Attachment_I__Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

PDF 40 KB Posted

Attached to
Meter Data Management System (MDMS)
Solicitation number
W912DY-19-R-0022
Issued by

About this file

This solicitation requests proposals for meter data management services for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville Center. Offerors must operate, sustain, and maintain a centralized meter data management system to deliver dependable meter data using industry standards, enable facility energy managers to identify energy reduction opportunities, and continually optimize capabilities and technologies in compliance with laws and regulations. Services are required throughout the United States and its Territories, Hawaii, Germany, Italy, Japan and the Republic of Korea. Proposals must be received by April 5, 2019 at 2:00 PM Central Time at the US Army Engineering and Support Center- Huntsville located at 5021 Bradford Dr., Huntsville, AL 35805.

Amendment 0003, Attachment I

View the file

Other files

Show all 23

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

Amendment 0003.

(Presented for Information Only – Not to be completed by Offeror)

ATTACHMENT I

PAST PERFORMANCE RISK ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Please return this completed Questionnaire via e-mail to the Contract Specialist at robin.L.boateng@usace.army.mil Thank you for your assistance. Completed PPQs should be submitted with the Offeror's proposal" unless the client requests to submit directly to CEHNC-MDMS@usace.army.mil and Robin.Boateng@usace.army.mil.

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Company/Agency Name Address Person Completing Survey Date Survey Completed Position Held in Reference to the Contract Length of Involvement in Contract Email Address Telephone Number Fax Number

Contractor Contract Title Contract Number Project Description Contract Type/Cost Award Date Original Contract Price Final Contract Price Explain Difference Percentage of Work Performed by

Roles and Responsibilities as Sub or Prime

Expected Completion Date Actual Completion Date Explain Differences mailto:lashonda.smith@usace.army.mil

1. Quality of Work:

a) How was the contractor’s compliance with applicable safety standards to protect personnel and company/agency resources?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

b) How was the contractor’s compliance with applicable labor standards?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

c) Was the contractor’s effort in Quality Control successful in ensuring quality workmanship on your project?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

d) Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

e) Overall rating for Quality of Work

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

2. Cost Controls:

a) Did the Contractor perform the required services at the contract price without adverse effect on performance?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

b) Did the contractor submit a fair and reasonable proposal when requested to perform additional work?

c) If this contract is an indefinite delivery type contract (e.g., Multiple Award Environmental Contract, Task Order

Contract, etc.), has the Contractor submitted competitive quotes on the individual orders issued under this contract?

Yes No N/A

d) Overall rating for Cost Controls

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

3. Timeliness of Performance:

a) Was the contractor timely in submitting schedules, reports, billings and other contract submittals?

Always Usually Sometimes Never N/A

b) Was the contractor timely in responding to requests for proposals for additional work?

c) Did the contractor complete the contract on time taking into account all excusable delays?

Yes No N/A

d) Was the contractor assessed any liquidated damages or deductions for late or nonperformance of required work?

If yes, please explain.

Yes No

e) Did the contractor exceed contractual requirements in relation to Timeliness of Performance in a way that was deemed beneficial to your agency?

If you answered No, indicate your reason by checking one of the following:

Contractor met the requirements, but did not exceed them Did not meet some of the requirements Did not meet requirements and recovery is not likely

f) Overall rating for Timeliness of Performance

4. Effectiveness of Management:

a) Did the contractor award subcontracts in a timely manner and properly manage them?

b) If applicable, did the contractor meet its small, small disadvantaged and women-owned business participation goals?

c) How would you rate the management of this firm as it relates to the completion of your contract and to the qualifications of its on-site personnel. Please explain.

d) Describe the performance of the following personnel (if applicable)

1. Program Manger U M S VG E

2. Project Manager U M S VG E

3. Engineering/Technical U M S VG E

4. Quality Control Manager U M S VG E

5. Safety Officer U M S VG E

6. Superintendent U M S VG E

5. Customer Satisfaction:

a) Did the Contractor show reasonable and cooperative behavior and attention to customer satisfaction?

If you answered NO, please explain why:

6. Overall Rating of Contractor:

In summary, which of the following would you choose to best describe the overall quality of this firm’s past performance?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

7. Contact Information

Name of Person Completing Form Position Project Description Role of

Phone No.

The information in this Questionnaire may be verified by Personnel from the U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville.

1. Quality of Work:
2. Cost Controls:
3. Timeliness of Performance:
4. Effectiveness of Management:
5. Customer Satisfaction:
6. Overall Rating of Contractor:
7. Contact Information

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