Attachment 2 - W564KV25RA0020005 VAP Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf
PDF 181 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W564KV-25-R-A002
About this file
This document is a Performance Assessment Questionnaire for the Family Advocacy Program (FAP) Victim Advocacy Program (VAP) and Emergency Placement Care (EPC) Support Services contract (Solicitation Number W564KV-25-R-A002). The questionnaire is designed to collect past performance information from previous contractors, with the goal of evaluating their performance across several key areas including product/service compliance, project management effectiveness, timeliness of performance, customer satisfaction, and overall business conduct.
The assessment uses a confidence rating system with four levels: Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, and No Confidence. Respondents are asked to provide detailed rationale for their ratings in each category. The completed questionnaire should be returned to Contracting Officer Carlos Mayorga and Contract Specialist Jessica Spencer via email. The contract supports the Army's efforts in preventing and responding to domestic violence and juvenile problematic sexual behavior, requiring 24/7 victim advocacy response and emergency placement care coordination.
View the file
Other files
Show all 28
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
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE
Please provide your candid responses. The information that you provide will be used in the awarding of federal contracts. Therefore, it is important that your information be as factual, accurate and complete as possible to preclude the need for follow-up by the evaluators. If you do not have knowledge of or experience with the company in question, please forward this Questionnaire to the person who does (and/or) notify the Contracting Officer. Please return the completed Questionnaire to the Contracting Officer Carlos Mayorga at carlos.a.mayorga.civ@army.mil and Contract Specialist Jessica Spencer at jessica.r.spencer2.civ@army.mil within the stated timeframe requested.
Rating Definitions:
Substantial Confidence: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements that benefit the end user. Work was accomplished with few, if any, minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. The offeror has been highly successfully in performing the required effort.
Satisfactory Confidence: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements that benefit the end user. Work was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. The offeror has successfully performed the required effort.
Limited Confidence: Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. Serious problems with contractor performance were experienced for which the contractor has either not yet identified corrective actions or the corrective actions taken appear only marginally effective.
The offeror has had little success performing the required effort.
No Confidence: Performance does not meet most contractual requirements. Serious problems with contractor performance were experienced for which the corrective actions were ineffective.
The offeror has not successfully performed the required effort.
PART I. (To be completed by the Offeror)
A. CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
Contractor/Company Name/Division:
Address:
Program Identification/Title:
Contract Number:
Contract Type:
Prime Contractor Name (if different from the contractor name cited above):
Contract Award Date:
Forecasted or Actual Contract Completion Date:
Nature of the Contractual Effort or Items Purchased:
mailto:carlos.a.mayorga.civ@army.mil mailto:jessica.r.spencer2.civ@army.mil
Total Contract Value:
B. IDENTIFICATION OF OFFEROR’S REPRESENTATIVE
Name:
Title:
Date:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
PART II. EVALUATION (To be completed by Point of Contact – Respondent) *Note: rationale is required for each response.
A. Compliance of Products, Services, Documents, and Related Deliverables to Specification Requirements and Standards of Good Workmanship
Substantial Confidence Satisfactory Confidence Limited Confidence No Confidence
Rationale: _________________________________________________________
B. Effectiveness of Project Management (to include use and control of subcontractors).
Rationale: __________________________________________________________
C. Timeliness of Performance for Services and Product Deliverables.
D. Reserved
E. Commitment to Customer Satisfaction and Business-like Concern for its Customers’ Interest
F. General Comments. Provide any other relevant performance information.
Comments: _________________________________________________________
G. Other Information Sources. Please provide the following information:
Are you aware of other relevant past efforts by this company?
If yes, please provide the name and telephone number of a point of contact:
Point of Contact (Name): __________________________________________ Telephone Number: ______________________________________________
H. Respondent Identification. Please provide the following information:
Organization:
Name:
Title:
Date:
Telephone Number
E-mail Address:
PART III. RETURN INFORMATION
Please return this completed Questionnaire to the Contracting Officer Carlos Mayorga at carlos.a.mayorga.civ@army.mil and Contract Specialist Jessica Spencer at jessica.r.spencer2.civ@army.mil.
Thank you for your assistance.
mailto:carlos.a.mayorga.civ@army.mil mailto:jessica.r.spencer2.civ@army.mil
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .