ADDENDA_TO_FAR_52.212-1_AND_FAR_52.212-2.pdf

ADDENDA TO FAR 52.212-1 AND FAR 52.212-2

I. ADDENDA TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL

ITEMS

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Office of Administration, intends to award a single award to one (1) Vendor. In response to the solicitation, Request for Quote (RFQ), this is an open market, total small business set-side under NAICS 561720, and a size standard of $18M in submitting a response. The requirements for the services are indicated under the Performance Work Statement (PWS) attached to the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) posting of this RFQ. Each Vendor will provide technical capabilities; a past performance and a price quote as described below.

1.2 This solicitation will be released electronically only. The electronic version of the RFQ is to be released via FBO as the official version for this acquisition. No hard copy of this solicitation will be issued. Offerors will be sent any and all applicable revisions to this solicitation electronically via FBO.gov so you are encouraged to check it often. Offerors must submit their Quotes in accordance with paragraph 3.0 of these instructions. The government will not accept any CD hard copies or removable media devices.

2.0 VENDOR QUESTIONS

2.1 The deadline for Offerors to submit questions is 5:00 pm EST August 2, 2018. No exceptions. Offerors are requested to e-mail questions to: Kelly Graves at graves.kelly@bls.gov and Lasondia Chaney at Chaney.Lasondia@bls.gov. Telephonic inquiries will not be accepted. All inquiries must be submitted in the form of a question.

Responses to all questions will be sent electronically to all Offerors via FBO.

3.0 QUOTE SUBMISSION DEADLINE

3.1 The due date and time for the response is 5:00 pm EST August 8, 2018. The Offeror shall submit all response information in electronic format via e-mail to Kelly Graves at graves.kelly@bls.gov and Lasondia Chaney at chaney.lasondia@bls.gov as an attachment and labeled. Responses not submitted by the due date and time will be considered “late” and will not be considered for award.

4.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

4.1 The government will not reimburse the contractor for expenses related to quote creation or submission of Quotes.

5.0 CONTENT

Each Quote shall contain the following information:

5.1 Cover letter. The following introductory information (letter or number format is acceptable) is required on the first page of your offer:

- Solicitation Number;

- Name and address of Vendor;

- Name and telephone number of your point-of-contact;

- Name of your contract administration office (if available);

- Date of submission;

- Name, title and signature of authorized representative;

- DUNS Number and Cage code;

- Taxpayer Identification Number

5.2 Quote Format and Content

5.2.1 Quotes should be typed on size 8.5 by 11 inch paper. Pages shall be single-spaced, with at least one-inch margins on the top, bottom and sides.

5.2.2 Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 12 point. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by section.

5.2.3 Tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc.

These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible and shall not exceed 8.5 by 11 inches in size. Elaborate brochures or documentation, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are not required and neither are they desired.

5.2.4 The Vendor shall prepare the response as set forth in the Volume Table below.

The titles and contents of the sections shall be as defined in the table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies specified.

Pages exceeding this page limitation set forth will not be read nor evaluated, and will be removed from the quote.

5.2.5 To assure timely and equitable evaluation of Quotes, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Vendors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

5.2.6 The response shall consist of three (3) separate parts and should be attached in an email under Vendor Attachments: Volume I – Technical Capability, Volume II – Past Performance, and Volume III – Price.

6.0 VOLUME TABLE

Volume # Volume Name Page Limit # of Copies

** Cover Letter Up to 2 pages

One (1) electronic copy submitted as an attachment in email and labeled

May be either in PDF or MS Word format

I Technical Capability

Up to 20 pages (single-side print only; (excludes title cover page, table of contents, resumes, attachments or appendices)

One (1) electronic copy submitted as an attachment in email and labeled.

May be either in PDF or

MS Word format

II Past Performance

Limited to 3 past performance references.

References used in Attachment 1 should be sent

Attachment 3 to complete and return to BLS.

One (1) electronic copy submitted as an attachment in email and labeled.

May be either in PDF or MS Word Format

III Price No limitation

One electronic copy submitted as an attachment in email and labeled in Excel or MS Word Table

Format

7.0 VOLUME I – TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s technical capability based upon their technical response to ensure the requirements outlined in the Performance Work Statement can be met.

The Technical response must provide itemized responses for the requested information below. If the Offeror is proposing more than one method to meet the criteria of the Performance Work

Statement, then separate and complete responses for each must be submitted in response to this solicitation.

7.1 Subfactor A – Technical Approach

7.1.1 The Offeror shall describe their understanding of the PWS requirements. The Offeror’s quote shall be in sufficient detail as to describe the means and methods for accomplishing the activities and deliverables described in the PWS. The Offeror shall describe their approach to conducting a procurement quality assurance review and display their understanding of the requirement to include a description of how the contractor will meet the acceptable quality levels (AQLs) outlined in the PWS. The quality control plan should address how the vendor intends to monitor, assess and address the quality and timeliness of contractor performance.

7.1.2 As part of the technical approach, the contractor shall discuss experience with similar Federal or private sector post-award contract reviews and offer suggested reporting and presentation frameworks.

7.1.3 The personnel identified by the Offeror are not necessarily being proposed to work on the contract resulting from this solicitation, but are intended to demonstrate to the Government the representative caliber and expertise that the Offeror believes appropriate to be assigned to this contract. The personnel identified must be current employees of the Offeror.

At a minimum, the Offeror will provide the following information:

• Employee Name

• Length of Employment with the Offeror‘s company

• Number of years of Federal Government-related Acquisition or Technical professional work experience with names of corresponding Agencies supported

• Relevant Acquisition or Technical Professional Accomplishments/Experiences

• Professional Certifications:

o FAC-C Certification Level (legacy or refresh) o DAWIA Contracting Certification Level o CFCM Certification

• Key experiences/competencies

• Other ( please clarify)

• Higher Level Education or Degree

7.2 Subfactor B – Key Personnel

The Offeror shall provide the resume and allocable contracting certification listed in the PWS for the Senior Acquisition Professional. The resume will display the required background skills/education/abilities as necessary to fulfill the qualifications listed in section 1 .7 of the PWS.

Resumes submitted for key personnel must represent the actual person or persons proposed for the position.

8.0 VOLUME II – PAST PERFORMANCE

a. Offerors shall provide three references that are most relevant to the requirements of the solicitation. If more than three references are received, the first three references listed with matching Past Performance Questionnaire’s (Attachment 3) will be reviewed. If more or less than three references and Past Performance Questionnaires are received, the first three Past Performance Information Sheets (PPIS)(Attachment 1) listed will be reviewed.

b. Past performance information will be obtained through questionnaires tailored to the circumstance of this acquisition. The Offeror will complete a Past Performance Information Sheet (PPIS) (Attachment 1) send out a Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3) for each reference. Past Performance Questionnaire’s completed by sub-contractors will be accompanied by the consent form (Attachment 2).

c. Submit information in accordance with the PPIS (Attachment 1). Past Performance Information shall be submitted on three contracts that you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort, same or similar work in terms of size and scope within the past three years. Include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance.

The scope and magnitude of this solicitation will be the Government’s determinant for relevancy of past performance information.

d. The Government reserves the right to contact and interview individuals listed on the PPIS by phone. The Offeror shall fill out section I and forward the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3) to each client identified on the PPIS (Attachment 1). The listed reference is to email the completed questionnaire to the Mrs. Kelly Graves at graves.kelly@bls.gov and Ms.

Lasondia Chaney at Chaney.Lasondia@bls.gov no later than the date established for receipt of responses. The Government is not responsible for non-receipt of questionnaires from references.

e. If an Offeror is unable to provide a Past Performance Questionnaire, though not preferable, a relevant and recent CPARS report may be used in lieu of the questionnaire. However, it must be submitted in PDF format in accordance with the instructions for submittal in Attachment 3. A CPARS submission will be treated the same as a questionnaire for rating purposes.

f. Offerors may show relevant past performance through a single project that encompasses all of the described under the solicitation or through a combination of projects that together show that work has been accomplished that is consistent in scope and complexity with the PWS. Offerors must follow limits set in 5.2 Quote Format and Content.

9.0 VOLUME III – PRICE

Offerors shall provide pricing that is firm fixed price. Pricing Quotes shall conform to the table below for each option year. Offeror shall submit detailed price information in a separate spreadsheet that outlines how price was established, i.e. What labor hour categories, rates, ODC’s, etc, are included in the Price.

If proposed Labor Hour categories are covered under the Service Contract Labor Standards statute (formerly known as the Service Contract Act) the Offeror’s proposed rates must comply with the prevailing wage determination table.

Base Year

CLIN Base Period Item Unit Qty. Qtr Unit Price

Total

0001 The contractor shall provide quarterly cleaning services for its primary Data Center, also called the Automated Data Processing (ADP) Center

QTR 4

Option Year 1

Price

Total

1001 The contractor shall provide quarterly cleaning services for its primary Data Center, also called the Automated Data Processing (ADP) Center

Option Year 2

Price

Total

2001 The contractor shall provide quarterly cleaning services for its primary Data Center, also called the Automated Data Processing (ADP) Center

Option Year 3

Price

Total

3001 The contractor shall provide quarterly cleaning services for its primary Data Center, also called the Automated

Option Year 4

Price

Total

4001 The contractor shall provide quarterly cleaning services for its primary Data Center, also called the Automated

The Government may request additional information to support the fair and reasonableness determination that is made by the Contracting Officer.

II. ADDENDA TO FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION—COMMERCIAL ITEMS

1. EVALUATION FACTORS

1.1 The vendor evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the Federal Acquisition

Regulation (FAR) 13 including 13.5 and 12.6, utilizing Simplified Acquisition Procedures.

FAR Part 15 does not apply to this procurement. The Government may award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

The Government may reject any or all responses if such action is in the public interest; accept an offer other than the lowest priced response; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in responses received. The Government reserves the right to make award without communications. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial responses should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct communications if the Contracting Officer later determines them in its best interests. This statement is not to be construed to mean that the Government is obligated to communicate with every Offeror (note that FAR Part 15 procedures do not apply to this Simplified Acquisition, therefore formal discussions are not applicable). If the Government awards without communications, the awardee may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their response or to resolve minor clerical errors.

1.2 All factors and subfactors are listed are listed in descending order of importance, so Factor I is more important than Factor II and Factor II is more important than Factor III. The subfactors for the technical capability are of the listed in descending order of importance as well. When combined, non-price factors are significantly more important than price.

Non-Price Factors:

• Factor I – Technical Capability o Subfactor A – Technical Approach o Subfactor B – Key Personnel

• Factor II – Past Performance

Price Factor:

• Factor III – Price

1.3 FACTOR I – TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

Subfactor A: Technical Approach

The government will evaluate the soundness, completeness, adequacy, and understanding of the Offeror's discussion of the submission requirements described in section 7.1 Subfactor A – Technical Approach.

Standard: The minimum requirement is met only when the Offeror adequately describes their approach and understanding of the submission requirements outlined in 7.1 Subfactor A – Technical Approach.

Subfactor B: Key Personnel

The government will evaluate the resume in accordance with section 7.2 Subfactor B – Key Personnel submitted for Key Personnel of the PWS for demonstrating the required background skills/education/abilities as necessary to fulfill the qualifications listed in section 1.7 of the PWS.

Standard: The minimum requirement is met only when the Offeror adequately proposes Key Personnel that meet the minimum qualifications listed in section 1.7 of the PWS.

Note that if an Offeror’s quote demonstrates a material failure to meet a Government requirement resulting in a deficient rating, their quote will be deemed unacceptable and not awardable.

In performing the technical capability evaluation, an overall rating will be given from the ratings below:

TECHNICAL EVALUATION RATINGS

RATING DESCRIPTION

OUTSTANDING

The response meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

GOOD

The response meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Response contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

ACCEPTABLE

The response meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate

MARGINAL

The response does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The response has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

UNACCEPTABLE

A response that contains a major error(s), omission(s) or deficiency(ies) that indicates a lack of understanding of the requirements or an approach that cannot be expected to meet requirements and none of these conditions can be corrected without a major rewrite or revision and is unawardable.

1.4 FACTOR II – PAST PERFORMANCE

The past performance evaluation will be accomplished though assignment of a confidence assessment rating based on a combination of the relevancy and quality of performance of the examples provided. Although the past performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the Technical Capability Subfactors, the resulting Performance Confidence Assessment represents an overall evaluation of contractor performance. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s demonstrated capability and past experience in acquisitions and procurements in complex acquisition environments that involved performance and analysis described in this solicitation, particularly such work conducted for federal agencies.

Under the Past Performance factor, the Performance Confidence Assessment represents the evaluation of an Offeror’s present and past work record to assess the Government’s confidence in the Offeror’s probability of successfully performing as proposed. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s demonstrated record of contract compliance in supplying services that meet the user’s needs, including but not limited to, controlling costs, adhering to schedules (including the administrative aspects of performance), and performance (reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction, and generally, the contractor’s business-like concern for the interest of the customer). As a result of this analysis, each Offeror will receive an integrated Performance Confidence Assessment rating, which is the rating for the Past Performance factor. In performing the past performance evaluation, each Offeror will be assigned one of the following ratings described below:

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT RATINGS

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.

SATISFACTORY

Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NEUTRAL

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.

LIMITED

Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NO

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.

Offerors are to note that, in conducting this assessment, the Government reserves the right to use both data provided by the Offeror and data obtained from other sources, including, but not limited to: Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting Systems (CPARS), or similar systems of other Government departments and agencies; Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA); interviews with program managers and Contracting Officers, and other sources known to the Government, including commercial sources. This information may include data on efforts performed by other divisions, critical subcontractors, or teaming contractors, if such resources will be brought to bear or significantly influence the performance of the proposed effort. The Government may consider as relevant efforts performed for agencies of the federal, state, or local governments and commercial customers.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance that involved performance and as described in this solicitation, particularly such work conducted for federal agencies.

CPARS may be used as part of the evaluation.

The evaluation will be based on relevant performance that demonstrates: Quality of service demonstrated by compliance with contract requirements, accuracy of reports and overall technical excellence. Timeliness performance demonstrated by meeting milestones, reliability, and responsiveness to direction. Business relations as demonstrated by effective management, effective use of small/small disadvantaged business in subcontracting plan (when applicable), reasonable/cooperative behavior, flexible, effective contractor recommended solutions and business like concerns for the Government‘s interest.

The Government will perform an independent determination of relevancy of the Offeror’s past performance (which includes, if applicable, the extent of its critical subcontractors’ or teaming partners’ involvement) based on the data provided or obtained. The Government may not necessarily agree with the Offeror’s opinion of relevancy. Each previous/current contract provided in the response will receive one of the relevancy ratings listed below:

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY ASSESSMENT

VERY

RELEVANT

Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

SOMEWHAT

Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

NOT

Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

More relevant performance will have greater impact in the performance confidence assessment than less relevant efforts.

In determining relevancy, consideration will be given, but not limited to experience conducting contract reviews, experience with Federal contracting, and experience conducting Federal government contract reviews. A strong record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than a "Neutral Confidence" rating. Likewise, a more relevant favorable past performance record may receive a higher confidence rating and be considered more favorably than a less relevant record of favorable performance.

If an Offeror has no single project that encompasses all types of the required experience, the Offeror may show relevant experience through personnel who are proposed to work on the contract that have had the required experience with another company.

Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive an "Neutral Confidence" rating for the Past Performance factor. For Offerors with no relevant performance record, the Government may consider relevant performance information regarding key personnel.

Adverse past performance is considered any rating below Satisfactory on any questionnaire, survey or Government evaluation. Where the relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any implemented corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness.

Quality of performance assesses how well the Offeror performed. This will be assessed based on the ratings received in the Past Performance Questionnaires and the nature of the comments provided. Any information considered from other sources will also be similarly assessed.

1.5 FACTOR III – PRICE

1.5.1 The approach to the source selection for this procurement will be pursuant to a best value concept.

The objective is to select the quote that offers the best value for the Government, not necessarily the lowest price. However, as the performance confidence assessments of the Offerors become more equal in past performance ratings, price may become a determining factor in award selection.

1.5.2 Although Price is least in importance, it will contribute to the source selection decision. While

Price will not be rated, as are Factors I and II, it will be evaluated as follows:

(a) Total Evaluated Price: Price reasonableness will be conducted for all Offerors. However, reasonableness will be based on the total evaluated price (base plus four option periods).

The Government will review the Pricing submissions for completeness and accuracy. The Government will review the Offeror’s total price (a base plus four option periods) for the requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Because FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services will be included in this requirement, the Government will add six months’ value based on the price of the of the final option year in calculating the evaluated price. The Offeror does not need to provide anything for evaluation of 6 month extension.

(b) For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay when consideration is given to prices in the market. Price reasonableness will be established through adequate price competition, and/or a comparison with the IGCE. Reasonableness will be based on the total evaluated price.

ATTACHMENT 1

PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEET (PPIS)

PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEET (PPIS)

Provide the information requested in this form for each Past Performance Reference as required by 1.4.

Provide frank, concise comments regarding performance on the reference you identify. Provide a separate completed form for each reference submitted. Submit the forms as part of the Past Performance Volume.

A. Offeror Name (Company/Division):

*Please identify if you are a teaming member or subcontractor with the prime

Cage Code:

DUNS Number:

(NOTE: If the company or division performing this effort is different than the offeror or the relevance of this effort to the instant acquisition is impacted by any company/corporate organizational change, note those changes below. Refer to the "Organizational Structure Change History" you provided as part of your Past Performance Volume).

B. Program Title:

C. Contract Specifics:

1. Contracting Agency or Customer:

2. Citation Number:

3. Contract Type:

4. Period of Performance:

5. Original Contract $ Value (Do not include unexercised options):

6. Current Contract $ Value (Do not include unexercised options):

7. If the amounts for 5 and 6 above are different, provide a brief description of the reason below.

8. Original completion date:

9. Current scheduled completion date:

10. Estimated completion date:

11. Number of contract changes:

12. Enter primary cause for contract changes below:

D. Enter below a brief description of effort as Prime or Subcontractor.

E. Primary customer points of contact. (For Government contracts/orders, provide current information on all three individuals. For commercial contracts, provide points of contact fulfilling these same roles.)

1. Program Manager and/or Site Manager

2. Procurement Contracting Officer

3. Administrative Contracting Officer

Name

Office

Address

Telephone

FAX #

E-Mail

F. Address below any technical (or other) area about this citation considered unique.

G. Describe the relevancy to the Technical Capability, Factor 1, Subfactor A for which this citation applies. Illustrate how your experience on this program applies to that subfactor.

H. Subcontracting Plan Requirements.

1. Was a subcontracting plan required? _______ If YES, go to # 2. If NO, skip this section.

2. Planned goal (%) Achieved goal (%)

3. Explain below why goals were not met.

ATTACHMENT 2

CONSENT FORM

CONSENT FORM

FOR THE RELEASE OF PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

TO THE PRIME CONTRACTOR

Past performance information concerning teaming partners cannot be disclosed to a private party without the teaming partner's consent. Because a prime contractor is a private party, the Government will need that consent before disclosing subcontractor past performance information to the prime during exchanges. In an effort to assist the Government's Performance Confidence Assessment Group (PCAG) in assessing your past performance relevancy and confidence, we request that the following consent form be completed by the major teaming partners identified in your quote. The completed consent forms should be submitted as part of your Past Performance Volume.

SAMPLE

Dear (Contracting Officer)

We are currently participating as a (teaming partner) with (prime contractor or name of entity providing quote) in responding to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, (location) request for quote (solicitation number) for the (program title or description of effort).

We understand that the Government is placing increased emphasis on past performance in order to obtain best value in source selections. In order to facilitate the performance confidence assessment process we are signing this consent form to allow you to discuss our past performance information with the prime contractor during the source selection process.

(Signature and Title of individual who has the authority to sign for and legally bind the company)

Company Name:

Address:

*Please identify if you are a teaming member or subcontractor with the prime

ATTACHMENT 3:

Mail-in Past Performance Questionnaire

TO: Government agency or commercial organization (i.e., customer) with knowledge of the Offeror's past performance.

Please complete this questionnaire, which concerns the past performance of a contractor or subcontractor who is doing business (or has done business) with you, and is interested in doing business with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). Handwritten responses are sufficient. If you need more space than that provided, please attach additional pages. Responses will be treated as source selection sensitive information. The contractor who provided DOL with your name as a reference was informed, via a solicitation provision, that by listing you as a reference and requesting your submission of the questionnaire, they are authorizing you to release information to DOL relative to their past performance, whether it is positive or negative information.

Email the completed questionnaire to the attention of Kelly Graves, graves.kelly@bls.gov and Lasondia Chaney, Chaney.Lasondia@bls.gov. The Offeror must fill in the solicitation number, fax number, email address, and name of Contracting Officer below, prior to providing you with the questionnaire, or provide you with the information to fill in. Your completed questionnaire must be provided directly to the Contracting Officer from you. DOL will not accept completed questionnaires sent from the Offeror.

(Attachment 3) PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

WHEN FILLED IN, THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION

IAW FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

Offeror: Complete SECTION 1, then e-mail questionnaire to the customer points of contact listed on the Past Performance Information Sheet for the contract identified.

Offeror’s Evaluator: Complete SECTIONS 2-3 and e-mail to: Jones.Elliott@bls.gov and chaney.lasondia@bls.gov.

(DO NOT PROVIDE COPY BACK TO THE OFFEROR)

SECTION 1: CONTRACTOR IDENTIFICATION

A. Contractor *Please identify if you are a teaming member or subcontractor with the prime

B. Prime Contractor Cage Code

C. Contract Number

D. Contract Type

E. Was this a competitive contract? Yes No

F. Period of Performance

G. Initial Contract Cost ($)

H. Current/Final Contract Cost ($)

I. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs (enter below):

SECTION 2: CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION

A. Customer or Agency Name

B. Customer or Agency Description (if applicable)

C. Geographic description of services under this contract, i.e., local, nationwide, worldwide, other Command

SECTION 3: EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION

A. Evaluator's Name

B. Evaluator's Title

C. Evaluator's Phone/Fax Number mailto:Jones.Elliott@bls.gov mailto:chaney.lasondia@bls.gov

D. Number of years evaluator worked on subject contract

SECTION 4: NARRATIVE SUMMARY

What were the contractor’s greatest strengths in the performance of the contract?

What were the contractor’s greatest weaknesses in the performance of the contract?

Did the contractor have a difficult time finding qualified personnel who have working experience in federal (or private industry) contract quality assurance review?

Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?

(Attachment 3) PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE