Attachment 5 - Past Performance Questionnaire Final.pdf

Controlled Unclassified Information

When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

FA252124R0008, Section L, Attachment 5: Past Performance Questionnaire – Sample 1

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 1 of 6

The 45th Contracting Squadron of the Patrick Space Force Base and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station are in the process of competitively selecting a source for a Simplified Acquisition for Base Engineering Requirements program.

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. Request your written response no later than 10 calendar days before the proposal due date. To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire will be filled out electronically and e-mailed to john.porter.23@spaceforce.mil, patricia.bates@spaceforce.mil, & gage.belyeu.2@spaceforce.mil. Your completed 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.

Patricia A. Bates

Contracting Officer 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:john.porter.23@spaceforce.mil mailto:patricia.bates@spaceforce.mil mailto:gage.belyeu.2@spaceforce.mil

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 2 of 6

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

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 Commands):

Section 3: Respondent Identification

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 3 of 6

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.

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 4 of 6

Note: The following are SAMPLE questions. Past Performance evaluation teams MUST construct a simple and concise Past Performance Questionnaire, tailored to seek out key information tied to the significant aspects of the planned acquisition. Avoid questions that can be answered with a “yes” or “no” but instead include probing and direct questions to draw out the required information desired.

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)?

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

P2. How reasonable and cooperative was the contractor when dealing with program staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)?

P3. How timely and effectively did the contractor resolve contract problems without extensive customer guidance?

P4. How well did the contractor understand/comply with customer objectives and technical requirements?

P5. How successfully did the contractor respond to emergency and/or surge situations?

P6. How well did the contractor manage quality/effectiveness of subcontracted efforts?

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 5 of 6

E V S M U N/A

P7. How effective was the contractor’s material management (including

Government Furnished Property or Material)?

P8. How effective was the contractor’s acquisition management?

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?

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).

SECTION 5: GENERAL COMMENT

Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I

[ click and select an item ] award to them today given a choice.

REMARKS:

Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 6 of 6

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

Mailing Address:

E-Mail to: