Past_Performance_Questionnaire.doc
DOC document 100 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Dock & Shed Rehab Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 140P6422R0005
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire and details of a federal contract opportunity for dock and shed rehabilitation work. The National Park Service seeks proposals to rebuild the existing Hokenson Dock, repair the existing Herring Shed, and relocate the shed to its original location on the dock at the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore in Bayfield, Wisconsin. The contract value is estimated between $1 million to $5 million, utilizing a firm-fixed price contract. Evaluation criteria include technical approach, past performance, and price. The North American Industry Classification System code is 237990 for the 100% small business set-aside. Offerors must register in the System for Award Management and have a Data Universal Numbering System number to be eligible for award. Proposals are due as specified in the forthcoming solicitation.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sol_140P6422R0005_Amd_0002.pdf | ||
| Questions and Answers_0002.pdf | ||
| Questions_and_Answers_0001.pdf | ||
| Sol_140P6422R0005_Amd_0001.pdf | ||
| Bid_Schedule_-_Dock___Shed_Rehab.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Technical_Questionnaire.pdf | ||
| Technical_Questionnaire.docx | DOCX document | |
| Specifications_-_Dock___Shed_Rehab.pdf | ||
| Attachment_-_Vaccination_Certification_Notification_Template.pdf | ||
| Sol_140P6422R0005.pdf | ||
| Notice_to_Contractors.pdf | ||
| Attachment_-_Submittal_List.pdf | ||
| Attachment_-_Certification_of_Vaccination_Form.pdf | ||
| Wage_Determination_-_Bayfield_Co.pdf | ||
| Bid_Schedule_-_Dock___Shed_Rehab.pdf | ||
| Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf | ||
| Attachment_-_Drawings.pdf |
Show all 17
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
Department of Interior
Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service is considering the company listed below in Section A for a project opportunity - Your comments would be appreciated regarding this company’s past performance.
Instructions:
1) The offeror is to complete only the information in Section A, then send the entire past performance questionnaire to project owner/evaluator for completion.
2) The project owner/evaluator (or reference) is to complete Section B, then send the entire past performance questionnaire back to the offeror to be provided with their complete proposal package, which will then be reviewed for evaluation.
3) The past performance questionnaire must be received by the contracting point of contact by the date and time specified in the solicitation (or any amendments). Please note that for electronic submissions, offerors should consider and account for potential delays in transmissions between when an electronic submission is submitted and when an electronic submission is received. Late past performance questionnaires will not be accepted.
4) One past performance questionnaire is to be used for each past performance project submitted. The offeror may submit between 3-5 past performance questionnaires for this solicitation. Past performance projects must have been completed within five years of the completion of performance of the evaluated contract or order.
Section A
Project Title:
Location:
Description:
| Company Name: |
| DUNS: |
| Owner/Project Manager Name: |
| Email Address: |
| Start Date: |
| Completion Date: |
| Initial Amount: |
| Final Amount: |
Section B
Evaluator
| Evaluator Name: |
| Company/Agency Name: |
| Address: |
| POC Email: |
Position Held or Function in Relation to Project:
Ratings Overview
Rating: If the rating is Marginal or Unacceptable, please provide additional information in the appropriate block or in the remarks section of this form.
| “O” |
| Outstanding |
| Performance greatly exceeded the contract requirements. |
| “A” |
| Above Average |
| Performance exceeded the contract requirements. |
| “S” |
| Satisfactory |
| Performance met the contract requirements. |
| “M” |
| Marginal |
| Performance met the minimum contract requirements but |
Some material aspects of the contractor’s performance were less than satisfactory.
| “U” |
| Unacceptable |
| Performance was poor and/or did not satisfy contract requirements. |
Questionnaire
Please select the appropriate rating and provide supporting information for the following questions.
| 1. The relationship between the company and client’s/customer’s contract team: |
| O |
FORMCHECKBOX
A
FORMCHECKBOX
S
FORMCHECKBOX
M
FORMCHECKBOX
U
FORMCHECKBOX
2. Overall corporate management, integrity, reasonableness, and cooperative conduct:
O
FORMCHECKBOX
A
FORMCHECKBOX
S
FORMCHECKBOX
M
FORMCHECKBOX
U
3. Quality control:
O
FORMCHECKBOX
A
FORMCHECKBOX
S
FORMCHECKBOX
M
FORMCHECKBOX
U
4. Ability to meet the performance schedule:
O
FORMCHECKBOX
A
FORMCHECKBOX
S
FORMCHECKBOX
M
FORMCHECKBOX
U
5. Have any cure notices, show cause letters, letter of reprimand, suspension of payment, or termination been issued? If yes, please explain:
Yes
FORMCHECKBOX
No
6. Would you award another contract to the company being evaluated? If no, please explain:
Yes
No
| 7. Was the customer satisfied with the final product and services? If no, please explain: |
| Yes |
No
8. Has the firm being evaluated been provided an opportunity to discuss or respond to any negative comments or performance ratings? If so, what were the results?
Yes
FORMCHECKBOX
No
9. Overall Rating
O
A
FORMCHECKBOX
S
FORMCHECKBOX
M
FORMCHECKBOX
U
10. Comments
Evaluator Signature
Name
Date:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .