J_Attachment 11_MRMSS_PPQ_1.pdf

Section J - Attachment 11

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

(Blocks 1 through 4 shall be completed by Contractor/Offeror.)

1. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR INFORMATION

Company Name: Point of Contact Name:

Phone Number: Phone Number:

Address: Email Address:

DUNS Number:

2. GENERAL INFORMATION

Work performed as: ☐ Prime ☐ SubContractor ☐ Other (please explain):

Percent (%) of work performed:

If a SubContractor, please identify the Prime (Company Name/Phone Number):

3. CONTRACT INFORMATION

Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order (if applicable):

Contract Type: ☐ Firm Fixed Price ☐ Cost Reimbursement ☐ Other (please explain):

Contract Title:

Award Date:

Contract Term/Period of Performance:

Total Contract Price:

Original Completion Date:

Actual Completion Date:

Explain Differences (if applicable):

Original Contract Price:

Final Contract Price (including all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences (if applicable):

4. CONTRACT DESCRIPTION

Complexity of work performed: ☐ High ☐ Medium ☐ Routine

How is this effort relevant to the effort of submission?

INSTRUCTIONS FOR CUSTOMERS COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE: The Department of Interior (DOI), Interior Business Center (IBC), Acquisition Services Directorate (AQD) on behalf of the Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) requests that customers complete this Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) and submit it, via email, directly to the Past Performance Evaluation Team (PPET) Chair and Contracting Officer (CO) identified below.

The Government requests that customers do not return nor furnish copies of the completed PPQ to the Contractor/Offeror. Please contact the PPET Chair and/or CO with any questions or concerns regarding this PPQ.

Contractors/Offerors and Customers are advised that the Government reserves the right to verify any and all information on this PPQ.

Please use the following adjective ratings and definitions for your evaluation of the contractor’s performance.

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(O) Outstanding

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’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.

An “outstanding” rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an “outstanding” rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(G) Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’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 were effective.

A “good” rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(A) Acceptable

Performance meets minimum 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.

An “acceptable” rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(M) Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A “marginal” rating is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unacceptable

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 serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An “unacceptable” rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an “unacceptable” rating.

(N/A) Not Applicable No information or did not apply to your contract Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CUSTOMER

CUSTOMER INFORMATION

(The following shall be completed by the Customer.)

POINT OF CONTACT INFORMATION

Name and Title:

Company:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

CONTRACT INFORMATION

Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order (if applicable):

Contract Title:

Contract Term/Period of Performance:

Contract Price:

Describe Your Role/Relation to the Contract:

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ) DATES

Date PPQ Received:

Date PPQ Completed/Submitted:

Customer’s Signature: ______________________________________________________________________

Please select the adjective rating that best reflects your evaluation of the contractor’s performance.

1. Operations & Maintenance (O&M): O G A M U n/a

(a) Rate the contractor’s ability to provide day-to-day O&M support services for large information technology systems. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(b) Rate the contractor’s ability to plan, manage, and control O&M tasks, such as configuration changes, data extractions, data cleanup, and modifications, for large information technology systems.

(c) Rate the contractor’s ability to provide timely, effective problem-solving solutions for O&M tasks without extensive customer guidance. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(d) Rate the contractor’s ability to perform in a Financial reporting environment. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(e) Rate the contractor’s ability to perform in a Compliancy reporting environment. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(f) Rate the contractor’s ability to perform in a Business Automation/Data Warehouse environment. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

2. New Development, Enhancements, and Upgrades O G A M U n/a

(a) Rate the contractor’s ability to design, implement, and execute New Development and Enhancement initiatives for large information technology systems.

(b) Rate the contractor’s ability to perform/apply Upgrades on large information technology systems without sustainable disruption of services. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

3. Hosting & Continuity of Operations O G A M U n/a

(a) Rate the contractor’s experience with FedRAMP. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(b) Rate the contractor’s ability to host, comply with physical and logical data/digital security requirements. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(c) Rate the contractor’s Emergency Preparedness and ability to maintain Continuity of Operations, to include disaster recovery (failover/failback). ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

4. Transition Plans O G A M U n/a

(a) Rate the contractor’s ability to plan, manage, and control the Transition of large information technology systems from/to contract/contractor. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(b) Rate the contractor’s ability to manage and provide the transfer of knowledge and processes, without substantial disruption of services. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(c) Rate the contractor’s ability to maintain services at the desired quality levels during Transition in/out periods. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

5. Project Management O G A M U n/a

(a) Rate the contractor’s effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, man-hour allocations, and/or labor force. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(b) Rate the contractor’s effectiveness of program/project management for large information technology systems. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(c) Rate the contractor’s ability to mitigate risk of end-of-life/end-of-support hardware, software, and/or licenses. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(d) Rate the contractor’s ability to simultaneously manage and control multiple components of large information technology systems. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

6. Quality Management O G A M U n/a

(a) Rate the contractor’s adequacy/effectiveness of quality control and adherence to quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance).

(b) Rate the contractor’s accuracy of reporting in a large information technology system. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(c) Rate the contractor’s timeliness of reporting in a large information technology system. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

7. Key Personnel O G A M U n/a

(a) Rate the contractor’s ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce of Key Personnel. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

(b) Rate the contractor’s ability to manage turnover of Key Personnel and the transfer of knowledge. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

8. Small Business O G A M U n/a

(a) Rate the contractor’s utilization of Small Business concerns. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

9. Summary Yes No

Would you hire or work with this contractor again?

(If no, please explain in the comments section below.) ☐ ☐

COMMENTS SECTION (Please attach additional pages, if necessary.)

Please provide any additional information for responses to the above questions (if applicable) and/or any additional remarks on performance and/or the contractor. If there are any known adverse performance to note, please explain. Also please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and/or any other comments which may assist DOI IBC AQD and ONRR in evaluating performance confidence of the contractor.

PLEASE SEND DIRECTLY TO:

Bradley “Wade” Ward, Contracting Officer - Bradley_Ward@ibc.doi.gov Amber Hughes, PPET Chair - Amber_Hughes@ibc.doi.gov

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

mailto:Bradley_Ward@ibc.doi.gov mailto:Bradley_Ward@ibc.doi.gov mailto:Amber_Hughes@ibc.doi.gov mailto:Amber_Hughes@ibc.doi.gov