Attachment 17 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx

DOCX document 27 KB Posted

Attached to
Synthetic Signature Guidance (SSG) Trainers
Solicitation number
N0016722R0004
Issued by

About this file

This past performance questionnaire requests information about a contractor's performance on a prior contract to provide scientific, engineering, and technical support services for the design, development, fabrication, integration, test, fleet implementation, and maintenance of Synthetic Signature Generation simulation systems. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division seeks responses by the closing date specified in solicitation N00167-22-R-0004 to award a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contract for similar services in support of the Signatures Department. The questionnaire collects contract details, assesses performance across cost control, schedule, quality, and other elements, and requests references.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
N00167-22-R-0004 SSG Consolidated Q_A FINAL 03MAR2022.pdf PDF
Attachment 14 - Personnel Qualifications RFP Amendment 1 1MAR2022.pdf PDF
N0016722R0004_Conformed_Amendment 0001.pdf PDF
Attachment 14 - Personnel Qualifications RFP Amendment 1 1MAR2022 Tracked Changes.pdf PDF
N0016722R0004_Amendment 001 Summary.pdf PDF
N0016722R0004 RFP TRACKED CHANGES.pdf PDF
Attachment 11 - GFP List.pdf PDF
Attachment 14 - Personnel Qualifications.docx DOCX document
Attachment 7 - NAVSEANOTE 2200.pdf PDF
Attachment 13 - Cost Summary Format.xls XLS spreadsheet
Attachment 16 - Staffing Plan (With Cost).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Exhibit A CDRLs A001 - A020.pdf PDF
Attachment 2 - OPNAV INSTRUCTION 3502.5B.pdf PDF
Attachment 10 - QASP.doc DOC document
Attachment 20 - Sample Indirect Rate Supporting Documentation.xls XLS spreadsheet
Attachment 12 - Subcontracting Plan Coversheet.docx DOCX document
Attachment 4 - MIL-STD-31000A.pdf PDF
Attachment 15 - Staffing Plan (No Cost).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Attachment 8 - CARDEROCKDIVINST 5239.6C.pdf PDF
Attachment 3 - OPNAV INSTRUCTION 11102.2.pdf PDF
Attachment 21 - Previous Contracting Efforts.docx DOCX document
Attachment 1 - Signed DD254.pdf PDF
Attachment 5 - DoD 8570.01-M.pdf PDF
N0016722R0004.pdf PDF
Attachment 6 - NAVSEAINST 2200.1.pdf PDF
Attachment 19 - Direct Labor Rate Substantiation.xls XLS spreadsheet
Attachment 9 - CARDEROCKDIVINST 5510.12.pdf PDF
Attachment 18 - Cyberspace IA Workforce Matrix SSG.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Show all 28

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

N00167-22-R-0004 N00167-22-R-0004 Attachment 17 Recent and Relevant Past Performance Questionnaire

1. Past Performance Assessment. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division (NSWCCD) is soliciting competitive offers to award a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract on behalf of the Signatures Department, Code 70, for scientific, engineering, and technical support required for the design, development, fabrication, integration, test, fleet implementation, and maintenance of Synthetic Signature Generation (SSG) based training systems utilizing the All World Environment Simulation (AWESIM) acoustic simulation and the Periscope Simulation (PSIM) visual simulation.

It is requested that you complete and submit this questionnaire via e-mail to the following individuals no later than the closing date and time specified in Block 9 of the solicitation:

Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division (NSWCCD) Attn: Stephanie A. Carter, Contracting Officer (Code 0221) 9500 MacArthur Boulevard West Bethesda, MD 20817-5700 Telephone: (301) 227-1224 E-mail: stephanie.a.carter@navy.mil

Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division (NSWCCD) Attn: Gregg G. Martin, Contract Specialist (Code 0221) 9500 MacArthur Boulevard West Bethesda, MD 20817-5700 Telephone: (301) 335-8297 E-mail: gregg.g.martin1@navy.mil

RETURN THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO THE ABOVE CONTRACTING POINTS OF CONTACT.

*NOTE: IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OFFEROR TO ENSURE ALL PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES ARE SUBMITTED TO THE GOVERNMENT BY THE PROPOSAL SUBMISSION CLOSING DATE AND TIME.

If you need more space than that provided, please attach additional pages. Responses will be treated as source selection sensitive information. If you have any questions, please contact the Contracting Officer or the Contract Specialist at the above e-mail addresses.

2. Contract Information. Please complete the following:

Contractor:

Contract Number:

Period of Performance:

Dollar Amount at Award:

Dollar Amount at Completion (or Current Dollar Amount, if not Completed):

Contract Type: Fixed-Price; Labor Hour or Time and Material; Cost-Reimbursement (CPFF, CPAF, CPIF, etc.)

Describe the Products or Services:

3. Contract Relevancy. For comparison with the size and scope of Solicitation N00167-22-R-0004, please provide the following information pertaining to the contract identified in Section 2 above:

(a) Size: $______ per year in contract services.

(b) Scope: Check all that apply:

______ Program Management Support ______ Planning Support ______ Business and Financial Management Support ______ Acquisition and Contract Management Support ______ Technical Management Support ______ Test and Evaluation Management Support ______ General Logistics Management Support ______ Production Management Support ______ Engineering Support ______ Other Support (please describe: _________________________)

4. Performance Assessment Values.

5 – Outstanding. Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements, to the Government’s benefit. Contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

4 – Excellent. Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements, to the Government’s benefit. Contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

3 – Good. Performance meets contractual requirements. Contractual performance of the element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

2 – Satisfactory. Performance barely meets some contractual requirements. Contractual performance of the element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

1 – Unsatisfactory. Performance does not meet some or most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. Contractual performance of the element being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

0 – Not Applicable. Unable to provide a score. Performance in this area not applicable to effort assessed.

5. Assessment Elements. Please select/circle the appropriate performance assessment value for each item on the questionnaire and provide supporting narrative.

a. Cost Control. Rate the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling cost (including reporting and analyzing variances) and ability to deliver at the agreed-to cost/price. Provide reasons for changes to the contract value (e.g., scope changes, overrun/underrun, Government-imposed schedule changes).

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

b. Schedule. Rate the contractor’s ability to deliver according to the agreed-to schedule. What were the causes of any schedule variances?

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

c. Mission Requirements. Rate the contractor’s ability to provide a product or service that met your mission requirements.

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

d. Quality. Rate the contractor’s ability to provide a product or service that met your required level of quality. Assess the contractor’s conformance to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship (e.g., commonly accepted technical, professional, environmental, or safety and health standards.)

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

e. Socioeconomic Goals. Rate the contractor’s ability to meet any applicable subcontracting goals for utilization of Small Businesses (SB), Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB), Women-Owned Small Businesses (WOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSB), HUBZone and Historically Black Colleges and Universities/Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI).

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

f. Subcontract Management. Rate the contractor’s ability to meet the goals of the subcontracting plan, to include the ability to timely award and manage subcontracts.

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

g. Business Relations. Rate the contractor’s ability to integrate and coordinate all activities needed to execute the contract, specifically the timeliness, completeness, quality of problem resolution, corrective action plans, the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, customer satisfaction, and its ability to submit accurate invoices in a timely manner.

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

h. Management of Key Personnel. Assess the contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting, and replacing—when necessary—key personnel.

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

i. Recommendation. To what extent would you recommend this contractor for additional contracts? Rate on the following scale: 5 = Yes, definitely; 4 = Yes, likely; 3 = Maybe, 2 = No, not likely; 1 = No, not ever; 0 = N/A.

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

6. Other References. If you are aware of any other Point of Contact (POC) who is familiar with the contractor’s performance under this contract, please identify.

Name, Phone, and E-mail Address:

7. Assessor Information. Please provide the following information about yourself:

Name:

Title:

Address:

Phone Number:

E-mail Address:

Thank you for your assistance.

NSWCCD C02 021-014 Past Performance Questionnaire Effective September 2021

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .