ATTACHMENT 5 Past Performance Survey.pdf

Attachment 5 – Past Performance Survey

PAST PERFORMANCE SURVEY

This past performance survey is to be completed on the designated contractor or key personnel as designated below:

PAST PERFORMANCE PROJECT IDENTIFICATON (To be filled out by the Offeror):

CONTRACTOR OR KEY

PERSONNEL NAME:

CONTRACT or ORDER

NUMBER:

PROJECT TITLE:

TOTAL PERIOD OF

PERFORMANCE, INCLUDING

OPTIONS

PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCE INFORMATION (To be filled out by the Reference):

NAME:

TITLE:

AGENCY or CUSTOMER:

PHONE:

E-MAIL

The Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Inspector General (HUD OIG) is procuring the services described in the box below. You have been selected by the contractor or key personnel identified above to provide past performance information to HUD OIG to be used in evaluating the offeror’s proposal for this acquisition. Thank you for your input.

The objective of this contract is to obtain the services of an independent public accounting firm (Contractor) to complete an audit of FHA stand-alone financial statements and HUD’s consolidated financial statements, for fiscal year 2021 (including the fiscal year 2020 comparatives) and up to three (3) subsequent option periods beginning with fiscal year 2022, in accordance with the CFO Act.

The CFO Act requires that the Inspector General, or independent external auditor as determined by the Inspector General, to conduct an annual audit of Department of Housing and Urban Development (DHUD) financial statements. Ginnie Mae's financial statements are a major component of Department of HUD’s consolidated financial statements. This audit must be conducted in accordance with the most recent version of the following standards:

• Generally accepted government auditing standards (GAGAS) or yellow book; issued by the Comptroller General of the United States;

• Generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS) as established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and promulgated in its Statements on Auditing Standards (SAS);

• Financial Audit Manual (FAM) issue by Government Accountability Office (GAO);

• GAO’s Federal Information System Controls Audit Manual (FISCAM);

• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standards and guidelines;

• OMB Bulletin 07-04, as amended, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial

Statements, and other related amendments and memorandum issued by OMB;

• OMB Circular A-136, Financial Reporting Requirements.

For each of the Five (5) criteria listed below, the rater must choose One (1) Adjectival Rating by checking the box, as applicable. At a minimum, for any rating that is checked Exceptional, Very Good, Marginal or Unsatisfactory, please submit additional comments to substantiate the rating.

If Cost Control is N/A, please explain why.

1. QUALITY OF SERVICE

RATING Adjectival Rating

Definition

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor/Key Personnel were highly effective

Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor/Key Personnel were effective

Satisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor/Key Personnel appear or were satisfactory

Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor/Key Personnel has not yet identified corrective actions.

Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the

Contractor’s/Key Personnel’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

2. SCHEDULE

the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the

3. COST CONTROL

the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the

Not Applicable

4. BUSINESS RELATIONS

the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the

5. MANAGEMENT OF KEY PERSONNEL

the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective the Government’s benefit. The element being assessed was assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the