Attachment 5 Task Order Performance Evaluation 11-15-2023.pdf

692M15-24-R-00005 Attachment 5 11/15/2023

TASK ORDER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

CONTRACTOR:

CONTRACT/TASK ORDER NUMBER:

QVL NUMBER:

QVL TITLE:

POC/REFERENCE NAME & TITLE:

ROLE (e.g., COR, TOR):

ADDRESS:

PHONE NUMBER:

E-MAIL:

The FAA TO Evaluator will rate the contractor’s TO performance utilizing the following definitions:

Evaluation Rating Definitions

Rating Definition Note

Exceptional 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.

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there must have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Very Good 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.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There must have been no significant weaknesses identified.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there must have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

There must have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements.

The contractual performance of the element or subelement 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.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government.

A Marginal rating must be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or subelement contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating must be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

The FAA TO Evaluator will objectively assess the contractor’s TO performance in each performance element below by assigning an “X” to the most appropriate rating as described below. For a rating of Marginal or Unsatisfactory for any performance element, the TOR must provide rationale that supports the assigned rating per the above definitions. The rationale must be detailed and provide objective findings that reference specific TO requirements.

Performance Element

Exceptional Very Good

Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory

Quality ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Rationale:

Schedule ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Management ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Regulatory Compliance

Given the choice, would you do business with this contractor again?

If no, please provide reasons.

Additional comments you would like to share:

EVALUATOR SIGNATURE DATE