F. EXHIBIT 2 SEM Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf

RFP 80GSFC21R0039

Exhibit 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTIONS

(Updated May, 2018)

Sections 1-3 provide for contract-related descriptive information and identification of the evaluator.

Section 4 lists the major work elements within our requirement. Please provide your assessment of the “relevant experience” and “performance” associated with our requirement evidenced within the contract for which you are a reference. “Experience” means a contractor who has performed work in the specific requirement element. “Did not Perform” means that the specific requirement element was not performed under the contract.

Section 5 evaluates the contractor’s technical, schedule, and cost performance and management. (Additional pages may be used for comments if desired). If you cannot answer any questions, please circle “N/R” for Not Rated.

The following definitions are offered for your use in assigning a performance rating for each of the factors in Sections 5 and 6:

Section 6 provides for evaluation of the contractor’s management of cost and award/incentive fee history.

RETURN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE TO NASA Goddard Space Flight Center BY May 12, 2022 Attn: Malika Graham Code 178 e-mail: malika.graham@nasa.gov

Very High

(VH)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance is of exceptional merit;

indicating exemplary performance in a timely, efficient, and economical manner; very minor (if any) problems with no adverse effect on overall performance.

High

(H)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance demonstrates very effective performance that would be fully responsive to contract requirements with contract requirements accomplished in a timely, efficient, and economical manner for the most part with only minor problems with little identifiable effect on overall performance.

Moderate

(M)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance demonstrates effective performance; fully responsive to contract requirements; reportable problems, but with little identifiable effect on overall performance.

Low

(L)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance meets or slightly exceeds minimum acceptable standards; adequate results; reportable problems with identifiable, but not substantial, effects on overall performance.

Very Low

(VL)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance does not meet minimum acceptable standards in one or more areas; remedial action required in one or more areas; problems in one or more areas which, adversely affect overall performance.

N/R Not Rated

RFP 80GSFC21R0039

Exhibit 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Contract Information

A. Name of Company/Division Being Evaluated:_____________________

B. Address:_____________________________________________

C. Contractor Cage Code and/or DUNS number

D. Contract Number:_______________________________________

E. Contract Type:_________________________________________

F. Period of Performance (including options): From:______ To:_______

G. Total Contract Value:_____________________________________

H. Award Information: Competitive: Yes___ No___ Basis of Selection: Technical___ Cost/Price___ Other (specify)_________________________

2. Description of Contract

During the contract performance being evaluated, this firm was the:

Prime Contractor____ Significant Subcontractor ____ Team Member ____ Other (describe)____________________________________________

Does a corporate or business relationship exist between the firm being evaluated and your organization?

Yes ___ No ___. If yes, please describe: ___________________________

3. Evaluator Information

Name: _____________________________________________________ Title: _______________________________________________________ Agency/Company: ____________________________________________ E-mail Address: _______________________________________________ Phone: ______________ Date Questionnaire Completed: _____________ Role in Program/Contract: ______________________________________ Length of Involvement in this Program/ Contract: _____________________

This form contains Source Selection Information when completed. See FAR 3.104. 3

4. Requirements Survey Relevance Ratings: Please check the appropriate blocks for Relevance (Performed or Did Not Perform)

REQUIREMENT ELEMENT

PERFORMED

DID NOT

PERFORM

Flight precision mechanism design meeting performance and interface requirements of all contract documents.

Flight precision mechanism analysis, including defining and implementing a comprehensive flight precision mechanism science data calibration program for the life of the mission.

Parts and material procurement (including long lead parts procurement planning and execution), fabrication and subassembly testing for flight precision mechanism.

Systems Management and Engineering, including:

• System studies, trades and risk assessments necessary to develop an precision mechanism system design that meets the system performance specifications

• Flow-down of system/ precision mechanism performance requirements into engineering functional requirements, detailed equipment and end item design requirements

• Establishment and maintenance of a system performance and environmental verification program that demonstrates that the system/ precision mechanism meets all mandated and derived performance requirements, and that the Ground Support Equipment (GSE) meets all design and interface requirements and is safe to use with the flight hardware.

Subcontract Management and Control System, providing technical direction and effective subcontract management utilizing schedule milestone controls.

Flight and Ground Test Software Development and Maintenance, including:

• Establishment and maintenance of a Software Management Program to plan and document software development processes and procedures, software tools, reviews, resources, schedules and deliverables.

• Development and maintenance of all flight software, ground test software, processes, procedures and software tools required for support of flight precision mechanism integration, the test and verification program, and on-orbit operations.

Contamination Control and Analysis, including establishment of a contamination control program and providing the resources necessary to assure that appropriate contamination control is exercised through all phases of precision mechanism manufacture, build-up/assembly, integration and test, and observatory integration and test, launch site processing, and on-orbit operation.

Implementation of a magnetic control and verification program to track, manage/report and ensure that precision mechanism-generated magnetic fields do not exceed the field limits during precision mechanism operation.

Maintaining a product assurance program and organization to ensure that the applicable quality requirements of the subcontract are satisfied during the design, development, manufacturing, testing, and delivery phases of the subcontracted item(s).

Implementation of an electrostatic discharge (ESD) prevention and control program for ESD sensitive components in accordance with ANSI/ESD S20.20.

Maintaining a Foreign Object (FO) Control program, ensuring that work is accomplished in a manner preventing foreign objects or materials from entering and remaining in deliverable items.

Maintaining a process control, inspection, measuring, test equipment, and tooling inspection media (range, accuracy, and type) to ensure conformance of articles to calibration system requirements.

Maintaining a configuration and data management system to assure control of the as-designed and as-built baselines of deliverable products (hardware, software, firmware).

This form contains Source Selection Information when completed. See FAR 3.104. 4

Analysis of kinematic constraints and resulting dynamic deployments to meet precise parameters.

Analysis of thermal effects on precision mechanism performance.

Planning for assembly, integration, and test (including post test refurbishments and reset) when mechanism access is limited due to physical configurations.

This form contains Source Selection Information when completed. See FAR 3.104. 5

5. General Performance Survey

NO PERFORMANCE QUESTIONS PERFORMANCE RATING

(Please Circle)

QUALITY

1. Quality of hardware and support provided VH H M L VL N/R

2. Timely identification and mitigation of risks VH H M L VL N/R

3. Ability to identify and correct performance deficiencies in a timely manner VH H M L VL N/R

4. Demonstrated understanding and compliance with mission safety requirements VH H M L VL N/R

Comment:

SCHEDULE

5. Timeliness, quality, and accuracy of schedule estimates and reporting VH H M L VL N/R

6. Ability to meet/exceed schedule milestones VH H M L VL N/R

COST

7. Ability to establish realistic cost estimates and adhere to estimated costs VH H M L VL N/R

8. Ability to anticipate, identify and control cost growth. VH H M L VL N/R

BUSINESS/MANAGEMENT

9. Communicating/interfacing with Government and overall responsiveness to Government requests VH H M L VL N/R

10. Ability to effectively manage the contract including subcontractor performance, if applicable VH H M L VL N/R

11.

Ability to recruit and retain highly skilled personnel, including ability to fill key vacancies in a timely manner.

VH H M L VL N/R

12. Adequacy of Contractor’s system(s) for processing task orders and/or changes. VH H M L VL N/R

13. Ability to meet Small Business Subcontracting Plan Goals VH H M L VL N/R

This form contains Source Selection Information when completed. See FAR 3.104. 6

Section 6:

What is the Contract Value:

Initial Value Current Value Estimated Cost: $___________ $____________

Fee: $___________ $____________

Total Value: $___________ $_____________

What are the total contract expenditures to date (cost/fees to date based on invoices, reports, etc)?

Was there a cost overrun? ( ) Yes ( ) No If yes, please explain:

If this was an award fee contract, what are the individual and/or average ratings of performance by your organization? Please attach any available award fee letters or database entries.

Please comment on particularly strong/weak points of Contractor’s performance (technical, schedule, and/or cost). If the Overall Contract Performance Rating below is less than Very High, please provide some explanation in this section on why a higher rating was not provided.

Overall Contract Performance Rating (circle one)

Very High High Moderate Low Very Low

If less than Very High Performance Rating, please explain:

Please add any other comments you may feel are pertinent.

Rater’s Signature Date

4. Requirements Survey Relevance Ratings: Please check the appropriate blocks for Relevance (Performed or Did Not Perform)