StenoServices_Attachment_9-2_PastPerformanceQuestionnaire 27July2022.docx
DOCX document 42 KB Posted
- Attached to
- FTC Stenographic Services (27 July 2022)
- Solicitation number
- Not on record
- Issued by
-
Federal Trade Commission
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
Federal Trade Commission Past Performance Questionnaire Stenographic and Remote Deposition Services 27 July 2022
Please return this completed questionnaire directly to Dawn Cavallo at dcavallo@ftc.gov and Matthew Woolstenhulme at mwoolstenhulme@ftc.gov no later than 12:00 PM (ET) Friday, August 26, 2022.
Please include the following subject line for the email: “[Offeror Name] – Stenographic and Remote Deposition Services – Past Performance Questionnaire.”
SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
| A. |
| Contractor: |
| B. |
| Contract number: |
| C. |
| Order Number: |
| D. |
| Contract type: |
| E. |
| Was this a competitive contract? |
| F. |
| Period of performance: |
| G. |
| Place of performance: |
| H. |
| Initial contract cost: |
| I. |
| Current/final contract cost: |
| J. |
| Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs, if any: |
| K. |
| Are you bound by a non-disclosure agreement or court order, which would prohibit you from responding to questions regarding any previous acquisition(s)? |
SECTION 2: CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION
| A. |
| Customer or Agency Name: |
| B. |
| Evaluator's Name: |
| C. |
| Evaluator's Title: |
| D. |
| Evaluator's Phone: |
| E. |
| Evaluator's E-mail: |
| F. |
| Timeframe evaluator worked on subject contract: |
SECTION 3: EVALUATION RATINGS
The rating scale is defined as follows:
Rating
Description
| Exceptional |
| E |
| The offeror’s past performance record leads to an extremely strong expectation of successful performance. |
| Good |
| G |
| The offeror’s past performance record leads to a strong expectation of successful performance. |
| Acceptable |
| A |
| The offeror’s past performance record leads to an expectation of successful performance. |
| Neutral |
| N |
| The offeror lacks a record of relevant or available past performance history. There is no expectation of either successful or unsuccessful performance based on the offeror’s past performance record. |
| Marginal |
| M |
| The offeror’s past performance record leads to an expectation that successful performance might be difficult to achieve or that it can occur only with increased levels of Government management and oversight. |
SECTION 4: EVALUATION FACTORS
Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question.
| 1. Quality of Product or Service |
| E |
| G |
| A |
| N |
| M |
Ability to understand/comply with customer objectives and technical requirements.
Effectiveness of assigned personnel in terms of the appropriate mix of education and experience to accomplish the requirement.
Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program.
Contractor proposed alternative methods/processes that improved the product or service which benefited the customer.
Quality/effectiveness of sub-contracted efforts.
| 2. Program Management and Timeliness |
| E |
| G |
| A |
| N |
| M |
Effectiveness of overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program).
Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance.
Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations.
Effectiveness of material management (including Government Furnished Property or Material).
Contractor implemented responsive/flexible processes to improve quality and timeliness of support.
| 3. Quality of Personnel |
| E |
| G |
| A |
| N |
| M |
Ability to work effectively and adapt to the customer environment
Ability to provide the appropriate personnel to work within the customer environment
Ability to hire qualified workforce to this effort.
Ability to retain the individual(s) originally hired to perform the work
Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with staff (including the ability to resolve disagreements/ disputes).
| 4. Cost Control |
| E |
| G |
| A |
| N |
| M |
Accuracy in forecasting contract costs.
Ability to meet forecasted costs and perform within contract costs.
Ability to alert Government of unforeseen costs before they occur.
Sufficiency and timeliness of cost reporting.
Contractor proposed alternative methods/processes that reduced cost of product or service which benefited the customer.
SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY
1. What were the contractor’s greatest strengths in the performance of the contract?
2. What were the contractor’s greatest weaknesses in the performance of the contract?
3. Would you hire this contractor in the future to perform one of your most critical and demanding requirements?
4. Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.
5. Government Contracts Only: Has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules, etc.).
| _____________________________________ | _____________________ | |
| Evaluator’s Signature | Date |
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .