ATTACHMENT3PP word 03.doc

DOC document 54 KB Posted

Attached to
Amended Synopsis Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
W912JB10R4014
Issued by
Department of the Army Michigan Army National Guard

About this file

Past Performance Questionnaire in Microsoft Word

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Amended Synopsis, newest first.
File Type Posted
Q A 1-61 and unanswered Q Sept 15.pdf PDF
Q A 1-58 Sept 14.pdf PDF
10R4014-01.pdf PDF
10R4014 released.pdf PDF
Q A 1-56 10 Sept 10.pdf PDF
Q A 1-54 9 Sept 10.pdf PDF
Pre Proposal Conference Q A 1-50 SEPT 8.pdf PDF
Final PASS Pre-Proposal Slides 31 Aug 10.ppt PPT presentation
PreProposal sign in.xls XLS spreadsheet

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

ATTACHMENT 3

Past Performance Reference Package

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SHEET COVER SHEET

Request for Quote Number: W912JB-10-R-4014 Proposal closing date:

Submit completed Cover Sheet and Survey via mail, fax, or email to:

127 MSC – Contracting Division

43200 Maple Street, Bldg. 105

Selfridge ANG Base, MI 48045-5213

Fax: (586) 239-4300

Email: 127wg.contractomb@ang.af.mil Name of Company:

Contract Number:

Contract Type:

Contract Amount:

Contract Period of Performance (including all options):

Product/Service Description:

Name, title and phone number of person completing questionnaire:

Length of time your firm has been involved with this company:

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY RATING SHEET

RATING SCALE

Please use the following ratings to answer the questions. If you are unable to rate an item because it was not a requirement, never an issue, or you have no knowledge of the item in question, please mark “Neutral/NA”.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Acceptable - The company’s performance was satisfactory and you would consider doing business with them again. There may have been minor performance problems which were satisfactorily corrected.

Unacceptable - The company’s performance was entirely unsatisfactory and you would not do business with them again under any circumstances. There were serious performance issues with the contractor for which the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.

Neutral/NA - No record exists or not applicable.

NOTE:

For statements indicating “Unacceptable”, please provide an explanation in the comments section of the survey.

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SURVEY

Neutral

/ NA

Acceptable
Unacceptable

A. QUALITY OF PRODUCT OR SERVICE:

(1) The Contractor provided a product or service that conformed to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship.

(2) The Contractor submitted accurate reports.

(3) The Contractor utilized personnel that were appropriate to the effort performed.

B. COST CONTROL:

(1) The Contractor performed the effort within the estimated cost/price.

(2) The Contractor submitted accurate invoices on a timely basis.

(3) The Contractor demonstrated cost efficiencies in performing the required effort.

(4) The actual costs/rates realized closely reflected the negotiated costs/rates.

C. SCHEDULE:

(1) The tasks required under this effort were performed in a timely manner and in accordance with the period of performance of the contract.

(2) The Contractor was responsive to technical and/or contractual direction.

D. BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS:

(1) The Contractor demonstrated effective management over the effort performed.

(2) The Contractor maintained an open line of communication so that the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and/or Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) were apprised of technical, cost, and schedule issues.

(3) The Contractor presented information and correspondence in a clear, concise, and businesslike manner.

(4) The Contractor promptly notified the COR, TPOC, and/or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent issues.

(5) The Contractor cooperated with the Government in providing flexible, proactive, and effective recommended solutions to critical program issues.

(6) The Contractor made timely award to, and demonstrated effective management of, its subcontractors.

(7) The Contractor demonstrated an effective small/small disadvantaged business subcontracting program.

E. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

(1) The products/services provided adequately met the needs of the program.

(2) The Contractor was able to perform with minimal or no direction from the COR or the TPOC.

(3) I am satisfied with the performance of the Contractor under this effort.

F. KEY PERSONNEL:

(1) The labor turnover in key personnel labor categories was minimal and did not adversely affect Contractor performance.

(2) The Contractor proposed qualified personnel to fulfill the requirements of the contract.

G. OTHER:

(1) Would you award this firm another contract? ( ) Yes ( ) No If “No”, please provide an explanation.________________________________________________________________________

(2) Was the contract terminated for default? ( ) Yes ( ) No If “Yes”, please provide an explanation. __________________________________________________________________________________

COMMENTS:

(Required for ALL Unacceptable Ratings)

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