;

In order for our team to compile its evaluation, we request that you complete the attached survey form and email it, and any other pertinent information, within ten (10) working days to chris.thompson1@navy.mil. Any relevant information you have would be vital in our assessment of the aforementioned Contractor.

Chris Thompson
Contracting Officer

ATTACHMENT 9 –

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY

N00039-18-R-0060

Competition Sensitive
[DATE]
For Official Use Only
Page 1 of 4

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY

CONTRACTOR NAME: CONTRACT NUMBER:

EVALUATION PERIOD: DELIVERY ORDER NO.:

GOVERNMENT TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE:

Name (print) Code Phone

Please read the statements below, indicating your relative level of agreement in the box provided. Please refer to the last page for definitions of “Exceptional”, “Very Good”, “Satisfactory”, “Marginal”, and “Not Satisfactory”.

EXCEPTIONAL
VERY GOOD
SATISFACTORY
MARGINAL
UNSATISFACTORY

a.) QUALITY OF PRODUCT OR SERVICE:

(1) The Contractor provided a product or service that conformed to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship

(2) The Contractor submitted accurate reports.

(3) The Contractor utilized personnel that were appropriate to the effort performed.

b.) COST CONTROL:

(1) The Contractor performed the effort within the estimated cost/price.

(2) The Contractor submitted accurate invoices on a timely basis.

(3) The Contractor demonstrated cost efficiencies in performing the required effort.

(4) The actual costs/rates realized closely reflected the negotiated costs/rates.

c.) SCHEDULE:

(1) The tasks required under this effort were performed in a timely manner and in accordance with the period of performance of the contract.

(2) The Contractor was responsive to technical and/or contractual direction.

NOTE: For statements indicating “Exceptional” or “Not Satisfactory,” please provide a brief explanation on the attached page.

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY CONTINUED

CONTRACTOR NAME: CONTRACT NUMBER:

EXCEPTIONAL
VERY GOOD
SATISFACTORY
MARGINAL
UNSATISFACTORY

d.) MANAGEMENT:

(1) The Contractor demonstrated effective management over the effort performed.

(2) The Contractor maintained an open line of communication so that the COR and/or Technical Point of Contact were apprised of technical, cost, and schedule issues.

(3) The Contractor presented information and correspondence in a clear, concise, and businesslike manner.

(4) The Contractor promptly notified the Contracting Officer’s Representative, Technical Point of Contact, and/or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent issues.

(5) The Contractor cooperated with the Government in providing flexible, proactive, and effective recommended solutions to critical program issues.

(6) The Contractor made timely award to, and demonstrated effective management of, its subcontractors.

(7) The Contractor demonstrated an effective small/small disadvantaged business subcontracting program.

e.) CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

(1) The products/services provided adequately met the needs of the program.

(2) The Contractor was able to perform with minimal or no direction from the COR or the Technical Point of Contact.

(3) I am satisfied with the performance of the Contractor under this effort.

NOTE: For statements indicating “Exceptional” or “Unsatisfactory,” please provide a brief explanation on the attached page.

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY CONTINUED

CONTRACTOR NAME: CONTRACT NUMBER:

Past Performance shall be evaluated based on the adjectival ratings described below:

EXCEPTIONAL: Outstanding in all respects, representing the best that could be expected from any contractor.

VERY GOOD: There are few problem areas reported; however, they are not of such magnitude or duration to pose significant risk to the Government. The contractor resolved problem areas quickly and to the satisfaction of the customer.

SATISFACTORY: Some problem areas have been reported and/or the resolution of problem areas, was, in some cases, prolonged.

MARGINAL: The contractor’s past performance did not meet some contractual requirements and resulted in some serious problems, which were not resolved satisfactorily.

UNSATISFACTORY: The contractor’s past performance did not meet most contractual requirements.

NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:

image1.wmf oleObject1.bin

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .