OPPD worksheet.docx

DOCX document 22 KB Posted

Attached to
SCBA Preventative and Corrective Maintenance
Solicitation number
N00244-26-Q-S017
Issued by

About this file

This is an Offeror's Past Performance Data worksheet used for evaluating contractor performance on federal contracts. The form is designated as source selection sensitive information and serves as a standardized evaluation tool for assessing past performance relevant to the SCBA Preventative and Corrective Maintenance solicitation (N00244-26-Q-S017) issued by Naval Supply Systems Command.

The worksheet captures essential contract identification information including solicitation number, contractor name, CAGE code, contract number, contract type, competitive acquisition status, period of performance, and initial and final contract costs with explanations for any cost variances. Evaluators document their identification details and provide narrative assessments across specific experience elements: PM/CM maintenance for SCBA equipment and scheduled delivery date performance, along with price performance metrics measuring accuracy in forecasted costs and contract cost compliance. The evaluation uses a five-point risk rating scale (A, B, D, F) to assess contractor performance against contractual requirements, with ratings ranging from "Exceptional" (A-rating indicating exceeded requirements with minimal problems) to "Unsatisfactory" (F-rating indicating failure to meet most requirements). The form includes sections for evaluators to document contractor strengths and weaknesses, identify any reservations about future solicitation of the contractor, and provide additional performance comments. Completed questionnaires are to be submitted to specified Navy personnel for source selection evaluation purposes.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
2.04 Copy of 1.17 ESS+Price+Template.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Solicitation - N0024426QS017.pdf PDF

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

N0024426QS017

OFFEROR’S PAST PERFORMANCE DATA

When filled in, this document is Source Selection Sensitive Information in accordance with FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

A. Solicitation Number: ____________________________________________________

B. Contractor: ____________________________________________________________

C. Cage Code of contractor contract was awarded to: _______________________________

D. Contract number: ____________________________________________________________

E. Contract type: ____________________

F. Was this a competitive acquisition? Yes ___ No _____

G. Period of performance: _________________________________________

I. Initial contract cost: $_______________________________________

J. Current/final contract cost: $____________________________________

K. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs: ______

L. Description of service provided

SECTION 2: EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION

A. Evaluator's name: ________________________________________________________

B. Evaluator's title: __________________

C. Evaluator’s organization: ___

D. Evaluator's phone/fax number/email address: __________

E. Additional Point of Contact and phone number: ______________________________________________________________________________________

SECTION 3: RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

EXPERIENCE ELEMENT
EXCEPTIONAL
SATISFACTORY
MARGINAL
UNSATISFACTORY

E1: PM/CM MAINTENANCE FOR SCBA

E2: Met scheduled delivery date

Price Performance P1 Accuracy in meeting forecasted costs and perform within contract costs

SECTION 4: EVALUATION

Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. The scale is defined as follows:

RISK RATING

A – The offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contract(s) met contractual requirements and exceeded many to the government’s benefit. The assessed prior performance was accomplished with very few or very minor problems for which corrective actions taken by, or proposed to be taken by, the offeror were, or are expected to be, highly effective. Performance of completed contracts either was consistently of the highest quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to an extremely strong expectation of successful performance.

B - The offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contract(s) met contractual requirements. The assessed prior performance was accomplished with some problems for which corrective actions taken by, or proposed to be taken by, the contractor were, or are expected to be, for the most part effective. Performance over completed contracts was consistently of adequate or better quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to an expectation of successful performance.

D - The offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contracts did not meet some contractual requirements. The assessed prior performance reflected some serious problems for which the contractor either failed to identify or implement corrective actions in a timely manner, or for which the corrective actions implemented or proposed to be implemented were, or are expected to be, only partially effective. Performance over completed contracts was consistently of mediocre quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to an expectation that successful performance might be difficult to achieve or that it can occur only with increased levels of government management and oversight.

F - The offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contract(s) did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery did not occur with the period of performance. The assessed prior performance reflected serious problem(s) for which the offeror either failed to identify or implement corrective actions or for which corrective actions, implemented, or proposed to be implemented, were, or are expected to be, mostly ineffective. Performance over completed contracts was consistently of poor quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The offeror’s past performance record leads to a strong expectation that successful performance will not be achieved or that it can occur only with greatly increased levels of government management and oversight.

SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY

What were the contractor’s greatest strengths in the performance of the contract? ____________________

Responsiveness to client requirements_____________________________________________

What were the contractor’s greatest weaknesses in the performance of the contract?

Would you have any reservation about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them fulfill one of your critical and demanding requirements?

Yes__No___ If yes, provide explanation: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.

_ _______________________________________________
Evaluator’s SignatureDate

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance.

Please email this completed questionnaire to with a copy to AMBER.M.HAVERSTICK.CIV@US.NAVY.MIL

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .