The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
SPE600-16-R-0805 Page 1 of 3 Fort Jackson, SC
SPE600-16-R-0805 Page 2 of 3 Fort Jackson, SC
Past Performance Questionnaire (Solicitation No. SPE600-16-R-0805)
NOTE TO RECIPIENT:
a) Per FAR 15.306(e)(4), the Government will not reveal the names of individuals providing reference information about an offeror’s past performance.
b) Please submit this completed questionnaire directly to the following DLA Energy Contracting Officer by close of business _____________________:
Vicki Warner Contracting Officer Defense Logistics Agency (Lorton) DLA Energy – FEEAB (Utility Services Division) 8725 John J. Kingman Road, STP 10400 Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6222 Tel: (703) 617-1509 E-mail: vicki.warner@dla.mil
NOTE TO OFFEROR: Complete Blocks 1 through 14 prior to providing to reference.
| 1) Owner/Customer/Agency/Installation Name |
| 2) Point of Contact |
| 3) Telephone |
| 4) E Mail |
| 5) Mailing Address |
| 6) Customer/Agency/Installation DLA Energy |
| 7) Offeror / Contractor Name |
| 8) Contract/Account Number |
| 9) Value |
| 10) Award Date |
| 11) Mailing Address |
| 12) Contract/Account Type |
| 13) Performance Period |
| 14) Completion Date |
Services Provided (see JA39 Attachment):
Questionnaire Instructions to Recipient In order for the Government to review and assess the contractor’s past performance rating, please use the following ratings to describe the offeror’s performance on your contract/account or project.
Choose the rating that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation.
Use the following descriptions as guidance in providing ratings. For each question, please place an “X” in the box corresponding to the rating. Please provide narrative explanations for any ratings of “Substantial Confidence” or “No Confidence.” Indicate non-applicable items as N/A.
The narrative explanations need not be lengthy, just detailed, clear and concise and provided at the end of the questionnaire. Guidelines for Ratings are provided in the table below:
Guidelines for Ratings
| Sub C |
| Substantial Confidence |
| Performance met or exceeded all contract/service requirements. Problems were minimized and were negligible and resolved by the Contractor in a timely, highly effective manner. |
| Sat C |
| Satisfactory Confidence |
| Performance met contract/service requirements. There were problems and corrective actions taken by the Contractor were acceptable. |
| LC |
| Limited Confidence |
| Performance met contract/service requirements. There were problems and corrective actions taken by the Contractor were ineffective at times. |
| NC |
| No Confidence |
| Performance did not meet all contract/service requirements. There were problems and corrective actions taken by the Contractor were ineffective. |
If more space is required, use the back of the questionnaire or attach additional pages. Ratings should only reflect the performance of the contractor in question.
Question Categories
| 1. Management Effectiveness: |
| Sub C |
| Sat C |
| LC |
| NC |
| N/A |
| a. Contractor provided competent program/project manager and supervisors (overall performance of the management team) |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| b. Contractor effectively managed equipment and people per Statement of Work and protected any leased or other property provided through the contract (i.e., buildings, etc.) |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| c. Contractor managed documentation (i.e., planning documents, reports, instructions, policies, training, licensing, certificates, etc.) |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| 2. Quality: |
| Sub C |
| Sat C |
| LC |
| NC |
| N/A |
| a. Contractor provided effective quality control and/or inspection procedures resulting in acceptable service (i.e., few failed inspections) |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| b. Contractor’s quality control system established adequate procedures to find and correct performance discrepancies |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| c. Contractor adhered to the quality control plan and worked closely with your company’s/agency’s quality control personnel |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| 3. Timeliness/Adherence to Schedules: |
| Sub C |
| Sat C |
| LC |
| NC |
| N/A |
| a. Contractor managed scheduling and met established project deadlines to complete the project on time (i.e., reports due, meeting attendance, delivery of service, etc.) |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| b. Contractor identified problems and responded to emergency/surge requirements in a timely manner (i.e., avoiding unnecessary schedule delays) |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| c. Contractor submitted the progress schedule and progress reports as required |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| 4. Sub Contracts and Management: |
| Sub C |
| Sat C |
| LC |
| NC |
| N/A |
a. Contractor provided experienced/qualified managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements
| b. Contractor hired quality subcontractors and effectively managed and coordinated their work |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| c. Contractor ensured the project manager had sufficient authority to make decisions and take actions during project performance to keep the project on schedule |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| d. Contractor complied with applicable Labor Laws, responding appropriately to all safety authorities and immediately correcting any deficiencies or areas of concern |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| 5. Change/Cost Control: |
| Sub C |
| Sat C |
| LC |
| NC |
| N/A |
| a. Contractor responsive to contract changes and provided accurate, reasonable and supportable cost proposals |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| b. Contractor demonstrated the ability to control costs and/or design projects or modifications within the magnitude specified |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| 6. Customer Satisfaction: |
| Sub C |
| Sat C |
| LC |
| NC |
| N/A |
| a. Contractor maintained a professional working relationship and was flexible in responding to customer requirements |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| b. Program/project manager had the authority to carry out the day-to-day operations of the contract/project |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| c. Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in resolving customer complaints |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| d. The overall rating the contractor would be given for this project |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
| |_| |
Would your organization award another contract to this contractor? (Circle one) YES or NO
Please provide a brief referenced narrative explanation for ratings of “Exceptional” or “Unacceptable”, and reference the specific question.
Question No.: Narrative:
Defense Logistics Agency Energy