Attachment J-4 Past Performance Questionnaire.docx
DOCX document 20 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W9133L20R1000
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a contractor seeking to provide centralized medical credentialing and privileging support services to the Army National Guard and Air National Guard. The services include supporting the credentialing and privileging process for medical personnel to ensure their competency and qualification to perform medical duties when in a military status. The questionnaire collects performance ratings and feedback from a past client on the contractor's technical, management, quality, and responsiveness in areas such as staffing, internal operations, issue resolution, contract compliance, and risk management. The completed questionnaire must be returned directly to the Army National Guard Readiness Center for consideration in its source selection evaluation.
View the file
Other files
Show all 12
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
Past Performance Questionnaire Centralized Medical Credentialing & Privileging Support Services The organization named below is asking you to be a past performance reference by completing this questionnaire. The Government refers to this organization as the Offeror. You are the client.
| 1. |
| Name of Offeror: |
This questionnaire is part of the offeror’s response in a Government source selection. By requesting you to complete this questionnaire, the offeror intends to use you as a reference for Government source selection evaluation purposes. The Government considers the information you provide here to be Source Selection Sensitive and confidential. The Government intends to use this data only for this source selection.
The Government asks that your answers to questions be honest and forthright, and that they be based only on your direct personal knowledge of the offeror. The Government will not share your responses outside of this source selection. To ensure fairness and impartiality, you are to e-mail your completed and signed questionnaire directly to the Government to cole.p.cook.civ@mail.mil and hillari.k.hawkins.civ@mail.mil. Be aware that the offeror is not to participate in your questionnaire responses in any way whatsoever.
This questionnaire has three parts. The offeror has to complete Part I. In Part I, the offeror tells you the particular contract or project he/she wants to use as his/her reference. Part II is your responsibility. In Part II, the questionnaire asks you to provide performance information about the referenced contract or project. Part III contains definitions to help you in your assessments. You will have to refer to these definitions to accurately complete the questionnaire.
If for any reason you are unable to complete this questionnaire, please complete item 10 in Part II and forward this questionnaire to the Government using the above specified email addresses.
Part I: Reference Background Information Part I of this questionnaire is to be completed by the offeror.
Client and Reference Project/Contract Information (Completed by Offeror)
| Name of Client | ___________________________________________ | |
| Contract Title | ___________________________________________ | |
| Contract Number | ___________________________________________ | |
| Contract Value | ___________________________________________ | |
| Type of Contract | ___________________________________________ | |
| Period of Performance | ___________________________________________ |
Part II: Past Performance Questions You are requested to complete Part II of this questionnaire, which involves filling out the CLIENT ASSESSMENT OF PAST PERFORMANCE table. There are four factors to address: Technical, Management, Quality of Service and Improvement, and Responsiveness to Customer. You are to assess each factor and mark an X in the appropriate column in the table.
Please use the ratings scheme defined in Part III of this questionnaire. In addition, please study the performance category definitions, rating definitions, and the rating scheme found in Part III of this questionnaire before assessing client performance.
Client Assessment of Past Performance
| PERFORMANCE FACTOR |
| UNACCEPTABLE |
| MARGINAL |
| ACCEPTABLE |
| GOOD |
| OUTSTANDING |
Technical
Management
Quality of Service and Improvement
Responsiveness to Customer
If your rating for any factor is excellent or unsatisfactory, please provide supporting data as requested below.
Remarks on Outstanding performance: provide data supporting this observation; you may continue on a separate sheet if needed.
Remarks on Unacceptable performance: provide data supporting this observation; you may continue on a separate sheet if needed.
Please identify any corporate affiliation you have with the offeror:
Other comments that you wish to make: you may continue on a separate sheet if needed.
Would you do business with ______________________________________again?
(Insert offeror’s name)
The following requests information about you. Please provide this information.
This questionnaire was completed by:
Client Name:____________________________________________________________
Title:_________________________________________________________________
Mailing Address (Street and P.O. Box): ______________________________________
City, State, and Zip Code:__________________________________________________
Telephone Number:_______________________________________________________
Email:____________________________________________________________
Date Information Provided:_________________________________________________
Signature:___________________________________ Date:______________________
Part III: Performance Categories, Definitions, and Ratings The Government requests that you make your assessment of the offeror using only the performance assessment descriptions for each of the four performance categories listed below. Use the appropriate assessment shown in the tables below as your entry in the CLIENT ASSESSMENT OF PAST PERFORMANCE table in Part II of this questionnaire.
To ensure consistency, please formulate your performance assessments based upon the assessment definitions table for each performance factor, which are found in the tables below. Select the appropriate assessment by marking an X in the appropriate column in the CLIENT ASSESSMENT OF PAST PERFORMANCE table.
Technical Factor The Technical Factor is used to measure the offeror’s success in the following areas:
1. Technical ability of the staff personnel to perform individual tasks;
1. Technical ability to implement and adhere to concise and well-defined internal organizational operational rules which support mission accomplishment;
1. Technical ability to deal with issues (personnel and technical) in a timely manner while minimizing impact on ongoing operations;
1. Technical ability to perform to the contract requirements; and
1. Technical ability to perform operations so as to reduce program risk.
| ASSESSMENT |
| ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION |
| Unacceptable |
| Ability to manage technical issues is jeopardizing performance of contract requirements, despite use of client resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, this level of ability to manage technical issues constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards. |
| Marginal |
| Ability to control technical issues requires minor client resources to ensure achievement of goals. There are no, or very minimal, technical management issues and the offeror has met the contract requirements. |
| Acceptable |
| There are no technical issues and the offeror has met the contract requirements. |
| Good |
| There are no technical issues and the offeror has exceeded the contract requirements, achieving cost savings to the client. |
| Outstanding |
| The offeror has demonstrated an excellent performance level. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where the offeror achieved technical performance clearly which exceeds the performance levels described as "Good." |
Management Factor
The Management Factor is used to measure the offeror’s success in the following areas:
1. Ability to hire and retain appropriate staff;
1. Ability to implement and adhere to concise and well-defined internal operational rules;
1. Ability to deal with issues (personnel and technical) in a timely manner while minimizing impact on ongoing operations;
1. Ability to manage to the contract requirements; and
1. Ability to manage risk.
| ASSESSMENT |
| ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Inability to manage issues is jeopardizing performance of contract requirements, despite use of client resources. Management is unable to address the issues. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, this level of ability to manage issues constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards. |
| Marginal |
| Weak management requires client resources to ensure achievement of goals: offeror not able to achieve some contract requirements or goals. |
| Acceptable |
| There are no management issues and the offeror has met the contract requirements. |
| Good |
| There are no management issues and the offeror has exceeded the contract requirements through the use of proactive or corrective actions. |
| Outstanding |
| The offeror has demonstrated an excellent management performance level. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where the offeror demonstrated performance that clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Good." |
Quality of Service and Improvement Factor The Quality of Service and Improvement Factor is used to measure the offeror’s success in the following areas:
1. Ability to provide/maintain high quality day-to-day service;
1. Ability to prepare the operations for changes associated with growth (additional staff) and/or industry trends (new software releases, security, etc.), including new regulations, policies or instructions in the case of governmental contracts;
1. Ability to analyze existing systems and policies and improve them;
1. Ability to manage risk by following strict change management principles; and
1. Ability to limit negative impact of changes on the enterprise and its users.
| ASSESSMENT |
| ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION |
| Unsatisfactory |
| Non-conformances are jeopardizing the achievement of contract requirements, despite use of client resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, it constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards containing similar requirements. |
| Marginal |
| Overall compliance requires minor client resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements. |
| Acceptable |
| There are no, or very minimal, quality problems, and the offeror has met the contract requirements. Testing and documentation of network management processes is evident. Analysis has resulted in some recommended process improvements |
| Good |
| There are no quality issues, and the offeror has substantially exceeded the contract performance requirements without commensurate additional costs to the client. Day-to-day system management provides a stable environment. Change management processes minimize disruptions, and testing and documentation are thorough. Analysis is pro-active, and recommendations are regular, timely, and have proved useful to the client. |
| Outstanding |
| The offeror has demonstrated an excellent performance level that was significantly in excess of anticipated achievements and is commendable as an example for others. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where offeror performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Good”. Day-to-day system management provides a stable environment. Change management processes demonstrably minimize disruptions and cost to the client, and testing and documentation are exemplary. Analysis is performed continuously, is pro-active, and constantly monitors state-of-the-art practices. Recommendations result in maintaining client network capability to achieve state-of-the-art performance and reliability. |
Responsiveness to Customer Factor The Responsiveness to Customer Factor is used to measure the offeror’s success in the ability to respond to requests for data (scheduled and ad hoc), analysis, and additional tasks in a timely and appropriate manner.
| Unsatisfactory |
| Response to inquiries (concerning issues or otherwise) is not effective. If not substantially mitigated or corrected it constitutes a significant impediment in considerations for future awards. |
| Marginal |
| Response to inquiries (concerning issues or otherwise) is somewhat effective. |
| Acceptable |
| Response to inquiries (concerning issues or otherwise) is consistently effective. |
| Good |
| Response to inquiries (concerning issues or otherwise) exceeds client expectation. |
| Outstanding |
| The offeror has demonstrated an excellent performance level. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where offeror performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Good”. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .