S01 Attachment 2 Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf
PDF 111 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 12FPC425Q0018
About this file
This is a Past Performance Information Questionnaire template required to be returned with quotes for a USDA FPAC Business Center contract opportunity. The questionnaire asks previous clients to rate contractor performance on a 5-point scale (0-4) across multiple categories including meeting deliverables, timeliness, pricing reasonableness, work quality, problem-solving ability, teamwork, and overall management effectiveness.
The rating scale defines 4 as Outstanding (substantially above requirements), 3 as Good (above minimum requirements), 2 as Satisfactory (met minimum requirements), 1 as Marginal (below requirements), and 0 as Unsatisfactory (failed to meet requirements). Respondents must provide explanatory narratives for any ratings below 2. The form requires the respondent's contact information, contract details, and signature. It concludes with a yes/no question about whether they would hire the contractor again. This questionnaire appears to be related to a solicitation for title abstract search and settlement/closing services in Washington for USDA NRCS conservation easement acquisitions.
View the file
Other files
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 Information Questionnaire (Return with Quote)
_[Insert Name of Offeror]______
Your assistance is requested by USDA FPAC Business Center to assist with providing feedback regarding the past performance of the Contractor named below. This document will be made part of the solicitation request. In efforts to expedite receipt of the requested information, the Contracting Officer respectfully requests that you complete and return to the Contractor named below as soon as possible. Please sign and date block 4.
The below ratings will be used to rate the contractor’s performance:
For any rating(s) less than 2, please attach an explanatory narrative. We greatly appreciate your time and assistance
Respondent: Please fill in the following table:
1. Complete Name and Title of Responder
2. Company or Agency Name, Address, Telephone Number, Facsimile Number (w/Area Code), and E-mail Address
3. Contract Name or Title, Contract Number and Type of Contract
4. Signature / Date
4 = Outstanding Performance was substantially and consistently above contract requirements. Contractor displayed an overall superior understanding of contract requirements and used innovative approaches leading to enhanced performance.
3 = Good Performance was above minimum contract requirements. Contractor displayed a thorough understanding of contract requirements.
2 = Satisfactory Performance met minimum contract requirements.
1 = Marginal Performance was below minimum contract requirements. Contractor displayed a lack of thorough understanding of contract requirements in one or more significant performance areas.
0 = Unsatisfactory Performance completely failed to meet the minimum contract requirements.
Contractor displayed a total lack of understanding of contract requirements.
NA = Not Applicable DK = Don’t Know No knowledge available to respond to this question.
Circle one.
1. How would you rate the Contractor’s performance in the following areas?
-Meeting contract deliverables?
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [NA] [DK]
-Submitting deliverables timely?
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [NA] [DK]
-Adherence to contract delivery dates?
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [NA] [DK]
2. If a request was made for changes, equitable adjustment, or claims, how would you rate the reasonableness of the pricing?
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [NA] [DK]
3. Was the Performance Work Statement executed effectively by the Contractor in a consistently high quality manner?
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [NA] [DK]
4. Has the Contractor shown difficulty when trying to solve issues during the work performance?
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [NA] [DK]
5. How would you rate the Contractor’s ability to create teaming/partnering relationships to achieve work tasks?
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [NA] [DK]
6. Has the Contractor refused to complete any portion of the work?
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [NA] [DK]
7. Did the Contractor manage effectively including cooperation with the technical representatives, the Contracting Officer, and other stakeholders showing flexibility and responsiveness?
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0] [NA] [DK]
8. Provide an overall assessment of the Contractor’s performance.
[4] [3] [2] [1] [0]
9. Would you hire this Company again?
[ ] Yes [ ] No
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .