For Official Use Only When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

NextSTEP-3 Appendix B Attachment C: Past Performance Questionnaire

For Official Use Only Page 1 of 8

The Strategy & Architecture Office (SAO) of the National Aeronautics & Space Administration (NASA) is in the process of competitively selecting sources for the Moon to Mars Architecture Studies initiative.

The purpose of this solicitation is to acquire applied concept development, risk reduction, and special studies effort that address the architecture gaps identified in NASA’s Architecture Description Document (ADD) in order to create the knowledge foundation NASA needs to make informed programmatic decisions. The scope of this solicitation is derived from NASA's architecture objectives topic will be related to lunar and Mars mission capabilities, for example: infrastructure, transportation, habitation, mission Concept of Operations (CONOPS), and lunar and Mars mission science.

One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offerors' past performance on contracts or other work efforts which reflect the offeror's ability to perform on the proposed effort. The Government depends on information received from organizations such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with the offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror's performance on those contracts or work efforts.

The Government’s areas of interest regarding the offeror are summarized in the attached questionnaire.

In order to meet the acquisition milestones, your completed questionnaire is requested no later than [insert date]. This schedule will allow the Government sufficient time to analyze the data as an integral part of the source evaluation and selection process.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to hq-nextstep3appb@mail.nasa.gov, Attention: Maranda McCord, Contracting Officer. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection record.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated, and your prompt response will facilitate the completion of this Source Selection.

Signature (Contracting Officer)

1 Attachment Past Performance Questionnaire http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/02.htm#P10_602 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/03.htm#P41_5836 mailto:hq-nextstep3appb@mail.nasa.gov

For Official Use Only Page 2 of 8

Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Contractor (Company/Division) [to be completed by Offeror]:

B. Contractor Cage Code [to be completed by Offeror]:

C. Contract Number [to be completed by Offeror]:

D. Contract Type (e.g., FFP, FPIF, CPIF, CPFF, etc.):

E. Program Title:

F. Brief Program Description:

G. Program Phase (e.g., Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD)):

H. Period of Performance

1. Original Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

2. Current Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

3. Reason for difference (if applicable):

I. Contract Dollar Value

1. Original maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

2. Current maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

3. Reasons for difference between original and current contract dollar value (if applicable):

J. Description of work performed:

K. Was this a competitively awarded contract? ☐ Yes ☐ No

L. Contractor’s Role: ☐ Prime Contractor ☐ Subcontractor ☐ Key Personnel

Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of services under this contract (i.e., local, nationwide, worldwide, other):

For Official Use Only Page 3 of 8

Section 3: Respondent Identification

A. Respondent’s name:

B. Respondent’s title:

C. Respondent’s phone number / fax number / e-mail address:

D. Respondent’s position (e.g., Program Manager, PCO/ACO, etc.):

E. Length of time (number of years/months) respondent worked on subject contract and description of responsibility/position/role:

Section 4: Performance Information

In the tables below, indicate your rating for the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block to the right of each question. Provide supporting information for each response in the space provided. Attach additional pages if more space is needed. The performance rating scale is defined as follows:

Code Performance Rating

E EXCEPTIONAL – Performance meets requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Customer’s benefit. The performance being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

V VERY GOOD – Performance meets requirements and exceeds some requirements to the

Customer’s benefit. The performance being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

S SATISFACTORY – Performance meets requirements. The performance being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

M MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some requirements. The performance being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions were only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

U UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most requirements, and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The performance being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective.

For Official Use Only Page 4 of 8

N/A NOT APPLICABLE – Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect, performance was not observed, or information was not available. Do not know.

Technical Performance E V S M U N/ A

T1. Did the contractor demonstrate a thorough understanding of the scope and complexity of the technical requirements?

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

T2. Were the studies, data, reports, and other deliverables comprehensive, complete, and feasible for their intended purpose?

T3. Did the services provided meet the required technical standards, specifications, and level of quality outlined in the contract/agreement?

T4. Was the contractor’s System Engineering Process adequately reflected in their performance and deliverables?

T5. Was the contractor's quality assurance (QA) program effective in ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the technical studies?

T6. Please provide comments on the technical depth and professionalism of the work performed.

For Official Use Only Page 5 of 8

Program Management E V S M U N/

P1. How effective was overall program management (including ability to effectively lead, manage, control and deliver on-time)?

P2. Did the contractor assign and maintain the required amount and type of qualified personnel (e.g., subject matter experts, engineers, analysts) throughout the contract/agreement term?

P3. How timely and effectively did the contractor resolve contract/agreement problems without extensive customer guidance?

P4. How would you rate the contractor's responsiveness to technical direction and feedback from your team?

P5. How responsive was the contractor in implementing corrections or changes to the schedule when unexpected issues or urgent requirements arose?

P6. How well did the contractor manage quality/effectiveness of subcontracted efforts?

P7. Was communication clear, concise, and timely??

For Official Use Only Page 6 of 8

Program Management E V S M U N/

P9. Of what benefit to the customer were contractor proposed alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors?

P10. To what degree did the contractor implement responsive/flexible processes to improve quality and timeliness of support?

P11. How effectively was the contractor able to hire/apply a qualified workforce to this effort?

P12. How effectively was the contractor able to retain a qualified workforce on this effort?

Cost Performance E V S M U N/

C1. How accurately did the contractor forecast contract/agreement costs?

C2. How well did the contractor meet forecasted costs and perform within contract/agreement costs?

For Official Use Only Page 7 of 8

Cost Performance E V S M U N/ A

C3. How successfully did the contractor alert the Government of unforeseen costs before they occurred?

C4. How sufficient and timely was the contractor’s cost reporting?

Government Contracts Only: Was this contract partially or completely terminated for default or convenience, or are there any pending terminations?

☐ Yes ☐ Default ☐ Convenience ☐ Pending Terminations ☐ No

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules).

SECTION 5: GENERAL COMMENT

Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what was promised in their proposal, I [ click and select an item ] award to them today given that I had a choice.

REMARKS:

Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.

December 10, 2025

Respondent’s Signature Date

For Official Use Only Page 8 of 8

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

Mailing Address:

[Insert here]

FAX to:

E-Mail to: