Past Performance Questionnaire - Saginaw.pdf
PDF 197 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Q301--Reference Lab Services - Saginaw PoP 08/01/2026-07/31/2031 Implementing EO 14398 DEI Discrimination.
- Solicitation number
- 36C25026Q0263
About this file
This is a Past Performance Questionnaire template for reference laboratory testing services solicitations. The form is designed to be completed by past customers of offerors (vendors) bidding on laboratory testing contracts, with responses submitted directly to the Contracting Officer. The questionnaire is issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs, with inquiries directed to Morgan.Stein@va.gov.
The questionnaire requires customers to evaluate offeror performance across ten specific service factors using a four-point confidence rating scale (Superior, Satisfactory, Unsatisfactory, or Neutral). The rated factors include: transmission and connectivity to IT systems, quality of IT support, startup time from contract award to start date, test menus, turnaround times, notification of specimen evaluation viability, metrics for critical results, specimen pick-up time, and continuing education materials (PACE, CME, and CE). Customers must provide general contract information such as offeror name and address, customer organization, contract number, contract value, period of performance, contract type, and work complexity level. The questionnaire also requires narrative responses regarding any partial terminations for default or convenience, the contractor's greatest strengths and weaknesses, and whether the customer would award another contract to the contractor. The evaluator must certify the accuracy and completeness of the information provided and include their signature, title, and date.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 36C25026Q0263 0002.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C25026Q0263 0001.docx | DOCX document | |
| Price Cost Schedule - Saginaw 03.2026.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Price Cost Schedule - Saginaw.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Declining Balance Spreadsheet - Reference Labs - Saginaw.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Purchase Card Procedures for VA and Contractor.pdf | ||
| 36C25026Q0263_1.docx | DOCX document | |
| Service Contract Act WD 2015-4865 REV 29 EFF 12.03.2025- Saginaw.pdf | ||
| Wage Determination Information - Saginaw Reference Lab.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
Reference Laboratory Testing Services
RFQ# ___________________________
PART ONE: INSTRUCTIONS
The company who has provided you with this form is proposing on reference laboratory testing services 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 to the
Contracting Officer (CO) directly.
If you have any questions about this request, please contact: Morgan.Stein@va.gov.
PART TWO: GENERAL INFORMATION
1. OFFEROR’S NAME AND ADDRESS: _____________________________________
2. CUSTOMER ORGANIZATION: _____________________________________
CUSTOMER POINT OF CONTACT/EVALUATOR:
NAME: ___________________________________
TITLE: ___________________________________
PHONE NO: ___________________________________
3. Contract Number: ___________________________________
4. Contract Value: ___________________________________
5. Period of Performance: ___________________________________
6. Contract Type: ___________________________________
7. Complexity of Work:
____DIFFICULT ____ROUTINE
8. Brief Description of Your Contract Requirements:
mailto:Morgan.Stein@va.gov
PART THREE: OFFEROR PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS
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.
Adjectival ratings are defined below and should be used as a reference in assessing performance:
RATING DEFINTION
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 nor positive assessment.
Superior Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Neutral
Transmission/Connectivity to your IT systems
Quality of IT Support
Startup Time from contract award to contract start date
Test Menus
Turn Around Times
Notification of Specimen Evaluation Viability
Metrics for Critical Results
Specimen Pick-Up Time
Continuing Education Materials (PACE, CME, and
CE)
1. Has this contract been partially terminated for default or convenience?
___ YES ___ Default ___Convenience
___ NO
If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules – also include contract number, name, and phone number of Termination 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.
SIGNED: ___________________________________________
TITLE: ___________________________________________
DATE: _______________
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .