Amendment 0004.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to make revisions to Section 00100, Instruction, Conditions, and Notice to Offerors. This amendment also extends the closing date. Please read the revised solicitation carefully. Those offerors that previously submitted proposals only need to resubmit those sections of their original proposals that they are revising. Please do not resubmit entire proposals, if you have previously submitted a proposal in response to this solicitation.

AMENDMENT 3 WAS NOT/WILL NOT BE POSTED. THEREFORE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF AMENDMENT 3 WILL NOT BE REQUIRED.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 14

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 06-Feb-2009

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W912HN-09-R-0014

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

29-Dec-2008

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

06-Feb-2009

CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, SAVANNAH

SAVANNAH REGIONAL CONTRACTING CENTER

CHARLESTON OFFICE

69-A HAGOOD AVENUE

CHARLESTON SC 29403-5107

W912HN 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912HN-09-R-0014

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 18-Feb-2009 02:00 PM to 18-Feb-2009 04:00 PM.

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been added by full text:

INSTRUCTION TO OFFEROR 2/5/09

SECTION 00100 IS HEREBY REVISED IN ITS ENTIRETY AND REPLACED WITH THIS

AMENDMENT

Section 00100

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICE TO OFFERORS

Equipment Rental for Drainage and Site Work (Phase 2)

Clouter Creek Disposal Area Berkeley County, South Carolina

PAST PERFORMANCE TRADEOFF (PPT)

1. PROPOSAL OVERVIEW: This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits the Equipment Rental for Drainage and Site Work (Phase 2) at the Clouter Creek Disposal Area, Berkeley County, South Carolina. This will be a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract. The purpose of the Source Selection Evaluation Criteria is to establish a uniform evaluation procedure for the technical evaluation by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB), and development of a selection decision by the Source Selection Authority (SSA), using the Best Value Tradeoff source selection process in accordance with FAR Part 15,101. In as much as the proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform any resulting contract, the proposal should be specific and complete in every detail. The proposal should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the contract. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent.

• 1.1 Proposal Submissions and the Past Performance Tradeoff Process. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. Offerors submit their Relevant Past Performance information for review and consideration by the Government. Following the review, evaluation, and rating of these proposals, the Government will evaluate price proposals for contractors that have acceptable technical proposals. The technical information contained in the proposals shall be reviewed and evaluated by the Government in accordance with the evaluation criteria provided in paragraph 4, Evaluation and 8, Rating Methodology. The SSEB reviews, evaluates, and rates the proposals against the source selection criteria in the RFP. Price information will not be rated, but will be evaluated funding limitations set out in Section 00010 – Bid Schedule, and in comparison to other Offeror’s price proposals. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal shall merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Who May Submit. Any legally organized Small Business (SB) may submit a proposal.

2.2 Where to Submit. Offerors shall submit their proposals to the Savannah Regional Contracting Center, Charleston Office at the address shown in Block 7 of the Standard Form 1442.

2.3 Submission Deadline. Proposals shall be received no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

2.4 General Requirements.

2.4.1 In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failure to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affect an Offeror's evaluation. Offerors should provide sufficient detail and clearly define all items required in this section.

2.4.2 Tabs. Proposal shall be organized and tabbed as shown in paragraph 2.5 Submission Format.

2.4.3 Size of Printed Matter Submissions.

2.4.4 Written materials shall be prepared on 8-1/2" x 11" paper.

2.4.4 Number of Copies. Offerors shall submit one (1) hard copy of Volume I and four (4) hard copies of Volume II of their Proposal. Volume II shall also be submitted on a CD-ROM.

2.5 Submission Format.

2.5.1 The proposals shall contain a detailed table of contents. If more than one binder is used, the complete table of contents shall be included in each. Any materials submitted but not required by the solicitation, (such as company brochures), shall be relegated to appendices. The Proposal will be tabbed and submitted in a three ring binders in the following format:

VOLUME I: CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS AND PRICE PROPOSAL

TAB A – SF 1442, completed and signed by an authorized person from the company or team

TAB B – Section 00010 – Supplies or Services and Price/Costs Schedule

TAB C – Section 00600 – Representations and Certifications

TAB D – PROPOSAL DATA SHEET – See the format provided in this Section. Ensure to include Offeror’s telephone number, FAX number, e-mail address, Tax ID Number, and DUNS number. Duns number will be used to accesses CCASS data. Joint Ventures (J-V) must submit a DUNS number for each member of the J-V. If a separate DUNS has been created for the J-V it must be submitted as well. Offeror may use Attachment I at the end of this of this section to provide this information.

TAB E – Bid Bond

TAB F – Financial Information (e.g. Latest Financial Statement, Annual Reports, Dun and Bradstreet ratings and/or number, etc.). A bank reference and a letter from your company on company letterhead authorizing the release of financial information from your bank, with point of contact and telephone number for verification.

TAB G – Not Used.

VOLUME II – Technical Proposal

TAB H– FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SHALL NOT INCLUDE ANY COST INFORMATION.

3. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS.

3.1 FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE

3.2 Submission Requirements.

3.2.1. Past Performance Information Sheets. The offeror shall complete and provide a Past Performance Project Information Sheet on two projects described below. Past performance Information Sheets shall also be completed for those parties identified in any proposed Joint Venture or Contractor Team Arrangement. A sample Past Performance Information Sheet is included in Attachment 2 at the end of this section.

3.2.2 Past Performance Questionnaires. Offeror shall identify two (2) projects, however, no more than five (5).

Two of the projects submitted must be completed, or substantially completed (More than 60%) within in the past three years that are of similar size, scope and complexity.

• Projects shall be similar to construction of drainage ditches, clearing, grading of existing dikes and berms, spreading of excavated materials to dry, withdrawing, construction of haul routes and appurtenant items. This site is accessible only by water.

• Projects submitted by the Offeror’s should have a value of $1 Million or higher.

3.2.3. Offeror shall provide a questionnaire to the Point of Contact for each project listed. When completed these forms shall be mailed or e-mailed to the Savannah Regional Contracting Center, Charleston Office Contract Specialist identified in the sample transmittal letter provided.

3.2.4. It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure that the reference documentation is provided as the Government may not make additional requests for past performance information from the references. The evaluation form shall be provided to the Savannah District directly from the reference. The Government will not consider Questionnaires received after the proposal due date. The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the offeror’s references or the references’ unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

3.2.5 If the Offeror is made up of separate construction companies that have combined for this project, then Past Performance Questionnaires must be completed twice (once for each company).

3.2.6 Contractor Team Arrangements. Contractor Team Arrangements are considered an arrangement in which (1) two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or (2) a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

3.2.7 Offeror proposed teaming arrangements, as defined above, and company relationships shall be fully disclosed in the proposal. All prospective Joint Ventures must comply with Part 13 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

124.513. For reference and evaluation purposes the Offeror shall identify the major or critical aspects to be performed by those identified in the Contractor Team Arrangement.

3.2.8 Other Sources. The Government may contact sources other than those provided by the Offeror for information with respect to past performance. These other sources may include CCASS (Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System), telephone interviews with organizations familiar with the Offeror’s performance, and Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability.

3.2.9. Offeror may include awards, customer letters of commendation and other information that recognized good performance.

4. EVALUATION

4.1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's past performance using the sources available to it, including but not limited to: the example projects identified by the Offeror and Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires received.

Offerors may be provided an opportunity to address any negative past performance information about which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond.

4.1.2 The Government will evaluate the quality of the offeror’s past performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the relative capability of the offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any and all sources including sources outside of the Government. Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance, however, the offeror must provide the information requested herein for past performance evaluation or affirmatively states that is possesses no relevant, directly related, or similar past performance.

4.1.3. Contractor Team Arrangements Evaluation. In accordance with FAR Part 9, the Government will recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements; provided, the arrangements are identified and company relationships are fully disclosed in the offer. Past Performance evaluation will not take into account the past performance information regarding predecessor companies; or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, unless identified in Contactor Team Arrangements. The submission must contain a narrative that clearly explains the relevance of the submitted information concerning a company that is part of a Contract Team Arrangement. The Government will consider the adequacy of this explanation in deciding the relevance and weight of the information to this procurement.

4.1.4 Past performance, which is considered by the Government to be similar in size and scope to this project, as defined in paragraph 4.1 of this section, may be considered by the Board to be more advantageous. The Government will evaluate past performance based on the elements listed below:

4.1.4 Quality of Service. Based on information provided in the questionnaire and other information, the Government will assess the quality of the actual services exhibited by the Offeror’s team.

4.1.5 Timeliness of Performance. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror completing past projects within the scheduled completion times.

4.1.6 Customer Satisfaction. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror’s past customer satisfaction, cooperation with customers, and interaction on past projects.

4.1.7 Subcontractor Management. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror’s management of subcontractors on past projects.

4.8 During the consensus evaluation, a single “consensus rating” worksheet shall be completed for each proposal and signed by all the evaluators. It is imperative that comments and supporting rationale for the rating assigned be included on the consensus sheet.

5. Evaluation criteria (factors) will be rated using the following adjectival descriptions. Evaluators will apply the appropriate adjective to each criterion rated. The evaluator’s narrative explanation must clearly establish that the

Offeror’s submittal meets the definitions established below. As each criterion is evaluated an assessment of Performance Risk will be made. Performance Risk relates to the assessment of an Offeror's present and past work and accomplishments to determine the Offeror's ability to successfully perform as required.

5.1 OUTSTANDING - Based on the offerors performance, record, essentially no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Very high probability of success. Very low risk to the Government.

5.2 ABOVE AVERAGE - Based on the offerors performance, record, essentially little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. High probability of success. Low risk to the Government.

5.3 SATISFACTORY - Information submitted demonstrates Offeror's potential to meet performance or capability standards. The Offeror's qualifications are responsive with weaknesses in several areas that are offset by strengths in other areas. The Offeror understands most aspects of the requirements and presents an acceptable solution to the extent adequate performance is anticipated. Offeror demonstrates an understanding of the RFP requirements, presents a complete and comprehensive proposal that will likely result in adequate performance which represents moderate risk to the Government. A rating of “Satisfactory” indicates that, in terms of the specific factor, the Offeror may satisfactorily complete the proposed tasks, but there is at least a moderate risk that it will not be successful. The Offeror possesses few or no advantages or strengths. Offeror meets all RFP requirements, presents a complete and comprehensive proposal. No significant advantages or disadvantages. Offeror’s response exceeds a "Marginal" rating. Based on the offerors performance, record, some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Moderate risk to the Government.

5.4 NEUTRAL In the case of no past performance on the part of the Offeror, the Offeror must so state in the proposal. No performance record identifiable, meaning the offeror is rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. A “Neutral” rating will be assigned for Past Performance.

5.5 MARGINAL - Based on the offerors performance, record, substantial doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Changes to the offerors existing processes maybe necessary in order to achieve contract requirments. High risk to the Government.

5.6 UNSATISFACTORY. Based on the offerors performance, record, extreme doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Changes to the offerors existing processes maybe necessary in order to achieve contract requirments. Unacceptably high risk to the Government.

6. PRICE

6.1 The Government will perform a price analysis on all proposals received. Price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, to determine completeness, reasonableness, and understanding of the work. The evaluation will determine the adequacy of the offer in fulfilling the requirements of the proposal. Completeness addresses the extent to which the elements of the price proposal are consistent with the requirements of the RFP.

Reasonableness will be established using historical price information, price competition information, the IGE, and any other pricing tools necessary.

6.2 Price will not be scored, but will be a factor in establishing the competitive range prior to discussions (if held) and in making the final best value determination for award.

6.3. Government reserves the right to make award to other than the low offeror price.

7. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS.

7.1 PRICE is approximately equal in importance to TECHNICAL FACTOR – Past Performance; when combined.

8. BASIS FOR AWARD

8.1 Proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP in order to be eligible for award, to include responsiveness, technical acceptability and responsibility. Award will be made to a responsible, responsive bidder, with a responsibility determination made in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 9.1.

8.2 In order to determine which proposal represents the best overall value, the Government will compare proposals to one another. The Government will award a contract to the responsible Offeror whose technical submittal and price proposal contains the combination of those criteria described in this document offering the best overall value to the Government. Best value will be determined by a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in this RFP.

8.3 The Government reserves the right to reject any and all offers.

8.4 Offerors are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer and not to automatically assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer. The Government may make award of a conforming proposal without discussions, if deemed to be within the best interests of the Government.

ATTACHMENT 1

VOLUME I – TAB D

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

Equipment Rental for Drainage and Site Work (Phase 2)

1. Name of Firm:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

E-mail:

Duns # (used for accessing CCASS)

If a joint venture or contractor-subcontractor association of firms, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association and provide a DUNS number for each firm.

Firm 1:

Firm 2:

Firm 3:

Nature of Association:

2. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS. FAR 52.215-11

The Offeror represents that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the Government in connection with this Request for Proposals (RFP).

Name of Person Authorized to Negotiate:

Negotiator's Address:

Negotiator's Telephone:

Negotiator’s E-mail:

ATTACHMENT 2

VOLUME II – TAB I

FACTOR 2: OFFEROR PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

1. On an attached sheet, provide information for two (2) projects completed, or substantially completed in the past three years of similar scope and complexity to this project to be used for reference and evaluation purposes and provide a questionnaire to the Point of Contact for each project listed. These should be the same projects for which questionnaires have been provided to the Procurement Point of Contact. If the offeror is made up of separate construction companies that have combined for this project, then this item must be completed twice (once for each company). For each project provide the information shown. Failure to provide this minimum information may result in lower ratings.

2. For each project provide the following information:

Project Title:

Location:

Contract number:

Procuring activity:

Procurement point of contact and telephone number:

List date of construction completion or percent completion if construction is underway:

Address of building(s):

Address and telephone number of owner:

Indicate type of project (private sector, Government, planned unit development, etc.):

General character:

Total cost:

Total cost of all modifications:

3. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. On an attached sheet, list any projects within the last three years that have been assessed liquidated damages. Provide an explanation.

4. TERMINATED PROJECTS. On an attached sheet, list any projects within the last three years that have been terminated. Provide an explanation.

5. GOVERNMENT PROJECTS. On an attached sheet, list all contracts with the Government within the last three years. Indicate Government contract number and contracting agency (with contact names and telephone numbers).

SAMPLE TRANSMITTAL LETTER

AND

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Date: _________________

To: ______________________________________

We have listed your firm as a reference for work we have performed for you as listed below. Our firm has submitted a proposal under a project advertised by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), an evaluation of our firm's past performance will be completed by the Corps of Engineers. Your candid response to the attached questionnaire will assist the evaluation team in this process.

We understand that you have a busy schedule and your participation in this evaluation is greatly appreciated. Please complete the enclosed questionnaire as thoroughly as possible. Space is provided for comments. Understand that while the responses to this questionnaire may be released to the offeror, FAR 15.306 (e)(4) prohibits the release of the names of the persons providing the responses. Complete confidentiality will be maintained. Furthermore, a questionnaire has also been sent to ____________________ of your organization. Only one response from each office is required. If at all possible, we request that you individually answer this questionnaire and then coordinate your responses with that of ________________________, to develop a consensus on one overall response from your organization.

Please send your completed questionnaire to the following address to arrive NOT LATER THAN 2:00P.M. (EST), 18 February 2009

Mailing Address:

Savannah Regional Contracting Center Attn: Lisa Simmons Charleston Office 69A Hagood Avenue Charleston, SC 29403

The questionnaires can also be e-mailed to lisa.s.simmons@usace.army.mil. If you have questions regarding the attached questionnaire, or require assistance, please contact Lisa Simmons (843) 329-8086.

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Equipment Rental for Drainage and Site Work (Phase 2)

Upon completion of this form, please send directly to the US Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District at Charleston, 69A Hagood Ave, Charleston, SC 29403, Attn: Lisa Simmons or e-mail to lisa.s.simmons@usace.army.mil

1. Contractor/Name & Address (City and State):

2. Type of Contract: Fixed Price ________ Cost Reimbursement ________ Other (Specify) ________________________________

3. Contract Number: _____________________________________________________________________

4. Description of Work: (Attach additional pages as necessary)

5. Complexity of Work: High ________ Mid _________ Routine __________

6. Location of Work:______________________________________________

7. Date of Award: ________________________

8. Status: Active _________ (provide percent complete)

Complete __________ (provide completion date)

9. Name, address and telephone number of Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative:

10. QUALITY OF WORK:

Evaluate the contractor's performance in complying with contract requirements, quality achieved and overall technical expertise demonstrated.

Outstanding Quality

Above Average Quality

Satisfactory Quality

Marginal Quality

Unsatisfactory or Experienced Significant Quality Problems

Remarks: __________________________________________________________________

11. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

To what extent did the contractor meet the contract and/or individual task order schedules if the contract was an indefinite delivery type contract?

Completed Substantially Ahead of Schedule (Outstanding)

Completed Ahead of Schedule (Above Average)

Completed on Schedule with Minor Delays Under Extenuating Circumstances (Satisfactory)

Completed Behind Schedule (Marginal)

Experienced Significant Delays without Justification (Unsatisfactory)

12. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

To what extent were the end users satisfied with:

Quality

Cost

Schedule

Exceptionally Satisfied (Outstanding)

Highly Satisfied (Above Average)

Satisfied (Satisfactory)

Somewhat Dissatisfied (Marginal)

Highly Dissatisfied (Unsatisfactory)

13. SUBCONTRACTOR MANAGEMENT

How well did the contractor manage and coordinate subcontractors, suppliers, and the labor force?

Outstanding management and coordination of subcontractors

Above Average management and coordination of subcontractors

Satisfactory management and coordination of subcontractors

Marginal management and coordination of subcontractors

Unsatisfactory management and coordination of subcontractors

14. IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY, WOULD YOU WORK WITH THIS CONTRACTOR AGAIN?

Yes ___________ No ____________ Not Sure ____________

15. OTHER REMARKS:

Use the space below to provide other information related to the contractor's performance. This may include the contractor's selection and management of subcontractors, flexibility in dealing with contract challenges, their overall concern for the Government's interest (if applicable), project awards received, etc.

(End of Summary of Changes)