A-E Services_PPQ Attachment 2.docx
DOCX document 40 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- _N6449824R4002_
About this file
This document is a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Architectural and Engineering (A-E) services in support of facilities projects for the Naval Surface Warfare Center Philadelphia Division (NSWCPD). The contract will be a single-award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) with a 5-year period of performance and a $4 million ceiling value. The A-E services required include planning, design, and construction services for new construction, repair, replacement, demolition, alteration, and improvement of military and other government facilities primarily in the Philadelphia, PA area. Key requirements include experience with DoD facility design, using SpecsIntact and CAD software, and managing subcontractors. Proposals must be submitted electronically via DOD SAFE by August 15, 2024 and will be evaluated on specialized experience, qualifications of key personnel, past performance, quality control processes, program management, geographic knowledge, and insurance coverage.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| N6449824R4002_PPI_QandA.docx | DOCX document | |
| A-E Services_Statement of Work_rev 6 Aug 2024.docx | DOCX document | |
| A-E Services_Statement of Work_Final 7-1-24.docx | DOCX document | |
| SF330-21.pdf | ||
| AE Synopsis_Final 7-1-24.docx | DOCX document |
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
Competition Sensitive Information
Return to:
Naval Surface Warfare Center Philadelphia Attn: David Rhoads and Edward D’Imperio Code 0242 CONTRACTS DEPARTMENT 5001 South Broad Street, Bldg 4 Philadelphia, PA 19112 Electronic Return Preferred
RESPONDING AGENCY/COMPANY/OFFEROR INFORMATION:
AGENCY/COMPANY/
OFFEROR: ADDRESS:
POINT OF CONTACT :
TITLE/RANK:
PHONE: EMAIL:
INFORMATION REQUEST FOR PAST PERFORMANCE
Our company is planning to submit a proposal to the Government and is requesting that you complete the attached Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) and submit it to the Government Points of Contact (POCs) via e-mail at david.a.rhoads8.civ@us.navy.mil and edward.r.dimperio.civ@us.navy.mil. We are requesting that you provide information regarding performance under Contract No. ______________________ , Project _____________________________________________________________ .
The Government intends to obtain data addressing the following areas:
a.) Quality of Product or Service - Conformance to contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship, accuracy of reports, appropriateness of personnel, and technical excellence;
b.) Schedule - Timeliness of performance, met interim milestones, reliable, responsive to technical and contractual direction, completed on time, including wrap-up and contract administration, no liquidated damages assessed;
c.) Cost Control - Within budget, current accurate and complete billings, actual cost/rates reflect closely to negotiated cost/rates, cost efficiency measures, adequate budgetary internal controls;
d.) Business Relationships - Effective management, businesslike correspondence, responsive to contract requirements, prompt notification of problems, reasonable/cooperative behavior, flexible, proactive, effective Contractor recommended solutions, timely award and management of subcontracts, effective small/small disadvantaged business subcontracting program; and e.) Key Personnel - How long key personnel stayed on the contract, how well they managed their portion of the contract, the quality and relevancy of the products/services generated by key personnel.
For the Government to compile its evaluation, we request that you complete the attached survey form and email it, and any other pertinent information, no later than the closing date on the solicitation to david.a.rhoads8.civ@us.navy.mil and edward.r.dimperio.civ@us.navy.mil. Please contact the Contractor/Offeror for closing date information. Any relevant feedback you are willing to share would be vital in our assessment of the aforementioned Contractor/Offeror.
ADJECTIVEAL 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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 |
| Rating will be neither positive nor negative. |
| Competition Sensitive |
| [DATE] |
| For Official Use Only |
| Page 3 of 5 |
AGENCY/COMPANY/OFFEROR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY
| COMPANY/OFFEROR NAME: | CONTRACT NUMBER: | |
| EVALUATION PERIOD: | PROJECT NAME.: |
RATING OFFICIAL (Government or Prime Contractor):
Rating Official’s Name (print)
Rating Official’s Code/Company Name
Rating Official’s Email Address Rating Official’s Telephone No.
| Company/Offeror performed work as: | Prime Contractor_________ Subcontractor_________ JV__________ | ||||
| *Prime Contractor POC (if work performed as sub) | Prime Contractor Name________________ | Phone__________________ | |||
| Percentage of work performed by Company: | __________ percent | ||||
| Project completion percentage to date: | __________ percent | ||||
| Project Complexity: | High__________ | Medium__________ Routine__________ | |||
| Project Type: | Firm-Fixed Price __________ | Cost Reimbursable ___________ |
Project Cost: $ ______________________________________________________ Please read the statements below, indicating your (the Rating Official’s) relative level of agreement in the box provided:
| EXCEPTIONAL |
| VERY GOOD |
| SATISFACTORY |
| MARGINAL |
| UNSATISFACTORY |
1. QUALITY OF PRODUCT OR SERVICE:
(a) The Company/Offeror provided a product or service that conformed to contract requirements, specifications, and industry standards of good workmanship
(b) The Company/Offeror submitted accurate reports
(c) The Company/Offeror utilized personnel that were appropriate to the effort performed.
2. SCHEDULE:
(a) The tasks required under this effort were performed in a timely manner and in accordance with the period of performance of the contract.
(b) The Company/Offeror was responsive to technical and/or contractual direction.
3. COST CONTROL:
(a) The Company/Offeror performed the effort within the estimated cost/price.
(b) The Company/Offeror submitted accurate invoices on a timely basis.
(c) The Company/Offeror demonstrated cost efficiencies in performing the required effort.
(d) The actual costs/rates realized closely reflected the negotiated costs/rates.
NOTE: For statements indicating “Exceptional” or “Unsatisfactory,” provide a brief explanation in the space below:
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
SOLICITATION N6449824R4002
pg. 2
| Competition Sensitive |
| [DATE] |
| For Official Use Only |
| Page 4 of 5 |
AGENCY/COMPANY/OFFEROR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY CONTINUED
| COMPANY/OFFEROR NAME: | CONTRACT NUMBER: | |
| EVALUATION PERIOD: | PROJECT NAME.: |
| EXCEPTIONAL |
| VERY GOOD |
| SATISFACTORY |
| MARGINAL |
| UNSATISFACTORY |
4. BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS:
(a) The Company/Offeror demonstrated effective management over the effort performed.
(b) The Company/Offeror 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.
(c) The Company/Offeror presented information and correspondence in a clear, concise, and businesslike manner.
(d) The Company/Offeror promptly notified the Contracting Officer’s Representative, Technical Point of Contact, and/or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent issues.
(e) The Company/Offeror cooperated with the Government in providing flexible, proactive, and effective recommended solutions to critical project issues.
(f) The Company/Offeror made timely award to, and demonstrated effective management of, its subcontractors.
(g) The Company/Offeror demonstrated an effective small/small-disadvantaged business subcontracting program.
5. KEY PERSONNEL:
(a) The labor turnover in key-personnel labor categories was minimal and did not adversely affect Company’s/Offeror’s performance.
(b) The Company/Offeror did not frequently propose personnel to fulfill the requirements of the contract that were clearly unqualified.
NOTE: For statements indicating “Exceptional” or “Unsatisfactory,” provide a brief explanation in the space below:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .