Attachment 4 - FA441725Q0014 - Addendum to 52.212-1 and 52.212-2.pdf

Attachment 4 – Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 and 52.212-2

FA441725Q0014 – Customer Support Services

Addendum to 52.212-1-INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS-COMMERCIAL

PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (SEP 2023)

***THIS SECTION IS FOR SOLICITATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS SECTION WILL

BE PHYSICALLY REMOVED FROM ANY RESULTANT AWARD.***

Addendum to 52.212-1(a), NAICS code and small business size standard. The NAICS code is

561110 and the size standard is $12.5M for this requirement.

Addendum to 52.212-1(b), Submission of Offers. Submit signed and dated offers in accordance with block 8 of the SF 1449 and any amendments.

General Instructions.

A. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of the offer, the offeror must follow the instruction contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including

• 1. Terms and conditions

• 2. Representation and certifications

Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award.

Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

B. The offer shall include three separate parts:

• Factor I – Price

• Factor II – Technical

• Factor III – Past Performance.

C. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in provisions and in the on-line

Representations and Certifications at Sam.gov. Return the provision FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications – Commercial Items along with the offer. For other provisions and clauses in the solicitation, the offeror is required to submit the pages that require an offeror fill-in.

D. Points of Contact: All communications shall be submitted via e-mail to all the following personnel and e-mail addresses.

• SrA Nashawna Browne - e-mail nashawna.browne@us.af.mil

• Ms. Amy Jenkins - e-mail amy.jenkins.4@us.af.mil

E. Questions must be submitted via e-mail to the personnel noted above. All questions are due no later than 19 December 2024 at 2:00 PM CST.

mailto:nashawna.browne@us.af.mil mailto:amy.jenkins.4@us.af.mil

All questions and answers will be posted to SAM.gov.

F. Offer Submission Instructions: Offers must be submitted electronically to the

Government via the DoD SAFE site (https://safe.apps.mil/). When submitting via DoD SAFE site, the offeror shall send an email requesting an “Electronic Drop Authorization” to both points of contact listed above no later than (NLT) 15 January 2025.

All documents submitted must be saved in .pdf format and shall follow the instructions in FAR 52.212-1. Title of the documents should include the offerors UEI Number (i.e., “Vol 1 Tech Proposal UEI#”).

Late offers will be processed in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f) “Late submission, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers.”

Offers shall be in 8 1/2” X 11” page. A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information. The text size shall be no less than 12 pitch. Offers shall use at least 1-inch margins on the top and bottom and 1 inch side margins.

Copies and Page Limits. Evaluators will only read up to the maximum number of pages specified. If the page limit is exceeded, the excess pages will not be evaluated.

Specific Instructions

Teaming Arrangement/Joint Venture Documentation (if applicable): Failure to submit this documentation, if offeror is claiming this in their business approach, will render the offeror’s offer non-responsive and no further evaluation of the offeror’s offer will be conducted.

Teaming Arrangements/Joint Venture Documentation (if applicable): If Teaming

Arrangements are contemplated they must comply with the appropriate Federal Regulations

(13 C.F.R. Part 121 (Size Regulations), Part 124 (8(a) & SDB) and Part 125 (Government

Contracting Programs))

The Joint Venture Arrangement must be received by SBA prior to offer due date and approved before award of any resulting contract. If the offer is contemplating a Joint

Venture on this project, the offer must advise the offeror’s assigned SBA Business

Opportunity Specialist (BOS) as soon as possible. It is also recommended that the arrangement be submitted as soon as practicable to ensure compliance with established regulations. Any corrections and/or changes needed can be made only when your SBA

BOS has adequate time for a thorough review before the offer due date. NO

CORRECTONS AND/OR CHANGES IN PROPOSED TEAMING ARRANGEMENTS

OR JOINT VENTURES ARE ALLOWED AFTER TIME OF SUBMISSION OF

OFFERS.

Teaming Arrangements as a Prime and Subcontractor relationship (if applicable):

Offerors must provide the following information no later than the date and time offers are due:

1. Include size of each concern required at 13 CFR 121.103(h)(l)(2) (ii) and 13 CFR

124.513 (b)(1)

2. Clearly establish roles of each party (who is prime and who is subcontractor, who is responsible for what tasks, contract administration, offers, work management, etc.);

3. Subcontractor past performance cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Provide a letter from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor, only if it is being used as part of the past performance evaluation;

4. Identify each member’s share of the prospective contract, 50/50, 51/49, etc.;

5. Include exclusivity that the team member will not be replaced for the duration of the contract, any exceptions should be identified and assurance that the team members are not teaming with another firm for the same procurement. Include a statement of acknowledgement that the prime contractor shall remain fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any teaming arrangements between the prime contractor and its subcontractors.

Joint Ventures (if applicable): Offerors must provide the following information no later than the date and time offers are due:

1. Include all requirements at 13 C.F.R. Part 1214.513, including size concern information.

2. Include a statement confirming that at least 50% of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern IAW FAR

52.219-14(c)(1); and

3. Joint Venture registration in SAM, identifying the Joint Venture as a small business concern under NAICS code 561110 in their representations and certifications. No corrections and/or changes in proposed teaming arrangement or joint ventures will be accepted after the solicitation closing date and time.

Factor I – Price Submission

1. Complete blocks 17a and 30a, b and c of the Standard Form (SF) 1449. In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the solicitation, with attachments. The solicitation constitutes the model contract.

2. Offerors shall submit prices using Attachment 2 – Pricing Schedule, including unit and extended prices, broken down by the base year and accompanying option years.

The extended amount must equal the whole dollar unit price multiplied by the number of units. The offer(s) must be submitted for a base period plus four (4)

Option Years (1 April 2025 – 31 March 2026 is the base period) and a total price including all option years must be included.

3. Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8:

Offerors shall submit pricing for the Option to Extend Services CLIN. The proposed pricing for the 6-month extension period provides the government with the opportunity to determine whether the pricing for the extension period is fair and reasonable at the time of offer evaluations for contract award. A determination of fair and reasonable is necessary should the government need to exercise the six-month extension IAW FAR 52.217-8. Failure to submit pricing for this 6-month extension period could render the offer as non-responsive to the solicitation. The period of performance for this contract award is a total of five years and does not include the extension period. The extension is used only if the government determines it necessary to provide continuation of services should the need arise (ie. should the follow-on contract award be delayed for any reason).

Evaluation of options shall not obligate the government to exercise option(s).

The Option to Extend Services is not considered part of the contract period of performance until the clause is exercised. These totals will not be included in the contract value until the clause is exercised.

4. Offerors shall round to the nearest cent (for example $1.02 not $1.0231). Offerors rejecting the terms and conditions may be excluded from consideration. Total price will be evaluated for price reasonableness IAW at least one of the methods indicated in FAR 13.106-3(a).

5. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in the Contract Clauses section. The provisions FAR 52.212-3 shall be returned along with the offer. If the offeror has completed all representations and certifications contained in this solicitation in their

SAM registration, the offeror shall state so.

6. Include Teaming Arrangement/Joint Venture (if applicable) as a part of Part I.

Factor II – Technical Submission: Limited to 30 pages total

The Technical Submission shall be comprised of two (2) subfactors:

• Subfactor 1: Staffing Plan

• Subfactor 2: Quality Control Plan

1. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical Factor as defined in Addendum

52.212-2. Quotes shall not simply rephrase or restate the Performance Work Statement

(PWS) or contain general statements such the technical portion of the offer meets solicitation requirements. Offerors shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of the offeror’s experience. The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offer.

2. Staffing Plan: Offerors shall submit a Staffing Plan that clearly demonstrates offerors’ understanding of the staffing requirements of the PWS. The Staffing Plan shall identify key personnel such as the contract manager and alternate contract manager(s). The Staffing Plan shall also identify the number and labor category of personnel proposed, and a narrative description for each duty title. The Staffing Plan shall detail how the offeror intends to recruit, retain, and replace sufficient personnel who have the knowledge, experience, and skills to perform customer support services as required in the PWS. The Staffing Plan shall identify how the offeror intends to continue uninterrupted services during personnel absences, such as sickness, vacations, etc. without any degradation in services provided.

3. Quality Control Plan: Offerors shall submit a Quality Control Plan that outlines the offeror’s management structure; to include personnel authority and responsibility, quality policy, quality objectives and related documents needed to ensure effective planning, operation, and control of your processes. The Quality Control Plan shall describe how you will notify the Government of issues affecting contract performance, contract impact, and proposed mitigation.

Factor III – Past Performance Submission: Limited to 10 pages total

Past Performance Questionnaires and Contractor Performance Assessment

Reporting System (CPARS) evaluations are not included in the page limitation.

1. Past Performance: Offerors shall provide adequate past performance information on completed or current contracts (including Federal, State, local government and private) considered most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed work as identified within the PWS. Offerors must provide past performance information to establish Recency and Relevancy on all Federal contracts before State, local government or private contracts. The Government's evaluation of past performance information will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects (See Teaming Agreements, Specific Instructions), when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition.

Offerors are required to explain what aspects of each contract are deemed relevant to complexity and magnitude as related to the requirements of this solicitation and in accordance with FAR 52.212-2. Failure to provide required relevancy description may impact the confidence rating, (i.e. aspects of previous projects should match work elements identified in the Solicitation/PWS).

2. Provide a summary of the previous contracts described above, not to exceed 2 pages of past performance information per reference. The summary should explain what aspects of each contract are deemed recent and relevant as related to the requirements of this solicitation. Failure to provide required relevancy description may impact the confidence rating, (i.e. aspects of previous projects should match work elements identified in the solicitation/PWS).

3. The maximum number of past performance references shall not exceed 5. The summary should not exceed 2 pages per reference (maximum total of 10 pages) and include:

a) Name of project (Contract number, if applicable)

b) Name and address of customer or Government agency

c) Name, telephone, fax number and/or email of customer contact or contracting officer

d) Dollar value

e) Period of performance/Completion date

f) Description of work performed, and how the effort performed is relevant.

g) Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions.

4. Each proposal shall provide current and relevant information regarding an offeror's actions under previously awarded contracts.

a) Recency Assessment: An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been completed during the past three (3) years from the issuance month of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

b) Relevancy Assessment: The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the

Customer Support Services performed under those contracts relate to the scope, magnitude/complexity, contract environment and the cost/price factors of the Hurlburt Field AFB requirement. For each recent or current past performance citation reviewed, the relevance of the work performed will generally be assessed for the scope, magnitude/complexity and contract environment aspects (however, all aspects of performance that relate to this acquisition may be considered). Consideration will be given to efforts that are of the type that are similar in scope, magnitude/complexity, and contract environment when compared to the services described in this solicitation. A relevancy determination of the offeror's past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations, including joint venture partner(s). In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror or teaming partner whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance questionnaires and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance.

5. Complete Section 1, Contractor Identification, of Attachment 3, Past Performance

Questionnaire and mail, or email the attached Past/Present Performance Questionnaire to all past performance references in the list you provide and instruct them to return the completed questionnaire to the individual(s) indicated in paragraph 5 below. Evaluators are only allowed to use the Attachment 3, Past Performance Questionnaire.

Altered or substituted questionnaires will not be evaluated. Also, Past Performance

Questionnaires will only be accepted electronically by email from Project Owners or their authorized representatives. Past Performance Questionnaires will not be accepted from Prime Contractors, Subcontractors, or Manufacturers. Offerors are responsible to ensure questionnaires are transmitted to their references, and to indicate which references the questionnaire was sent to.

6. Inform your references that they shall forward questionnaires electronically by email directly to the address below. Questionnaires must be received in the 1st Special

Operations Contracting Squadron office no later than the closing date and time of this solicitation. Offerors are responsible for ensuring their references transmit the questionnaire to the Contracting Office.

In lieu of a Past Performance Questionnaire, if a project is currently available in the

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), the contractor should attach the evaluation to the questionnaire with the relevant solicitation number and submit directly to the 1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron office before the official closing date and time.

Electronic submissions shall be sent to:

SrA Nashawna Browne - e-mail: nashawna.browne@us.af.mil

Mrs. Amy Jenkins – e-mail: amy.jenkins.4@us.af.mil

7. Lack of any past performance will not automatically disqualify an offeror, but it is a factor that is considered in the Best Value Performance Price Tradeoff Source Selection described in FAR 52.212-2.

8. If the offeror claims there is no past performance, then that status must be identified to the contracting officer no later than the date and time proposals are due from all offerors.

(End of Addendum) mailto:nashawna.browne@us.af.mil mailto:amy.jenkins.4@us.af.mil

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2 – EVALUATION—COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND

COMMERCIAL SERVICES (NOV 2021)

1. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

This acquisition will utilize the best value approach, in which the Government seeks to award to an offeror who provides the greatest confidence that they will meet the

Government’s requirements affordably. The Best Value technique for this acquisition will be Performance Price Tradeoff, where technical and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price. The evaluation factors are described below:

• Factor 1: Price

• Factor 2: Technical

− Subfactor 1: Staffing Plan

− Subfactor 2: Quality Control Plan

• Factor 3: Past Performance

2. SYNOPSIS OF EVALUATION

STEP ONE: The government will evaluate all quotations for responsiveness defined as meeting the submission requirements in Addendum to 52.212-1-Instructions to Offerors-

Commercial Products and Commercial Services (SEP 2023).

Cover page will be reviewed and if applicable, any proposed Teaming Arrangement/Joint

Venture documentation for completeness. Teaming Arrangements shall conform to all requirements identified in the Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 of this solicitation and include all elements stated in Addendum to FAR 52.212-2-Evaluation-Commercial Products and

Commercials Services (Nov 2021). If an offeror is claiming this business approach, failure to submit Teaming Arrangement/Joint Venture documentation will render the offerors quote non-responsive and no further evaluation will be conducted.

STEP TWO: The government will evaluate prices and order all responsive quotes based upon the quoter’s Total Evaluated Price (TEP) in ascending order from lowest to highest price.

STEP THREE: The three (3) lowest priced responsive quotes shall be evaluated for technical acceptability. In the event that the lowest three (3) evaluated quotes do not yield a quote with an acceptable technical rating, the evaluation process will continue to the next lowest price responsive quote until at least three (3) technically acceptable quotes are identified. The three (3) lowest priced, technically acceptable quotes will move to step four (4).

STEP FOUR: Past performance will be evaluated for the lowest three (3) priced technically acceptable offerors. The Government will proceed to award to the vendor that adheres to the instruction to offerors, has an acceptable rating for the Technical Factor and has a past performance rating that is most beneficial to the government. Should none of the three lowest priced offerors have acceptable past performance, the government will continue to assess the next lowest priced quoter until a vendor with an acceptable rating for the Technical Factor and a past performance rating that is most beneficial to the government is obtained. The Contracting Officer will then make an integrated assessment to render the best value award decision.

STEP FIVE: Pursuant to FAR 12.602, contract award will be made using Simplified

Acquistion Procedures in accordance with FAR 13.106. The government shall make a best value decision based on the Evaluation criteria below to the responsible quoter who quote conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

During all stages of the evaluation, the Government reserves the right to engage with one or multiple offerors but is not required to do so. Therefore, offerors should provide their best available pricing in their initial quote.

3. PRICE EVALUATION

Price proposals conforming to all requirements of this solicitation will be ranked based on the Total Evaluated Price (TEP). Total Evaluated Price = (Total Evaluated

Price for Base Period) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 1) + (Total

Evaluated Price for Option Period 2) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 3) +

(Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 4) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option to

Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8).

Quantities identified will be multiplied by the unit price to confirm the extended price and then the extended price for all CLINS will be added together for a total for that specific period. Unit prices shall be used in the event that extended prices are calculated incorrectly.

Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8: Offerors shall submit pricing for the Option to Extend Services CLIN. The proposed pricing for the 6-month extension period provides the government with the opportunity to determine whether the pricing for the extension period is fair and reasonable at the time of offer evaluations for contract award. A determination of fair and reasonable is necessary should the government need to exercise the six-month extension IAW FAR

52.217-8. Failure to submit pricing for this 6-month extension period could render the offer as non-responsive to the solicitation.

The period of performance for this contract award is a total of five years and does not include the extension period. The extension is used only if the government determines it necessary to provide continuation of services should the need arise (ie. should the follow-on contract award be delayed for any reason).

Evaluation of options shall not obligate the government to exercise option(s).

The Option to Extend Services is not considered part of the contract period of performance until the clause is exercised. These totals will not be included in the contract value until the clause is exercised.

Prices will be rounded off to two decimal points. Total price will be evaluated for price reasonableness IAW at least one of the methods indicated in FAR 13.106-3(a).

4. TECHNICAL EVALUATION

The three lowest priced offers will be evaluated for technical acceptability. If the three lowest priced offers are not determined technically acceptable, the technical evaluation will continue until at least three offers are determined technically acceptable. The technical evaluation will continue until all offers are evaluated. Only those offerors determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for further evaluation.

Evaluation of technical factors will consider the quoter's ability to perform the duties as outlined in the PWS. Offerors will be evaluated as either Acceptable or Unacceptable for Technical Factors. Quotes shall not simply rephrase or restate the PWS or contain general statements such the technical portion of the quoter meets solicitation requirements. Offerors shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of the quoter's experience. The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the quote.

In order to be technically acceptable, the quote must meet the following criteria:

The quote shall be evaluated to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined in the table below. One technical rating will be assigned to each technical sub factor. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an "acceptable" rating in all sub factors.

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Quote meets the requirements of the solicitation

Unacceptable Quote does not meet the requirements of the solicitation

Subfactor 1 Staffing Plan: The Staffing Plan will be rated acceptable if it demonstrates a reasonable approach to managing the contract in regards to:

a) Identification of key personnel;

b) Identification of the number and labor category of personnel proposed, and a narrative description for each duty title;

c) How to recruit, retain, and replace sufficient personnel who have the knowledge, experience, and skills to perform Customer Support services as required in the PWS;

d) How to continue uninterrupted services during personnel absences without any degradation in services provided.

Subfactor 2 Quality Control Plan: The Quality Control Plan will be rated acceptable if it demonstrates a reasonable approach to successfully comply with the PWS and at a minimum address:

a) Outlines the quoter's management structure; to include personnel authority and responsibility, quality policy, quality objectives and related documents needed to ensure effective planning, operation, and control of your processes.

b) How you will notify the Government of issues affecting contract performance, contract impact, and proposed mitigation.

5. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

The Government will evaluate the recency, relevancy and quality of the offerors’ provided past performance information, and other past performance information data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources to include, but not limited to: Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS); Federal

Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (F APIIS); Electronic

Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and other databases

In addition, information obtained from Attachment 3, Past Performance

Questionnaire, point of contacts will be used in determining the overall performance confidence assessment rating.

Recency: Past Performance will first be evaluated for recency. Recent is defined as work within the last three (3) years from the issue month of the solicitation. The information provided must be on efforts/contracts that are ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

Relevancy: Past Performance will then be evaluated for relevancy and rated as relevant, or not relevant; according to the table below.

Adjectival Rating Description

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. In order to be defined as Very Relevant, the effort shall have included the three services listed below (1-3) and the requirement outlined in 4:

(1) Familiarity and experience with Defense Enrollment

Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) for Real-time

Personnel Identification System (RAPIDS) terminals.

(2) Familiarity and experience with Automatic Records

Management System (ARMS)/Personnel Records Display

Application (PRDA), Military Personnel Data System

(MilPDS).

(3) Familiarity and experience with maintaining and managing ID card stock IAW DMDC Guidelines, CAC ID stock, and CAC consumables, manual and machine-readable cardstock, CAC return forms, and mailing supplies.

(4) Familiarity and experience with maintaining 50% of personnel with a Secret Security clearance.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. In order to be defined as Relevant, the effort shall have included the two of the services listed below (1-3) and the requirement outlined in 4:

(1) Familiarity and experience with Defense Enrollment

Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) for Real-time

Personnel Identification System (RAPIDS) terminals.

(2) Familiarity and experience with Automatic Records

Management System (ARMS)/Personnel Records Display

Application (PRDA), Military Personnel Data System

(MilPDS).

(3) Familiarity and experience with maintaining and managing ID card stock IAW DMDC Guidelines, CAC ID stock, and CAC consumables, manual and machine-readable cardstock, CAC return forms, and mailing supplies.

(4) Familiarity and experience with maintaining a minimum of

25% but less than 50% of personnel with a Secret Security clearance.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. In order to be defined as Somewhat Relevant, the effort shall have included one of the services listed below (1-3) and the requirement outlined in 4:

(1) Familiarity and experience with Defense Enrollment

Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) for Real-time

Personnel Identification System (RAPIDS) terminals.

(2) Familiarity and experience with Automatic Records

Management System (ARMS)/Personnel Records Display

Application (PRDA), Military Personnel Data System

(MilPDS).

(3) Familiarity and experience with maintaining and managing ID card stock IAW DMDC Guidelines, CAC ID stock, and CAC consumables, manual and machine-readable cardstock, CAC return forms, and mailing supplies.

(4) Familiarity and experience with maintaining a minimum of

1% but less than 25% personnel with a Secret Security clearance.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities that this solicitation requires.

(1) No Familiarity and experience with Defense Enrollment

Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) for Real-time

Personnel Identification System (RAPIDS) terminals.

(2) No Familiarity and experience with Automatic Records

Management System (ARMS)/Personnel Records Display

Application (PRDA), Military Personnel Data System

(MilPDS).

(3) No Familiarity and experience with maintaining and managing

ID card stock IAW DMDC Guidelines, CAC ID stock, and

CAC consumables, manual and machine-readable cardstock, CAC return forms, and mailing supplies.

(4) No Familiarity and experience with personnel maintaining a

Secret Security clearance.

Quality of Performance: All recent past performance that is determined to be relevant will be reviewed to determine the quality of the offeror's performance and general trends of the performance.

One of the following confidence ratings will be assigned to the evaluated offer:

Adjectival Rating Description

Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. This is the highest past performance rating an offeror can obtain.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror's performance record is not recent or relevant.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

(End of Addendum to FAR 52.212-2)