Attachment_2-Contractor_Performance_Questionnaire.docx

DOCX document 22 KB Posted

Attached to
Mixed Waste Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
N42158-18-R-E004
Issued by
Department of the Navy Naval Sea Systems Command

About this file

Attachment 2- Contractor Performance Questionnaire

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Mixed Waste, newest first.
File Type Posted
Contract_Data_Requirements_List_DD_Form_1423_18RE004.pdf PDF
N4215818RE004-0002.pdf PDF
N4215818RE004-0001.pdf PDF
PWS_Attachment_I.docx DOCX document
Attachment_1-Past_Performance_Information_Form.docx DOCX document
Solicitation_N4215818RE004.pdf PDF
Attachment_3_-_Pricing_Rationale_Worksheet.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment_4_-_Transportation_Matrices.docx DOCX document

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

ATTACHMENT 2

Contractor Performance Customer Input Sheet/ Questionnaire

Solicitation Number: N42158-18-R-E004

1. Please complete this questionnaire. Handwritten responses are sufficient. If you need more space than that provided, please attach additional pages or write on the back. Responses will be treated as source selection sensitive information. This form is available in electronic format (MS Word) or as "hard copy." Completed questionnaires may be emailed to:

Norfolk Naval Shipyard Contracting Department ATTN: Donyette Rodgers, Contract Specialist

Portsmouth, VA 23709
Phone: Commercial (757) 396-8350
Fax: Commercial: (757) 396-9895

Email: donyette.smith@navy.mil

2. Explanation of codes:

CODE PERFORMANCE LEVEL

HA HIGHLY ACCEPTABLE – Superior accomplishment of contract requirements and very high customer satisfaction. Very Low Performance Risk. Based on the offeror's performance record, very little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

A ACCEPTABLE - Fully-compliant accomplishment of contract requirements and positive customer satisfaction. Low Performance Risk: Based on the offeror's performance record, minimal (but perhaps some) doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

M MARGINAL - Minimal or weak accomplishment of contract requirements and low level of customer satisfaction. High Performance Risk. Based on the offeror's performance record, significant doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

U UNACCEPTABLE - Failure to properly accomplish contract requirements and failure to satisfy customer. Very High Performance Risk. Based on the offeror's performance record, it appears unlikely that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

N NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score. Performance in this area not applicable to effort assessed.

3. Please complete the following identifying information and past performance assessment:

a. Contractor: _____________________________________________________

b. Contract number: _________________________________________________

c. Period of Performance:_____________________________________________

d. Negotiated price or cost at award: ____________________________________

e. Current estimated contract dollar amount: _____________________________

f. Dollar value of work actually performed to date: _________________________

g. Describe product/ service acquired: ___________________________________

4. Assessment Elements. Circle the appropriate letter for each item on the questionnaire (or if forwarding electronic copy via e-mail, “bold” the appropriate letter) and provide supporting narrative.

(1) Quality/Meeting Contract Requirements: The offeror’s demonstrated history of delivering products and services that met or exceeded the requirements of the contract.

· How would you describe your level of customer satisfaction?

HA A M U N

· Were there instances of rework and/or deficiency reports? (If yes, explain)

HA A M U N

· Did the contractor engage in effective and/or innovative work applications that were beneficial to the Government?

HA A M U N

(2) Quality/Timeliness.

· Did the Contractor meet/comply with performance schedules?

HA A M U N

· Rate the timeliness of submission of requested information, reports and invoicing.

HA A M U N

(3) Quality/Contractor Responsiveness. The offeror’s demonstrated ability to:

· respond to customer concerns

HA A M U N

· isolate and resolve problems

· the number and severity of problems,

· the effectiveness of corrective actions taken.

HA A M U N

· Contractor's cost control. Did the contractor deliver at the agreed-to price/cost? Describe the reasons for changes to contract value (e.g., scope changes, overrun/underrun, Government-imposed schedule changes, etc.)

HA A M U N

5. Additional Observations/Information

· Identify the contractor's overall strengths and weaknesses.

· Given hindsight, are you satisfied that that the contract was awarded to the right contractor? Would you be pleased to have this contractor perform work for you again? Why?

· Are you aware of any other contracted efforts performed by this contractor similar in nature to this contract? Please identify contract/program and point of contact.

· Is there anyone else we should send this questionnaire to? Please identify by name, organization, and phone number.

6. Socioeconomic Past Performance.

Did the contractor meet (or exceed) applicable goals for utilization of small, small disadvantaged, woman-owned small business concerns, historically black colleges and universities and minority institutions?

HA A M U N

7. Please provide the name, title, address, and phone number of the person completing this questionnaire.

Phone _______________ FAX ___________________

Thank you for your assistance in this source selection. If you have any questions, please call Donyette Rodgers at Commercial (757)396-8350 or Email:donyette.rodgers@navy.mil.

File details come from the government source that posted it.