JETS Attachment 5 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 22 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Renewal Rapid Prototype Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- SP4701-26-R-0003
- Issued by
- Defense Logistics Agency
About this file
This document is a Past Performance Questionnaire template for a Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Information Technology Services procurement, specifically associated with Solicitation Number SP4701-26-R-0003. The form is designed to collect detailed performance ratings from previous contract evaluators across six key performance elements: technical approach quality, understanding of requirements, timeliness of performance, customer service, issue addressing, and cost control.
The questionnaire provides a structured rating scale ranging from Exceptional to Unsatisfactory, allowing evaluators to comprehensively assess a contractor's past performance. The document is part of the DLA J6 Technology Accelerator's procurement process, which focuses on developing rapid prototype capabilities to identify and test innovative technological solutions that can potentially transform DLA's business operations. The evaluation aims to help the agency assess a contractor's risk and performance potential by gathering systematic feedback from previous project stakeholders.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment X - Contractor 8570 Deliverable Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Rapid Prototype Combined Synopsis Solicitation (2).docx | DOCX document | |
| Question Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment X - 8570 Deliverable Template 2018.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 4 - PastPerformance Template....docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 2 - Vendor Pricing Sheet - Copy.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Rapid Prototype Combined Synopsis Solicitation.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 3 - Key Personnel Resume Template.docx | DOCX document |
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 5 – PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
**Offeror on RFQ SP4709-XX-Q-XXXX:
The Defense Logistics Agency intends to acquire Information Technology Services.
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.
Upon completion of this form, please submit it as an e-mailed attachment to xxxxxx@dla.mil
Please make the subject line of the e-mail read “SP4709-XX-Q-0XXX – Past Performance Questionnaire
– Insert Evaluated Company’s Name.”
The following standards will be considered in arriving at the Government’s evaluation and assessment of risk for Past Performance. The ratings descriptions are those utilized within PPIRS:
Exceptional: Contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. Contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective.
Very Good: Contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. Contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.
| Satisfactory: | Contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. Contractual performance contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory. |
| Marginal: | Contractor’s performance does not meet some contractual requirements. Contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective action. The Contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. |
Unsatisfactory: Contractor’s performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. Contractual performance contains a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
Not Applicable: Should be used if the ratings are not going to be applied to a particular area for evaluation.
Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Source Selection Sensitive Information - See FAR 2.101 & 3.104
Performance Rating Form
NAME OF COMPANY EVALUATED:
ADDRESS OF COMPANY EVALUATED:
CONTRACT NUMBER:
CONTRACT PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE:
| CONTRACT VALUE: |
| CONTRACT TYPE: |
TYPE OF SERVICES PERFORMED (ACTIVITY):
NAME OF EVALUATOR, COMPANY/AGENCY, ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS
DATE EVALUATION PROVIDED
| Performance Element |
| Exceptional |
| Very Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
| N/A |
1. QUALITY OF TECHNICAL APPROACH
How would you rate the contractor’s Overall Quality of Technical Approach? What was the level of quality for required reports and deliverables?
2. UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIREMENTS
What was the degree of conformance to contractual requirements?
2. 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?)
4. CUSTOMER SERVICE
How would you rate the contractor’s customer service?
5. ADDRESSING ISSUES
How would you rate the contractor’s effectiveness in addressing issues?
6. 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?
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .