Past Performance Reference 36C78626Q50050.docx
DOCX document 31 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Disinterment Support Service NMCP -- G001
- Solicitation number
- QSE--36C78626Q50050
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Reference form for a Disinterment Support Services contract (Solicitation 36C78626Q50050) at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific in Honolulu, Hawaii. The solicitation is a 100% Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Business Set-Aside under NAICS code 812220, with a small business size standard of $25 million. The contract requires the contractor to provide personnel, equipment, tools, and supervision to perform disinterment support services in accordance with the Statement of Work.
Key contract details include procurement under FAR Part 12 for commercial products and services, with vendor questions due by 01/28/26 at 1 PM PST. Contractors must be actively registered in SAM.gov and submit all required documents to be considered for competition. The form includes a comprehensive past performance evaluation template with ratings for quality of work, timeliness, responsiveness, safety compliance, and customer satisfaction, using a scale from Unsatisfactory to Exceptional. The solicitation is issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs National Cemetery Administration.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| WD 2015-5689 Rev 27 12 03 2025.pdf | ||
| Solicitation.pdf | ||
| S02 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS EVALUATIONS FAR Part 12.docx | DOCX document | |
| P09 SOW Disinterment Support Svc 01.05.26.docx | DOCX document | |
| DIGNITY CLAUSE.docx | DOCX document | |
| Contract Guarantee Minimum.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 Reference Solicitation: 36C78626Q50050 Disinterment Support Services at National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific
The offeror listed below has identified your organization as a reference for work performed under a contract or task order within the last three (3) years. Please provide the requested information to the best of your knowledge. Your responses will be used by the Government to evaluate the offeror’s past performance for relevance, recency, and quality of performance.
Contract Information (Contractor to complete sections 1-4)
1. Contract Information Firm Name:
Address:
Phone Number
Email Address
Point of Contact
UEI Number/Cage Code
2. Worked Performed as:
Prime Contractor/Subcontractor/ Joint Venture/ other
Percent of project work performed
If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #)
3. Contract Information:
Contract Number
Contract Type (Firm-Fixed Price (FFP), Cost Reimbursement)
Contract Title
Contract Location
Award Date (mm/dd/yy) Contract completion date (mm/dd/yy) Actual Completion (mm/dd/yy) Explain differences
Original Contract Price (award Amount) Final Contract Price Explain differences
4. Provide Project Description (how is this project relevant to the project of submission? (Please provide detail such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)
Complexity of work ___High___ Medium__ Routine
CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete sections 5-8)
5. Client Information
Name
Title
Phone Number
Email Address
6. Describe the Client’s role in the project:
7. Provide the ratings below for worked performed.
| Criteria |
| Rating |
Comments / Examples
| Quality of Work / PWS compliance |
| Excellent / Satisfactory / Marginal / Unsatisfactory |
| Timeliness / Schedule Adherence |
| Excellent / Satisfactory / Marginal / Unsatisfactory |
| Responsiveness / Communication |
| Excellent / Satisfactory / Marginal / Unsatisfactory |
| Safety Compliance / Environmental Compliance |
| Excellent / Satisfactory / Marginal / Unsatisfactory |
| Customer Satisfaction / Professionalism |
| Excellent / Satisfactory / Marginal / Unsatisfactory |
8. Additional Comments Please provide any additional observations regarding the offeror’s ability to perform similar work successfully:
Signature / Date: _________________________
RATING DEFINITION NOTE
| (E) Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub- element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective. |
| An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. |
| (S) Satisfactory |
| Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract. |
| (M) Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective |
or were not fully implemented.
A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.
| (U) Unsatisfactory |
| Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective. |
| An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an |
unsatisfactory rating.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .