Attachment_9_Contractor_Performance_Questionairre.docx
DOCX document 19 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- USM-HQ-13-0018
About this file
Ammendment 1 - Updated Attachment 9 - Contractor Performance Questionairre Update corrects return date. Due date for Contractor Performance Questionairre is April 19 2013.
View the file
Other files
Show all 32
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
ATTACHMENT 9 – CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRRE
CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
UNITED STATES MINT ORDER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM II
The United States Mint requests your prompt attention. Please return this survey to: colleen.grinnell@usmint.treas.gov no later than April 19, 2013 3:00 pm Eastern Time.
Using the rating table below, please provide ratings and concise comments regarding your overall assessment of the offeror’s performance on the contract identified below. Please note that representatives from the United States may need to contact you for further information.
CONTRACT DESCRIPTION:
Contractor/Offeror Name:
Contract Number:
Contracting Agency’s Name and Address:
Contracting Officer’s Name and Telephone:
Total Amount of Contract:
Period of Performance:
Brief description of supplies, services, or equipment provided by the contractor:
Explanation of any problems or delays encountered:
RATING TABLE
| 1. | Marginal: The Contractor lacked a basic understanding of the work and the capacity to fulfill the requirements. Contractor’s performance was inadequate and contract requirements were often not met. |
| 2. | Acceptable: The Contractor satisfactorily performed the services with some minor discrepancies. Overall performance was in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract. |
| 3. | Good: The Contractor consistently met general contract requirements and understood customer needs. The Contractor’s performance was thorough, comprehensive, and more than satisfactory. There is no history of practices or processes that were detrimental to the customer. |
| 4. | Excellent: The Contractor demonstrated exceptional performance and innovative practices and/or processes. The Contractor’s efficiency, productivity, and product enhancements lead to real cost savings and efficiencies for the customer. The Contractor consistently exceeded customer needs. |
| 5. | Not Applicable: Does not apply |
QUALITY OF SERVICES
1. DID THE CONTRACTOR PROVIDE QUALITY PRODUCTS OR SERVICES?
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Rating: 1 2 3 4 N/A
2. WAS THE CONTRACTOR COOPERATIVE AND RESPONSIVE TO CHANGING NEEDS OF THE CUSTOMER?
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Rating: 1 2 3 4 N/A
DELIVERY/COMPLETION
1. WERE THE CONTRACT/TASK DELIVERABLES COMPLETED ON TIME?
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Rating: 1 2 3 4 N/A
2. WERE THERE INSTANCES OF REQUIRED RE-WORK? WAS UNNECESSARY REWORK CAUSED BY THE CONTRACTOR OR GOVERNMENT?
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Rating: 1 2 3 4 N/A
CONTRACTORS OVERALL PERFORMANCE
Please rate the Contractor’s overall performance under this contract: 1 2 3 4
THE UNITED STATES MINT APPRECIATES YOUR COOPERATION.
Signature of Person Completing this Form: _______________________________ Date: ______________
Printed Name of Person Completing this Form: _______________________________________________
Organization: _____________________________________ Position Title: _________________________
Telephone: _______________________________ E-mail: ______________________________________
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .