Past_Performance_Questionnaire-L-3.doc

DOC document 88 KB Posted

Attached to
RFP for Quantitative Research Analytical Data Support (QRADS) Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
SECHQ1-13-R-0005
Issued by
Securities and Exchange Commission

About this file

Past Performance Questionnaire (Word Version)

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to RFP for Quantitative Research Analytical Data Support (QRADS), newest first.
File Type Posted
SECHQ1-13-R-0005-Award_Notice-.pdf PDF
SECHQ1-13-R-0005-IDIQ_Award_Notification.doc.pdf PDF
Copy_of_Copy_of_L-1_-_Pricing_Templates_07-03-13_(FINAL).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Past_Performance_Questionnaire-L-3_-7.3.13.doc DOC document
Work_Category_3_-final.doc DOC document
Work_Category_2_-_final.doc DOC document
Work_Category_1_-_final.doc DOC document
QRADSAmendment000001.pdf PDF
Work_Category_4_-_final.doc DOC document
Work_Category_5_-_final.doc DOC document
QRADSSectionJ_and_Questions.pdf PDF
PDF1_cov_PRIS_RFP.pdf PDF
PDF_II_section_j_attachments.pdf PDF
Copy_of_Copy_of_L-1_-_Pricing_Templates_6-13-13_(FINAL).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Show all 14

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

Attachment L-3

Past Performance Questionnaire

SECHQ1-13-R-0005

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Office of Acquisition, intends to obtain a qualified firm under RFP No. SECHQ1-13-R-0005 to conduct and coordinate on behalf of the Division of Economic and Risk Analysis, Office of Quantitative Research. In order to accurately evaluate the Offeror’s past performance, your assistance is requested in obtaining and verifying the past performance history of this Offeror.

Two forms are provided to complete the evaluation: 1) Performance Rating Form; and 2) Supplemental Comment Form. Upon completion of this form, please submit it as an e-mailed attachment Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted to QRADS@sec.gov NO LATER THAN 2:00 P.M. Eastern Time on July 15, 2013. Please make the subject line of the e-mail read “SECHQ1-13-R-0005 - Past Performance Questionnaire – Insert Evaluated Company’s Name.”

The following standards shall be used in arriving at the rating.

Outstanding
The Quoter’s record of past performance, as applicable, specifically relates to and suggests that SEC can expect superior performance and customer satisfaction for this effort with very low risk.
Very Good
The Quoter’s record of past performance, as applicable, specifically relates to and suggests that SEC may expect highly satisfactory performance and customer satisfaction for this effort with minimal risk.
Acceptable
The Quoter’s record of past performance, as applicable, specifically relates to and suggests that the SEC may expect satisfactory performance and customer satisfaction for this effort. The Quoter’s past performance record reflects minimal prior SEC experience and suggests some risk.
Marginal
The Quoter’s record of past performance, as applicable, suggests no prior experience and suggests that the Government may expect less than satisfactory performance and customer satisfaction for this effort. The Quoter’s performance record presents a high degree of risk.

Unacceptable

The Quoter’s record of past performance, as applicable, suggests that the Government may expect unsatisfactory performance and customer satisfaction for this effort. The Quoter’s performance record, as applicable, suggests a high degree of risk.

Neutral

A "Neutral" rating indicates a quoter without a record of past performance or for whom information on relevant past performance is not available.

Performance Rating Form

NAME OF COMPANY EVALUATED:

ADDRESS OF COMPANY EVALUATED:

CONTRACT NUMBER

CONTRACT PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

CONTRACT VALUE
CONTRACT TYPE

CONTRACTING OFFICER NAME,

ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND EMAIL ADDRESS

TYPE OF SERVICES PERFORMED (ACTIVITY):

NAME OF EVALUATOR, COMPANY/AGENCY, ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS
DATE EVALUATION PROVIDED

Additional Comment Form

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

Performance Element

Outstanding

Very Good

Acceptable

Marginal

Unacceptab le

Neutral

1. QUALITY OF TECHNICAL APPROACH

(For example:

Were the services comprehensive, complete, and feasible?

(Met needs, performed successfully, accommodated changing requirements.)

2. UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIREMENTS

(For example:

Did contractor show an understanding of scope requirements an appreciation complexity requirements?

And did contractor effectively identify flaws, inconsistencies other inaccuracies in your technical direction?)

3. EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT USE OF

RESOURCES

(For example: 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?)

4. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE

(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic schedules, monitoring performance, completing work on time, and implementing corrections/changes in a timely manner?)

5. QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE/CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION

(For example: Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?)

6. BUSINESS BEHAVIOR

(For example: 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?)

7. COMMUNICATION

(For example: Did the contractor work and communicate well with contracting officers, contracting officer’s technical representatives, end users, other contractors, subcontractors, and in-house staff?)

8. COST CONTROL

(For example: 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?)

NO

9.

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

YES

FOR #9, PLEASE ANSWER “Yes” or “No”, as appropriate

Cost Control

Timeliness of Performance

Quality / Customer Satisfaction

Technical Performance (Quality of Product or Service)

PAGE

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