ACC_APG_S3CoE_Past_Performance_Symposium_27June18.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED

27 June 2018 Source Selection Support

Center of Excellence ~ S3CoE

U.S. Army Contracting Command

Past Performance Evaluations

ACC APG S3CoE SYMPOSIUM SERIES

Agenda

• Welcome from ACC APG Executive Director

• Share Ground Rules and Fundamental Principles

• Objectives o Recap outstanding action items and updates from 5 March 18 symposium o Provide rationale for Past Performance Evaluation topic selection o Past Performance Defined o Past Performance’s relevance to the Source Selection Decision o How we evaluate past performance o Define past performance confidence ratings and acceptable/unacceptable ratings o Challenges and Mitigation Strategies related to Past Performance

Evaluations

• Panel Member Introductions

• Panel ~ Audience Discussion

• Closing remarks

Ground Rules and Fundamental Principles

Ground Rules:

• Informal Discussion - Not Binding.

• The contracting officer (KO) is ultimately responsible for communications relating to specific solicitations.

• Always rely on the solicitation language, not what you hear today.

• We are not discussing specific solicitations, awards, litigations, etc.

• The positions stated are the opinions of the participants and not that of the Army or AMC.

Fundamental Principles driving Government/Industry communication:

• Improving requirements, solicitations, evaluations and the overall process.

• Maintaining the integrity of the procurement process.

• Ensuring Fairness in Acquisitions.

• Promoting competition.

• Mission Accomplishment while protecting the taxpayer.

Outstanding Action Items Updates from 5 Mar 18

ACTION ITEM STATUS

ACC APG web-link with upcoming acquisitions and updates (via FedBizOpps).

ACC APG Divisions update information at least quarterly on FedBizOpps.

Provide written Communication Rules of

Engagement (ROE) guidance from AMC Legal.

o Information will be made available upon completion.

Provide BAA # of white papers and BAA funding.

Support Virtual Industry Days.

o ACC APG will have to discuss with Mission

Partners and Legal.

o ACC APG still reviewing information.

Industry question: Per recent trends, please explain binding prices in CPFF for Division E effort?

Division E did have a CPFF solicitation with a capped CPFF CLIN for labor as negotiated for billing submittals PWS section 1.3

(W56JSR-18-R-0005).

Industry question: Has APG considered IGCE and budget information like your sister organization in the south?

Two post symposium questions were received unknown POC to follow up to ensure questions understood.

APG S3CoE was unable to confirm or locate an effort that provided the IGCE budget information to consider (contacted and reviewed FBO information for RSA, Orlando and MICC).

Questions were unclear to properly answer.

Legend: ACC APG Action Item Complete.

o Legend: Outstanding ACC APG Government Team Action Item.

Rationale for Topic Selection/ Past Performance Defined/Past Performance’s Relevance to the Source Selection Decision

Enhance Industry’s understanding of the past performance evaluation and how it relates to the Source Selection Decision (Best Value).

Improve past performance proposal submissions IAW FAR 15.305 (a)(2).

The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements.

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation : recency, relevancy and quality.

To provide the SSA with the information needed to make an informed and reasoned selection.

Relevance is a threshold when considering past performance.

Corporate Experience is a technical factor or subfactor that is a comparative analysis where an offeror may get additional credit for breadth or depth of the experience and is different from the past performance factor.

A satisfactory performance record is part of a responsibility determination FAR 9.401-1(c) and is separate from the past performance factor.

How Past Performance is Evaluated

Is it recent? Yes

Is it relevant?

Assess quality of work

Yes

The purpose of this evaluation is to lead to a single overall confidence assessment rating for each Offeror

To what degree?

No

STOP

How Past Performance is Evaluated Con’t

There are various sources of Past Performance Information that the Government might consider as part of its evaluation:

• Reviews questionnaire responses

• Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)

• Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)

• Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)

• Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS)

• Follow up interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers and Representatives.

• The evaluators will go beyond the ratings on the questionnaires:

• considers comments in questionnaires

• makes follow-up calls to respondents

• Elevates as necessary to get information to understand any discrepancies

How Past Performance is Evaluated Con’t

Adverse Past Performance Information

What constitutes adverse past performance information?

• Information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system.

• A judgment call based on circumstances of the acquisition.

Potential Adverse Past Performance Information Considerations

• Has the Offeror had an opportunity to respond?

• Obtain a second perspective

• Mitigating circumstances

• Corrective actions taken by Contractor

• Number and severity of problems

• Overall work record

Past Performance Ratings Defined

Recency – Within a specified time period (normally 3 years).

Relevancy as defined below.

Quality for confidence assessment ratings as defined below.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Description

Very

Relevant

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

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

Somewhat

Relevant

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

Not

Relevant

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

Past Performance Ratings Defined

Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Evaluation Ratings:

Acceptable - Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror’s performance is unknown.

Unacceptable - Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Past Performance Challenges/Strategies

How can both Industry and Government ensure required information when questionnaires are not received?

Industry:

Ensure reliable references on questionnaires with valid contact information.

Be prepared to provide other verifiable past performance information if requested by the Contracting Officer.

***Please Note: A CPARS rating other than exceptional such as very good is a favorable rating.***

Past Performance Evaluations

Questions for the panel?

Please send post symposium questions or comments to ACC APG S3CoE email address:

usarmy.apg.acc.mbx.acc-apg-s3coe@mail.mil

All symposium questions, answers and pending responses will be updated on FedBizOpps no later than 11 July 2018.