Performance Assessment Questionnaire.docx

DOCX document 77 KB Posted

Attached to
K-9 Explosive and Narcotics Detection Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
W911SD23R0014
Issued by
Department of the Army Materiel Command Mission and Installation Contracting Command Fort Eustis

About this file

This document contains a solicitation for K-9 explosive and narcotics detection services at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York. The Army's Mission Installation Contracting Command is seeking proposals for a base year plus four option years, running from 2023 through 2027. Interested vendors must attend a mandatory site visit on February 8, 2023 and submit proposals by March 1, 2023. Services required include K-9 teams for explosive and narcotic detection. Pricing should be provided on an hourly basis for each contract line item. The solicitation is designated as NAICS code 561612 with PSC code R430.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to K-9 Explosive and Narcotics Detection, newest first.
File Type Posted
W911SD-23-R-0014.pdf PDF
W911SD-23-R-0014-0001-AMENDMENT.pdf PDF
W911SD-23-R-0014.pdf PDF
PWS REVISION 01-04-23.pdf 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

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

Maureen.a.flanagan2.civ@army.mil with W911SD-23-R-0014 PPQ in the subject heading. Thank You

When filled in this document is source selection sensitive information IAW FAR 3.104

SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

A. Contractor:

B. Cage Code:

C. Contract number:

D. Contract type:

E. Was this a competitive contract? Yes No

F. Period of performance:

G. Initial contract cost: $

H. Current/final contract cost: $

I. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs:

J. Description of service provided:

SECTION 2: CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of services under this contract, i.e. local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands:

SECTION 3: EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION

A. Evaluator's name:

B. Evaluator's title:

C. Evaluator's phone/fax number:

D. Number of years evaluator worked on subject contract:

SECTION 4: EVALUATION

Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:

CODE PERFORMANCE LEVEL

S SATISFACTORY – The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

M MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

US UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

NA NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score.

Technical Performance
S
M
US
NA

T1. Quality & repeatability of operations & maintenance.

T2. Quality of technical system testing and certification efforts

T3. Quality/integrity of technical data/report preparation efforts

T4. Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements

T5. Adequacy/effectiveness of environmental safety procedures

T6. Ability to implement current standard practices for computer hardware design, operation, maintenance, upgrades and configuration control

T7. Ability to implement current standard practices for computer software design, operation, maintenance, upgrades and configuration control

Program Management
S
M
US
NA

P1. Effectiveness of overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

P2. Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)

P3. Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

P4. Understand/complied with customer objectives and technical requirements

P5. Successfully responded to emergency and/or surge situations

P6. Quality/effectiveness of sub-contracted efforts

Program Management
S
M
US
NA

P7. Effectiveness of material management (including Government Furnished Property or Material)

P8. Effectiveness of acquisition management

P9. Contractor proposed alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the customer

P10. Contractor implemented responsive/flexible processes to improve quality and timeliness of support.

Transition/phase-in
S
M
US
NA

T1. Contractor ability to smoothly transition resources and personnel.

T2. Contractor effectiveness on maintaining continuity of mission support while transitioning/phasing in resources and personnel to support other efforts.

Employee Retention/Attraction
S
M
US
NA

E1. Ability to hire/apply a qualified workforce to this effort.

E2. Ability to retain a qualified workforce on this effort.

E3. Effectiveness of employee compensation towards quality of work.

1. Please discuss each and every response for which you indicated M (Marginal) or US (Unsatisfactory) in response to the questions above (use additional sheets, if necessary).

2. Government Contracts Only: Has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations?

Yes

Default

Convenience

Pending Terminations

No

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules, etc).

SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY

Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?

Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.

Evaluator’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:Maureen.a.flanagan2.civ@mail.mil with

W911SD-17-T-0251-PPQ in the subject heading.

SPECIFIC RELEVANT CONTRACTS

Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet

The quoter shall provide documentation outlining the quoter’s past performance with contracts, as a prime or major subcontractor, which is the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the effort being procured under this Solicitation. The submittal shall include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance and how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the work specified by this solicitation. Quoters are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate.

1. Contract Number, Award Date and Contract type.

2. Price/Cost – original awarded AND final (or projected final, if contract is current).

3. Delivery Schedule – original AND final (or projected final, if the contract is current).

4. Contact Information - Address and telephone number for the Government (or commercial) procuring contracting activity AND contract administrative activity (if applicable).

Name, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address for the following:

5. Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)

6. Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)

7. Government or commercial technical representative or COR Identify in specific detail for each contract listed, why or how you consider that effort relevant or similar to the effort required by this solicitation. In determining relevancy, consideration should be given but not limited to such things as project similarity, project, size and complexity, contract type, contract environment, division of company proposing, and subcontractor interaction.

8. Narrative explanation on each contract listed describing the objectives achieved and the following data: any cost growth or schedule delays encountered. For any Government contracts which did not/do not meet original requirements with regard to cost, schedule, or technical performance, a brief explanation of the reason(s) for such shortcomings and any demonstrated corrective actions taken to avoid recurrence. Quoters may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the quoter to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk.

Merely having problems does not automatically equate to an unacceptable rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an quoter may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The quoter is required to clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. This may allow the quoter to be considered an acceptable past performance candidate.

9. Negative Performance Documentation. A copy of any cure notices, show cause letters or contract discrepancy reports received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action by the quoter or proposed subcontractor.

10. Completion Date/Delivery Schedule. The contractor shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .