Attachment_A_Past_Performance_Ltr_and_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

ATTACHMENT A: PAST PERFORMANCE LETTER AND QUESTIONNAIRE

(For each referenced contract for which the work was not performed for the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and for which no Contractor performance data is available in PPIRS, the Contractor shall provide the Attachment A: Past Performance Letter and Questionnaire to the client identified as a reference.)

Sample Past Performance Letter

Dear_______________________:

We are participating in a procurement for the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) for the acquisition of EEO/Investigative Services. We are asking for your assistance in completing the attached questionnaire and forwarding to the BBG to aid in its evaluation of our past performance. Please return the completed questionnaire within 3 calendar days.

YOU ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SCAN AND EMAIL THE QUESTIONNAIRE TO THE

EMAIL ADDRESS PROVIDED BELOW: Email Address: agray@bbg.gov and jacob.acosta@bbg.gov

If you are unable to scan and email a copy, it can be mailed to the following address:

Broadcasting Board of Governors Office of Contracts, Attn: Mr. Jacob Acosta 330 Independence Ave SW Room 4360 Washington, DC 20237

If mailing, please mark the envelope:

“PROCUREMENT SENSITIVE SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - SEE FAR 3.104”

“TO BE OPENED ONLY BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER”

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE:

A. REFERENCED CONTRACT AND CLIENT INFORMATION

Name of Company Being Evaluated:

Evaluator’s Name:

Evaluator’s Address:

Evaluator’s Phone:

Evaluator’s Organization:

mailto:wipp@emcbc.doe.gov

Evaluator’s role in the management of the contract:

B. RATING SCALE AND 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 evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were 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 should 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 evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

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

Satisfactory 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.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated 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 should 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 sub-element 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 should 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).

C. ASSESSMENT AREAS:

1. Quality of Product or Service

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory Not

Applicable Do Not Know

Supporting Narrative:

2. Schedule Compliance

Do Not Know

3. Cost Control

Do Not Know

4. Business Relations

Do Not Know

5. Management of Key Personnel

Do Not Know

6. Utilization of Small Business

Do Not Know

ATTACHMENT L-4: PAST PERFORMANCE LETTER AND QUESTIONNAIRE