Attachment 4 - PPQ - NII - CIP.pdf

NON‐INTRUSIVE INSPECTION (NII)

COMMON INTEGRATION PLATFORM (CIP) AND COMMON VIEWER (CV)

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

PART ONE: INSTRUCTIONS

The company who has provided you with this form is responding to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) solicitation to provide a Non-Intrusive Inspection (NII) Common Integration Platform (CIP) with Common Viewer (CV) to meet the mission needs of CBP. Past Performance is an extremely important part of the evaluation criteria for this acquisition, so your input is very important. The information you provide will go directly to the CBP Procurement.

This information will not be disclosed to the offeror. Please provide an honest assessment and return the questionnaire to CBP, by e-mail, to the address shown below, no later than the time and date the solicitation closes. If you have questions, please contact Nicholas Martinelli at Nicholas.Martinelli@cbp.dhs.gov.

Completed questionnaires should be emailed to the following addresses: Nicholas Martinelli at Nicholas.Martinelli@cbp.dhs.gov.

PART TWO: GENERAL INFORMATION

1. CONTRACTOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS 2. YOUR AGENCY NAME

3. CONTRACT NUMBER: 2a. EVALUATOR

4. CONTRACT VALUE (including options): ________ NAME:

TITLE:

PHONE NO:

5. CONTRACT AWARD DATE: 6. CONTRACT COMPLETION

DATE:

7. CONTRACT TYPE (Circle All That Apply):

Fixed Price Cost-Plus Fixed Price Cost-Plus Award Fee Time and Materials

OTHER

8. COMPLEXITY OF WORK

Difficult Routine

9. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF YOUR CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS (SCOPE):

PART THREE: PERFORMANCE RATING

On the following pages, please summarize the offeror’s performance in each rating factors. Each factor has a set of sub factors with four possible adjectival ratings. Determine the adjectival rating that most nearly represents your experience with this offeror and indicate your assessment by placing an “X” under the appropriate heading. Offeror performance factors are:

A. QUALITY

B. SCHEDULE

C. COST CONTROL

D. MANAGEMENT

Adjectival ratings are defined by FAR 45.1503 Table 42-1. The ratings are listed below and should be used as a reference in assessing performance:

EXCEPTIONAL - 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.

VERY GOOD - 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.

SATISFACTORY - 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.

MARGINAL - 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.

UNSATISFACTORY - 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.

N/A - Not applicable.

MANAGEMENT Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

How well did the contractor provide effective contract and project management?

How effective was the contractor in understanding and responding to user requirements?

How would you rate the contractor’s ability to staff and respond to special operational circumstances (such as fluctuations in call volume or outages)?

How would you rate the contractor’s ability to establish and maintain effective quality control standards and procedures?

How would you rate the contractor’s ability to control employee turnover?

How would you rate the contractor’s ability to effectively manage, coordinate, and integrate subcontractors?

QUALITY Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

How would you rate the contractor’s ability to provide quality services?

How well did the contractor provide quality reports and documentation (i.e., accurate, current, and complete)?

How would you rate the contractor’s ability to solve contract performance problems without extensive guidance from Government counterparts?

How would you rate the contractor’s ability to provide professional and qualified personnel?

SCHEDULE Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

Did the contractor adhere to contract delivery schedules in the following areas:

(a) Performance of services?

(b) Delivery of reports or other documentation?

(c) Qualified Staffing

COST CONTROL Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

How well did the contractor display effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract or order costs.

How well did the contractor keep within the total estimated costs?

How would you rate your overall satisfaction with the contractor’s performance?

How would you rate the contractor’s commitment to customer satisfaction?

1. Has this contract been partially or completely terminated for default? YES NO

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules - also include contract number, name, address, and phone number of Terminating Contracting Officer - TCO).

2. What was the contractor’s greatest strength in the performance of the contract?

3. What was the contractor’s greatest weakness in the performance of the contract?

4. Would you award another contract to this contractor? YES No

COMMENTS:

PART FOUR: EVALUATION CERTIFICATION

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION IN THIS FORM IS ACCURATE AND

COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.

X

SIGNATURE OF EVALUATOR

TITLE OF EVALUATOR DATE