Attachment 17 Draft 96 CTG Self-Scoring Matrix.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 304 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Technical Management Advisory Services (TMAS) 2 Draft FOPR UPDATED Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA2486-20-XXX
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 19
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
Self Score Sheet
| TMAS 2 96 CTG |
| SOLICITATION # FA2486-20-F-1001 |
| ATTACHMENT 17 |
| DRAFT SELF-SCORING MATRIX |
| OFFEROR NAME: [FILL IN OFFEROR NAME HERE] |
| Note: See Attachment 05, Evaluation Criteria, for Additional Information |
| Note: Offerors only fill in the orange shaded blocks throughout |
| Eval Criteria Section | Category | Max Count | Offeror's Position/Location Total | Points Per Position/ Location (1,000 Points/Max Count) | Weight Factor | Max. Possible Points | Offeror's Self-Score | Offeror's Weighted Self-Score |
| 3.1 | General | |||||||
| 3.1.1 | Number of total positions. (max CME count) | 400 | 2.50 | 5 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.1.2 | Number of geographically separated work locations supported with at least 10 CMEs each. (max location count) | 7 | 142.86 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.1.3 | Number of incumbent positions transitioned in a 90 day span. | 400 | 2.50 | 5 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.1.4 | Number of non-incumbent Cybersecurity Engineering Support positions hired in a 30 day span. | 10 | 50.00 | 5 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.1.5 | Number of personnel supporting programs requiring an adjudicated, current non-critical sensitive investigation (secret)/Tier 3 Investigation or above. (max positions) | 400 | 2.50 | 5 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.1.6 | Financial stability - ability to cover up to three months of base year cost. truncate decimals--e.g. enter 22.6 percent as "22" | 25 | 40.00 | 3 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.1.7 | Business Structure Efficiency: Direct Labor Cost / (Overheads and G&A) **Exclude Fringe from Overhead pool** see Business_Efficiency Tabs | 1 | 1000.00 | 5 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.2 | Technical | ||||||
| 3.2.1 | Number of Contracts/TOs providing C4ISR systems support in aircraft and/or inter-connected system-of-systems (SoS) across the full Battlespace Arena and Kill-Chain. (max count = 5) Min CMEs = 125 | 5 | 200.00 | 5 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.2.2 | Number of Contracts/TOs providing functional testing for ground/airborne sensors and/or electronic warfare. (max count = 5) Min CMEs = 50 | 5 | 200.00 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.2.3 | Number of Contracts/TOs providing functional testing of offensive and defensive cyber warfare programs. (max count = 5) Min CMEs = 50 | 5 | 200.00 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.2.4 | Number of Contracts/TOs providing Cybersecurity compliance testing. (max count = 5) Min CMEs = 50 | 5 | 200.00 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.2.5 | Number of Contracts/TOs providing Cybersecurity IT penetration testing. (max count = 5) Min CMEs = 20 | 5 | 200.00 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.2.6 | Number of Contracts/TOs providing Cybersecurity non-traditional (avionics and embedded systems) penetration testing. (max count = 5) Min CMEs = 50 | 5 | 200.00 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.2.7 | Number of Contracts/TOs providing Mission Planning testing for aircraft. (max count = 5) Min CMEs = 100 | 5 | 200.00 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.2.8 | Number of Contracts/TOs providing Data Links developmental test support. (max count = 5) Min CMEs = 75 | 5 | 200.00 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.2.9 | Number of Contracts/TOs providing Space situational awareness developmental test support. (max count = 5) Min CMEs = 20 | 5 | 200.00 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 |
| Eval Criteria Section | Category | 1000 Points | 750 Points | 500 Points | 0 Points | -500 Points | -1000 Points | Weight Factor | Max. Possible Points | Offeror's Self-Score |
| 3.3 | DSS Vunerability Rating | |||||||||
| 3.3.1 | Most recent DSS vulnerability assessment | Superior | Commendable | Satisfactory | No Current Rating Available | Marginal | Unsatisfactory | 1 | 1,000 | 1,000 |
| Eval Criteria Section | Category | Percentage of CPAR Ratings (Cannot Exceed 100.00% in Total) | Points for Each Rating | Weight Factor | Max Possible Points | Offeror's Self-Score | Offeror's Weighted Self-Score |
| 3.4 | Work Sample CPAR Ratings | ||||||
| 3.4.1 | CPAR categories rated "exceptional" over last 5 years | 85.00% | 1,000 | 18 | 18,000 | 850 | 15,300 |
| 3.4.2 | CPAR categories rated "very good" over last 5 years | 10.00% | 900 | 18 | 16,200 | 90 | 1,620 |
| 3.4.3 | CPAR categories rated "satisfactory" over last 5 years | 5.00% | 800 | 18 | 14,400 | 40 | 720 |
| 3.4.4 | CPAR categories rated "marginal" over last 5 years | (250) | 18 | (4,500) | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.4.5 | CPAR categories rated "unsatisfactory" over last 5 years | (1,000) | 18 | (18,000) | 0 | 0 |
Totals 100.00% 18,000 980 17,640
| Maximum Total Score | 88,000 |
| Offeror's Total Self-Score | 18,640 |
Business_Efficiency
| Fill in | cells. Formulas will carry out remaining calculations resulting in "Offeror's Weighted Self-Score" | ||||||||
| WORK SAMPLE #1 | WORK SAMPLE #2 | ||||||||
| Cost Element | TOTAL | Cost Element | TOTAL | Cost Element | COMBINED TOTAL | COMBINED APPLICABLE OVERHEADS | Calculated Efficiency | ||
| Labor Hours | - 0 | Labor Hours | - 0 | Direct Labor: | $ - 0 | Direct Labor: | $ - 0 | 0.00% | |
| Labor Dollars | $ - 0 | Labor Dollars | $ - 0 | Labor O/H: | $ - 0 | Indirect Labor: | $ - 0 | ||
| Fringe | $ - 0 | Fringe | $ - 0 | Fringe: | $ - 0 | Labor Cost (minus Fringe): | $ - 0 | ||
| Labor O/H | $ - 0 | Labor O/H | $ - 0 | Labor G&A: | $ - 0 | ||||
| Material | $ - 0 | Material | $ - 0 | Labor Cost: | $ - 0 | ||||
| Subcontracts | $ - 0 | Subcontracts | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Material O/H | $ - 0 | Material O/H | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Other O/H | $ - 0 | Other O/H | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Travel | $ - 0 | Travel | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Other ODCs | $ - 0 | Other ODCs | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Labor G&A | $ - 0 | Labor G&A | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Other G&A | $ - 0 | Other G&A | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Cost | $ - 0 | Cost | $ - 0 | ||||||
| FCCOM | $ - 0 | FCCOM | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Profit | $ - 0 | Profit | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Price | $ - 0 | Price | $ - 0 |
| Points Per Position/ Location (1,000 Points/Max Count) | Weight Factor | Max. Possible Points | Offeror's Self-Score | Offeror's Weighted Self-Score |
| 0 | 5 | 5,000 | - 0 | 0 |
Business_Efficiency EXAMPLE
| Fill in | cells. Formulas will carry out remaining calculations resulting in "Offeror's Weighted Self-Score" | ||||||||
| WORK SAMPLE #1 | WORK SAMPLE #2 | ||||||||
| Cost Element | TOTAL | Cost Element | TOTAL | Cost Element | COMBINED TOTAL | COMBINED APPLICABLE OVERHEADS | Calculated Efficiency | ||
| Labor Hours | 19,765 | Labor Hours | 19,765 | Direct Labor: | $ 2,274,886 | Direct Labor: | $ 2,274,886 | 89.60% | |
| Labor Dollars | $ 1,137,443 | Labor Dollars | $ 1,137,443 | Labor O/H: | $ 1,776,518 | Indirect Labor: | $ 2,538,978 | ||
| Fringe | $ 733,655 | Fringe | $ 733,655 | Fringe: | $ 1,467,310 | Labor Cost (minus Fringe): | $ 4,813,864 | ||
| Labor O/H | $ 888,259 | Labor O/H | $ 888,259 | Labor G&A: | $ 762,460 | ||||
| Material | $ 134,123 | Material | $ 134,123 | Labor Cost: | $ 6,281,174 | ||||
| Subcontracts | $ - 0 | Subcontracts | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Material O/H | $ 1,749 | Material O/H | $ 1,749 | ||||||
| Other O/H | $ 477,133 | Other O/H | $ 477,133 | ||||||
| Travel | $ 41,978 | Travel | $ 41,978 | ||||||
| Other ODCs | $ 83,424 | Other ODCs | $ 83,424 | ||||||
| Labor G&A | $ 381,230 | Labor G&A | $ 381,230 | ||||||
| Other G&A | $ - 0 | Other G&A | $ - 0 | ||||||
| Cost | $ 3,878,994 | Cost | $ 3,878,994 | ||||||
| FCCOM | $ 36,484 | FCCOM | $ 36,484 | ||||||
| Profit | $ 391,656 | Profit | $ 391,656 | ||||||
| Price | $ 4,307,134 | Price | $ 4,307,134 |
| Points Per Position/ Location (1,000 Points/Max Count) | Weight Factor | Max. Possible Points | Offeror's Self-Score | Offeror's Weighted Self-Score |
| 896 | 5 | 5,000 | 4,480 | 4,480 |
Summation Instructions
| Instructions for Atch 09 Self Scoring Matrix FOPR 48 | |
| Tab Scoring Sheet: | The purpose of this workbook is to assist the Offeror in calculating the number of positions being utilized by work sample against some of the evaluation criteria. This will also provide additional reference points to the Government Technical team in helping better locate and validate the Offeror's substantiation of their Self-Score |
| Summation Tab | This worksheet will automatically populate the Offeror's Self Score based on the data entered on the Work Sample Sheet tabs. |
| Work Sample Sheets: | Match up the Work Samples being used based on the identifier selected in Attachment 10, Work Sample Cover Sheet, to the tabs in this workbook. Below is a sample worksheet filled out: |
| Contract/TO #: | FA9876-17-F-1234 | Enter in the Work Sample Contract/TO # |
| WS Category | Cat-1 | Select the Work Sample Category applicable to the Work Sample based on the categories listed in Attachment 05 Eval Criteria section 3.0 |
| # Geo Locations | 2 | Starting with WS 1, enter in the number of geographically separated locations (GSL) on the Contract/TO. On WS 2, enter in the number of GSLs that were not included with WS 1. Continue with WS 3, 4, and 5. |
| Each GSL can only be counted once. For example, WS 1 has GSLs of Robins AFB and Hill AFB, so a 2 would be entered. WS 2 has GSLs of Robins AFB and WPAFB, a 1 would be entered as Robins AFB was already accounted for. WS 3 has GSLs of Hill AFB, WPAFB, Tinker AFB, and Hanscom AFB, so a 2 would be entered to account for the new GSLs. |
| Criteria 3.1.1 (Point in Time): | 9/15/16 | Criteria 3.2.3 (Point in Time): | N/A | Enter in the Single Point in Time that will be used for each specific Criteria. If the work sample does not address one of the Criteria, enter N/A for the Date in Time. The sample shows for Criteria 3.1.5 the Single Point in Time used to determine the number of Positions is 15 September 2016. The sample uses a different Point in Time for Criteria 3.2.5, 15 June 2017. Criteria 3.2.4 is not covered by this sample so N/A was entered. The Point/Period in Time entered here will be checked against tte Start and End Dates entered in Columns O and P. |
| Criteria 3.1.3 (Period in Time): | 9/15/2016-11/13/2016 | Criteria 3.2.4 (Point in Time): | N/A | |
| Criteria 3.1.4 (Period in Time): | 9/15/2016-10/14/2016 | Criteria 3.2.5 (Point in Time): | 6/15/17 | |
| Criteria 3.1.5 (Point in Time): | 9/15/16 | Criteria 3.3.1 (Point in Time): | 6/15/17 | |
| Criteria 3.2.1 (Point in Time): | 9/15/16 | Criteria 3.3.2 (Point in Time): | 6/15/17 | |
| Criteria 3.2.2 (Point in Time): | 9/15/16 |
| Position Identification | Evaluation Criteria | |||||||||||||||
| UID | Name | Labor Category | 3.1.1 | 3.1.3 | 3.1.4 | 3.1.5 | 3.2.1 | 3.2.2 | 3.2.3 | 3.2.4 | 3.2.5 | 3.3.1 | 3.3.2 | Start Date | End Date or Present | Reference(s) |
| 1234.ABC.01 | Johnson, John | Program Manager | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6/1/16 | 5/30/18 | WS-1, Pgs 4, 18 | |||||||
| 1234.ABC.02 | Adams, Abigail | Systems Engineer | 1 | 1 | 6/1/16 | 4/15/17 | WS-1, Pgs 4, 26 | |||||||||
| 1234.ABC.02 | Richards, Robert | Systems Engineer | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5/1/17 | Present | WS-1, Pgs 5, 52 | |||||||
| 1234.ABC.03 | Griffin, Gail | Acquisition Logistician | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6/1/16 | Present | WS-1, Pgs 4, 28 |
| Unique Identification Number (UID): Enter in the UID used during the performance of the contract or if no UIDs were used create a UID for each unique position | |
| Name: | Enter the full name of the individual associated with the UID under Column A |
| Labor Category: | Enter in the labor category as used in the performance of the contract |
| Evaluation Category: | Put a "1" under those columns in which a position meets the requirements for each criteria. In the Sample UID 1234.ABC.01, John Johnson, applies to Categories 3.1.1, 3.1.4, 3.1.4, and 3.2.2, thus "1"s were included under those Criteria |
| Start Date: | Enter the date upon which the contractor personnel under Column B began working, not the date the UID under Column A was put on contract |
| End Date or Present: | Enter either the date upon which the contractor personnel under Column B stopped working or enter "Present" if they are still currently working under the contract |
| Reference(s): | Include the reference(s) that substantiate this position/contractor personnel within Volume II |
Summation
| FOPR # 48 - AFLCMC/WWU (F-22 Division) |
| SOLICITATION # FA8622-19-R-8138 |
| ATTACHMENT 09 |
| SELF-SCORING MATRIX |
| OFFEROR NAME: [FILL IN OFFEROR NAME HERE] |
| Note: See Attachment 05, Evaluation Criteria, for Additional Information |
| Note: Offerors only fill in the orange shaded blocks throughout |
| Eval Criteria Section | Category | Offeror's Position/Location Total | Points Per Position/ Location (1,000 Points/Max. Count) | Weight Factor | Max. Possible Points | Offeror's Self-Score | Offeror's Weighted Self-Score | Offeror's WS Rollup | WS-1 | WS-2 | WS-3 | WS-4 | WS-5 | ||||||
| 3.1 | General | ||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | 3.1.1 | Number of total positions (Max. count = 93) | 10.75 | 5 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 3.1.2 | Number of geographically separated work locations supported (Max. count = 3) | 333.33 | 1 | 1,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||
| 2 | 3.1.3 | Number of non-incumbent positions hired in a 30 day span (Max. count = 16) | 62.50 | 3 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 3 | 3.1.4 | Number of incumbent positions transitioned in a 60 day span (Max. count = 77) | 12.99 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 4 | 3.1.5 | Number of total positions supporting programs which require an adjudicated Single Scope Background Investigation (SSBI)/Tier 5 Investigation | |||||||||||||||||
| (Max. count = 93) | 10.75 | 3 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
| 3.2 | Technical | ||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | 3.2.1 | Number of positions whose primary purpose is providing A&AS support for fifth-generation fighter aircraft (Max. count = 86) | 11.63 | 5 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 6 | 3.2.2 | Number of positions whose primary purpose is providing A&AS support for low-observable non-fighter aircraft (Max. count = 86) | 11.63 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 7 | 3.2.3 | Number of positions whose primary purpose is providing A&AS support for modern fourth-generation fighter aircraft | |||||||||||||||||
| (Max. count = 86) | 11.63 | 3 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
| 8 | 3.2.4 | Number of positions whose primary purpose is providing acquisition program management A&AS support for fifth-generation fighter aircraft (Max. count = 34) | 29.41 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 9 | 3.2.5 | Number of positions whose primary purpose is providing acquisition program management A&AS support for low-observable non-fighter aircraft (Max. count = 34) | 29.41 | 3 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 10 | 3.2.6 | Number of positions whose primary purpose is providing acquisition program management A&AS support for modern fourth-generation fighter aircraft (Max. count = 34) | 29.41 | 2 | 2,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 11 | 3.2.7 | Number of positions who provide Agile acquisition A&AS support for fifth-generation fighter aircraft (Max. count = 30) | 33.33 | 5 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 12 | 3.2.8 | Number of positions who provide Agile acquisition A&AS support for low-observable non-fighter aircraft (Max. count = 30) | 33.33 | 4 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 13 | 3.2.9 | Number of positions who provide Agile acquisition A&AS support for modern fourth-generation fighter aircraft (Max. count = 30) | 33.33 | 3 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 14 | 3.2.10 | Number of positions whose primary purpose is providing security management A&AS support (Max. count = 8) | 125.00 | 3 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 15 | 3.2.11 | Number of positions whose primary purpose is providing system security engineering (SSE) A&AS support (Max. count = 4) | 250.00 | 2 | 2,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| Eval Criteria Section | Category | 1000 Points | 800 Points | 600 Points | 400 Points | 200 Points | Weight Factor | Max. Possible Points | Offeror's Self-Score | Offeror's Weighted Self-Score | Offeror's WS Rollup | WS-1 | WS-2 | WS-3 | WS-4 | WS-5 | |||
| 16 | 3.2.12 | Providing relevant avionics engineering A&AS support | DoD Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft | DoD Low-Observable Non-Fighter Aircraft | DoD Modern Fourth-Generation Fighter Aircraft | DoD Major Weapon System Aircraft | Other DoD Aircraft | 2 | 2,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| 17 | 3.2.13 | Providing relevant radar engineering A&AS support | DoD Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft | DoD Low-Observable Non-Fighter Aircraft | DoD Modern Fourth-Generation Fighter Aircraft | DoD Major Weapon System Aircraft | Other DoD Aircraft | 2 | 2,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| 18 | 3.2.14 | Providing relevant communication, navigation, and identification engineering A&AS support | DoD Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft | DoD Low-Observable Non-Fighter Aircraft | DoD Modern Fourth-Generation Fighter Aircraft | DoD Major Weapon System Aircraft | Other DoD Aircraft | 2 | 2,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| 19 | 3.2.15 | Providing relevant electronic warfare engineering A&AS support | DoD Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft | DoD Low-Observable Non-Fighter Aircraft | DoD Modern Fourth-Generation Fighter Aircraft | DoD Major Weapon System Aircraft | Other DoD Aircraft | 2 | 2,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Eval Criteria Section | Category | 1000 Points | 750 Points | 500 Points | 0 Points | -500 Points | -1000 Points | Weight Factor | Max. Possible Points | Offeror's Self-Score |
| 3.3 | DSS Vunerability Rating | |||||||||
| 3.3.1 | Most recent DSS vulnerability assessment | Superior | Commendable | Satisfactory | No Current Rating Available | Marginal | Unsatisfactory | 1 | 1,000 |
| Eval Criteria Section | Category | Percentage of CPAR Ratings (Cannot Exceed 100.00% in Total) | Points for Each Rating | Weight Factor | Max Possible Points | Offeror's Self-Score | Offeror's Weighted Self-Score |
| 3.4 | Work Sample CPAR Ratings | ||||||
| 3.4.1 | CPAR categories rated "exceptional" over last 5 years | 1,000 | 10 | 10,000 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.4.2 | CPAR categories rated "very good" over last 5 years | 750 | 10 | 7,500 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.4.3 | CPAR categories rated "satisfactory" over last 5 years | 500 | 10 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.4.4 | CPAR categories rated "not applicable" over last 5 years | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.4.5 | CPAR categories rated "marginal" over last 5 years | (500) | 10 | (5,000) | 0 | 0 | |
| 3.4.6 | CPAR categories rated "unsatisfactory" over last 5 years | (1,000) | 10 | (10,000) | 0 | 0 |
Totals 0.00% 10,000 0 0
| Maximum Total Score | 54,000 |
| Offeror's Total Self-Score | 0 |
WS-1
| Work Sample 1 |
| Contract/TO #: |
| WS Category |
| # Geo Locations |
| Criteria 3.1.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.3 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.9 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.3 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.4 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.10 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.4 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.11 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.6 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.12 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.7 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.13 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.2 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.8 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.3.1 (Point in Time): |
| Position Identification | Evaluation Criteria | Period of Performance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| UID | Name | Labor Category | 3.1.1 | 3.1.3 | 3.1.4 | 3.1.5 | 3.2.1 | 3.2.2 | 3.2.3 | 3.2.4 | 3.2.5 | 3.2.6 | 3.2.7 | 3.2.8 | 3.2.9 | 3.2.10 | 3.2.11 | 3.2.12 | 3.2.13 | 3.2.14 | 3.2.15 | Start Date | End Date or Present | Reference(s) |
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WS-2
| Work Sample 2 |
| Contract/TO #: |
| WS Category |
| # Geo Locations |
| Criteria 3.1.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.3 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.9 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.3 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.4 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.10 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.4 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.11 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.6 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.12 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.7 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.13 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.2 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.8 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.3.1 (Point in Time): |
| Position Identification | Evaluation Criteria | Period of Performance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| UID | Name | Labor Category | 3.1.1 | 3.1.3 | 3.1.4 | 3.1.5 | 3.2.1 | 3.2.2 | 3.2.3 | 3.2.4 | 3.2.5 | 3.2.6 | 3.2.7 | 3.2.8 | 3.2.9 | 3.2.10 | 3.2.11 | 3.2.12 | 3.2.13 | 3.2.14 | 3.2.15 | Start Date | End Date or Present | Reference(s) |
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WS-3
| Work Sample 3 |
| Contract/TO #: |
| WS Category |
| # Geo Locations |
| Criteria 3.1.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.3 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.9 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.3 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.4 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.10 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.4 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.11 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.6 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.12 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.7 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.13 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.2 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.8 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.3.1 (Point in Time): |
| Position Identification | Evaluation Criteria | Period of Performance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| UID | Name | Labor Category | 3.1.1 | 3.1.3 | 3.1.4 | 3.1.5 | 3.2.1 | 3.2.2 | 3.2.3 | 3.2.4 | 3.2.5 | 3.2.6 | 3.2.7 | 3.2.8 | 3.2.9 | 3.2.10 | 3.2.11 | 3.2.12 | 3.2.13 | 3.2.14 | 3.2.15 | Start Date | End Date or Present | Reference(s) |
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WS-4
| Work Sample 4 |
| Contract/TO #: |
| WS Category |
| # Geo Locations |
| Criteria 3.1.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.3 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.9 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.3 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.4 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.10 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.4 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.11 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.6 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.12 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.7 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.13 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.2 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.8 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.3.1 (Point in Time): |
| Position Identification | Evaluation Criteria | Period of Performance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| UID | Name | Labor Category | 3.1.1 | 3.1.3 | 3.1.4 | 3.1.5 | 3.2.1 | 3.2.2 | 3.2.3 | 3.2.4 | 3.2.5 | 3.2.6 | 3.2.7 | 3.2.8 | 3.2.9 | 3.2.10 | 3.2.11 | 3.2.12 | 3.2.13 | 3.2.14 | 3.2.15 | Start Date | End Date or Present | Reference(s) |
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WS-5
| Work Sample 5 |
| Contract/TO #: |
| WS Category |
| # Geo Locations |
| Criteria 3.1.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.3 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.9 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.3 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.4 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.10 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.4 (Period in Time): | Criteria 3.2.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.11 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.1.5 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.6 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.12 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.1 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.7 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.13 (Point in Time): |
| Criteria 3.2.2 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.2.8 (Point in Time): | Criteria 3.3.1 (Point in Time): |
| Position Identification | Evaluation Criteria | Period of Performance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| UID | Name | Labor Category | 3.1.1 | 3.1.3 | 3.1.4 | 3.1.5 | 3.2.1 | 3.2.2 | 3.2.3 | 3.2.4 | 3.2.5 | 3.2.6 | 3.2.7 | 3.2.8 | 3.2.9 | 3.2.10 | 3.2.11 | 3.2.12 | 3.2.13 | 3.2.14 | 3.2.15 | Start Date | End Date or Present | Reference(s) |
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .