This information is for reference purposes only. It was current when produced and may now be outdated. Archive material is no longer maintained, and some links may not work. Persons with disabilities having difficulty accessing this information should contact us at: https://info.ahrq.gov. Let us know the nature of the problem, the Web address of what you want, and your contact information.
Please go to www.ahrq.gov for current information.
ATTACHMENT 1
PAST
PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
PART ONE: INSTRUCTIONS
The offeror listed below has submitted a proposal in
response to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Solicitation
No. AHRQ-08-10036, entitled "Incorporating Health IT into Workflow
Redesign." Past performance is an important part of the evaluation criteria
for this acquisition, so input from previous customers of the offeror is
important. This office would greatly appreciate you taking the time to
complete this form. This information is to be provided to Linda Simpson,
the AHRQ Contract Specialist, and is NOT to be disclosed to the offeror either
verbally or in writing. Please provide an honest assessment and return to
AHRQ to the address shown below, no later than August 29, 2008, 12 noon EST
Agency
for Healthcare Research and Quality
Division
of Contracts Management
Attn: Linda Simpson, Contract Specialist
540 Gaither Road
Rockville, Maryland 20850
FAX:
(301) 427-1740
If you have any questions, please contact the Contract
Specialist via E-mail at Linda.Simpson@ahrq.hhs.gov.
NAME OF
OFFEROR:_____________________________________
ADDRESS:_____________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Performance Form
1. Name
of Organization:____________________________________
2. Address:_____________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
3. Contract/Grant
Number (if
relevant): _______________________________________
4. Contract/Grant
Value (Base Plus Options) (if
relevant): ________________________
5. Contract/Grant Award or
Project Beginning Date: _____________________________
6. Contract/Grant/Project
Completion Date: ________________________________
7. Type
of Contract/Grant/Project: (Check all that apply) ( )FP ( )FPI ( )FP-EPA
( ) Award Fee ( ) CPFF-Completion ( ) CPFF-Term
( ) CPIF ( ) CPAF
( ) IO/IQ ( ) BOA ( ) Requirements ( ) Labor-Hour ( )T&M ( ) SBSA
( )8(a) ( )SBIR ( ) Sealed Bid( )Negotiated( )Competitive ( )Non-Competitive
( ) Other __________________________
8. Description of
Requirement:_____________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
PERFORMANCE RATING
Ratings:
Summarize performance and circle in the column on the right the number which
corresponds to the performance rating for each rating category. Please select for
explanation of rating scale.
| Category |
Comments |
Rating Scale |
| Quality
of Product or Service
|
Comments
|
0 |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
5
|
| Cost Control |
Comments
|
0 |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
5
|
| Timeliness
of Performance |
Comments
|
0 |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
5
|
| Business
Relations |
Comments
|
0 |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
5
|
Customer
Satisfaction—Is/was the organization committed to customer satisfaction? Yes ___ No ___
Would you
use this organization again? Yes ___ No ___
Reason: ________________________________________
NAME OF EVALUATOR: ________________________________________
(Please
Print)
TITLE OF EVALUATOR:
________________________________________
SIGNATURE OF EVALUATOR:___________________________________
DATE:_____________________
MAILING ADDRESS: Include
name of organization/Federal agency
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
PHONE #:__________________________________
E-MAIL:__________________________________
Rating
Guidelines:
Summarize performance in each of the rating areas. Assign each area a rating
0(Unsatisfactory), 1(Poor), 2(Fair), 3(Good), 4(Excellent) 5(Outstanding).
Use the following instructions as guidance in making these evaluations.
| Rating Scale |
Quality |
Cost Control |
Timeliness of Performance |
Business Relation |
|
|
-Compliance with contract requirements
-Accuracy of reports
-Technical excellence
|
-Within budget (over/ under target costs)
-Current, accurate, and complete billings
-Relationship of negotiated costs to actual
-Cost efficiencies
-Change orders issue
|
-Met interim milestones
-Reliable
-Responsive to technical direction
-Completed on time, including wrap-up and project
adm
-No liquidated damages assessed
|
-Effective management
-Businesslike
correspondence
-Responsive to project
requirements
-Prompt notification of
problems
-Reasonable/cooperative
-Flexible
-Pro-active
-Effective small/small disadvantaged business sub-contracting program
|
|
0-unsatisfactory
|
Nonconformances are
jeopardizing the
achievement of project
requirements, despite use
of Agency resources
|
Ability to manage cost
issues is jeopardizing
performance of project
requirements, despite
use of Agency
resources
|
Delays are jeopardizing
the achievement of
project requirements.
despite use of Agency's
resources
|
Response to inquiries,
technical/service/administrative
issues is not effective
|
|
1-Poor
|
Overall compliance requires
major Agency resources
to ensure achievement
of project requirements
|
Ability to manage cost issues
requires major Agency
resources to ensure
achievement of project requirements
|
Delays require major Agency
resources to ensure
achievement of project requirements
|
Response to inquiries, technical/service/administrative issues is marginally effective
|
|
2-Fair
|
Overall compliance requires
minor Agency resources
to ensure achievement
of project requirements
|
Ability to manage cost issues
requires minor Agency
resources to ensure
achievement of project requirements
|
Delays require minor Agency
resources to ensure
achievement of project requirements
|
Response to inquiries, technical/service/administrative issues
is somewhat effective
|
|
3-Good
|
Overall compliance does not
impact achievement of project
requirements
|
Management of cost issues
does not impact achievement
of project requirements
|
Delays do not impact achievement
of project requirements
|
Response to inquiries, technical/service/administrative issues is
usually effective
|
|
4-Excellent
|
There are no quality problems
|
There are no cost management issues
|
There
are no delays
|
Response to inquiries, technical/service/administrative issues is effective
|
|
5-Outstanding
| The organization has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that
justifies adding a point to the score. It is expected that this rating will be
used in those rare circumstances where organization performance clearly exceeds
the performance levels described as "Excellent." |
Return to Contents
Proceed to Next Section