Attachment 7 - Past Performance Questionnaire v2.doc
DOC document 43 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Army Virtual Learning Environment (AVLE) - Solicitation Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- W911S023RMCTU
About this file
This document is a past performance evaluation questionnaire template for use in evaluating offerors for the Army Virtual Learning Environment (AVLE) solicitation. The solicitation is issued by the Department of the Army Materiel Command Mission and Installation Contracting Command at Fort Eustis to provide virtual learning environment services. The past performance questionnaire requests information about the offeror's record of past and current performance on contracts within the last three years, including compliance with requirements and standards, project management effectiveness, timeliness of performance, cost control on cost reimbursement contracts, and commitment to customer satisfaction. Respondents are to provide ratings and explanations in specific questions and any other relevant performance information. Identifying information is also requested for the respondent and other performance references.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 36
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION (SEE FAR 3.104)
PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE FORM
| Contractor: | Contract No.: | Subcontract No. (if applicable): | ||
| POC: | Title: | (Name) | (E.G. PCO/ACO/TM) |
(Agency, Telephone No., & E-mail Address)
The following questions pertain to the Contractor’s record of past (within the past three years) and current performance. The information that you provide will be used in the awarding of a federal contract. Therefore, it is important that our information be as factual and accurate as possible. Please provide examples and/or explanations (use additional pages if necessary). The following adjectival ratings shall be used in your response.
Outstanding: 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.
Good: 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.
Acceptable: Performance meets contractual requirements. Work was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were satisfactory.
Marginal: 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.
Unacceptable: Performance does not meet most contractual requirements. Serious problems with Contractor performance were experienced for which the corrective actions were ineffective.
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:
B. IDENTIFICATION OF OFFEROR’S REPRESENTATIVE
Name:
Title:
Date:
Telephone Number:
Address:
E-mail Address:
PART II. EVALUATION (To be completed by Point of Contact – Respondent) A. Compliance of Products, Services, Documents, and Related Deliverables to Specification Requirements and Standards of Good Workmanship
| Outstanding (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Unsatisfactory (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
Comments:
B. Effectiveness of Project Management (to include use and control of subcontractors).
| Outstanding (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Unsatisfactory (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
C. Timeliness of Performance for Services and Product Deliverables.
| Outstanding (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Unsatisfactory (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
D. Effectiveness in Forecasting and Controlling Estimated Costs (Use this Question on Cost Reimbursement Type Contracts Only).
file_0.bin
| Outstanding (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Unsatisfactory (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
E. Commitment to Customer Satisfaction and Business-like Concern for its Customers’ Interest
| Outstanding (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Good |
| Acceptable |
| Marginal (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
| Unsatisfactory (Explanation must be provided in Comments field below) |
F. General Comments. Provide any other relevant performance information.
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:
H. Respondent Identification. Please provide the following information:
Organization:
Name:
Title:
Date:
Telephone Number Address:
E-mail Address:
PART III. RETURN INFORMATION
Please return this completed Questionnaire via e-mail to the Contracting Officer identified in the cover letter.
Thank you for your assistance.
Signature Date
Typed or Printed Name
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .