PAST_PERFORMANCE_QUESTIONNAIRE PSC U0-- docx.docx
DOCX document 39 KB Posted
- Attached to
- BPA - Educational Support Services PSC U001, U002, U004 -U006, U008, U009, U012, U014, U099
- Solicitation number
- N0017424SN0032
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire template for a blanket purchase agreement for educational support services. The Navy seeks past performance information from agencies that have previously contracted with offerors for similar requirements. The questionnaire evaluates offerors on customer satisfaction, timeliness, technical success, program management, and quality. Respondents are asked to recommend the contractor for similar contracts and note any unique problems.
The related federal contract opportunity is a solicitation from the Navy for a blanket purchase agreement to provide educational support services under PSC codes U001, U002, U004 through U006, U008, U009, U012, U014, and U099. The solicitation number and agency details are provided.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| PAST_PERFORMANCE_QUESTIONNAIRE PSC U0-- docx.docx | DOCX document |
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
FOR BLANKET PURCHASE AGREEMENT TO Educational Support Services Offeror’s Name:
Offeror’s Contact Name: _____________________________________ Offeror’s Phone Number:
Offeror’s Address:
Contract order number:
Item description:
Cost:
Name of agency/activity completing questionnaire: Name and title of the person completing questionnaire:
Length of time your agency/activity has been involved with the Offeror:
SUBMIT PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE TO:
Naval Surface Warfare Center 4081 N. Jackson Road, Bldg 841 Indian Head, MD 20640-5115 Barbara Grinder, Code 023E
E-mail address: barbara.j.grinder.civ@us.navy.mil
************************************************************************************** RATING
Please use the following guidelines to answer the questions. The Offeror’s Past Performance will be considered ACCEPTABLE or UNACCEPTABLE as detailed below:
EVALUATION CRITERIA
ACCEPTABLE-The Offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contract(s) met or exceeded contractual requirements. The assessed prior performance was accomplished with very minor problems or some problems for which corrective actions taken, or proposed to be taken, by the Offeror were, or are expected to be, mostly effective. Performance over completed contracts ranged from adequate to the highest quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The Offeror’s past performance record leads to an expectation of successful performance.
UNACCEPTABLE-The Offeror’s performance of previously awarded relevant contract(s) did not meet some contractual requirements and recovery did not occur within the period of performance. The assessed prior performance reflected some serious problem(s) for which the Offeror either failed to identify or implement corrective actions in a timely manner, or for which the corrective actions implemented or proposed to be implemented were, or are expected to be, partially or mostly ineffective. Performance over completed contracts was consistently of mediocre or poor quality or exhibited a trend of becoming so. The Offeror’s past performance record leads to an expectation that successful performance will not be achieved, or might be difficult to achieve, or that it can occur only with increased levels of Government management and oversight.
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION
SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
ACCEPTABLE
UNACCEPTABLE
The referenced contractor was responsive to the customer’s needs.
The contractor’s personnel were qualified to meet the requirements.
The contractor’s ability to accurately estimate cost.
TIMELINESS
The contractor’s ability to ensure, to the extent of its responsibility, that all tasks were completed within the requested time frame.
TECHNICAL SUCCESS
The contractor had a clear understanding of the tasks detailed in the SOW and/or Delivery Orders.
The contractor’s ability to complete tasks correctly the first time.
The contractor’s ability to resolve problems.
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
Did the contractor successfully manage its subcontractors?
Was the contractor’s management effective in controlling cost, schedule and performance requirements?
QUALITY
The contractor’s quality and reliability of services delivered.
PLEASE PROVIDE SUBJECTIVE RESPONSES FOR THE FOLLOWING:
1. Would you recommend this contractor for similar contracts? Please explain:
2. Have you experienced special or unique problems with the referenced contractor that the Government should be aware of in making our decision?
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .