ExhibitC.doc

DOC document 125 KB Posted

Attached to
Design/Build closed loop geothermal heating and cooling HVAC system Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
W91ZRS-08-R-0003
Issued by
Department of the Army Connecticut Army National Guard

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Design/Build closed loop geothermal heating and cooling HVAC system, newest first.
File Type Posted
ExhibitA.doc DOC document
Ex_H_GeneralDecision_CT20080004_20080606.doc DOC document
ExhibitB.doc DOC document
ExhibitF.doc DOC document
W91ZRS-08-R-0003.doc DOC document
CEKT062001volume2.doc DOC document
CEKT062001solicitation .doc DOC document

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

W91ZRS-08-R-0003

Geothermal HVAC System, Bradley

EXHIBIT C PACKAGE INFORMATION AND FORMS

Instructions to Offeror for sending Reference Questionnaire Forms: Prepare and send a reference questionnaire package for each project listed on your Exhibit A, Performance Information Form. For Government contracts, send to Contracting Officer or Technical Representative. For commercial references send to personnel with duties similar to those for Government contracts. It is your responsibility to follow-up and to encourage your references to send in their questionnaire. If you have multiple references at one location (Base etc.) send one cover letter and questionnaires for each contract you want a reference for. Your questionnaire package should contain the following.

1. Cover Letter (See SAMPLE)

2. Respondent Info Rating Sheets Offeror should put name in spaces indicated and ensure it is on every page for identification purposes

3. Suggested Pre Addressed stamped envelope.

DELETE THESE INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE SENDING OUT QUESTIONNAIRES

EXHIBIT C

SAMPLE TRANSMITTAL LETTER

AND

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Your Company Letterhead

Date: _________________

To: ______________________________________

We have listed your firm as a reference for work we have performed for you Our firm intends to submit a proposal under a project advertised by The USPFO for Connecticut entitled, Geothermal HVAC System, Bradley Air National Guard Base. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), they will evaluate our firm's past performance. 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. (include the following paragraph if more than one questionnaire is sent to the same organization or delete the paragraph) Furthermore, a questionnaire has also been sent to ____________________ of your organization. Only one response from each office is required. If at all possible, we suggest that you individually answer this questionnaire and then coordinate your responses with that of ________________________, to forge a consensus on one overall response from your organization.

Please send your completed questionnaire to the following address to arrive NOT LATER

THAN 11:00 AM on July 17, 2008, the date and time set for receipt of Phase I proposals. Do not return them to our company.

If you have questions regarding the attached questionnaire, or require assistance, please contact, . Thank you for your assistance. E-Mail is preferred.

Signature and Title

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

Upon completion of this form, and the questionnaire please send directly to the following:

USPFO for Connecticut Purchasing and Contracting

Attention: Michael Mastalski 360 Broad Street Hartford, CT 06105-3706

Phone: (860) 524-4873

FAX: (860) 524-4874

e-mail: michael.mastalski@us.army.mil Do not return this form to offeror’s office. Return this page with the Questionnaire to Contracting Officer at the USPFO for Connecticut.

RESPONDENT IDENTIFICATION AND RATINGS

(Part 1 Contractor submitting Proposal fill-in) Reference is provided for: ________________________________Prime____ or Subcontractor____

Subcontractor provide name of Prime contractor proposing ____________________.

Contract Number or Project Title______________________________________________________

Date of Award/ ________________________Completion Date______________________________

If not complete provide percentage complete _____________________________________

Location_________________________________________________________________________

Dollar Amount of Award__________________ Final or Current ____________________________

Brief Description of work and your role in the referenced contract: ___________________________

(Part 2 Person providing Reference) Reference is provided by: ___________________________

Company/Agency: _________________________________________________________________

Business Address; ________________________________________________________________

Telephone Number: _______________________________________________________________

E-Mail Address: __________________________________________________________________

Relationship to Contract: ___________________________________________________________

If information above (Part 1) is not accurate please indicate.

To obtain an electronic version of the form please contact: Michael Mastalski at michael.mastalski@us.army.mil

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE WHEN COMPLETED

Please Mark the appropriate rating. Use the rating chart on the last page. Include the name of the company the reference is for on each page. Please provide remarks so we can better understand you rating.

(1) Quality Control (QC) (Design and or Construction) – Evaluate the contractor's performance in complying with contract requirements, quality achieved and overall technical expertise demonstrated Overall, how would you rate the quality of workmanship for this project? To what extent did the contractor:
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

· Demonstrate adequate QC practices

E
VG
S
M
U
NA
· Adequacy of Materials - Were Submittals well researched and were materials clearly identified
E
VG
S
M
U
NA
· Provide adequate "As-Builts”
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

REMARKS:

(2) Timely Performance (Design and or Construction Rate timeliness in meeting requirements and adhering to contract schedules (delivery/performance), taking into account all excusable delays including cooperation and attention to contract completion efforts. To what extent did the contractor:
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

· Meet established schedule

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

· Resolve delays in an expeditious manner

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

· Identify/correct deficient work in a timely manner

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

· Timely complete punch-list items( construction) or respond to design comments (A&E)

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

· Provide timely and satisfactory responses to warranty issues after project completion. (NA- A&E)

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

· Process submittals in a timely manner

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

· Provide timely submission of close out documents

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

· Provide timely solutions to design defects or omissions (NA Construction)

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

REMARKS:

(3) Management Effectiveness (Design and or Construction) Overall, how would you rate this contractor’s business practices, customer relationship, and ability to successfully perform? Did the contractor demonstrate a reasonable and cooperative business relationship with the Government’s contract management personnel?
E
VG
S
M
U
NA
To what extent did the contractor provide experienced personnel with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements contract schedules (delivery/performance), taking into account all excusable delays including cooperation and attention to contract completion efforts.
E
VG
S
M
U
NA
To what extent did the contractor cooperated to resolve problems, attending meetings (as applicable) and maintained communication to assure satisfactory resolution.
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

REMARKS:

(4) Subcontractor Management: Rate how well subcontractors/tradesmen were managed and work coordinated. Explain in remarks any subcontracting issues (positive or negative) that impacted the performance of your contract.
E
VG
S
M
U
NA
To what extent did the contractor provide experienced, adequate, competent and qualified, management, subcontractors capable of meeting contract requirements throughout the performance period of the contract?
E
VG
S
M
U
NA
To what extent were subcontractors/suppliers paid in a timely manner (NA Design)
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

REMARKS:

(5) Pricing: How effective was the contractor in meeting Cost/Price performance targets and controlling contingencies (i.e. changes, etc.)? Did the proposals accurately represent the work required?

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

To what extent did the contractor's supporting price/cost information for modifications are accurate, complete and reasonable (not over inflated or under estimated). Was pricing data well-substantiated?

E
VG
S
M
U
NA

REMARKS:

(6) Site Management/Superintendent/Designer Involvement To what extent did the contractor's Management team ensured compliance to contract requirements?

E
VG
S
M
U
NA
How timely and effective were the contractor’s responses to and resolution of technical problems? Did Site/Project Management team have sufficient authority to make decisions or take actions during project performance?
E
VG
S
M
U
NA
Was the Site manager always present on site when work was performed? (NA for A&E)
E
VG
S
M
U
NA
How flexible, cooperative, and reasonable was the contractor in meeting mission requirements?
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

REMARKS:

(7) How effective was the contractor’s safety program to ensure compliance with federal, state and local regulations? Did the contractor implement and follow their safety plan? Did they run a “safe” jobsite? (NA for A&E)
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

REMARKS:

(8) Applicable to Federal Contracts – How well did the contractor comply with applicable Federal laws and regulations such as Davis Bacon Act- timely payrolls and compliance, Drug Free Workplace? (NA for A&E)
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

REMARKS:

(9 To what extent were Environmental Regulations followed and Use of Recovered Materials, Executive Order 13101 specified and used?
E
VG
S
M
U
NA
(10) Applicable to Federal Contracts Only – How well did the contractor comply with Utilization of Small Business Concerns requirements? For Large Businesses: Were Small Business goals met in the Small Business Subcontracting Plan?
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

REMARKS:

(11) How would you rate the Contractor’s overall performance?
E
VG
S
M
U
NA

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

To what extent were the end users satisfied with:

Quality? Cost? Schedule?

Exceptionally Satisfied Q____ C_____S____

Highly Satisfied

Q____ C_____S____

Satisfied

Q____ C_____S____

Somewhat Dissatisfied Q____ C_____S____ (explain please)

REMARKS:

(12) What were the contractor’s top documented strengths, if any, in performing the contract requirements?

REMARKS:

(13) Please Provide Any Additional Information You Feel Is Important Not Covered Elsewhere:

REMARKS:

Thank you for your remarks. Please ensure that you return this questionnaire to the Contracting Agency. Do NOT return to the evaluated contractor. Be sure to include the information page.

Reference provided by ________________________________ DATE:________________

RATING DEFINITION CHART IS ON NEXT PAGE

RATING
DEFINITION
Exceptional (E)
Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Exceeded that required by the contract. (Timeliness) Completion was ahead of schedule.
Very Good (VG)
Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Met All contractual requirements.
Satisfactory (S)
Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Met Essentially All contractual requirements.
Marginal (M)
Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Met Some of the contractual requirements. However, changes to the contractor’s existing processes may be necessary in order to achieve contract requirements.
Unsatisfactory (U)
Indicates the contractor’s performance record within the area of evaluation Failed to Meet the minimum Government requirements.
Unknown or Not Applicable (N/A)
The question does not apply. No performance record identifiable within the area of evaluation.

� Insert name and phone number

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