PastPerformanceFile Attachment VII.doc
DOC document 94 KB Posted
- Attached to
- 100% Recycled Paper
- Solicitation number
- NIHOD2009111
About this file
Past Performance
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Questions and Answers.doc | DOC document | |
| Mod1solicitation.pdf | ||
| MILSTD1189B Attachment V.pdf | ||
| MILSTD1189bCanc Attachment IV.pdf | ||
| AIMBC1 Attachment II.pdf | ||
| FedStd123g Attachment III.pdf | ||
| JCP-065 Attachment VI.pdf | ||
| IFBNIHOD2009111.pdf | ||
| NIH STD 6D Attachment I.doc | DOC 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
Attachment 7 Solicitation # NIHOD2009111
National Institutes of Health
CONTRACT PERFORMANCE
RFP CUSTOMER SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Please complete the following questionnaire and return via fax to 301-480-1203 or mailed to 6011 Executive Blvd., Room 539-C, Rockville, MD 20852 to the attention of Terita Stevenson or email this form to stevenst@od.nih.gov. Form must be returned by 08/13/09 at 3:00 pm ET directly from the evaluator.
Baseline Information
This survey pertains to the company:
Date of Survey:
Name of Person completing survey:
Your company/Agency:
Contract Number(s):
Your role in this contract:
Contracting Officer
Contract Specialist
Project Officer
Other : ______________________
Contract Award Date:
Contract Expiration Date:
Contract Value including all option and option periods Type of Contract:
Approximate percentage of work being performed (or completed) by subcontractor(s): ______%
Subcontracting company names with Program Manager and phone numbers General description of products/services required under the contract:
Rating Guidelines - Answers may be indicated with a ( or (.
Quality of Product or Service
0 = Unsatisfactory 1 = Poor 2 = Fair 3 = Good 4 = Excellent 5 = Outstanding
Unsatisfactory
Non-conformances are jeopardizing the achievement of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, it constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards containing similar requirements.
Poor
Overall compliance requires significant Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.
Fair
Overall compliance requires minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.
Good
There are no, or very minimal, quality problems, and the Contractor has met the contract requirements.
Excellent
There are no quality issues, and the Contractor has substantially exceeded the contract performance requirements without commensurate additional costs to the Government.
Outstanding
The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that was significantly in excess of anticipated achievements and is commendable as an example for others, so that it justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent".
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 1 |
| Compliance with contract requirements |
| 2 |
| Accuracy of Reports |
| 3 |
| Effectiveness of personnel |
| 4 |
| Technical excellence |
Cost Control
Unsatisfactory
Ability to manage cost issues is jeopardizing performance of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, this level of ability to manage cost issues constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards.
Poor
Ability to manage cost issues requires significant Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.
Fair
Ability to control cost issues requires minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.
Good
There are no, or very minimal, cost management issues and the Contractor has met the contract requirements.
Excellent
There are no cost management issues and the Contractor has exceeded the contract requirements, achieving cost savings to the Government.
Outstanding
The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where the contractor achieved cost savings and performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent".
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 1 |
| Record of forecasting and controlling target costs |
| 2 |
| Current accurate and complete billings |
| 3 |
| Relationship of negotiated costs to actuals |
| 4 |
| Cost efficiencies |
Timeliness of Performance
Unsatisfactory
Delays are jeopardizing the achievement of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, it constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards.
| Poor |
| Delays require significant Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements. |
| Fair |
| Delays require minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements. |
| Good |
| There are no, or minimal, delays that impact achievement of contract requirements. |
| Excellent |
| There are no delays and the contractor has exceeded the agreed upon time schedule |
| Outstanding |
| The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent". |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 1 |
| Met interim milestones |
| 2 |
| Reliability |
| 3 |
| Responsive to technical direction |
| 4 |
| Completed on time including wrap-up and contract administration |
| 5 |
| Met delivery schedules |
| 6 |
| No liquidated damages assessed |
Business Relations
Unsatisfactory
Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues are not effective. If not substantially mitigated or corrected it should constitute a significant impediment in considerations for future awards.
Poor
Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues are marginally effective.
Good
Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues are consistently effective.
Excellent
Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues exceed Government expectation
Outstanding
The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent"
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| 1 |
| Effective management, including subcontracts |
| 2 |
| Reasonable/Cooperative behavior |
| 3 |
| Responsive to contract requirements |
| 4 |
| Notification of problems |
| 5 |
| Flexibility |
| 6 |
| Pro-active vs. reactive |
| 7 |
| Effective small/small disadvantaged business subcontracting program |
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
| Yes |
| No |
The contractor is committed to customer satisfaction.
Would you select this firm again?
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .