Attachment J-6 Award Fee Plan.pdf

Attachment J-6

AWARD FEE DETERMINATION PLAN

FOR

ENTERPRISE FACILITIES OPERATIONS

AND MAINTENANCE (EFOM)

Solicitation #15F067-24-R-0000188

AWARD FEE DETERMINATION PLAN

I. Overview of Award Fee Determination Plan

A. Purpose The purpose of this Award Fee Determination Plan (AFDP) is to set forth the basic procedures and criteria for the periodic evaluation of, and fee determination for, the performance of the Contractor responsible for the facility operations and maintenance (O&M) of all equipment and facilities at the [location TBD].

This plan identifies the personnel responsible for the execution of this plan, discusses (in general terms) performance monitoring, and sets forth guidelines for the Award Fee Determining Board (AFDB). This plan is developed unilaterally by the Government. Award fee determinations made by the Fee Determining Official (FDO) are unilateral determinations.

The Fee Determining Official and the AFDB Chairperson have, as a team, the primary management responsibility for the fair, ethical and equitable administration of this plan.

Likewise, each party identified in this plan is charged with accomplishing his/her responsibilities in a fair, ethical, and equitable manner as well as with great integrity.

B. Specific Contract Data

This contract is a Fixed-Price/Award-Fee/IDIQ contract with a base performance period commencing on 16 October 2024 through 15 October 2025, with four one-year option periods to potentially carry the contract through 15 October 2029. Should all option periods be exercised, the contract shall cover a total of 66 months.

The Contractor is required to provide the management and supervision along with all necessary labor, materials, supplies, and equipment required to provide full, complete and efficient operation of all of the facilities listed in the Task Order. The Contractor shall further plan, schedule, coordinate and assure effective performance of any and all of the following services:

electrical and mechanical maintenance for all electrical and mechanical equipment on this compound, including but not limited to all emergency power, structural, electrical, mechanical, plumbing architectural systems, including elevators and fire alarm systems. The Contractor’s more specific responsibilities are outlined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

C. Evaluation Periods

Evaluation Period Award Fee

Base Period:

16 OCT 2024 through 15 OCT 2025 TBD (2% FFP)

Option Period 1:

16 OCT 2025 through 15 OCT 2026 TBD (2% FFP)

Option Period 2:

16 OCT 2026 through 15 OCT 2027 TBD (2% FFP)

Option Period 3:

16 OCT 2027 through 15 OCT 2028 TBD (2% FFP)

Option Period 4:

16 OCT 2028 through 15 OCT 2029 TBD (2% FFP)

Each performance evaluation will be completed within 60 days after the end of the evaluation period. The evaluation is considered complete on the date the Fee Determining Official’s (FDO’s) written notification of the approved award fee amount is sent to the Contractor’s corporate office.

D. Award Fee Amount

The earned award fee will be based on the Contractor’s performance during each evaluation period. An earned award fee amount will be determined by the FDO in accordance with this plan and the award fee criteria given to the Contractor.

Once a numerical percentage (representing performance) is determined, the percentage of quarterly award fee to be paid will be determined according to the following formula:

Contractor Performance Rating (%) x Maximum Available Award Quarterly Earned Award Fee

The Award Fee may not exceed 100% of the maximum award fee amount for the year stated in the plan and Section B of the contract. The ultimate award amount and the award-fee determination methodology are unilateral decisions solely at the discretion of the Government.

E. Award Fee Plan Change Procedure

The Government has the unilateral right to modify award fee criteria as required to meet program needs. Any changes to this award fee plan shall be provided to the Contractor through written modification signed by the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) at least 15 calendar days prior to the start of each award fee period.

Should the Contractor have an objection to any revised or new criteria, a written appeal must be submitted to the ACO within seven (7) days of the receipt of the revised plan. The ACO shall render a decision in the time remaining prior to the start of the new award fee period. The determination of the ACO shall be final and cannot be appealed.

II: PERSONNEL INVOLVED IN THE AWARD PROCESS

A. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

The COR, as appointed by the CO/ACO, has overall responsibility for the technical requirements of the contract including monitoring, assessing, recording, and reporting the technical performance of the Contractor on a continuous (day-to-day) basis. To accomplish this responsibility, the COR must be thoroughly familiar with:

- The Performance Work Statement (PWS)

- The Contractor’s Technical Proposal

- The Award Fee Determination Plan

The COR is responsible for preparing a written performance report and presenting all material required by the AFDB to make its quarterly assessment of the Contractor’s performance in a meeting to be held within 45 days after the last day of the evaluation period. The COR is responsible for accomplishing the following procedures to produce the documentation required for the deliberation of the AFDB:

1) The COR must report all factual events which constitute the Contractor’s required performance for the quarter.

2) Maintain and record all performance results. All Contractor performance for the contract shall be recorded and tracked. Forms that shall be used and maintained are: The Monthly Preventive Maintenance Report; Monthly Building Condition Report; facility-generated Preventive Maintenance Work Orders and facility-generated Service Call tickets. All facility O&M forms shall be reviewed by the COR and initialed as satisfactorily performed. All unsatisfactory work shall be so noted on the form and reported to the Contractor for re-performance when this is possible. If the item continues to be unsatisfactory, the item will be noted in the COR’s Quarterly Report to the AFDB.

3) Record performance information in the COR’s Quarterly Performance Evaluation Report and Contract Files. The recording of an unsatisfactory event must be supported by sufficient information to provide the reader with a clear understanding of the significance of the event and its impact. If the unsatisfactory event affects the Annual Award Fee, it must be included in the COR’s Quarterly Performance Evaluation Report and clearly described in regard to a violation of the specific line item in the Award Fee Determination Plan.

4) Judge each event in accordance with the following definitions of the Contractor performance and so indicate on the appropriate inspection form:

• Superior – The event is indicative of above and beyond an acceptable level of performance. Superior performance shall be so noted in the Remarks column of the inspection documentation.

• Satisfactory – The event is indicative of an acceptable level of performance.

• Unsatisfactory – The event is indicative of an unacceptable level of performance.

B. Award Fee Determining Board (AFDB)

The AFDB consists of a board of FBI Task Order service recipients (i.e., Unit Chief or Program Manager) and employees who perform an in-depth review of all aspects of the Contractor’s performance. The AFDB will meet on a quarterly basis approximately 45 days after the end of each performance period. During its quarterly meeting, the AFDB will hear oral presentations from the COR receive a self-assessment from the Contractor, evaluate and discuss all documentation submitted by the ACO and rate the Contractor on performance in each category.

The AFDB is responsible for preparing an Award Fee Determination Report that clearly and thoroughly explains their rationale for each rating assigned to the Contractor and recommends a total award fee amount to the Fee Determining Official. The AFDB will forward the report to the ACO for review.

Each member of the board is responsible for performing their duties in as fair, equitable, and objective manner as possible, and to provide sufficient rationale for their recommendations. Each member of the AFDB is responsible for assuring that they are thoroughly familiar with the contract’s PWS and this plan. Board members should also be generally familiar with the Contractor’s technical proposal.

C. AFDB Chairperson

The ACO will act as the Chairperson. The Chairperson is responsible for conducting the meetings of the AFDB and ensuring that the evaluation process is conducted in a fair, equitable, and objective manner. The Chairperson is also responsible for ensuring that the views of each of the AFDB’s members are heard and considered. Furthermore, the Chairperson ensures that the AFDB report accurately reflects the opinions of the AFDB. The Chairperson is not a voting member of the board.

When appropriate, the COR will provide the ACO with changes to the Award Fee Determination Plan. The ACO will notify the Contractor of any changes through issuance of a written contract modification.

D. Fee Determining Official (FDO)

The FDO for this acquisition shall be the Program Manager for the facility that the Task Order provides services to. The FDO reviews the recommendation and reports of the AFDB in order to make the final determination of award fee for each performance period. It is the FDO’s responsibility to assure that the documentation adequately supports the recommendation and is in accordance with criteria stated in this plan and, if necessary, seek clarification from the AFDB.

If the FDO disagrees with the AFDB’s recommendation, the FDO must include a narrative supporting its decision. The FDO must sign and date the Award Fee Determination Report and forward it to the ACO.

E. Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)

The ACO is responsible for receiving the Contractor’s Quarterly Self-Assessment and the COR’s Quarterly Performance Evaluation Report. The ACO will review the COR’s report to ensure that rationale supports the performance evaluation category’s individual scores. The ACO will then organize the material provided by the COR and the Contractor in such a manner as to enable it to be used (1) as the Board’s agenda for the meeting, and (2) as the complete documentation package supporting the fee recommendation and forward it to the AFDB approximately 30 days after the end of the performance period. It will be organized into separate sections for each performance evaluation category. Each section will consist of the following material:

a. COR’s Quarterly Report

b. Contractor’s Quarterly Self-evaluation

c. Any correspondence relating to Contractor performance, such as Contractor’s response to negative reports, letters of appreciation from customers, and so forth

The ACO will receive and review the AFDB’s Award Fee Determination reports to ensure that the rationale supports the performance evaluation categories’ individual scores. If there are discrepancies or inconsistencies with the rationale, the ACO will work with the COR and/or AFDB to identify a mutually acceptable resolution and/or adjustment. If a mutually acceptable resolution cannot be reached, the ACO will recommend an appropriate adjustment to the FDO to ensure that the earned award fee decision is in compliance with the contract.

The ACO is also responsible for validating and assessing the Contractor’s version of events and resolving any difference between the COR’s version and the Contractor’s version.

The ACO is responsible for communicating negative reports as soon as possible to the Contractor to facilitate the Contractor’s ability to initiate corrective action.

The ACO is responsible for issuing contract modifications to change this award fee plan.

III: PERFORMANCE MONITORING

A. Overview

The purpose of monitoring and reporting on the Contractor’s performance is to ensure that the Task Order facility receives the best quality performance possible from the Contractor. The day-to-day performance monitoring will be accomplished by the COR and Government Maintenance Work Inspectors. The COR’s monitoring activities will focus on the “technical quality” aspects of the Contractor’s performance.

The ACO will be responsible for monitoring and evaluating administrative aspects of the Contractor’s performance. The ACO will also be responsible for reviewing and assessing the documentation produced by the COR.

(NOTE: It must be understood that an unsatisfactory event can affect more than one of the quarterly evaluation criteria in the Award Fee Determination Plan, i.e., the contract phase-in quarter – an unsatisfactory event such as a failure of an emergency generator due to improper, or lack of, maintenance could invoke deductions in the Operation & Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, and Subcontracting criteria.)

It is important that during each phase of the performance monitoring, the Contractor be aware of how their performance is perceived. This plan is designed so that through constant communication between the COR, ACO, and the Contractor--the Contractor may improve their performance. With this objective in mind, both the Task Order facility and the Contractor will benefit through outstanding operations and maintenance support to the TO facility and improved ratings and greater profit for the Contractor.

B. Performance Evaluation Categories

For purposes of contract monitoring and assessment of performance, the Contractor’s overall effort is divided into Performance Evaluation Categories. Beginning with the 1st quarter of the base period, the Performance Evaluation Categories are revised to be as follows:

1. FACILITY OPERATIONS 25%

2. PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE 25%

4. SERVICE CALLS 25%

5. MANAGEMENT 15%

6. SUBCONTRACTING 05%

TOTAL AWARD FEE POSSIBLE 100%

The Contractor’s performance in the individual categories is to be reviewed, evaluated, and rated solely on work performed under this contract. Any other work being done by the Contractor for the GSA or other Government entities on this facility but not as a part of this contract should not be reviewed or considered nor evaluated under this performance appraisal for the O&M Contractor.

These individual categories to be rated in each performance period are detailed in the PWS. The following are some further descriptions of what is being reviewed and evaluated under the noted category which may assist in understanding what the Government is looking at in a particular category.

Category #4 Management – The Contractor’s overall ability to appropriately use and control all resources and systems which support the contract. The effectiveness of the management programs and the effect on contract performance. Other items to be reviewed and evaluated under the management category include:

a. The functioning of the Contractor’s “Safety and Environmental Programs.” This criterion applies to compliance with any local EMS, safety manuals, regulations, certifications, and commonly accepted safety procedures regarding the proper and safe use of equipment to ensure the safety of Contractor and Government employees and property.

b. The aspect of autonomy (The degree to which Contractor relies on the

Government for guidance or decisions in areas that are properly the Contractor’s responsibility.)

c. Timeliness and effectiveness of business decisions made by the Contractor locally versus decisions from corporate headquarters.

d. The effect of these decisions in item “c” above on local operations.

Category #5 Subcontracting – The effective and efficient management and control of subcontractors and suppliers.

C. General Evaluation Criteria

The following ten General Evaluation Criteria will be used with each category as a guide in evaluating the Contractor’s performance against the minimum required performance under the contract. This will allow for the determination of how well the Contractor did in his performance within each of the Evaluation Categories in this award fee plan.

1. WORKMANSHIP

The level of performance required to successfully support the TO facility under this contract by the Contractor. All work performed under this contract by Contractor’s personnel shall be at the fully qualified level. The COR is responsible for evaluating the skillfulness with which a job is performed under this criterion. On occasion, higher or lower quality of workmanship will be detected, reflecting different factors (such as attention to detail and pride of workmanship).

These factors should be reflected in the performance assessment. Also identified will be the strengths and weaknesses of the Contractor’s staff as it relates to the mission to be performed.

The use of personnel, materials, and equipment should be analyzed.

2. EFFICIENCY

This criterion is concerned with the economic use of time, personnel, and equipment. The effective selection of personnel and equipment to perform the mission requirements will be analyzed.

3. INGENUITY

Ingenuity entails the development, by the Contractor, of original solutions to problems which result in savings of time, money, manpower, or improvements to the facility support functions or operational systems.

4. RESPONSIVENESS

This criterion involves the promptness and degree of concern with which the Contractor responds to the needs, requests, and demands of the COR and ACO.

5. PERCEPTIVENESS

Contractor personnel, since they are journeymen or fully trained in their respective fields, should be able to detect possible, potential, or imminent problems, thereby facilitating the correction of such before failures occur and are noticed by Government inspectors. Personnel conducting evaluations of Contractor performance should be keenly aware of this criterion.

6. THOROUGHNESS

Thoroughness refers to the “absolute” completion of an activity to include ensuring that all related aspects (including documentation) of the task have been addressed.

7. TIMELINESS

This entails the “on-time” completion of tasks, whether scheduled with established completion dates/times/milestones and deadlines, or are unscheduled tasks, such as corrective maintenance in response to equipment failures.

8. RESOURCEFULNESS

Resourcefulness refers to the safe, appropriate, and acceptable use of alternate resources (methods, personnel, equipment) to accomplish a task for which the prescribed resources are not available.

9. ACCURACY

This criterion applies to tasks that should be completed within certain tolerances or in accordance with prescribed standards of performance.

10. COMMUNICATION

Adequacy, effectiveness, and efficiency of Contractor’s channels of communication within its own organization and with Government personnel. The ability to support full understanding of circumstances by both Government and Contractor personnel.

D. Monitoring/Documentation/Reporting

1. MONITORING

The COR will be monitoring the Contractor’s technical work efforts that include but are not limited to the following broad categories: Routine or normal building operations and preventive maintenance; repair tasks, new work; customer-initiated service call requests, service calls initiated by Government inspectors; and work initiated by the Contractor through either common task work requests or preventive maintenance schedules.

Work that is classified as routine or normal operations and maintenance is work which does not require that a “customer initiated” Work Request be issued for the work to be accomplished. The requirements for this kind of work are set forth clearly in the contract’s PWS. Overall, the monitoring of routine operations and maintenance will be conducted using periodic inspection techniques at frequencies established by the COR. Monitoring by the COR may also be initiated by customer complaints. The COR will generally use the PWS, and the evaluation criteria outlined in this plan.

Over and Above (OAA) Work Orders will generally fall into two broad categories: Those that are word orders negotiated to accomplish building and equipment repairs and those that are work orders to perform new work such as minor construction and/or services as may be required by the Government.

Customer-initiated Service Call Requests will generally fall into four broad categories: Those that are an emergency, Hot/Cold complaints, Urgent, and routine in nature. All service calls will be periodically monitored at a frequency determined by the COR. The COR will assess the Contractor’s performance according to the PWS, the evaluation criteria in this plan, and the customer’s instructions contained on the Work Requests. All (100%) “emergency response” service calls will be monitored. In addition, all customer complaints concerning work accomplished under a service call request will be investigated.

Service calls initiated by Government inspectors will generally fall into the same four broad categories as mentioned above under customer-initiated service calls: Those that are an emergency, hot/cold complaints, urgent, and routine. All service calls will be periodically monitored at a frequency determined by the COR. The Government Inspectors and the COR will issue service calls in the facility monitoring system when deficiencies have been found in the Contractor’s performance of PM work, service calls, building operations, etc. The COR will assess the Contractor’s performance according to the PWS, the evaluation criteria in this plan, and the Government inspector’s instructions contained on the Work Requests. 100% of All “emergency response” Work Requests will be monitored.

In addition, all customer complaints concerning work accomplished under work requests will be investigated and reported.

Finally, work that is generated by the facilities monitoring system, such as the Contractor’s preventive maintenance procedures and schedules, will be inspected on a periodic basis by the COR and/or Government inspectors. The COR will evaluate the Contractor’s performance according to the PWS, the evaluation criteria, FBI preventive maintenance guidelines, and other applicable standards (such as state and local codes, manufacturer’s instructions, and so forth).

2. DOCUMENTATION

As mentioned previously, the COR will be required to use the Monthly Preventive Maintenance Reports, Monthly Building Condition Reports, FBI-generated Preventive Maintenance Work Orders and Service Call tickets, etc., to determine the evaluation of the Contractor’s performance. Note that the format will require documentation which will reflect on the COR’s understanding of what the Contractor was supposed to do, what was actually done, and the impact or consequences of what was done.

The evaluation criteria outlined in this plan should be reflected in the COR’s narrative. The COR will summarize their narrative by assigning a rating as outlined in Chapter II of this plan.

The ACO reviews any unsatisfactory events reported by the COR and provides the assessment of the facts, circumstances, and opinions outlined by the COR. When appropriate, the ACO might investigate the event further to determine if all the facts and circumstances surrounding the event were considered. In some cases, the ACO’s investigation, technical insight, or management perspective may legitimately result in a change in the evaluation assessment. Such a change should not be viewed as being critical of the COR’s original rating, but as a strength of the checks and balances built into the evaluation process.

At the end of each quarterly evaluation period, the COR/ACO will prepare a summary of the unsatisfactory events generated during that quarter, prepare a written report which captures pertinent information not reflected on the unsatisfactory event report, and secure the Contractor’s quarterly self-assessment report. The ACO will provide this entire package to the members of the AFDB for evaluation purposes.

3. REPORTING

Flow of Reports – The COR shall review all inspection forms. The COR will bring unresolved unsatisfactory reports to the attention of the ACO as soon as possible. Likewise, the ACO will communicate the unsatisfactory events to the Contractor, in writing, as quickly as possible to facilitate corrective action.

Contractor Self-Assessment – The Contractor will submit a Self-Assessment to the ACO within 25 days after the completion of the evaluation period. The assessment shall comply with the requirements of this plan and shall address the Contractor’s performance under each of the criteria and areas of emphasis but may contain any additional information that may reasonably be expected to assist the AFDB in evaluation of the Contractor’s performance and determining an appropriate earned award fee.

Quarterly Performance Evaluation Report – The COR will submit a Quarterly Performance Evaluation Report of the Contractor’s performance to the ACO within 25 days after the completion of the evaluation period. This report shall comply with the requirements of this plan and shall address the Contractor’s performance under each of the criteria and areas of emphasis. The report shall be results oriented, contain specifics, and avoid generalities. The report shall include significant strengths and weakness in order of importance. The AFDB will use this report in the evaluation of the Contractor’s performance and determining an appropriate earned award fee.

Oral Presentations – The COR will present oral presentations to the AFDB approximately 45 days after the evaluation period has ended. Oral presentations shall summarize the Contractor’s written Self-Assessment and the COR’s written Quarterly Performance Evaluation Report. Oral presentations will be limited to no more than 30 minutes with an additional 15 minutes for discussion.

III: AWARD FEE DETERMINATION BOARD – GUIDELINES

A. Evaluation Overview

The evaluation process involves all levels of Contractor and Government personnel – technical, administrative, and management personnel.

The Contractor manages their employees to perform the requirements of the contract in view of the evaluation criteria and in hopes of earning the award fee.

Government personnel (principally the COR, Government inspectors and the ACO) will monitor, assess, document, and report on the Contractor’s performance. FBI personnel will review and assess the reports submitted by the COR, inspectors, ACO, and decide upon the amount of fee to be awarded and communicate that decision to the Contractor’s corporate management.

Corporate management relays the results of the award fee decision to their on-site project management which, in turn, relays it to the performers of the contract work.

Thus, the communications loop, with regard to evaluation of the performance, completes a full circle. Communication lines cross between levels during the cycle thereby enhancing the prospects for outstanding performance, as well as the earliest possible correction of substandard performance.

The constant monitoring performed by Government personnel enables the Government to give better technical direction to the Contractor; assures that the priorities and needs of the FBI facility are satisfied; and “trouble-shoots” performance problems before they become unsatisfactory.

During the evaluation process, the Contractor is able to voice its opinion of its performance and respond to unsatisfactory evaluations or clarify the situation as the unsatisfactory performance occurs. The constant feedback and interchange of ideas can create an optimum climate for satisfactory or outstanding contract performance.

Expected performance levels are realistic so they motivate the Contractor towards excellent or outstanding performance and the Contractor can strive towards earning the maximum award fee.

The decisions of the FDO should give a clear indication of what FBI facility management expects from the Contractor, as well as what it considers substandard, satisfactory, or outstanding performance. It is important that the integrity of the evaluation process be maintained at all times to assure reasonable judgment has been made in the fee determination process. Monitoring, reporting, and evaluation procedures should be performed by Government personnel who are knowledgeable of the contract requirements but sufficiently diversified to create a balance in the system, thereby assuring management judgment and objectivity are brought to bear on the award fee decision.

B. Procedures

Approximately forty-five (45) days after the end of the evaluation period, the AFDB shall convene. The COR will have an opportunity to make oral presentations to the AFDB.

NOTE: Each member of the AFDB should review the COR’s quarterly report and the Contractor’s self-evaluation report prior to the Quarterly AFDB meeting.

The AFDB should note any unresolved unsatisfactory events or questionable areas and compute a tentative score for each Performance Evaluation Category.

During the presentations, the AFDB may request clarification on any of the points addressed which are unclear and may ask for elaboration on any point that was not adequately supported in the presentation.

Immediately following the oral presentation, the AFDB shall deliberate to discuss and assess the Contractor’s performance based on its review of all pertinent documentation.

The AFDB should then arrive at a score for each performance evaluation category. The AFDB will arrive at the score by averaging individual scores or through consensus.

The AFDB will then draft the Award Fee Determination Report narrative report for the FDO’s signature. The report will include narrative statements of strengths and weaknesses against each performance standard identified in the Award Fee Plan to substantiate the award fee position. The AFDB shall forward the report to the ACO via electronic mail.

The ACO will review the Award Fee Determination Report to ensure the AFDB’s rationale supports the performance evaluation categories individual scores. The ACO will forward the report to the FDO for review and approval.

The FDO will review the recommendations of the AFDB, consider all pertinent information and make a final determination of the earned award fee amount. The FDO will sign, date, and provide the ACO with the Award Fee Determination Report.

Sixty (60) days after the end of the evaluation period, the ACO will prepare and submit an Earned Award Fee Decision Letter to the Contractor.

Upon receipt of the FDO Decision Letter, the Contractor shall submit an invoice for payment of the award fee. Payments from the award fee pool will be made within 30 days after receipt of invoice, following each evaluation period.

TARGET SCHEDULE FOR QUARTERLY EVALUATIONS

Owner Activity After Quarter

COR Prepares and distributes summary of 25 Days Quarterly evaluation to ACO

Contractor Submits self-assessment to ACO 25 Days

ACO Compiles information from the COR 30 Days and Contractor into a quarterly report and Forwards to the AFDB

AFDB Reviews ACO report 30 Days

AFDB Convenes to decide upon recommended 45 Days award fee

FDO Reviews AFDB recommendation and 60 Days provides ACO with the earned award fee amount

Rating Sheet for the Contractor’s Quarterly Performance

Categories 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Operations

PM NA

Service Calls Management

Subcontracting

Column labeled #1 is to be used to rate Workmanship

Column labeled #2 is to be used to rate Efficiency

Column labeled #3 is to be used to rate Ingenuity

Column labeled #4 is to be used to rate Responsiveness

Column labeled #5 is to be used to rate Perceptiveness

Column labeled #6 is to be used to rate Thoroughness

Column labeled #7 is to be used to rate Timeliness

Column labeled #8 is to be used to rate Resourcefulness

Column labeled #9 is to be used to rate Accuracy

Column labeled #10 is to be used to rate Communication

The rating scheme shall be as follows:

Rate each category under a given criteria with a numerical score between 1 and 5 with 1 being the lowest score or rating and 5 being an exceptionally high rating.

If there is an NA in the matrix, that means that the category is not to be rated using that criterion.