J-2_Award_Fee_Plan.pdf

J.2

INFORMATION NOT RELEASABLE TO THE PUBLIC UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY LAW

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 1

Fraud Prevention System

AWARD FEE DETERMINATION PLAN

Revision 03/27/2015 (FEDSIM FINAL)

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 2

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 This Award Fee Determination Plan (AFDP) provides procedures for evaluating the Contractor's performance on the Fraud Prevention System (FPS) contract on a Cost-Plus-Award- Fee (CPAF) basis for contract (insert number). A Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a FAR 46.401 requirement; this AFDP replaces the QASP for the work performed on a CPAF basis. The AFDP may be revised unilaterally by the Government at any time during the period of performance. The Government will make every attempt to provide changes to the contractor 15 workdays prior to the start of the evaluation period to which the change will apply. The AFDP may be re-evaluated each evaluation period with input from the contractor. The award fee objective for this contract is to afford the Contractor the opportunity to earn award fee commensurate with optimum performance:

● By providing a workable AFDP with a high probability of successful implementation.

● By clearly communicating evaluation procedures that provide effective two-way communication between the Contractor and the Government.

● By focusing the Contractor on areas of greatest importance in order to motivate high quality, cost conscious and effective performance.

1.2 The use of award fee permits the Government to focus on overall operational, technical and cost performance and to emphasize those aspects of critical milestone achievements essential to reach performance objectives.

The amount of the Award Fee earned and payable to the Contractor for achieving specified levels of performance will be determined by the Award Fee Determination Official (AFDO), with the assistance of the Award Fee Evaluation Board (AFEB), per this Plan. The maximum fee payable for any period is 100% of the Award Fee Pool Allocation. The Contractor may earn all, part, or none of the Award Fee allocated to an evaluation period. Unearned fee for a previous performance period will not be rolled over to subsequent periods, pursuant to limitations established by the FAR in 16.401(e)(4).

Standard terms used in the AFDP are:

Award Fee Pool: The maximum award fee pool established at award.

Award Fee Pool Allocation: The amount of the award fee pool that is allocated and potentially earned from the Award Fee Pool for the specific award fee period subject to the AFDP.

2. EVALUATION PERIODS

The Government will evaluate Contractor performance every six months to determine award fee payment. Each Cost-Plus-Award-Fee labor Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) will contain two distinct Award Fee Evaluation Periods for a twelve-month period. Mid-Period reviews will be scheduled concurrent with in-process reviews (IPRs) as practicable.

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 3

Award Fee Evaluation Periods

CLIN(s) PERIOD Award Fee Evaluation Period Dates (Month, Day, Year)

0001 1 Month Day, 2015 - Month Day, 2016 0001 2 Month Day, 2016 - Month Day, 2016 1001 3 Month Day, 2016 - Month Day, 2017 1001 4 Month Day, 2017 - Month Day, 2017 2001 5 Month Day, 2017 - Month Day, 2018 2001 6 Month Day, 2018 - Month Day, 2018 3001 7 Month Day, 2018 - Month Day, 2019 3001 8 Month Day, 2019 - Month Day, 2019 4001 9 Month Day, 2019 - Month Day, 2020 4001 10 Month Day, 2020 - Month Day, 2020

The Award Fee periods may be changed at the unilateral discretion of the Government.

SECTION 3: AWARD FEE POOL ALLOCATION FORMULA

3.1 Maximum Award Fee

The maximum Award Fee Pool for Contract # (insert #) over the life of the Contract is $ (insert maximum AF pool from award document).

The maximum Award Fee Pool Allocation determined for each period shall never exceed the matching proportional amount of Award Fee listed in Contract Section B CLIN for the applicable period of performance.

3.2 Allowable Award Fee Pool Allocation Methods

There two methods to determine the maximum Award Fee Pool Allocation for each period.

3.2.1 Planned Value

Prior to the start of an award fee evaluation period, the AFDP is incorporated into the Contract by modification, identifying in Section 4 and Section 8:

● Planned Value for the Award Fee Evaluation Period (SECTION 4).

● Cost Control Criteria (SECTION 8).

● Service Level Agreements on Cost Control encouraging reductions in cost to achieve higher award fee and/or higher return on sale (SECTION 8).

3.2.2 Incurred Cost

In the absence of a documented Planned Value, the Award Fee Pool Allocation shall be based on the incurred cost for the period. Incurred cost data shall be provided by the Contractor after the end of the Award Fee Evaluation Period, as calculated and reported by the Contractor’s approved Cost Accounting System. Invoiced cost shall not be used unless incurred cost is not available.

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 4

3.3 First Award Fee Evaluation Period

The first Award Fee Evaluation Period for all CPAF awards will default to utilizing incurred cost to determine the Award Fee Pool Allocation. Transition activities inherently introduce level of effort variation. A Planned Value cannot be determined prior to award. Subsequent award fee evaluation periods should progress towards Planned Value.

SECTION 4: AWARD FEE PLANNED VALUE / RESULTS REPORTING

4.1 Initial Award Fee Evaluation Period

The Award Fee Planned Value/Results Reporting Table is completed after the end of the first Award Fee Evaluation Period. The fields to be completed are Cost Incurred, Available Award Fee Pool Allocation, Earned Fee, and Unearned Fee.

4.2 Second and Subsequent Award Fee Evaluation Period

If the Award Fee Pool Allocation methodology is progressing from Incurred Cost to Planned Value, the Planned Value amount shall be recorded in the table below prior to the start of the section evaluation period.

The Available Award Fee Pool Allocation, Earned Fee, and Unearned Fee are completed after each award fee period to record results. If Planned Value allocation was not used, the default Cost Incurred will be reported at the end of the award fee period.

Award Fee Planned Value/Results Reporting Table Year Period Planned

Value (Estimated

Cost + Award Fee)

Cost Incurred (if Planned

Value not available)

Award Fee Pool

Allocation

Earned Award

Fee

Unearned Fee

Base Year 1 Base Year 2 Option Year 1 3 Option Year 1 4 Option Year 2 5 Option Year 2 6 Option Year 3 7 Option Year 3 8 Option Year 4 9 Option Year 4 10

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 5

Timeline for Planned Value

SECTION 5 - AWARD FEE EVALUATION RATINGS

The following table shows the Award Fee Pool Allocation percentage by scores. The definition for each rating adjective is shown in Section 3.3. (The percentages in this section are prescribed in FAR 16.401(e)(3)(iv).)

The performance categories, once graded, describe the overall customer satisfaction with the tasks’ key indicators. Contained in the ratings is a word picture of standards that allows each monitor to work from a common grading scale. (The adjectival ratings and descriptions in this section are prescribed in FAR 16.401(e)(3)(iv). Per that section of the FAR, the Contracting Officer may choose to supplement the adjectival rating descriptions included in this section.)

EXCELLENT

Contractor has exceeded almost all of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the AFDP for the award-fee evaluation period.

VERY GOOD

Contractor has exceeded many of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the AFDP for the award-fee evaluation period.

Rating Percentage of Fee

Excellent 91%-100%

Very Good 76%-90%

Good 51%-75%

Satisfactory No Greater than 50%

Unsatisfactory 0%

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 6

GOOD

Contractor has exceeded some of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the AFDP for the award-fee evaluation period.

SATISFACTORY

Contractor has met overall, cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the AFDP for the award fee evaluation period.

UNSATISFACTORY

Contractor has failed to meet overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the AFDP for the award-fee evaluation period.

SECTION 6: ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF AWARD FEE DETERMINATION

6.1 Award Fee Determination Official (AFDO)

The AFDO is the Group Director of Data Analytics System Group (DASG). The Contracting Officer (CO) will appoint the AFDO in writing.

The AFDO's responsibilities are:

● Approve the AFDP and authorize any changes to the AFDP throughout the life of the Contract.

● Approve the members of the AFEB and appoint the AFEB Chairperson.

● Review assessments of Contractor performance. Feedback coordinated with the AFEB will be provided to the Contractor as appropriate during the evaluation period to enhance overall performance and minimize problems.

● Determine the amount of award fee the Contractor has earned based on its performance during each evaluation period.

6.2 Award Fee Evaluation Board (AFEB)

The AFEB has a Chairperson. The CO is a non-voting advisory member of the AFEB. Additional non-voting board members may be Performance Monitors as deemed appropriate by the AFEB Chairperson. The following table provides the title or role of the individuals that are members of the AFEB. Substitutions are permitted in the event of a schedule conflict, subject to approval by the AFEB Chairperson. Attendance of the non-voting members is not required to convene a board.

Board Position Title/Role Chairperson COR, CMS AFEB Voting Member Technical Lead, CMS AFEB Voting Member Technical Lead, CMS AFEB Voting Member ** Technical Lead, CMS

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 7

AFEB Voting Member ** Title/Role, CMS AFEB Voting Member Contracting Officer’s Representative AFEB Non-Voting Member Contracting Officer AFEB Non-Voting Member(s) Title/Role, CMS

** Optional seats. The AFEB Chairperson may appoint as many AFEB Voting members as desired but must have three voting members in addition to the Chairperson.

Non-voting members will participate in AFEB assessments of Performance Monitor evaluations and discussions of award fee recommendations. Additionally, non-voting members are allowed to submit written reports on Contractor performance to the AFEB for its consideration.

The responsibilities of the AFEB are:

a. Recommend to the AFDO the specific elements upon which the Contractor will be evaluated for each evaluation period.

b. Request and obtain performance information from Performance Monitors involved in observing Contractor performance.

c. Evaluate the Contractor’s performance and summarize its findings and recommendations for the AFDO.

d. Recommend to the AFDO the percentage of award fee available during an evaluation period which the Contractor should receive.

6.2.1 AFEB Chairperson

The responsibilities of the AFEB Chairperson are to:

a. Conduct AFEB meetings.

b. Resolve any inconsistencies in the AFEB evaluations.

c. Ensure AFEB recommendations to the AFDO are timely and made in accordance with the Award Fee Agreement and this Plan.

d. Ensure timely payment of award fee earned by the Contractor.

e. Recommend any changes to the AFDP to the AFDO.

f. Ensure and have overall responsibility for the proper execution of the AFDP including managing the activities of the AFEB.

g. Exerts overall responsibility for all documents and activities associated with the AFEB.

h. Maintain the award fee files, including current copy of the AFDP, any internal procedures, Performance Monitor’s reports, and any other documentation having a bearing on the AFDO’s award fee decisions.

6.2.2 Performance Monitors

Government and Contract support personnel will be identified by the AFEB Chairperson as Performance Monitors to aid the AFEB in making its recommendation for award fee. Performance

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 8

Monitors (responsible for the technical administration of specific tasks issued under the Contract) document the Contractor’s performance against evaluation criteria in their assigned evaluation areas(s). The primary responsibilities of the Performance Monitors include:

● Monitoring, evaluating, and assessing Contractor performance in assigned areas.

● Preparing evaluation reports (scorecards) that ensure a fair and accurate portrayal of the

Contractor’s performance.

● Recommending changes to the AFDP to the AFEB Chairperson.

These Performance Monitors will submit written reports, as required by the AFEB Chairperson, on the Contractor’s performance to the AFEB for consideration. Submission of their reports will be coordinated through the AFEB Chairperson. Procedures and instructions for the Performance Monitors regarding midterm and final evaluations are provided below. The final report will be comprehensive and will be completed and submitted to the AFEB Chairperson in a timely manner.

SECTION 7: AWARD FEE DETERMINATION PROCESS

The Contractor begins each evaluation period with zero percent of the available award fee and works up to the earned award fee based on performance during the evaluation period.

7.1 Monitoring and Assessing Performance

The AFEB Chairperson will assign Performance Monitors for the major performance areas. The Performance Monitors will be selected on the basis of their expertise in the prescribed performance areas and/or their association with specific technical tasks. The AFEB Chairperson may assign and change Performance Monitors assignments at any time without notice to the Contractor. The AFEB Chairperson will ensure that each Monitor and board member has copies of the Contract and all modifications, a copy of this Plan, and all changes and specific instructions for assigned areas.

Performance Monitors will conduct assessments of the Contractor performance in their assigned areas. Feedback coordinated with the AFEB Chairperson will be provided to the Contractor as appropriate during the evaluation period to enhance overall performance and minimize problems.

7.1.1 Instructions for Performance Monitors

Performance Monitors will maintain a periodic written record of the Contractor’s performance, including inputs from other Government personnel, in the evaluation areas of responsibility.

Performance Monitors will retain informal records used to prepare evaluation reports for 12 months after the completion of an evaluation period to support any inquires made by the AFDO.

Performance Monitors will conduct assessments in an open, objective, and cooperative spirit, so that a fair and accurate evaluation is made. Performance Monitors will make every effort to be consistent from period to period in their approach to determine recommended ratings. Positive accomplishments should be emphasized just as readily as negative ones.

a. Performance Monitor Evaluation Reports. Performance Monitors will prepare midterm and final evaluation reports for each evaluation period during which they are Performance Monitors. The final reports will be more comprehensive. The reports, as a minimum, contain the following information:

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 9

1. The criteria and methods used to evaluate the Contractor’s performance during the evaluation period.

2. The technical, economic, and schedule environment under which the Contractor was required to perform. What effect did the environment have on the Contractor’s performance?

3. The Contractor’s major strengths and weaknesses during the evaluation period. Give examples of the Contractor performance for each strength and weakness listed. Also provide the reference in the specification, statement of work, data requirement, Contract, etc. that relates to each strength or weakness.

4. A recommended rating for the evaluation period using the adjectives and their definitions set forth in this AFDP. Provide concrete examples of the Contractor’s performance to support the recommended rating.

7.2 Exclusions

Throughout the entire evaluation period, the Contractor shall present and document any exclusion to the period of performance, due to circumstances beyond the control of the Contractor, to the AFEB Chairperson within 10 days of the end of the Award Fee Period. The Performance Monitors should present the exclusions (if any) to the AFEB. If necessary, the AFEB will ask the Contractor to present its case. The AFEB, in conjunction with the CO, will make a unilateral decision as to the exclusion from the evaluation.

7.3 Contractor Monthly Performance Reports

The Contractor shall prepare Monthly Performance Reports that contain data that can be used to compare against the Performance Standards stated in this AFDP. All Performance Reports, including the raw data, shall be provided to the designated Performance Monitors.

Performance Monitors will collect the Monthly Performance Reports from the Contractor, which they will review and analyze for accuracy and, if required, provide an oral or written summary to the AFEB.

7.4 Midterm Evaluation Procedures

The purpose of the midterm evaluation is to provide the Contractor a quick, concise, interim Government review of Contractor performance, and provide the Contractor an opportunity to improve its performance prior to the determination of award fee earned at the end of the evaluation period. No award fee is paid based on midterm evaluations.

7.5 Final Evaluation Reports

The Performance Monitors will provide evaluations for the entire six-month evaluation period.

Performance Monitors will submit final evaluation reports after the end date of the evaluation period to the AFEB Chairperson.

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 10

7.6 Contractor Self Evaluation Presentation

The Contractor may prepare a written self-evaluation against the AFDP, along with the option of presenting the results to the AFEB upon request. This presentation shall last no longer than one hour. If necessary, a subsequent question-and-answer session is permissible.

7.7 AFEB Meeting and Memorandum to the AFDO

The AFEB, after receipt of the Contractor's self-evaluation, will meet and evaluate all performance information it has obtained. The AFEB will review the Performance Monitors’ reports and prepare an Award Fee Evaluation Report. The Report will be a memorandum to the AFDO with the AFEB’s recommendation.

7.8 AFEB Final Report

After meeting with the Contractor, the AFEB will finalize the report and present it to the AFDO.

The report will recommend the award fee amount and any unresolved Contractor issues to the

AFDO.

7.9 Issuing Award Fee Determination Report

The AFDO will consider the final AFEB report and ensure compliance with the AFDP. The AFDO may accept, reject, or modify the AFEB recommendation. The AFDO will make the final determination of the award fee earned during the period. The AFDO’s determination of the amount of award fee earned and the basis of the determination will be stated in an Award Fee Determination Report and forwarded to the CO for the Contract file via modification.

7.10 Award Fee Determination Notice

The CO will prepare this notice to the Contractor stating the amount of the award fee earned for the evaluation period. The Contractor shall invoice after accepting the modification including the award fee determination and any corresponding deobligation of unearned fee.

7.11 Failure to Conduct Timely Award Fee Determinations

If the Government fails to complete the Award Fee Determination within three calendar months of the end of the Award Fee Evaluation Period for two separate periods, the Government will convert the Cost-Plus-Award-Fee CLINs for the remaining periods of performance to Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee.

The Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee type will be term. The fixed fee amount will be the same percentage as negotiated for award fee (limited by the statutory limit of 10 percent).

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 11

SECTION 8: EVALUATION CRITERIA AND WEIGHTS

The AFDP consists of award fee provisions for three distinct areas. The award fee areas are broken down as follows:

25% Financial 25% Program Management 50% Technical Performance

100% t Total

The criteria and weights provided above and discussed in detail below are guidelines to be used in evaluating these areas to determine the appropriate award fee. The criteria and relative percentages may be adjusted for subsequent award fee periods. Members of the AFEB and working group will use the following examples of criteria to evaluate the Contractor’s performance during each award fee evaluation period.

Service Level Agreements (SLAs) and other subjective criteria may be revised for subsequent award fee periods. Those future SLAs will be developed jointly by the Contractor and Government and may replace some or all of the criteria listed below. The Government has the final say as to what SLAs will be incorporated.

8.1 Criteria 1: Financial – 25%

The objective of this award fee provision is to provide the incentive for the contractor to achieve optimum cost effectiveness during the performance of all Contract requirements and objectives.

• Does the contractor stay within Task and CLIN budgets and contract ceilings?

• Does the contractor submit timely and accurate invoices?

• Does the contractor submit timely and accurate financial status reports, cost estimates, and other financial documents and cost data as required?

• Are the cost variances within 10 percent for Development, Modernization, and

Enhancement (DM&E) projects in the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)?

• Does the contractor minimize costs variance for Steady State (SS)/Maintenance projects?

• Does the contractor minimize overhead costs associated with managing the contract?

• Does the contractor reduce costs by finding and implementing technical, program, or other efficiencies?

• Does the contractor provide for transparency of costs when interacting with authorized

Government stakeholders?

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 12

8.2 Criteria 2: Program Management – 25%

The objective of the award fee provision is to provide an incentive to the contractor to achieve optimum management performance of the Contract requirements and objectives. The evaluation of Program Management performance is a subjective, qualitative factor.

• Does the contractor execute transition activities with minimal disruption in service or customer complaints (evaluated only during transition period(s))?

• Are the key personnel effectively leading and guiding the work of staff members (e.g.

resource pooling, implementation of standard processes, effective internal communications, effective skills mix, etc.)?

• Does the contractor adhere to and execute CMS procedures for change and configuration control?

• How effectively does the contractor provide interim solutions to meet business due dates or mitigate emergencies?

• Does the contractor identify problem areas and present opportunities for improvement?

• Does the contractor propose signature-ready solutions to business and technical problems that are in alignment with CMS enterprise architecture?

• Does the contractor foresee risks and take steps to reduce, mitigate or prevent risks to operations continuity?

• Does the contractor effectively manage day-to-day activities as well as short-term surge projects?

• Does the contractor effectively manage inter-relationships between Contract functional requirements (i.e. UPIC, ZPIC, PSCs, MACs, CMS, Modeling Contractor (s))

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 13

8.3 Criteria 3: Technical Performance – 50%

The objective of this award fee provision is to provide the incentive for the contractor to achieve optimum technical performance of Contract requirements and objectives. This is a combination of subjective and objective (SLAs) evaluation criteria.

• Does the contractor exceed production system performance and availability requirements/metrics according to the Service Level Agreement (SLA)?

• Are deliverables (including maintenance updates or other changes) timely, accurate, and complete?

• Does the contractor effectively document, manage and implement business requirements?

• Are contractor solutions fully-functional and effective for stakeholders?

• Are end-users trained on newly deployed functionality and in areas of frequent concern?

• Does the contractor provide efficient restart and recovery of business systems?

• Does the Contractor plan, manage, execute software deployment activities within the timeframe outlined in the project plan

• System continually meets CMS 508 compliant per CMS guidelines

• Is the contractor documenting and providing reports to the Government on recurring problems, including recommendations for resolution and targets for improvements within a timely manner.

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 14

APPENDIX 1: SLA’s

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 15

APPENDIX 2: AFEB Summary Evaluation Report

Date:

AFEB Chairperson Name:

Award Fee Period: from __________ to __________ (Attach additional pages, supporting data, etc. as needed.)

Criteria 1: Rating Adjective/Performance Points

Discussion:

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Criteria 2: Rating Adjective/Performance Points

Criteria 3: Rating Adjective/Performance Points

Award fee rating recommended for this evaluation criteria and period of performance with recommended percentage earned.

AFB Chairperson Signature: ________________________________

This information has not been publicly disclosed and may be privileged and confidential.

It is for internal government use only and must not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive the information. Unauthorized disclosure may result in prosecution to the full extent of the law. Page 16

APPENDIX 3: AFEB Evaluator's Report

Instructions: Evaluators are requested to use bulletized format for submitting strengths, weaknesses and recommendations. Also, evaluators are encouraged to attach additional sheets, supporting data, etc. for the final report.

Date:

Evaluator Name and Title:

Award Fee Period: from __________ to __________ Evaluator’s Primary Task Area(s) (check all that apply):

Financial Program Management Technical Performance

Note: Evaluators are NOT limited to evaluating only their own task areas. Experiences in other areas should also be evaluated. However, please indicate in the boxes above your primary area(s) of responsibility.

Special Circumstances during this period and their impact:

Strengths of the Contractor’s performance:

Weaknesses in the Contractor’s performance (with examples and contract references):

Impact of the Contractor’s performance on execution of the program:

Corrective actions recommended, if any:

Award fee rating recommended for this evaluation criteria and period of performance (with supporting examples):

Evaluator Signature: ________________________________