S-4 Past Performance Reference.docx

DOCX document 28 KB Posted

Attached to
PRODUCT FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES - AMENDMENT 0003
Solicitation number
N5523625R3000
Issued by

About this file

This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire related to a federal contract opportunity. The questionnaire requests information on the contractor's past performance in the areas of quality, schedule, cost control, management, and regulatory compliance. Specific areas of interest include conformance to contract requirements, timeliness of performance, cost management, problem identification and corrective action, and compliance with applicable regulations. The questionnaire is being used to evaluate a contractor's past performance as part of the source selection process for a competitive service contract solicitation. The contract opportunity is for PRODUCT FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES for the Naval Sea Systems Command's Southwest Regional Maintenance Center, to provide maintenance, repair, and assessment execution and coordination expertise across various product families and divisions. This is a total small business set-aside with one base year and four one-year option periods.

View the file

Other files

Show all 21

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

N55236-25-R-3000 Section J Attachment S-4 Past Performance Questionnaire

NAVSEA - Southwest Regional Maintenance Center

TO: AGENCY/COMPANY:

PHONE: EMAIL:

INFORMATION REQUEST

PAST PERFORMANCE

This office is currently in the process of awarding a competitive service contract. [CONTRACTOR NAME] has provided your name and organization as a reference regarding [CONTRACTOR’S NAME] record of past performance under Contract No. [CONTRACT NO.]. Specifically, we are looking for past performance information regarding the following areas:

(1) Quality - Conformance to contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship, accuracy of reports, technical excellence, reliability.

(2) Schedule - Timeliness of performance with regard to contract milestones, delivery/performance schedules, administrative requirements, actions that contribute to or affect schedule variance, contractor corrective actions.

(3) Cost Control - Effectiveness in forecasting, managing and controlling contract cost; demonstrated sense of cost responsibility, efficient use of resources, cost savings; current, accurate and complete billings; actual cost/rates reflect closely to negotiated cost/rates.

(4) Management - Integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action, history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, customer satisfaction; responsiveness; subcontract management (when applicable); program management; management of key personnel (when applicable).

(5) Regulatory Compliance - Compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract relating to applicable regulations and codes, to include – when applicable – compliance with financial, environmental, safety and labor regulations as well as any reporting requirements.

Note: Pursuant to FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), an offeror without a record of relevant past performance, or for whom information on past performance is not available, may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Such offerors will receive a neutral rating.

In order for our team to compile its evaluation, we request that you complete the attached survey form and email it, and any other pertinent information, by the proposal due date/time ads specified in the solicitation to both Kathy Choi, Contract Specialist, via email at kathy.e.choi.civ@us.navy.mil and Dayen Lagunas, Contract Specialist, via email at dayen.lagunas.civ@us.navy.mil. Any relevant information you have would be vital in our assessment of the aforementioned Contractor.

Thank you very much!

John Rocks Contracting Officer

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY

CONTRACTOR NAME: CONTRACT NUMBER:

EVALUATION PERIOD: TASK ORDER NO.:

GOVERNMENT/CUSTOMER TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE:

Name (print) Phone

RATING DEFINITIONS

Unsatisfactory Entirely unfavorable past performance. Offeror has consistently not satisfied previous customers and/or violated laws, regulations, and contract requirements. Performance did not meet contractual requirements and any corrective action taken was not effective.

Marginal Record of performance split between favorable & unfavorable. Performance did not meet some of the contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor did not implement or has not implemented satisfactory corrective actions.

Satisfactory Record of performance favorable. Offeror has satisfied previous customers, laws, regulations, and contract requirements.

Very Good Record of performance very favorable. Offeror has satisfied previous customers, laws, regulations, and contract requirements and exceeded some of the contract requirements to the government’s benefit.

Exceptional Record of performance extremely favorable. Offeror has always satisfied previous customers, laws, regulations, and contract requirements to a high degree and exceeded many contractual requirements to the government’s benefit.

Please read the statements on the following page(s), indicating your relative level of agreement in the box provided keeping in mind the definitions above. Please provide a brief explanation for the ratings on the Narrative Explanation page, especially in instances where the rating is Marginal or Unsatisfactory.

EXCEPTIONAL
VERY GOOD
SATISFACTORY
MARGINAL
UNSAT

a.) QUALITY:

(1) The Contractor provided a product or service that conformed to contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship

(2) The Contractor submitted accurate reports.

(3) The Contractor’s performance demonstrated technical excellence and reliability.

b.) SCHEDULE:

(1) The tasks required under this effort were performed in a timely manner and in accordance with the period of performance of the contract.

(2) The contractor’s actions avoided any negative schedule variances; or, appropriate corrective action was taken.

c.) COST CONTROL:

(1) The Contractor performed the effort within the estimated cost/price.

(2) The Contractor submitted accurate invoices on a timely basis.

(3) The Contractor demonstrated cost efficiencies in performing the required effort.

(4) The actual costs/rates realized closely reflected the negotiated costs/rates.

d.) MANAGEMENT:

(1) The Contractor demonstrated effective management over the effort performed.

(2) The Contractor effectively managed the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification; and took appropriate corrective action when needed.

(3) The Contractor consistently demonstrated reasonable and cooperative behavior.

(4) The Contractor was committed to customer satisfaction.

(5) The Contractor was responsive.

(6) The Contractor effectively managed subcontracts for this effort, if applicable.

(7) The Contractor provided effective program management for this effort.

(8) The Contractor effectively managed key personnel with minimum turnover and well qualified replacements.

f.) REGULATORY COMPLIANCE:

(1) The contractor complied with all terms and conditions relating to applicable regulations and codes.

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY CONTINUED

CONTRACTOR NAME: CONTRACT NUMBER:

NARRATIVE EXPLANATION:

N55236-25-R-3000

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