Encl_3_Past_Performance_Questionnaire_USTDA_RFQ-CO201531173.docx

Solicitation: [RFQ-CO201531173] Enclosure [2]

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Contractor Being Evaluated:

Company Completing Questionnaire:

Contract Number:

Delivery Order/Task Order Number:

Contract Value ($):

Evaluator Point of Contact Information:

Length of Involvement with Contractor (w/in 5yrs):

Scope of Project or Description of Deliverables/Service:

EVALUATION INSTRUCTIONS—PLEASE TYPE YOUR RESPONSES

This questionnaire will be used by the Government to obtain past performance information from a reference listed in the Contractor’s solicitation response. Please provide your assessment of the Contractor’s level of past performance on the contract for which you are a reference. Mark (X) the appropriate block using the following rating guidelines. Please provide comments for each of the headings.

Submit completed Questionnaire by the RFQ due date of July 10, 2015 via e-mail to: iezeonwuka@ustda.gov

Ratings

Outstanding (O) Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the reference’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.

Good (G) Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the reference’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

Acceptable

(ACC)

Performance meets 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.

Marginal

(MAR)

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.

Unacceptable

(UNA)

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 a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

No Rating

(NR)

Used if you are unable to rate an item because it was not a requirement and does not apply, or you have no knowledge of the item in question. Please explain in the comments section. This is neither a negative or positive assessment.

TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE (QUALITY OF SERVICE)

A.) QUALITY OF TECHNICAL APPROACH: Were the services comprehensive, complete, and feasible? (i.e. Met the needs, performed successfully, and accommodated changing requirements)

COMMENTS:

B.) UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIREMENTS: Did the contractor show an understanding of the scope of the requirements and an appreciation of the complexity of the requirements? And did the contractor effectively identify flaws, inconsistencies and other inaccuracies in your technical direction?

COMMENTS:

TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE

A.) EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES: Was the contractor able to obtain in a timely manner the amount and type of personnel resources required to support the project, effectively train personnel to perform the work required for the project, and maintain the required workforce throughout the term of the contract?

COMMENTS:

B.) TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic schedules, monitoring performance, completing work on time, and implementing corrections/changes in a timely manner?

COMMENTS:

QUALITY / CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

A.) QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE/CUSTOMER SATISFACTION: Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?

COMMENTS:

B. BUSINESS BEHAVIOR: Was the contractor reasonable and cooperative at the corporate and program levels in response to changes in technical direction, correcting errors, poor performance, criticism/rejection of contract deliverables and other quality issues?

COMMENTS:

C. COMMUNICATION: Did the contractor work and communicate well with contracting officers, contracting officer’s technical representatives, end users, other contractors, subcontractors, and in-house staff?

COMMENTS:

COST CONTROL

D. COST CONTROL: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic costs, monitoring performance, operating at or below budget, and implementing corrections/changes in a cost effective manner?

COMMENTS:

TOTAL AGGREGATE RATING:

Given the choice, would you do business with this contractor again?

Thank you for your time.

Additional Comment Page

Please provide any additional comments regarding your performance element ratings in the space below. Please add additional pages as necessary.

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE - SEE FAR 2.101 & 3.104