Attachment_J.9_Past_Performance_Reference_Template.docx
DOCX document 29 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N6133120R0004
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire template for evaluating contractors on federal contracts. It includes assessment elements related to cost control, schedule, mission requirements, quality, subcontract management, business relations, management of key personnel, and an overall recommendation. Contracting officers would use this template to gather input from references on a contractor's past performance on relevant contracts to aid in source selection decisions for new opportunities. The template focuses on evaluating the contractor's performance against contractual requirements and does not itself specify any required products or services.
This opportunity notice is for operation and maintenance support of the Sea Fighter (FSF-1), a wave-piercing catamaran. The Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City Division intends to award a single cost-plus-fixed-fee contract with cost reimbursable line items to a qualified 8(a) small business. The contract would include a 12-month base period and four 12-month option periods, for a total period of five years. The contractor must provide crew and support to operate and maintain the FSF-1 during systems testing, experimentation, and transit between ports. TOP SECRET security clearances are required. The anticipated solicitation number is N6133120R0004 and will be available through the Government Point of Entry website. The current incumbent is Yulista/Y-Tech under contract N61331-15-C-0025.
View the file
Other files
Show all 24
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
RFP# N6133120R3001
Attachment J.10 Past Performance Questionnaire
Contractor Name:
Contract/Task Order Number:
Government POC Name, Title & Location:
Government POC Telephone number:
Government POC E-mail address:
Total Contract Value:
Period of Performance: From: To:
Past Performance Questionnaire Based on your knowledge of the contract, please provide your assessment of how well the contractor performed on each of the following topics. Please check the appropriate rating and comment on all responses other than those rated N/A.
Performance Assessment Values:
| 5 = Exceptional |
| 4 = Very Good |
| 3 = Satisfactory |
| 2 = Marginal |
| 1 = Unsatisfactory |
| 0 = Not Applicable |
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.
Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated 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.
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 a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
Unable to provide a score. Performance in this area not applicable to effort assessed.
Assessment Elements:
| Question |
| Performance Rating |
| Comments |
| Cost Control. Rate the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling cost (including reporting and analyzing variances) and ability to deliver at the agreed-to cost/price. Provide reasons for changes to the contract value (e.g., scope changes, overrun/underrun, Government-imposed schedule changes). |
| 5 |
| Schedule. Rate the contractor’s ability to deliver according to the agreed-to schedule. What were the causes of any schedule variances? |
| 5 |
| Mission Requirements. Rate the contractor’s ability to provide a product or service that met your mission requirements. |
| 5 |
| Quality. Rate the contractor’s ability to provide a product or service that met your required level of quality. Assess the contractor’s conformance to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship (e.g., commonly accepted technical, professional, environmental, or safety and health standards.) |
| 5 |
| Subcontract Management. Rate the contractor’s ability to meet the goals of the subcontracting plan, to include the ability to timely award and manage subcontracts. |
| 5 |
| Business Relations. Rate the contractor’s ability to integrate and coordinate all activities needed to execute the contract, specifically the timeliness, completeness, quality of problem resolution, corrective action plans, the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, customer satisfaction, and its ability to submit accurate invoices in a timely manner. |
| 5 |
| Management of Key Personnel. Assess the contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting, and replacing—when necessary—key personnel. |
| 5 |
| Recommendation. To what extent would you recommend this contractor for additional contracts? Rate on the following scale: 5 = Yes, definitely; 4 = Yes, likely; 3 = Maybe, 2 = No, not likely; 1 = No, not ever; 0 = N/A. |
| 5 |
Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .