Skip Navigation U.S. Department of Health and Human Services www.hhs.gov
Agency for Healthcare Research Quality www.ahrq.gov
Archive print banner

Incorporating Health Information Technology Into Workflow Redesign

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 It was current when produced and may now be outdated. Archive material is no longer maintained, and some links may not work.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

 

The information on this page is archived and provided for reference purposes only.

 

AHRQ Advancing Excellence in Health Care