Attachment 4 Past Performance Relevancy Matrix.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Attached to
- MARCENT OAMS Follow-On
- Solicitation number
- M00264-25-R-0001
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
The file is a Past Performance Relevancy Matrix Excel spreadsheet for the MARCENT OAMS Follow-On solicitation (M00264-25-R-0001). The matrix provides a structured template for contractors to document and demonstrate their past performance relevance for a Marine Corps Central Command professional support services contract. The matrix captures critical details including contract record information, performance periods, scope alignment, deliverables, full-time equivalents, contract values, and performance ratings.
The solicitation seeks professional support services for MARCENT and subordinate commands, covering a wide range of strategic and operational support functions both within the United States (CONUS) and internationally (OCONUS). Key service areas include command element support, intelligence, operations, logistics, planning, communications, operational and concept planning, strategy development, doctrinal and policy reviews, crisis action planning, training plans, and wargaming exercise support. The past performance matrix is designed to help contractors demonstrate their capability and experience relevance through a structured evaluation of previous contract performance across four potential past performance records.
View the file
Other files
Show all 25
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
Sheet1
| Contractor Name: | |||||||||||||||
| Past Performance Matrix | |||||||||||||||
| General Information | Recency | Relevancy | Quality | Compliance with the requirement of FAR Part 52.219-8 (Utilization of Small Business Concerns | |||||||||||
| Scope | Complexity | Magnitude | |||||||||||||
| Contract Record (Max to 4 records) | Past Performance Record Number | Past Performance Record Name | Name of company (prime) to whom the contract record was awarded to | Point of Contact of the record (e.g. COR) | Agency who issued the record (Agency/Command name)? | NAICS used in the Past Performance Record | Signed Prime and Subcontractor commitment included in your Proposal? | Start and End date of the record (Period of Performance) within the past four years (from solicitation date). This includes a record with an expiration date that falls within 4 years from solicitation issuance date. For a past performance reference to be considered, the offeror (or its affiliate or subcontractor) shall have performed under the referenced contract within a period no older than 4 years from RFP due date. | Scope of Past Performance Record per contract record PWS/SOW/SOO What is this record for as stated in the scope section of the past performance record PWS/SOW/SOO? | Identify what past performance (domains/task/deliverable/function) of this record relates to the MARCENT 2.0 requirement. Please identify which section(s) of the MARCENT OAMS PWS does this past performance record relates | Mapping of claimed Past Performance against past performance source record: • Submit and map primary source information for each Past Performance record. The Offeror must tag/map those specific written passages in the SOW/PWS that support a relevance determination in the proposed domain(s). |
• If a Statement of Objectives (SOO) clearly indicates past performance (domain/task/deliverable/function) relevance, the SOO may be submitted. If the SOO is not clear, then the contractor-generated SOW/PWS must be submitted along with the SOO.
• Identify page and paragraph number.
• Highlight the section in the past performance source contract document. Does this record require a DD-254 at the Top Secret level? Does this record shows experience working CONUS and OCONUS? State if past performance is claimed as prime or subcontractor List a summary description of the deliverables (e.g., after action reports, briefing to flag officers, X number of transactions entered per month, X number of call processed per year) executed in the performance of this record. List number of Full Time Equivalents used in this past performance record as it applies to the claimed past performance Total Value of the Past Performance Record Please provide the Quality Technical rating granted in CPARS? If there is no CPARS, please use the Past Performance Questionnaire. Confirm that a copy of CPARS/ Past Performance Questionnaire of the respective record is included in your proposal. Please demonstrate how compliance with FAR 52.219-8 was achieved for each past performance record included in your proposal.
Sheet2
| Table 4. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings | |
| Rating | Definition |
| 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 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .