Past Performance Questionnaire Laundry 2025.pdf
PDF 298 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Laundry Services FSS/Lodging/ASA-NCOA 2025 Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA448425R0032
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire issued by the Air Force for a laundry services contract at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey. The questionnaire is designed to gather detailed performance feedback from a previous client or contract manager about a contractor's capabilities, with rating scales ranging from 0 (Not Applicable) to 5 (Exceptional) across multiple performance dimensions. The evaluation covers areas such as management quality, problem-solving, quality control, project supervision, maintenance professionalism, and overall contract performance.
Key contact points for this evaluation are Captain Jared Skipper and Lizbette Zalybniuk, both with @us.af.mil email addresses. The form requires the respondent to provide comprehensive feedback, including whether they would award another contract to the contractor, if subcontractors were paid timely, and details about any project discrepancies. The evaluation is structured to provide a holistic assessment of the contractor's performance, with opportunities for narrative explanations to support the numerical ratings.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Solicitation Amendment FA448425R00320001 SF 30.pdf | ||
| Laundry Services FSS-Lodging-ASA-NCOA 2025 Q_A.docx | DOCX document | |
| PWS Laundry Services FSSLodgingASA-NCOA 2025.docx | DOCX document | |
| JB MDL AT Awareness for Contractors Trifold.pdf | ||
| JB MDL AT Awareness Guide for Contractors.pdf | ||
| Medical Statement.docx | DOCX document | |
| Burlington countie WD Aug 2025.txt | TXT text file | |
| Ocean countie WD Aug 2025.txt | TXT text file | |
| SFS Appendix.pdf | ||
| SAM Laundry Solicitation - FA448425R0032.pdf |
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
Questionnaire
SUBJECT: Request for Past Performance Evaluation
You have been identified as a point of contact for a past performance evaluation of the firm listed on the attached questionnaire. This firm is currently being considered to provide laundry services to the lodging facilities at Joint Base McGuire-Dix- Lakehurst, NJ.
Your prompt attention to this questionnaire will be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions concerning this request, please contact Capt Jared Skipper at Jared.Skipper.1@us.af.mil and Lizbette Zalybniuk at lizbette.zalybniuk.1@us.af.mil.
LIZBETTE ZALYBNIUK
Contracting Officer mailto:lisa.goodwin.2@us.af.mil mailto:lizbette.zalybniuk.1@us.af.mil
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Contractor’s Name:
Address:
Telephone Number:
Fax Number:
Point of Contact:
Project Title or Brief Description of Work:
Contract Number: Dollar Amount:
Contract Period or Dates of Performance:
*Note: If offeror holds or has held other contracts with your agency/organization in the last 3 years, please complete separate evaluation forms for those contracts as well.
Contractor performed as the: Prime Contractor Sub-Contractor Key Personnel.
A. RESPONDENT INFORMATION:
Name of Respondent:
Title:
Address:
Telephone Number:
Email Address:
Signature:
B. EMAIL COMPLETED SURVEY FORM TO:
Lizbette.Zalybniuk.1@us.af.mil
Jared.Skipper.1@us.af.mil mailto:lisa.goodwin.2@us.af.mil mailto:patrick.duff.5@us.af.mil
C. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the number on the scale of 0 to 5 that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. Indicate Not Applicable (N/A) as necessary.
PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ANY RATINGS.
PERFORMANCE
RATING DEFINITION
(5) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
(4) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
(3) Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
(2) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.
(1) Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
(0) Not Applicable Unable to provide a score. Performance in this area is not applicable to the effort assessed.
CONTRACTOR’S NAME: CONTRACT NUMBER
The contractor:
1. Provided experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements.
0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
2. Provided effective quality control and/ or inspection procedures to meet contract requirements.
0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
3. Corrected deficiencies in timely manner and pursuant to their quality control procedures.
0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
4. Identified problems as they occurred and promptly informed project director.
0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
5. Suggested alternative approaches to problems. 0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
6. Displayed initiative to solve problems. 0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
7. Provided adequate project supervision. 0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
8. Perform repair and maintenance in a complete and professional manner.
0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
9. Cooperated with Government personnel after award. 0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
10. How would you rate the contractor's overall performance on this contract?
0 1 2 3 4 5 N/A
11. Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain outcome in “remarks.”
Yes No
12. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain in “remarks.”
Yes No
13. Did any discrepancies occur during project? If so, what occurred and was the issued handled in a satisfactory manner to the government? Explain in “remarks.”
Yes No
14. Paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner? Yes No
Remarks:
| Project Title or Brief Description of Work 1: |
| Project Title or Brief Description of Work 2: |
| Project Title or Brief Description of Work 3: |
| Project Title or Brief Description of Work 4: |
| Project Title or Brief Description of Work 5: |
| Project Title or Brief Description of Work 6: |
| Project Title or Brief Description of Work 7: |
| Project Title or Brief Description of Work 8: |
| Prime Contractor: Off |
| SubContractor: Off |
| Key Personnel: Off |
| DEFINITION: |
| 5 Exceptional: |
| 4 Very Good: |
| 3 Satisfactory: |
| 2 Marginal: |
| 1 Unsatisfactory: |
| 0 Not Applicable: |
| Unable to provide a score Performance in this area is not applicable to the effort assessed: |
| CONTRACTORS NAME: |
| CONTRACT NUMBER: |
| The contractor: |
| undefined: |
| 1: |
| 0: |
| 1_2: |
| 2: |
| 3: |
| 4: |
| 5: |
| NA: |
| 2_2: |
| 0_2: |
| 1_3: |
| 2_3: |
| 3_2: |
| 4_2: |
| 5_2: |
| NA_2: |
| 3_3: |
| 0_3: |
| 1_4: |
| 2_4: |
| 3_4: |
| 4_3: |
| 5_3: |
| NA_3: |
| 4_4: |
| 0_4: |
| 1_5: |
| 2_5: |
| 3_5: |
| 4_5: |
| 5_4: |
| NA_4: |
| 6: |
| Displayed initiative to solve problems: |
| 0_5: |
| 1_6: |
| 2_6: |
| 3_6: |
| 4_6: |
| 5_5: |
| NA_5: |
| 7: |
| Provided adequate project supervision: |
| 0_6: |
| 1_7: |
| 2_7: |
| 3_7: |
| 4_7: |
| 5_6: |
| NA_6: |
| 8: |
| 0_7: |
| 1_8: |
| 2_8: |
| 3_8: |
| 4_8: |
| 5_7: |
| NA_7: |
| 9: |
| Cooperated with Government personnel after award: |
| 0_8: |
| 1_9: |
| 2_9: |
| 3_9: |
| 4_9: |
| 5_8: |
| NA_8: |
| 10: |
| 0_9: |
| 1_10: |
| 2_10: |
| 3_10: |
| 4_10: |
| 5_9: |
| 11: |
| Yes: |
| No: |
| NANo: |
| 12: |
| Would you award another contract to this contractor If not explain in remarks: |
| Yes_2: |
| No_2: |
| 13 Did any discrepancies occur during project If so what: |
| Yes_3: |
| No_3: |
| 14 Was contract performance part of Air Show: |
| undefined_2: |
| Yes_4: |
| No_4: |
| undefined_3: |
| Remarks 1: |
| Remarks 2: |
| Remarks 3: |
| Remarks 4: |
| Remarks 5: |
| Remarks 6: |
| Remarks 7: |
| Text2: |
| Text3: |
| Text4: |
| Text5: |
| Text6: |
| Text7: |
| Text8: |
| Text9: |
| Text10: |
| Text11: |
| Text12: |
| Text13: |
| Text14: |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .