Attachment L - Past Performance Questionaire.pdf

80GRC022R0017 – Environmental, Safety, Health and Mission Assurance (ESHMA)

ATTACHMENT L:

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

FOR ESHMA PROCUREMENT

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

GLENN RESEARCH CENTER

21000 BROOKPARK ROAD, CLEVELAND, OHIO 44135

80GRC022R0017

July 2023

80GRC022R0017 – Environmental, Safety, Health and Mission Assurance (ESHMA) PROCUREMENT

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

ATTENTION ALL OFFERORS:

The following questionnaire shall be forwarded to the owners of the three projects proposed by your firm under the past performance evaluation factor for this solicitation.

It is recommended that a letter authorizing the reference to provide past performance information to the Government be included with the questionnaire. Following is a sample letter that NASA recommends be sent along with the questionnaire.

Sample Letter:

Dear Client:

We are currently responding to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Solicitation

Number 80GRC022R0017 for the procurement of the Environmental, Safety, Health and Mission Assurance (ESHMA) to the NASA Glenn Research Center in Cleveland, OH.

NASA is placing emphasis in their procurements on past performance as a source selection factor.

NASA is requiring that clients of entities responding to their solicitations be identified and their participation in the evaluation process be requested. In the event you are contacted for information on work we have performed, you are hereby authorized to respond to those inquiries.

We have identified Mr./Ms.____________________________ of your organization as the point of contact based on their knowledge concerning our work. Your cooperation is appreciated. Any questions may be directed to Contracting Officers Traci A. Patton and Tyler Braden at traci.a.patton@nasa.gov and tyler.r.braden@nasa.gov.

Sincerely, Name

Title

Firm

INSTRUCTION PAGE

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

You have been selected by an Offeror to complete the attached questionnaire that concerns an evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance on a project completed or in progress for you.

Please complete the following questionnaire concerning evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance.

Your response to this evaluation will be utilized by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA) for selection.

NASA is placing increased emphasis on past performance as a source selection factor. Your complete response is critical, as NASA will rely upon this information in the selection of a firm for the proposed project. Please answer all questions by circling only one (1) response per question.

NASA officials may contact you concerning responses made by you in this questionnaire.

If you have any questions and/or concerns, you may contact the NASA Contracting Officers, Traci A. Patton at traci.a.patton@nasa.gov and Tyler Braden at tyler.r.braden@nasa.gov.

Instructions for returning this evaluation:

Completed questionnaires will be considered procurement sensitive information and will not be seen or reviewed by the Offeror in question or any other party not having a need to know.

Electronic copies of the completed questionnaire should be emailed to the Contracting Officers Traci A.

Patton at traci.a.patton@nasa.gov and Tyler Braden at tyler.r.braden@nasa.gov.

Hard copies may be mailed to:

NASA Glenn Research Center

Institutional Services Branch

Attn: Traci A. Patton and Tyler R. Braden/Contracting Officer

Mail Stop: 60-1

21000 Brookpark Road

Cleveland, OH 44135

80GRC022R0017 – Environmental, Safety, Health and Mission Assurance (ESHMA)

OWNER EVALUATION COVER SHEET

Offeror being evaluated:

Clent Name (Organization Name, Evaluator Name, Address, Zip, and Telephone Number)

Name, Location, Description of Project (Use additional sheets if necessary)

Contract Amount: Original: $

Final: $ _____________________

Type of Contract:

Percent of Final Contract Amount resulting from owner initiated changes ______ %

Status of project: active 100% complete

If active, expected completion date ________________________________

Would you award a contract to this firm again for similar work? YES/ NO

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government / Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an

Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s /

Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the

Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the

Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum 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.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed 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.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government / Owner.

(U) 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 serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government /

Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable No information or did not apply to your contract

Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE