Past_Performance_Questionnaire.doc
DOC document 192 KB Posted
- Attached to
- HAVO REPL AUDITORIUM CARPET SEATS Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 140P8221Q0027
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for contractors bidding on the Theater Seating and Floor Replacement project at Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park. The questionnaire asks for details on a reference contractor's past work such as the nature, location, value, and period of performance of previous projects. It also queries about the reference contractor's timeliness, communications, quality of work, and any post-award issues. Bidders are asked to recommend or not recommend the reference contractor.
The related federal contract opportunity is solicitation number 140P8221Q0027 for replacing the auditorium carpet, seats, and floor at Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park. The solicitation was issued by the National Park Service within the Department of the Interior.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sol_140P8221Q0027_Amd_0001.pdf | ||
| Sol_140P8221Q0027.pdf | ||
| A06_Revised_Drawing.pdf | ||
| B03_SCA_2015_5691_Rev_12.pdf | ||
| A05_Revised_Statement_of_Work.docx | DOCX document | |
| A05_QUALITY_ASSURANCE_SURVEILLANCE_PLAN.docx | DOCX document |
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
Kilauea Visitor Center Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park Theater Seating and Floor Replacement Past Performance Questionnaire Contractor Name:_______________________________________
1. What was the nature of the work they performed? Where was the work performed? What was the dollar value and period of performance?
2. Timeliness and communications. Did the Contractor complete contract requirements on time? Were there communications prompt, responsible, clear, professional?
3. Quality of work. What was the contractor's quality of work?
4. Post-award problems? Did the contractor request modifications after award to extend time of performance or cost of contract, or were they able to meet all requirements as quoted with no changes? If changes were requested, were they reasonable?
5. Would this reference recommend hiring this contractor again (highly recommend, recommend, not recommend)?
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .