Attachment_11_-_Past_Performance_Survey.docx

DOCX document 22 KB Posted

Attached to
SURFMAC ROLLING ADMISSIONS Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
N32253-18-R-0019
Issued by
Department of the Navy Naval Sea Systems Command

About this file

Attachment 11

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Show all 11

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

Past Performance Questionnaire

When filled in this document is source selection sensitive IAW FAR 3.104

1. Instructions Please complete this questionnaire and send the completed copy to the Contract Specialists, Joy Tran and Charles Feldman, at joy.tran@navy.mil and charles.feldman@navy.mil.

Contract Identification

Contractor: Insert contractor name

Contract number: Insert contract number

Contract type: Insert contract type

Was this a competitive contract? (check one) Yes __ No __

Period of performance: Insert period of performance

Initial contract cost: Total Contract: Insert contract cost Current/final contract cost: Insert final contract cost

Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs:

Description of service provided:

2. Evaluation Customer or agency name:

Geographic description of services under this contract (i.e. local, nationwide, worldwide, or other):

Evaluator's name and title:

Evaluator's phone/fax number:

Number of years evaluator worked on subject contract:

Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:

Table 1 – Definition of Terms

(E) EXCEPTIONAL
The contractor has substantially exceeded the contract performance requirements.
(S) SATISFACTORY
There are no, or very minimal issues and the contractor has met the contract requirements.
(U) 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.
(N) NOT APPLICABLE
Evaluation area not applicable to this contracted effort

Table 2 – Evaluation Factors

Overall Customer Satisfaction.
E
S
U
N

How satisfied was the customer with firm’s demonstrated business-like concern for the interest of its customer?

How satisfied was the customer with the firm’s management of its internal or external design agent(s) in meeting the customer’s requirements?

Would the customer select this firm again? (Check Yes/No)

Technical Expertise

How well did the company perform ship repairs?

How well did the company provide competent and experienced personnel to perform on the contract/task order?

How well did the company provide competent and experience key personnel to perform on the contract/task order?

How well did the company complete the ship repair/maintenance work?

Quality of Product.

How well was the firm able to demonstrate compliance with contract requirements?

How well was the firm able to submit deliverables and accurately complete reports to the highest quality standards?

How well was the firm able to demonstrate appropriate levels of expertise and professionalism?

How well was the firm able to administer the contract in an acceptable and appropriate manner?

Timeliness of Performance.

How well was the firm able to meet all milestones as defined by the contract and customer?

How well was the firm able to complete deliverables in a timely manner?

How well did the firm respond to contract requirements and customer direction?

How was the firm’s overall reliability in performing in a timely manner?

File details come from the government source that posted it.