EXHIBIT_A_and_B.pdf

RFP N40084-14-R-0404

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT “A” – OFFEROR

EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET

The purpose of this form is to provide supporting project information for Factor [1], Corporate Experience of the Offeror. This form is to be completed by the Offeror. Only projects that fit within the parameters of this factor will be evaluated. All other projects will be removed and discarded prior to evaluation.

1. Contract Number, Delivery/Task Order Number, Project Number, Title, and Location:

2. Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Is project at least 80% complete: Yes No

3. Award Amount:

Final Contract Price (Including all options):

Is this the total project or subcontract price

4. Type of work: New Construction Renovation Repair Alteration

5. Type of Contract:

Design-Build Design-Bid-Build Other (explain):

6. Firm Who Performed the Work: (check one)

Contractor Sub Contractor

Firm’s Name:

If your firm was a subcontractor on this project, identify the prime:

If a Design-Build Project, identify the Lead Design Firm:

7. Customer/Owner Information:

Customer Name:

Point of Contact:

Phone Number:

FAX Number:

E-mail address:

8. If this project was performed by key personnel, a subsidiary, satellite office, or parent company, explain how this office/person will participate in this contract.

RFP N40084-14-R-0404

EXHIBIT A

9. Provide a detailed description of the project:

10. Provide a detailed description of what work your firm self performed on this project:

Form may be expanded

MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES FOR VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENTS AT

NEW SANNO HOTEL

N40084-14-R-0404

EXHIBIT B

NAVFAC PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0)

CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO NAVFAC WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON NAVFAC SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO NAVFAC. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR NAVFAC POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL

INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES FOR VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION

EQUIPMENTS AT NEW SANNO HOTEL N40084-14-R-0404

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’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 was highly effective. （特に優れている）

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’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. （優れている）

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum 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.

（満足）

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) 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. （問題あり）

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) 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. （不満足問

題あり）

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable No information or did not apply to your contract （該当なし）

Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

Contractor Information (Firm Name): ________________________________________________

Client Information (Name): ________________________________________________________

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts 技術データやレポートは信頼性がありましたか？

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance 工事又は提供されているサービスの品質は仕様書で要求されている 技術基準に適合していましたか？

E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance 詳細な客先の助言無しで問題を適時/適正に解決しましたか？

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance) 品質管理プログラムは適切かつ有効で実際にそのプログラ

ムに基づいて品質管理が実施されていましたか？

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

契約全体及び中間点までの期日は遵守されていましたか？（遅延損害

金があった場合は下記余白にお書き下さい）

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract 契約で要求された仕事を遂行するための、材

料調達源や情報網は優れていましたか？

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project?

エンドユーザーのこの仕事への満足度はいかがでしたか？

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication) 業者は御社の担当者に協力的でしたか？（御社の担当者と業者間の 見解の相違を効果的に解決する能力、書類提出物に対する信頼性、ビ

ジネスライクな対応を含む）

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

業者はどの程度、協力的かつビジネスライクに顧客の利益を考慮して

作業をすすめましたか？

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction 総合的な顧客満足度はいかがでしたか？

E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force? 下請け業者を含む多

種多様の現場の管理は効果的に実行されていましたか？

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort 業者は適任者を採用し適所に配置していましたか？

E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control 軍の契約の場合、軍の建物などの財産

に対する扱い方はいかがでしたか？

E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel 知識/専門知識は業者によって実証されましたか？

E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines 同時に複数のプロジェクトを管理する能力はありましたか？

E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes 顧客の要求や優先順位の変化に対応する能力はありましたか？

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program) 工事全体の管理は効果的に実施されていましたか？（管理、監督を含

む）

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

契約した金額の範囲内で工期や要求事項を満たしましたか？

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client 業者の提案は革新的で、経費軽減やメンテナンスを容易にするなど、

顧客の利益を重視したものでしたか？

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.

業者の会計方法は、かかった費用に対して適性に算出されていました

か？ そうでない場合は余白に説明をお書き下さい。

Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

この工事が、公共工事または米国政府との契約の場合：工事が、 部分的に、又は工事全体が業者の責任（又はその他の理由）で中断することは

ありましたか？ または現在中断されていますか？ もし、上記の中断等に関

連する警告文書等がすでに業者に出されているか、もしくは、何らかの解約手

続が進行中であれば、余白にお書き下さい。

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

この業者が財政/金融等の問題をかかえているような徴候はありません

か？ もしあれば、余白に説明をお書き下さい。

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues?

(Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

業者は、安全計画に沿って作業を遂行し、不安全行為/作業に対する対

応を確実にすることができる環境でしたか？

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

安全保障、警備に対する基準は確実に守られていましたか？

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

緊急時の仕事又は仕事量の急増に、契約担当官と連携をとり充分に対

応できましたか？

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues)

契約条件/条項は遵守されていましたか？ 特異なケースがあれば余白

に説明をお書き下さい。

E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below) またこの業者と契約を結びたいと思いますか？(そうでない場合は、余

白に説明をお書き下さい。) Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

この工事を行った業者に対する総合判定はいかがでしたか？

E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):

上記の設問にお答えいただき、説明を加える必要がある事柄については余白にご記入下さい。用紙が足りない場合

は別紙を添付されて結構です。 ご説明いただくことにより、より適正な業者選定に役立つことになりますので、

ご協力をお願い致します。