Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 43 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 70B03C26Q00000237
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire template designed to evaluate contractor qualifications and experience for the grounds maintenance and snow removal services contract at the BP Station in Swanton, Vermont. The questionnaire serves as an assessment tool for the Department of Homeland Security Customs and Border Protection to gather information about bidders' relevant past performance, project experience, and capability to execute similar services.
The document functions as a standard evaluation template rather than a completed questionnaire with specific scoring criteria or performance metrics. It is intended for use by small business vendors responding to the solicitation (NAICS 561730 - Landscaping Services) to demonstrate their experience with comparable grounds maintenance and snow removal projects, their project management approach, and references from previous clients. Prospective contractors should complete this questionnaire as part of their proposal submission to establish their qualifications and track record in delivering similar facility maintenance services.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| SOW.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment A Building Information.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFQ 70B03C26Q00000237.pdf | ||
| Attachment B Task and Frequency.docx | DOCX document | |
| Price Schedule.docx | DOCX document | |
| WD 2015-4137 r38.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
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
Grounds/Snow BP Station, Swanton, VT
RFQ 70B03C26Q00000237
PART ONE: INSTRUCTIONS
The company who has provided you with this form is proposing on a Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection solicitation. Past Performance is an important part of the evaluation criteria for this acquisition, so your input is very important. Please provide an honest assessment and return the questionnaire via email to robert.j.kay@cbp.dhs.gov by the end of the solicitation date, Tuesday, 8/4/2026 at 12:00 p.m. ET.
PART TWO: GENERAL INFORMATION
1. OFFEROR’S NAME AND ADDRESS 2. CUSTOMER ORGANIZATION
3. CONTRACT NUMBER: 2a. EVALUATOR
4. CONTRACT VALUE: $______________________ NAME:
TITLE:
PHONE NO:
| 5. CONTRACT AWARD DATE: | 6. CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE: | |
| _____/_____/_____ | _____/____/_____ |
7. CONTRACT TYPE: 8. COMPLEXITY OF WORK (Circle One)
DIFFICULT ROUTINE
9. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF YOUR CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS:
| __________________________________________________________________________ | |
| _____________________________________________________________________________ |
PART THREE: OFFEROR PERFORMANCE RATING
On the following pages, please summarize the offeror’s performance in each rating factors. Each factor has a set of sub-factors with four possible confidence ratings. Determine the adjectival rating that most nearly represents experience with this offeror and indicate assessment by placing an “X” under the appropriate heading. Offeror performance factors are:
| A. QUALITY OF SERVICES/REPORTS |
| B. PROJECT MANAGEMENT - RESOURCE ALLOCATION |
| C. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE |
| D. COST EFFECTIVENESS |
Adjectival ratings are defined below and should be used as a reference in assessing performance:
| Rating |
| Definition |
| Superior |
| Based on the offeror’s past performance record, it is highly likely that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. |
Satisfactory Based on the offeror’s past performance record, it is likely that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.
Unsatisfactory Based on the offeror’s past performance record, it is not likely that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.
| Neutral |
| No relevant performance record is identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance rating. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the offeror, key personnel, or subcontractors. This is neither a negative or positive assessment. |
| A |
| QUALITY OF SERVICE |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| 1 |
| How was the overall value of services provided? |
| 2 |
| Did the contractor provide quality reports and documentation (i.e., accurate, current and complete)? |
| B |
| PROJECT MANAGEMENT |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| 1 |
| Did the contractor provide effective contract and project management? |
| 2 |
| Was the contractor able to solve contract performance problems without extensive guidance from counterparts? |
| 3 |
| Did the contractor supply adequate and qualified replacement personnel? |
| 4 |
| How effective has the contractor been in understanding and responding to user requirements? |
| 5 |
| Did the contractor establish and maintain effective quality control standards and procedures? |
C
| TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| 1 |
| Did the contractor adhere to contract delivery schedules in the following areas: |
(a) Performance of services?
(b) Delivery of goods?
(c) Delivery of reports or other documentation?
| 2 |
| Were replacement personnel identified and assigned to the project in a timely manner? |
D
| COST EFFECTIVENESS |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Not Applicable |
| 1 |
| To what extent did the contractor meet the cost estimate? |
| 2 |
| Did the contractor effectively plan work to ensure maximum effective utilization of resources? |
PART THREE: OFFEROR PERFORMANCE RATING CONTINUED
1. Has this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience?
| YES | Default___ or Convenience ___ |
| NO |
If yes, please explain (e.g. inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules - also include contract number, name, address, and phone number of Terminating Contracting Officer - TCO).
2. What was the contractor’s greatest strength in the performance of the contract?
3. What was the contractor’s greatest weakness in the performance of the contract?
4. Would you award another contract to this contractor?
YES No
COMMENTS:
PART FOUR: EVALUATOR’S CERTIFICATION
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION IN THIS FORM IS ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
SIGNATURE OF EVALUATOR
TITLE OF EVALUATOR
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .