Att_L-2_Past_Performance_Questionaire_(PPQ).doc
DOC document 106 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N6134018R1200
About this file
This document contains an attachment to a past performance questionnaire for solicitation N61340-18-R-1200. The past performance questionnaire is seeking information about an offeror's performance on prior contracts to provide engineering support services. It requests details about the prior contract such as contract number, role of the contractor, contract type and value. It also contains a rating scale for evaluating the contractor's past performance in areas such as quality, cost control, schedule and management. Additionally, the associated federal contract opportunity provides information about solicitation N6134018R1200, which seeks engineering support services at Fleet Readiness Center Southeast. Services under all engineering disciplines are required to support aircraft and weapon systems programs including P-3, P-8, F/A-18, E-6, EA-6B and others. The solicitation is planned to be posted by February 28, 2018. The Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division has issued this opportunity.
Att_L-2_Past_Performance_Questionaire_(PPQ).doc
View the file
Other files
Show all 28
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 L-2 Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)
From: Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (NAWCTSD), Contracts Department
12211 Science Drive, Orlando, FL 32826
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
| FOR SOLICITATION: |
| N61340-18-R-1200 |
Submit completed past performance questionnaire package (see Section L) to: Anthony McEntegart
| Email to: |
| anthony.mcentegart@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 values for contractor identified in Block (1): |
| a. Overall contract value (identify prime contractor): |
b. Value awarded to Contractor:
c. Amount Invoiced to date by Contractor:
d. Dollar amount of work performed relevant to engineering support services:
(8) Description of service:
(9) Is Performance by Contractor, Block (1), 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:
(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 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.
d.) MANAGEMENT:
(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 labor turnover in labor categories was minimal and did not adversely affect Contractor performance.
(8) The Contractor proposed qualified personnel to fulfill the requirements of the contract.
e.) UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS:
(1) The Contractor made a good faith effort to fulfill all subcontracting plan goals.
(2) The Contractor utilized small business concerns to the maximum extent practicable.
(3) The Contractor provided opportunities for small business including Alaska Native Corporations (ANC), Women Owned Small Business, HUBZone, Veteran Owned, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business, and ANCs and Indian Tribes that are not Small Disadvantaged Business or Small Business, to participate in contract/order performance.
(4) The Contractor utilized small business concerns in compliance with FAR 52.219-8 Utilization of Small Business Concerns.
f.) REGULATORY COMPLIANCE:
(1) The Contractor complied with terms and conditions in the contract or order relating to applicable regulations and codes.
COMMENTS:
Source Selection Information. See FAR 3.104. AIR- 2.5.1 PPQ FORM
VERSION D1 07/2008
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .