Exhibit 1 - Past Perfromance Questionnaire NSROC IV.pdf

PDF 84 KB Posted

Attached to
NASA Sounding Rocket Operations Contract (NSROC) IV - FINAL Request for Proposal Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
80GSFC21R0037
Issued by
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Center

About this file

This document includes a past performance questionnaire and information on the NASA Sounding Rocket Operations Contract (NSROC) IV solicitation. The past performance questionnaire requests a reference to evaluate a contractor's performance on elements including management, safety, quality, schedule, cost and business management. It will be used to assess offerors' past performance on relevant contracts.

The NSROC IV solicitation seeks proposals to operate and maintain government-owned facilities at NASA's Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia and White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico for sounding rocket operations. Services include conducting launches from multiple sites and remote campaigns. Offerors are invited to comment on all aspects of the draft solicitation by June 1st, including requirements, schedules, proposal instructions, evaluation approaches, and any risks. Comments on areas like unnecessary requirements, the CLIN structure, Representative Task Order clarity and pricing, and evaluation criteria are encouraged.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to NASA Sounding Rocket Operations Contract (NSROC) IV - FINAL Request for Proposal, newest first.
File Type Posted
Attachment F - Direct Labor Rates Indirect Rates Fee Matrices 04-20-22.pdf PDF
Enclosure 2 - Phase-in SOW - 04-20-22.pdf PDF
Attachment B Part 3 - Ordnance and Vehicle Hardware.pdf PDF
Attachment C4 - NM WD2015-5461 Grant-Hidalgo-Luna-Sierra Counties 12-27-21.pdf PDF
Attahcment M - Contract Historical Data.pdf PDF
NSROC IV Security Classification DD254.pdf PDF
Attachment T - Contractor Proposed Enhancements.pdf PDF
Enclosure 11 (DRAFT Performance Evaluation Plan).pdf PDF
Attachment C3 - NM WD2015-5447 Dona Ana County 12-27-21.pdf PDF
Attachment C5 - AK WD2015-5683 Fairbanks North 12-27-21.pdf PDF
Attachment F - Rates and Fee Matrices.pdf PDF
Attachment S - IT Security Applicable Docs.pdf PDF
Enclosure 1 (Top Program Technical Challenges).pdf PDF
Enclosure 3 (Supplemental Safety Health and Environmental).pdf PDF
Enclosure 5 (RTO 1).pdf PDF
Enclosure 6 (RTO 2).pdf PDF
Enclosure 9 IT Security Management Plan Template.pdf PDF
Exhibit B Question and Response Format.pdf PDF
Request for Proposal - 80GSFC21R0037 DRFP to RFP Changes.pdf PDF
Attachment B Part 1 - Equipment Inventory.pdf PDF
Attachment B Part 2 - Stock Inventory March 2022.pdf PDF
Attachment C1 - VA WD2015-4327 Accomack-Northampton Counties 12-27-21.pdf PDF
NSROC IV DRFP Questions and Government Responses (FINAL).pdf PDF
Attachment C.5 - NM 2015-5461 Grant_Hidalgo_Luna_Sierra.txt TXT text file
Attachment C.6 - TX 2015-5805 Culberson.txt TXT text file
Enclosure 2 (Phase-in SOW).pdf PDF
Enclosure 3 (Supplemental Safety Health and Environmental Information).pdf PDF
Enclosure 11 (DRAFT Performance Evaluation Plan).pdf PDF
Attachment T - Contractor Proposed Enhancements.pdf PDF
Attachment A - NSROC IV SOW.pdf PDF
Attachment B Part 2 - Stock Inventory May 2021-1.pdf PDF
Attachment N - PIV Card Issuance Procedures.pdf PDF
Enclosure 1 (Top Program Technical Challenges).pdf PDF
Enclosure 8b (RTO Cost Exhibits).pdf PDF
Draft Request for Proposal - 80GSFC21R0037 (UPDATE).pdf PDF
Attachment B Part 1 - Equipment Inventory May 2021.pdf PDF
Attachment C.2 - VA 2015-4327 Accomack_Northampton.txt TXT text file
Attachment C.3 - NM 2015-5455 Chaves_Eddy_Lincoln_Otero.txt TXT text file
Attachment C.7 - TX 2015-5229 El Paso_Hudspeth.txt TXT text file
Attachment E - Financial Management Reporting Requirements - DRFP Final.pdf PDF
Attachment F - Direct Labor Rates Indirect Rates Fee Matrices.pdf PDF
Attachment K - NSROC IV WBS and WBS Dictionary - DRFP Final.pdf PDF
Attahcment M - Contract Historical Data.pdf PDF
Attachment O - NSROC IV Security Classification DD254.pdf PDF
Attachment P - Applicable Standards and Policies - DRFP Final 07072021.pdf PDF
Enclosure 4 (SRPO Technology Roadmap June 2021).pdf PDF
Enclosure 7 (Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan).pdf PDF
Enclosure 8a (CORE Cost Exhibits).pdf PDF
Enclosure 9 (IT Security Management Plan Template).pdf PDF
Enclosure 10 (NSROC Historical Data October 2021).pdf PDF
Show all 50

NASA Sounding Rocket Operations Contract (NSROC) IV - FINAL Request for Proposal has more files on GovTribe.

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTIONS

(Updated MAY, 2018)

Sections 1-3 provide for contract-related descriptive information and identification of the evaluator.

Section 4 lists the major work elements within our Statement of Work (SOW). Please provide your assessment of the “relevant experience” and “performance” associated with our SOW evidenced within the contract for which you are a reference. “Experience” means a contractor who has performed work in the specific SOW Element. “Did not Perform” means that the specific SOW element was not performed under the contract.

Section 5 evaluates the contractor’s technical, schedule, and cost performance and management. (Additional pages may be used for comments if desired). If you cannot answer any questions, please circle “N/R” for Not Rated.

The following definitions are offered for your use in assigning a performance rating for each of the factors in Sections 5 and 6:

Very High

(VH)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance is of exceptional merit;

indicating exemplary performance in a timely, efficient, and economical manner; very minor (if any) problems with no adverse effect on overall performance.

High

(H)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance demonstrates very effective performance that would be fully responsive to contract requirements with contract requirements accomplished in a timely, efficient, and economical manner for the most part with only minor problems with little identifiable effect on overall performance.

Moderate

(M)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance demonstrates effective performance; fully responsive to contract requirements; reportable problems, but with little identifiable effect on overall performance.

Low

(L)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance meets or slightly exceeds minimum acceptable standards; adequate results; reportable problems with identifiable, but not substantial, effects on overall performance.

Very Low

(VL)

The Offeror’s relevant past performance does not meet minimum acceptable standards in one or more areas; remedial action required in one or more areas; problems in one or more areas which, adversely affect overall performance.

N/R Not Rated

Section 6 provides for evaluation of the contractor’s management of cost and award/incentive fee history.

RETURN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE ELECTRONICALLY TO: Colin R. Bornmann, Contracting Officer BY TBD. colin.bornmann@nasa.gov

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Contract Information

A. Name of Company/Division Being Evaluated:_____________________

B. Address:_____________________________________________

C. Contractor Cage Code and/or DUNS number

D. Contract Number:_______________________________________

E. Contract Type:_________________________________________

F. Period of Performance (including options): From:______ To:_______

G. Total Contract Value:_____________________________________

H. Award Information: Competitive: Yes___ No___ Basis of Selection: Technical___ Cost/Price___ Other (specify)_________________________

2. Description of Contract

Briefly describe the services provided under this contract:

During the contract performance being evaluated, this firm was the:

Prime Contractor____ Significant Subcontractor ____ Team Member ____ Other (describe)____________________________________________

Does a corporate or business relationship exist between the firm being evaluated and your organization?

Yes ___ No ___. If yes, please describe: ___________________________

3. Evaluator Information

Name: _____________________________________________________ Title: _______________________________________________________ Agency/Company: ____________________________________________ E-mail Address: _______________________________________________ Phone: ______________ Date Questionnaire Completed: _____________ Role in Program/Contract: ______________________________________ Length of Involvement in this Program/ Contract: _____________________

This form contains Source Selection Information when completed. See FAR 3.104. 3

4. SOW Survey Relevance Ratings: Please check the appropriate blocks for Relevance (Performed or Did Not Perform)

SOW ELEMENT

PERFORMED

DID NOT

PERFORM

Management and Administration

Program Management (SOW 2.1.2)

Human Capital Management (SOW 2.1.2.1)

Planning and Scheduling (SOW 2.1.2.2)

Government Property (SOW 2.1.3.2

Safety Program (2.1.3.6)

Risk Management (SOW 2.1.3.9)

Mission Task Orders

Design Phase (SOW 3.1.2)

Flight Hardware and GSE Fabrication (SOW 3.1.3.1)

Integration, Testing, and Flight Qualification (SOW 3.1.3.3)

This form contains Source Selection Information when completed. See FAR 3.104. 4

5. General Performance Survey

NO PERFORMANCE QUESTIONS

PERFORMANCE RATING

(Please Circle)

QUALITY

1. Quality of services and support provided VH H M L VL N/R

2. Timely identification and mitigation of risks VH H M L VL N/R

3.

Ability to identify and correct performance deficiencies in a timely manner

VH H M L VL N/R

4.

Demonstrated understanding and compliance with mission safety requirements

VH H M L VL N/R

Comment:

SCHEDULE

5.

Timeliness, quality, and accuracy of schedule estimates and reporting

6. Ability to meet/exceed schedule milestones VH H M L VL N/R

COST

7.

Ability to establish realistic cost estimates and adhere to estimated costs

VH H M L VL N/R

8.

Ability to anticipate, identify and control cost growth.

BUSINESS/MANAGEMENT

9.

Communicating/interfacing with Government and overall responsiveness to Government requests

VH H M L VL N/R

10.

Ability to effectively manage the contract including subcontractor performance, if applicable

VH H M L VL N/R

11.

Ability to recruit and retain highly skilled personnel, including ability to fill key vacancies in a timely manner.

VH H M L VL N/R

12.

Adequacy of Contractor’s system(s) for processing task orders and/or changes.

VH H M L VL N/R

13.

Ability to meet Small Business Subcontracting Plan Goals

This form contains Source Selection Information when completed. See FAR 3.104. 5

Section 6:

What is the Contract Value:

Initial Value Current Value Estimated Cost: $___________ $____________

Fee: $___________ $____________

Total Value: $___________ $_____________

What are the total contract expenditures to date (cost/fees to date based on invoices, reports, etc)?

What is the Annual Contract Value to Date (The current contract expenditures to date divided by the number of years of performance to date)?

For example (note, these example numbers may not relate to this specific procurement):

Assume your contract is a current five year contract, is still ongoing, and the latest cost report reflects a cost/fee of $43,500,000 through the first 2 years and 4 months (to date). In this example, current/total Contract Expenditures incurred to Date are $43,500,000 and associated period of performance for those expenditures, expressed in years, is 2.33 years.

Therefore, the Average Annual Cost/Fee Incurred to Date: $18,669,528 ($43,500,000/2.33 years)

Was there a cost overrun? ( ) Yes ( ) No If yes, please explain:

If this was an award fee contract, what are the individual and/or average ratings of performance by your organization? Please attach any available award fee letters or database entries.

Please comment on particularly strong/weak points of Contractor’s performance (technical, schedule, and/or cost). If the Overall Contract Performance Rating below is less than Very High, please provide some explanation in this section on why a higher rating was not provided.

Overall Contract Performance Rating (circle one)

Very High High Moderate Low Very Low

If less than Very High Performance Rating, please explain:

This form contains Source Selection Information when completed. See FAR 3.104. 6

Please add any other comments you may feel are pertinent.

Rater’s Signature Date

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .