12 RFP 25RE001 - PPI Relevancy Baseline.XLSX
XLSX spreadsheet 35 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Warrior Care Global Support RFP
- Solicitation number
- H9240025RE001
- Issued by
-
United States Special Operations Command
About this file
The document is a Past Performance Relevancy Baseline matrix (RFP 25RE001) that defines how past performance will be evaluated for the Warrior Care Global Support contract. The matrix provides a structured scoring methodology for assessing contractor performance, with relevancy ratings ranging from "Very Relevant" (10 points) to "Not Relevant" (0 points), based on factors such as contract magnitude, complexity, personnel count, and contract value. The scoring considers organizational structures, management expertise, and business processes.
The evaluation criteria include performance confidence assessments with adjectival ratings from "Exceptional/Blue" to "Unsatisfactory/Red", and confidence levels ranging from "Substantial Confidence" to "No Confidence". For relevancy, contractors will be scored on contract value thresholds ($15M+, $10M+, $5M+, less than $5M) and number of contracted personnel (75+, 50+, 25+, 7 labor categories). The matrix is specifically designed for the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) Warrior Care Program, which provides non-clinical case management and advocacy services for Special Operations Forces wounded, ill, or injured service members.
View the file
Other files
Show all 38
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
Factor 3
| Past Performance Factor Ratings | |||||
| Recency | 3 years from the date of issuance of the solicitation | Performance Rating Definitions | Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Method | Criterion Relevancy Score | |
| Exceptional/Blue | Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective. |
| Adjectival Rating | Description | Rating | Very Relevant | Relevant | Somewhat Relevant | Not Relevant | |||||||
| Relevancy | Very Good/Purple | Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective. | Substantial Confidence | Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. | Score Value | 10 Points | 6 Points | 3 Points | 0 Points | ||||
| Adjectival Rating | Description | Satisfactory/Green | Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. | Satisfactory Confidence | Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. | ||||||||
| Very Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. | Yellow/Marginal | Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. | Neutral Confidence | No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance. | Relevancy Ratings Ranges | |||||||
| Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. | Unsatisfactory/Red | Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. | Limited Confidence | Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. | Rating | Very Relevant | Relevant | Somewhat Relevant | Not Relevant | |||
| Somewhat Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. | No Confidence | Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. | Overall Score | 80-100 | 60-79 | 30-59 | 1-29 | |||||
| Not Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
PP Relevancy Matrix
| SECTION L - Table 2. Past Performance Relevancy Criteria Baseline | ||||
| Section L4.5 | Very Relevant (10) | Relevant (6) | Somewhat Relevant (3) | Not Relevant (0) |
| Similar Magnitude and Complexity- Which requires similar organizational structures, management expertise, and business processes required by this solicitation | ||||
| Point Range | 80-100 | 60-79 | 30-59 | 0-29 |
| Magnitude and Contract Type | ||||
| Current Contract Value (excluding unexercised options) | $15M+ | $10M+ | $5M+ | Less than $5M |
| Number of Contracted Personnel | 75+ | 50+ | 25+ | <25 |
| Complexity | ||||
| Security Classification Requirements Personnel | TS/SCI Pers Cleared | TS Pers Cleared | Secret only Pers Cleared | No personnel with clearance |
| Performance Locations and Geographical requirements | Performance required in 10 or more locations with a minimum of 1 which requires ITAR compliance | Less than 10/more than 5 locations with a minimum of 1 which requires ITAR compliance | More than one CONUS location | Performance required at one location |
| Similarity of the Scope | ||||
| Variety of Labor Categories | >7 labor categories | 5-6 | 3-4 | <3 |
| DoD and OGA Support | DoD | Other Government Agencies only | Commercial only |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .