Attachment 4 - Past Performance Questionnaire (5-31-2024).docx

CONTRACTOR PRESENT/PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

BACKGROUND

A Request for Proposal (RFP) has been issued to solicit offers that would provide the best value to the Government for the requirements of an acquisition. The specific RFP requirements may be referenced at sam.gov under H9821024R0010.

This effort requires that a Contractor establish agreements with accredited IHEs to provide quality language and culture instruction that can provide sustainment or enhancement training, which count toward a degree requirement, or provide continuing education units if so desired. Therefore, the Contractor shall have negotiated agreements in place with IHEs that have the ability to provide training in the following functional languages: Arabic (incl Levantine dialect), French, Indonesian, Korean, Japanese, Mandarin Chinese, Persian (Dari, Farsi, Tajik), Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, Tagalog, Ukrainian, and Vietnamese.

The Contractor shall also possess the ability to establish new agreements if additional languages are required that are not presently offered by the IHEs in their portfolio. .

Instruction may include regional and cultural components, or teacher training. Language instruction services shall be provided beyond those available at the grant-funded LTCs. Instruction shall be offered virtually, at the IHE, or at a Government facility, as defined by DoD organization or agency within each task order. LTC Program instruction within this effort can only be provided by IHEs as described under Section 529 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2010.

POINT OF CONTACT FOR COMPLETED REFERENCE:

A company that is interested in providing an offer on the RFP has requested that you complete this present/past performance questionnaire. All completed questionnaires shall be submitted via email to the following government POCs (Contract Specialist & Contracting Officer) by the proposal due date and time referenced in the RFP: Jada Weaver, jada.a.weaver.civ@mail.mil & Mike Carnley, charles.m.carnley.civ@mail.mil

Controlled By:

Controlled By:

CUI Category:

Distribution/Dissemination Controls:

POC:

CUI

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104 (WHEN COMPLETED) H9821024R0010 Attachment 4 – Past Performance Questionnaire

(WHEN COMPLETED)

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104 CUI

PREVIOUS CONTRACT GENERAL INFORMATION

The following information is to be completed by the Rater/Evaluator/Assessing Official (AO):

a) Contractor Name:

b) Prime contractor or first tier subcontractor:

c) Name of the customer /agency:

d) Contract / Purchase Order Number for the Reference (Subcontract number if a subcontractor for the overall effort):

e) Length of contract and period of performance (dates):

f) Initial and Final Contract Price for the past performance reference (Subcontract value if a subcontractor for the overall effort):

g) Description of service provided:

QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTIONS

This questionnaire covers the topics that are in line with the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). This questionnaire is designed to provide basic information regarding the Contractor’s present/past performance results on the contracts they have been awarded with your company and your satisfaction with their performance.

Please use the following guide in preparing your response to the performance assessments::

Exceptional Definition: 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.

Note: 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 Definition: 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.

Note: 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 Definition: 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.

Note: 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 Definition: 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.

Note: 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 Definition: 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.

Note: 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).

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

Please select the applicable rating for each of the following questions using the below scale.

In addition, please provide a justification for rating given if above or below satisfactory.

1. QUALITY OF PRODUCT OR SERVICE:

Justification for Rating:

2. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE/SCHEDULE:

Justification for Rating:

3. COST CONTROL:

Justification for Rating:

4. GOOD BUSINESS RELATIONS:

5. MANAGEMENT OF KEY PERSONNEL:

6. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE:.

EVALUATOR INFORMATION

Name:

Title:

Telephone Number:

Agency or Business:

Agency of Business Address:

Signature: Date: