DRAFT RFP_B08-W912PF26RA011_ATT C_ PPQ_DRAFT.docx

DBB STORM & SANITARY SEWER REPAIR ATTACHMENT C

CASERMA MIOTTO

W912PF26RA011

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ)

Source Selection Information – Sensitive

Solicitation Number: W912PF26RA011 Project Title: Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Repair of Storm Sewer Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems, Caserma Miotto, Longare, Vicenza, Italy

INSTRUCTIONS TO EVALUATOR

You have been identified as a reference for the Contractor named below. The information you provide will be used to evaluate the Contractor’s past performance on a current/proposed Federal contract.

IMPORTANT: To maintain the integrity of the source selection process, DO NOT return this completed questionnaire to the Contractor. Please email the completed form directly to the Contracting Officer / Contract Specialist:

Deadline: TBD

SECTION 1: CONTRACT INFORMATION

(To be completed by offeror)

Contractor Being Evaluated:

Contract Number:

Contract Type:

Initial Contract Award Value:

Final Contract Value (with modifications):

Period of Performance:

Brief Description of Work:

SECTION 2: EVALUATOR INFORMATION

(To be completed by offeror before sending to client)

Name & Title:

Agency/Organization:

Phone & Email:

SECTION 3: PERFORMANCE NARRATIVES (To be completed by evaluator) Please provide a written narrative for each of the following areas based on the Contractor's performance. Focus on specific examples, successes, failures, and corrective actions taken.

1. Quality.

This narrative should reflect the contractor’s management of the quality control program, the quality of the work itself, and whether a quality product was provided. Please include sufficient comments to support rating.

Factors to consider:

· Ability to maintain quality control and accuracy of CQC documentation.

· Implementation of the 3-phase inspection process

· Adequacy, identification, and correction of deficient work.

· Timeliness and quality of reviews of materials and shop drawings.

· Whether there was incorporation of unspecified materials.

Evaluator Narrative:

2. Schedule.

This narrative should assess the timeliness of the contractor against the required completion date of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements.

Factors to consider:

· Timely completion of design/engineering and physical construction activities.

· Adequacy of the project schedule, timely updates, and adherence to approved milestones (both physical and administrative).

· Timely submittal of management responses to Requests for Proposals (RFPs) and deliverables.

· Corrective actions taken by the contractor of their own volition when the schedule slipped through their fault.

· Any adverse actions such as liquidated damages, Cure Notices, Show Cause Notices, or Delinquency Notices.

3. Cost Control.

This narrative should assess the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract/order costs, as well as their resource efficiency. (Note: This section may be rated N/A for Fixed-Price contracts).

Factors to consider:

· Relationship of actual costs to budgeted/negotiated costs and remaining within the total estimated cost.

· Accuracy, currency, and completeness of billings, and the adequacy of budgetary internal controls.

· Ability to design the project so that it can be constructed within available funds, and prompt notification to the Government if estimates exceed funds.

· Performance during any Undefinitized Contract Actions (UCAs) prior to final negotiation.

· Any innovative methods used that resulted in cost savings.

4. Management.

This narrative should reflect the integration and coordination of all activities needed to execute the contract, including customer orientation, business relations, and the capacity of home/on-site office personnel to plan, resource, and manage the work.

Factors to consider:

· Management Responsiveness: Timeliness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, cooperative behavior, and proposal submittals (especially ECPs, change orders, or UCAs).

· Subcontract Management: Timely award of subcontracts, early identification of subcontractor issues, prompt subcontractor payments, and management of subcontractors to ensure labor and safety compliance.

· Program & Key Personnel: Risk management practices, tracking of contract compliance, management of Government Furnished Property (GFP), and effectiveness in selecting, supporting, retaining, and replacing qualified key personnel.

5. Regulatory Compliance.

This narrative assesses compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract relating to applicable regulations and codes, including financial, environmental, and labor regulations.

Factors to consider:

· Compliance with all contract clauses and reporting requirements (e.g., Integrity reporting, Cost Accounting Standards (CAS), environmental reporting).

· Compliance with the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).

· Instances of failure to report, late/nonpayment to subcontractors, trafficking violations, tax delinquency, defective cost/pricing data, terminations, or suspensions/debarments.

· Strict compliance with the Construction Wage Rate Statute (formerly Davis-Bacon) and correction of any compliance deficiencies.

6. Other Evaluation Areas (Safety & Unique Requirements).

Specify additional evaluation areas that are unique to the contract/order, or that cannot be captured elsewhere. For this construction requirement, Safety is the primary "Other Area" being evaluated.

Factors to consider:

· Safety Plan: Adequacy and implementation of the Contractor’s Safety Plan.

· Safety Execution: Identification and correction of safety deficiencies, and a quantitative evaluation of any accidents or injuries.

· Unique Requirements: Compliance with any other standard or unique contractual requirements specific to this project not addressed above.

SECTION 4: CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS (To be completed by evaluator) Understanding the Customer Perspective: Were there any significant modifications issued on this contract? Specifically, did the final contract cost exceed the initial award amount by more than 25%? If so, please explain the nature of these modifications from the Client's perspective (e.g., were they due to unforeseen differing site conditions, Government-directed changes, or Contractor-driven errors/mismanagement?). How well did the Contractor handle the negotiation, pricing, and execution of these modifications?

SECTION 5: OVERALL RATING

Based on the narratives provided above and the Contractor's overall performance on this contract, please select the single rating below that best reflects your overall confidence assessment.

SECTION 6: EVALUATOR SIGNATURE (To be completed by evaluator) By signing below, I verify that I have evaluated the Contractor's performance based on my direct knowledge of the project and that the information provided herein is accurate to the best of my knowledge.

Evaluator Printed Name: _______________________________________

Evaluator Signature: __________________________________________

Date: ___________________

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – (SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104)