Attach_P2-_PPQ.doc
DOC document 113 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N0042119R0038
About this file
This past performance questionnaire package is for services solicited under solicitation number N00421-19-R0038 for business and financial support services at the Naval Air Warfare Center. The incumbent contractor is being evaluated on quality, cost control, schedule, business relationships and management of key personnel for an existing contract. The questionnaire requests ratings in these categories on a scale of exceptional to unsatisfactory. It also includes fields for the name of the agency completing the form, contact information for the point of contact, and a comments section.
Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire
View the file
Other files
Show all 23
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
Attachment P2
From: Naval Air Warfare Center AD-PAX Annex 1 22473 Millstone Rd., Bldg 505, Patuxent River, MD 20670
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE PACKAGE FOR SERVICES
| FOR SOLICITATION: |
| N00421-19-R-0038 |
Submit completed past performance questionnaire package
By: to: Sarah Morley
By Facsimile at:
| Email to: |
| Sarah.morley@navy.mil |
(1) Name of Contractor questionnaire is being completed for:
(2) Contract Number:
(3) Role Contractor played in Prior Contract
Prime
Joint Venture Team Member
Subcontractor
(4) Proposed Role in Pending Contract
Prime
Joint Venture Team Member
Subcontractor
(5) Length of time your agency/firm has been involved with the Offeror:
(6) Contract type:
(7) Contract value:
(8) Description of service:
(9) Is Performance on this contract being reported in CPARS
No, complete page 2 of questionnaire
Yes, answer question (i) below
(i) Has the scope of work significantly changed since the last CPAR?
No
Yes, provide details in (iv) below
(ii) Have there been any significant changes in contractor performance between the last CPAR and now?
No
Yes, answer question (iii) below
(iii) Has an out-of-cycle CPAR been initiated to document changes in performance?
No, provide details of changes in (iv) below
Yes
(iv) Comments to support answers to questions (i), (ii) and (iii):
(10) Name of agency/company completing questionnaire:
(11) Name of person completing questionnaire:
(12) Email address of person completing questionnaire:
(13) Title of person completing questionnaire:
(14) Phone number of person completing questionnaire:
(15) Date questionnaire is being completed:
RATING SCALE: Please use the following ratings to answer the questions on page 2.
| Rating |
| Definition |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| Neutral |
| No record exists. |
| N/A |
| (Not applicable) should be used if the ratings are not going to be applied to a particular area for evaluation |
NOTE: For statements indicating less than “Satisfactory”, please provide a brief explanation in the comments section of the survey.
| CONTRACTOR PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY FOR SERVICES |
| N/A |
| Neutral |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Satisfactory |
| Very Good |
| Exceptional |
a.) QUALITY OF 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.
d.) BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS:
(1) The Contractor demonstrated effective management over the effort performed.
(2) The Contractor maintained an open line of communication so that the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and/or Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) 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 COR, TPOC, 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.) MANAGEMENT OF KEY PERSONNEL:
(1) The labor turnover in key personnel labor categories was minimal and did not adversely affect Contractor performance.
(2) The Contractor proposed qualified personnel to fulfill the requirements of the contract.
f.) CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:
(1) The 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 TPOC.
(3) I am satisfied with the performance of the Contractor under this effort.
COMMENTS:
AIR- 2.5.1 PPQ FORM
VERSION D1 07/2008
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .