Attachment L001 - PPQ.pdf

Part IV– Section L Attachment L001 - Past Performance Questionnaire SIR No. 693KA9-24-R-00012

Attachment L001– Page 1

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE (L001)

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS SENDING REFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE FORMS:

Section A (Part I and Part II) shall be completed by the Offeror (the firm requesting the reference) prior to issuing the questionnaires. The Offeror shall send the questionnaires for three (3) relevant projects that are referenced in its Technical Proposal that are in progress or completed in the past 48 months from the release date of this SIR to the individuals who will provide the reference. For Government contracts, send to the Contracting Officer (CO) or CO’s Technical Representative. At least two (2) of the Past Performances references must be for PRIME contract work. For commercial references, send to personnel with duties similar to those for Government contracts. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to follow-up and encourage references to submit the questionnaire. The completed questionnaire shall be submitted via e-mail directly from the person providing the reference. In addition, copies of all requested questionnaire forms by the Offeror to the Reference source must be included with the Offeror’s proposal due 2:00 PM EST, on September 20, 2024.

INSTRUCTIONS TO PERSON PROVIDING REFERENCE:

In order to assess potential vendors under SIR No. 693KA9-24-R-00012, the FAA contracting office is obtaining past performance information with respect to each Offeror. As a reference for work performed by the firm identified in Section A of this questionnaire, your candid response will assist in the evaluation process. Please complete Section B (Part I and Part II) of the questionnaire as thoroughly as possible and submit to 9-AWA-AAQ410-Contracting-Team@faa.gov no later than 2:00 PM EST, on September 20, 2024. The subject line in the submission e-mail shall clearly indicate: SIR No. 693KA9-24-R-00012 Past Performance Questionnaire Submission for <Company Name> and the message shall originate from the reference’s government or commercial e-mail system.

In addition to this questionnaire, you may receive a follow-up phone call to confirm or clarify information.

This is a major FAA acquisition and your input into this evaluation is greatly appreciated. If you have questions regarding this questionnaire or require assistance, please submit inquiries to: 9-AWA-AAQ410- Contracting-Team@faa.gov mailto:9-AWA-AAQ410-Contracting-Team@faa.gov

Attachment L001– Page 2

SECTION A

TO BE COMPLETED BY OFFEROR (THE FIRM REQUESTING THE REFERENCE)

PART I: FAA NISC ENTERPRISE SUPPORT TASKING OFFEROR INFORMATION

COMPANY NAME OF OFFEROR:

OFFEROR ADDRESS:

COMPANY NAME OF FAA WORKFORCE SCHEDULING TOOL PERFORMING TEAM MEMBER FOR THIS

REFERENCE (IF APPLICABLE):

TEAM MEMBER ADDRESS:

PART II: PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

TITLE OF PROJECT/CONTRACT NUMBER FOR WHICH REFERENCE IS REQUESTED:

AGENCY/CUSTOMER:

CONTRACT/ORDER/SUBCONTRACT/OTHER:

CONTRACT TYPE: (Check all that apply)

FP CPFF-Completion CPFF-Term CPIF CPAF IDIQ/Task Order

Requirements Labor-Hour T&M CR Other (Specify)

DATE OF AWARD:

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE (INCLUDING OPTIONS):

CONTRACT AMOUNT:

• INITIAL CONTRACT DOLLAR VALUE (W/OPTIONS): _________________________

• FINAL CONTRACT DOLLAR VALUE (W/OPTIONS): _________________________

ROLE ON PROJECT:

PRIME

SUBCONTRACTOR (EXPLAIN TYPE AND EXTENT OF SUBCONTRACTING, IF APPLICABLE):

OTHER (EXPLAIN): ________________________________________________________________________________

Attachment L001– Page 3

GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF TYPE OF SERVICES/PRODUCTS REQUIRED UNDER THE CONTRACT:

DESCRIBE COMPLEXITY OF WORK:

Attachment L001– Page 4

SECTION B

TO BE COMPLETED BY EVALUATOR (PERSON PROVIDING REFERENCE)

PART I: REFERENCE INFORMATION

NAME & TITLE:

ORGANIZATION (INCLUDING AGENCY AND/OR COMPANY):

CONTRACT ROLE (e.g. CO, COTR):

ADDRESS:

PHONE NUMBER:

FAX NUMBER:

E-MAIL:

PART II: INFORMATION ABOUT PROJECT/CONTRACT FOR WHICH REFERENCE IS REQUESTED

Please identify and correct any information that is not accurate in Section A.

Please objectively assess the requesting firm in each performance element below by assigning a check mark to the most appropriate rating as described below:

Performance Element

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory

1. Technical Performance / Quality of Service

· Met all performance requirements / Exceeded 20 % or more

· Minor problems / Highly effective corrective actions / Improved performance/ quality results

· Met all performance requirements / Exceeded 5% or more

· Minor problems / Effective corrective actions

· Met all performance requirements

· Minor problems / Satisfactory corrective actions

· Some performance requirements not met

· Performance reflects serious problem / Ineffective corrective actions

· Most performance requirements are not met

· Recovery not likely

Assessment (Check Box)

2. Complexity of Service

· 350+ active users

· Database w/ a minimum of five

(5) workflows

· Database w/ a minimum 1,000,000 lines of code

· 200+ active users

· Database w/ a minimum of four

(4) workflows

· Database w/ a minimum 750,000 lines of code

· 100+ active users

· Database w/ a minimum of three

(3) workflows

· Database w/ a minimum 300,000 lines of code

· 50+ active users

· Database w/ a minimum of two

(2) workflows

· Database w/ a minimum 200,000 lines of code

· Less than 50 active users

· Database w/ less than two (2) workflows

· Database w/ less than 200,000 lines of code

Assessment (Check Box)

Attachment L001– Page 5

3. Timeliness of

Performance

· Significantly exceeded delivery requirements (All on-time with many early deliveries to the Government’s benefit)

· Quickly resolved delivery issues / Highly effective corrective actions

· On-Time deliveries / Some early deliveries to the Government’s benefit

· Quickly resolved delivery issues / Effective corrective actions

· On-time deliveries

· Minor problems / Did not effect delivery schedule

· Some late deliveries

· No corrective actions

· Many late deliveries

· Negative cost impact / Loss of capability for Government

· Ineffective corrective actions / Not likely to recover

4. Experience

Writing Code

· SME in understanding, maintaining and modifying a large code base

· Fixes bugs with four (4) hours

· Add/enhance current features within 32 hours

· Highly proficient in understanding, maintaining and eight (8) hours within 48 hours

· Competent in understanding, maintaining and

· Fixes bugs with 12 hours

· Add/enhance current features within 60 hours

· Basic ability in understanding, maintaining and

24 hours within 80 hours

· Little familiarity in understanding, maintaining and modifying a large code base

48 hours

· Unable to add/enhance current features within 80 hours

FOR #5, PLEASE ANSWER “Yes” or “No”, as appropriate

5. Given the choice, would you do business with this contractor again?

YES NO

6. Additional comments you would like to share

SIGNATURE DATE