E_Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ).pdf

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

NextSTEP-3 Appendix E Attachment E: Past Performance Questionnaire

For Official Use Only Page 1 of 7

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. We depend 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.

Our areas of interest regarding the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. To meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than June 15, 2026. This schedule will allow us 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 Jennifer George at msfc-nexus@mail.nasa.gov. Your complete questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated, and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this Source Selection.

Signature, Jennifer George, MSFC/PS50 Procuring Contracting Officer

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:msfc-nexus@mail.nasa.gov

For Official Use Only Page 2 of 7

Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Contractor (Company/Division):

B. Contractor Cage Code:

C. Contract Number:

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 7

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:

F. Other suggested points of contact:

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 contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual 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 contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the

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

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

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

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

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.

For Official Use Only Page 4 of 7

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?

T4. Was the contractor’s System Engineering Process adequately reflected in their analyses 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.

Program Management E V S M U N/A

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

For Official Use Only Page 5 of 7

Program Management E V S M U N/A

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 term?

P3. How timely and effectively did the contractor resolve contract 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??

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?

For Official Use Only Page 6 of 7

Program Management E V S M U N/A

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/A

C1. How accurately did the contractor forecast contract costs?

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

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).

For Official Use Only Page 7 of 7

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.

April 7, 2026

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

E-Mail to: Jennifer George, Contracting Officer at msfc-nexus@mail.nasa.gov and Jennifer.George@nasa.gov mailto:msfc-nexus@mail.nasa.gov mailto:Jennifer.George@nasa.gov