W911S0-17-R-0002_ATTACHMENT_6_Questionnaire.docx

DOCX document 17 KB Posted

Attached to
TRADOC Asymmetric Warfare Group (AWG) Operations Support
Solicitation number
W911S0-17-R-0002
Issued by

About this file

Attachment 6 - PERFORMANCE AND RISK ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

View the file

Other files

Show all 17

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 6

PERFORMANCE AND RISK ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.605, Past Performance is an evaluation factor in all solicitations. Your organization has been identified for participation in past performance evaluation on a current solicitation at Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC) – Fort Eustis, Fort Eustis, Virginia. This information contained in this survey will be used to evaluate the past performance for the contractor and contracting action identified below.

Your candid response to the questions is important to our evaluation effort and may affect the award outcome. In accordance with FAR 15.610(c)(6) and 15.1004(e)(4), the names of individuals supplying past performance information will remain confidential and are not releasable under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The completed form may be submitted by electronic mail or facsimile transmission (provided the complete form is transmitted under the agency/company cover and the telephone number on the transmittal verifies that the agency/company facsimile was used).

1.If submitting by electronic mail return to: Christina Crawley at christina.m.crawley.civ@mail.mil

2.If submitting by facsimile: (757) 501-8208, ATTN: Christina Crawley (W911S0-17-R-0002)

The following information pertains to the Solicitation under evaluation. If you have any questions/ concerns pertaining to this survey/the requested information please contact the person identified below.

Solicitation
W911S0-17-R-0002
Address
Mission and Installation Contracting Command - Fort Eustis

ATTN: Christina Crawley 705 Washington Blvd, Suite 126 Fort Eustis, VA 2360

Point of Contact
Christina Crawley
Email Address
Christina.m.crawley.civ@mail.mil
Telephone Number
(757) 501-8122

Thank you for your time and effort in completing this survey.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1. Contractor Information:

Contractor

Address

Point of Contact

Email Address

Telephone Number

2. The following information concerns the agency/individual completing this survey:

Name

Agency/Company

Email Address

Telephone Number

3. The following information pertains to the contract for which the information is requested:

Contract #

Type of Contract

Period of Performance

Years Remaining

Type of Product/Service

Award Amount
$
Current Value
$
Projected Final Value
$
Primary Mission
Secondary Mission
Not Part of the Mission

AWG HQ

Operations Squadron

Training & Support Squadron

Concepts Integration

AWG Facilities at AP Hill

DEFINITIONS.

Please use the following definitions when completing the Past Performance Questionnaire. Indicate "NA" in any area that was not applicable to work performed on your contracting action.:

Rating
Description
Excellent
Essentially no doubt exists that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance Risk Level: Very Low
Good
Little doubt exists that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance Risk Level: Low
Adequate
Some doubt exists that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance Risk Level: Moderate
Marginal
Significant doubt exists that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance Risk Level: High
Poor
It is extremely doubtful that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance Risk Level: Very High
Neutral
The Offeror has little/no relevant past performance upon which to base a meaningful performance risk prediction. Performance Risk Level: Unknown

SECTION A - PERFORMANCE

(Please complete if you are/were an end user of the contractor's product or service or involved in quality assurance evaluation)

Rating

1. How would you rate the quality of the service provided?

2. How would you rate the accuracy of deliverables (reports, etc.)

3. How would you rate the responsiveness to emergency situations?

4. How would you rate the contractor's responsiveness to and professionalism when communicating with customers?

5. How would you rate the ability of the contractor to meet deadlines and/or established milestones?

6. How would you rate the overall performance by the contractor?

SECTION B - Managerial (Please complete if you are/were an end user of the contractor's product or service)

Rating

1. How would you rate the quality of the management support assigned by the contractor to the project?

2. How would you rate the contractor's management of any subcontractors?

3. How would you rate the overall quality of contract management?

4. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to hire trained, qualified employees?

5. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to keep trained personnel on your project?

6. How successful was the contractor in keeping abreast of changes in Government regulations (i.e. Federal Regulations, Military Specs, local regulations, etc)?

7. How effective was the on-site management?

8. How effective was the authority of the on-site management in dealing with emergency situations?

SECTION C – PERSONNEL/EXPERIENCE

(Please complete if you are/were an end user of the contractor's product or service or involved in quality assurance evaluation)

Rating

1. How would you rate the quality of the contractor’s personnel assigned to the project?

2. How would you rate the quality of the contractor’s corporate backup for the employees at your site?

3. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to obtain qualified substitutions for departing employees throughout the performance period?

4. How would you rate the contractor’s ability to provide seamless transition between departing and replacement employees throughout the performance period?

5. How would you rate the contractor’s employees at developing innovative and alternative methods of performing required functions on your project?

6. How would you rate the contractor's cooperativeness in reacting to changes?

7. How would you rate the contractor’s employees overall (how satisfied were you with the performance of the contractor employees)?

SECTION D - CONTRACTUAL ISSUES

(Please complete if you are were the contract specialist/officer/administrator)

Rating

1. How would you rate the contractor's ability to meet any socio-economic subcontracting requirements?

2. How would you rate the accuracy of cost/pricing proposal in relationship to the final price?

3. How would you rate the contractor's cooperation in negotiating (both initial award and modifications)?

4. How would you rate the contractor's ability to control the number of modifications?

5. How would you rate the contractor's responsiveness to the Contracting Office?

6. How would you rate the contractor's ability to meet suspense dates and milestones?

7. How would you rate the contractor's ability to deal with changes and deficiencies?

8. How successful was the contractor in completing the project (i.e. were there any show cause or cure notices issued, was the contractor defaulted on the action or any other contracting action of which you are aware)?

If you have any comments concerning the referenced contractor which you feel would be of benefit to our evaluation for past performance or want to explain any answer to the above questions please provide them on this page.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .