Att L-1 Alaskan Satellite Space Segment.pdf

Alaskan Satellite Space Segment SIR # 693KA8-25-R-00006

1 | P a g e

Attachment L1 – Past Performance Questionnaire

Block 1: Contract Information [Contractor to Complete]

a. Contractor name

b. Contract title:

c. Contract number

d. Role on contract (e.g., prime or subcontractor):

e. Period of Performance [Start Date] to [End Date or “Ongoing”]

f. Value of Contract Total Ceiling: [Enter Value]

Funds Obligated to Date: [Enter Value]

g. Contract Type(s) (e.g. Fixed Price, IDIQ, BPA, Cost

Reimbursement, Time and Materials, Labor Hour)

h. Description

Block 2: Reference Information [Reference to Complete]

a. Name:

b. Name of Organization (Agency / Company):

c. Current Position Title:

d. Role on Referenced Contract (e.g., CO, COR, PM):

e. Mailing Address:

f. Telephone number:

g. E-mail Address:

For Blocks 3(a) – 3(f) Please objectively assess the Contractor in each performance element below by assigning an “X” to the most appropriate rating as described below. If a performance element is not applicable to the contract or if you do not have personal knowledge of the Contractor’s performance relative to that element, select “Not Applicable”

Block 3: Assessment of Performance Elements [Reference to Complete] Block 3(a): Element 1 - Quality of Service Delivery Assessment of the Contractor’s performance relative to consistently providing quality services that met or exceeded the requirements of the contract

Rating Definition ☐ Exceptional • Quality and performance of services frequently exceeded requirements and customer expectations.

• Very high quality of deliverables; re-work not required.

☐ Good • Quality and performance of services met and sometimes exceeded requirements and customer expectations.

• High quality of deliverables; re-work not required.

☐ Satisfactory • Quality and performance of services met requirements and customer expectations.

• No re-work of deliverables required beyond editorial updates.

☐ Marginal • Quality and performance of services did not consistently meet requirements and was sometimes below customer expectations.

• Re-work of deliverables occasionally required to address quality issues and requirements shortfalls.

2 | P a g e

Block 3: Assessment of Performance Elements [Reference to Complete] Block 3(a): Element 1 - Quality of Service Delivery ☐ Unsatisfactory • Quality and performance of services frequently did not meet requirements and was often below customer expectations.

• Re-work of deliverables frequently required to address quality issues and requirements shortfalls.

☐ Not Applicable • Not applicable

Explanation (Required if rating is Marginal or Unsatisfactory):

Block 3(b): Element 2 - Timeliness of Performance Assessment of the Contractor’s performance relative to achieving milestones, fulfilling contract requirements on time, and meeting delivery schedules

Rating Definition ☐ Exceptional • Deliverables, products, and services consistently provided in advance of the required due dates.

• No corrective actions required to improve on-time delivery.

☐ Good • Deliverables, products, and services sometimes provided in advance of the required due dates.

• Corrective actions, if any were required, were very effective in improving on-time delivery.

☐ Satisfactory • Deliverables, products, and services generally provided by the required due dates.

• Corrective actions to improve on-time delivery were effective.

☐ Marginal • Deliverables, products, and services sometimes provided after the required due dates.

• Corrective actions to improve on-time delivery had minimal effectiveness.

☐ Unsatisfactory • Deliverables, products, and services consistently provided after the required due dates.

• Corrective actions to improve on-time delivery were not effective.

Block 3(c): Element 3 – Cost Control Assessment of the Contractor’s performance relative to successfully maintaining cost control and completing work efforts within the proposed cost or target price.

Rating Definition

3 | P a g e

Block 3(c): Element 3 – Cost Control ☐ Exceptional • Met or exceeded contract requirements at more than 10% below cost estimates or target prices.

• Effectively applied earned value management or other management techniques

• No cost or price issues encountered.

☐ Good • Met or exceeded contract requirements at 5-10% below cost estimates or target prices.

• Quickly resolved any cost or price issues.

☐ Satisfactory • Performed within cost estimates or target prices while meeting contract requirements.

• Resolved any cost or price issues within a reasonable amount of time.

• No requests for recovery of costs above the cost estimates or target prices.

☐ Marginal • Cost overruns (30% or less) on the contract.

• Contractor-recommended strategies for bringing costs or prices within expectations were not effective.

☐ Unsatisfactory • Significant cost overruns (more than 30%) on the contract.

• No strategies or corrective actions recommended by the Contractor to bring costs or prices within expectations.

Block 3(d): Element 4 – Program Management Assessment of the Contractor’s performance relative to: (1) effectively managing programs, (2) assessing performance and implementing corrective actions when performance shortfalls are identified, and (3) providing adequate supervision of contractor personnel and their work efforts.

Rating Definition ☐ Exceptional • Contractor’s Program Management function was fully engaged in oversight of work efforts.

• Instituted well-defined and repeatable management processes to assess performance and avoid the need for corrective actions.

• Staff deployed very efficiently. All deadlines met or exceeded with the least staff necessary.

☐ Good • Contractor’s Program Management function was consistently engaged in oversight of work efforts.

• Corrective actions were identified in a timely manner and successfully implemented as needed.

• Staff deployed efficiently. Tasks completed in an efficient manner without surplus staff.

☐ Satisfactory • Contractor’s Program Management function was adequately engaged in oversight of work efforts.

• Corrective actions were adequately identified and implemented as needed.

• Staff deployed appropriately. Tasks completed with reasonable number of staff.

4 | P a g e

Block 3(d): Element 4 – Program Management ☐ Marginal • Contractor’s Program Management function was not consistently engaged in oversight of work efforts.

• Corrective actions were not consistently identified and implemented as needed.

• Staff not consistently deployed efficiently. Required additional staff to complete the task.

☐ Unsatisfactory • Contractor’s Program Management function was rarely engaged in oversight of work efforts.

• Corrective actions were not identified and implemented as needed.

• Staff always deployed inefficiently. Required many additional staff to complete the task.

Block 3(e): Element 5 – Customer Relationship Assessment of the Contractor’s performance relative to effectively communicating with customers, being proactive, and acting in partnership with the customer to achieve program objectives.

Rating Definition ☐ Exceptional • Consistent and effective level of communication with customers.

• Very high level of customer satisfaction.

• Standard practice was to act proactively.

• Frequently responsive in advance of the expected timeframes.

• Standard practice was to act in partnership with the customer to achieve or exceed program objectives.

☐ Good • Consistent level of communication with customers.

• High level of customer satisfaction.

• Often acted proactively.

• Responsive within and/or in advance of the expected timeframes.

• Frequently acted in partnership with the customer to achieve program objectives.

☐ Satisfactory • Adequate level of communication with customers.

• Adequate level of customer satisfaction.

• Acted proactively.

• Responsive within the expected timeframes.

• Acted in partnership with the customer to achieve program objectives.

☐ Marginal • Inconsistent level of communication with customers.

• Low level of customer satisfaction.

• Did not consistently act proactively.

• Not consistently responsive within the expected timeframes.

• Infrequently acted in partnership with the customer to achieve program objectives.

5 | P a g e

Block 3(e): Element 5 – Customer Relationship ☐ Unsatisfactory • Inadequate level of communication with customers.

• Very low level of customer satisfaction.

• Did not act proactively.

• Rarely responsive within the expected timeframes.

• Did not act in partnership with the customer to achieve program objectives.

Block 3(f): Willing to Work with Contractor Again?

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

☐ Yes ☐ No Any additional comments you would like to share (Required if “No”):

Block 4: Signature [Reference to Complete]

Signature Date