P09 Past Performance Questionnairre.docx
DOCX document 58 KB Posted
- Attached to
- C1DA--689-25-112, AE Replace Underground Storage Tanks Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 36C24125R0025
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) template to be completed for at least three past performance references as part of an A/E services solicitation for replacing underground storage tanks at VA facilities in West Haven and Newington, CT. The questionnaire includes sections for general information about the A/E firm being evaluated, evaluator information, and a detailed performance evaluation matrix rating 21 factors on a 1-5 scale across categories including design services, construction support services, LEED, BIM, and overall performance. The evaluation factors focus on technical competence, design quality, cost control, schedule adherence, and responsiveness. The completed questionnaires must be submitted directly to the VA contracting office by February 14, 2025 at 11:00AM EST via email to cecilia.antwi@va.gov.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| S06 Site EHRM Utility Boring Plan.pdf | ||
| S06 Statement of Work 689-25-112 UST Replacements.docx | DOCX document | |
| S06 WH M4site UST Plan.pdf | ||
| S06 Past Performance Questionnairre.docx | DOCX document | |
| S06 Site West Haven-MASTER-utility plan.pdf | ||
| 36C24125R0025_4.docx | DOCX document | |
| S06 08750 Newington W-1 Site.pdf | ||
| 36C24125R0025_2.docx | DOCX document | |
| P11 WH M4site UST Plan.pdf | ||
| 36C24125R0025_1.docx | DOCX document | |
| S02 VA Notice of Limitations on Subcontracting.docx | DOCX document | |
| Site West Haven-MASTER-utility plan.pdf | ||
| 08750 Newington W-1 Site.pdf | ||
| Site EHRM Utility boring plan.pdf | ||
| P09_SOW_689-25-112 UST Replacements.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 15
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
ATTACHMENT 1 - PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE AND COVER LETTER
Complete one set of letters and forms for at least three projects identified in your firm’s Section F of the SF 330, which will best illustrate proposed team’s qualifications for this contract. Additional space or blank sheets may be added to answer any question.Transmittal letter to accompany Past Performance Questionnaire
FROM: [Insert Company Official Name, Title, and Company Name] SUBJECT: Past Performance Questionnaire for Contract(s):
[Insert Company Name] is currently responding to the Department of Veterans Affairs (NCO 1) request for SF 330 request for SF 330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications for the 689-25-112 Replace underground storage tanks, West Haven and Newington. This Request for SF 330’s requires respondents to identify customers and solicit their response regarding [Insert Company Name] performance.
[Insert Company Name] is providing past performance data to NCO 1 relating to our performance on contract [Insert contract name/number] and have identified [Insert name of reference] as the point of contact for this contract.
The request for SF 330 instructs that respondent provide customers with the attached questionnaire. Please complete the questionnaire and email it by 11:00AM EST on February 14, 2025, directly to the NCO 1 Contracting Office.
E-mail: cecilia.antwi@va.gov The information contained in the completed Past Performance Questionnaire is considered sensitive and cannot be released to [Insert Company Name]. Please direct any questions about the acquisition or the attached questionnaire to the VISN 1 NCO point of contact identified above.
Thank you, [Insert Company Official Name and Title]
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
A-E FIRM TO BE EVALUATED:
Firm Name: Address:
Telephone: Email address: Point of Contact:
Firm Cage Code: Firm Tax ID Number: Firm DUNS Number:
Project Title:
Description of Project:
Description of A-E Firms’ Responsibilities:
Contract Number: Dollar Amount:
Contract Period of Performance:
The A-E Firm performed as the Prime Contractor Sub-Contractor/Consultant/Team Member
Percent of work performed by A-E Firm: Other (Please describe)
B. EVALUATOR INFORMATION:
Evaluator’s Company or Agency Name: Address:
Evaluator’s Name: Title of Evaluator: Telephone: E-mail:
C. SEND COMPLETED QUESTIONAIRE (SECTIONS B through D) TO:
Email: cecilia.antwi@va.gov
D. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the appropriate rating that most accurately describes the A/E’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ALL RATINGS OF Marginal or Unsatisfactory on page 7 under Narrative Summary.
| Exceptional (5) |
| Very Good (4) |
| Satisfactory (3) |
| Marginal (2) |
| Unsatisfactory (1) |
| N/A |
| -Performance |
| -Performance meets |
| -Performance meets |
| -Performance |
| -Performance does |
| -Not applicable |
| meets or met |
| or met contractual |
| or met contractual |
| does or did not |
| or did not meet |
| or rater has not |
| contractual |
| requirements and |
| requirements. The |
| meet some |
| most contractual |
| observed |
| requirements and |
| exceeds or exceeded |
| contractual |
| contractual |
| requirements and |
| performance in |
| exceeds or |
| some of your |
| performance reflects |
| requirements. |
| recovery is not |
| this area. |
| exceeded many of |
| company’s |
| or reflected some |
| The contractual |
| likely or did not |
| your company’s |
| expectations. The |
| minor problems. |
| performance |
| occur. The |
| expectations. The |
| contractual |
| Corrective actions |
| reflects or |
| contractual |
| contractual |
| performance reflects |
| being taken by the |
| reflected serious |
| performance |
| performance |
| or reflected some |
| contractor appear to |
| problems(s) for |
| contains or |
| reflects or reflected |
| minor problems and |
| be effective or |
| which the |
| contained serious |
| few minor |
| corrective actions |
| Corrective actions |
| contractor has not |
| problem (s) for |
| problems and |
| being taken by the |
| taken were effective. |
| yet identified |
| which the |
| corrective actions |
| contractor appear to |
| acceptable |
| contractor’s |
| taken by the |
| be effective or |
| corrective actions |
| corrective actions |
| contractor appear |
| Corrective actions |
| or did not provide |
| appear ineffective |
| to be highly |
| taken were effective. |
| acceptable |
| or were |
effective or
| corrective |
| ineffective. |
corrective actions actions.
taken were effective.
A-E FIRM’S NAME: PROJECT NAME:
Contract Period of Performance:
Note: Include this information on each page of the questionnaire form to ensure there is no mix up in information among contracts surveyed for respective primes/subs, etc.
Place an “X” in the appropriate column using the definitions matrix on page 4.
Item
FACTORS TO BE RATED
| Exceptional (5) |
| Very Good (4) |
| Satisfactory (3) |
| Marginal (2) |
| Unsatisfactory (1) |
| N/A |
Design Services:
| 1. |
| Overall skill level and technical competence of A/E’s personnel. |
| 2. |
| A/E’s ability to identify and resolve design issues expeditiously. |
| 3. |
| A/E’s responsiveness to design review questions. |
| 4. |
| A/E’s ability to effectively coordinate, integrate and manage their consultants/subcontractors/team |
| 5. |
| A/E’s effectiveness and responsiveness in interfacing with the Client’s staff |
| 6. |
| Overall accuracy, completeness, and coordination of final design documents. (Quality) |
| 7. |
| A/E’s ability to provide detailed, accurate cost estimates. |
| 8. |
| A/E’s ability to meet contract schedule. |
Follow-On Construction Support Services:
| 9. |
| Thoroughness and timely review of construction submittals. |
| 10. |
| Timely resolution of construction design issues. |
| 11. |
| Overall quality, responsiveness, and timeliness of A/E follow- on construction support services. |
Item
FACTORS TO BE RATED
| Exceptional (5) |
| Very Good (4) |
| Satisfactory (3) |
| Marginal (2) |
| Unsatisfactory (1) |
| N/A |
LEED (If Applicable):
| 12. |
| Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and coordination of LEED documentation. |
| 13. |
| A/E’s ability and understanding of the overall LEED process. |
BIM (If Applicable):
| 14. |
| Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and coordination of BIM documentation. |
| 15. |
| A/E’s ability and understanding of the overall BIM process. |
Owner’s Representative on Design/Build Projects (If Applicable):
| 16. |
| Overall accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and coordination of requirements documents and bridging documents. |
| 17. |
| A/E’s ability, thoroughness, timeliness, and support as Owner’s Representative throughout the project. |
Overall:
| 18. |
| How would you rate the A/E’s ability to control cost? |
| 19. |
| How would you rate the A/E’s overall management performance on this contract? |
| 20. |
| How would you rate the A/E’s overall technical/quality performance on this contract? |
| 21. |
| Would you use this A/E again? (If “No”, please comment in the Narrative Summary) |
| YES |
| NO |
Number of A/E Design Errors & Omissions on Project:
Increased Project Cost Due to A/E Design Errors & Omissions:
CONTRACTOR’S NAME: PROJECT NAME
Contract Period of Performance:
Note: Include this information on each page of the questionnaire form to ensure there is no mix up in information among contracts surveyed for respective primes/subs, etc.
NARRATIVE SUMMARY (Use this section to explain any rating from the previous page)
| Item |
| COMMENTS |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .