AttachL-4_PPQ.docm

Attachment L-4 Past Performance Questionnaire

SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

Contractor: ___________________________ Contract number and/or program title: ______________________________________________________________ Period of performance: _______________________________ Contract value at award: ________________ Final/current value: ________________ Changes in contract dollar amount throughout the life of the contract are/were attributable for the most part to:

Customer issue change orders, Claims submitted by the contractor, Other customer actions, or other contract actions. Please elaborate: _________________________________________________________________ Identify the Specific Contract Elements from Section 5 of this PPQ addressed as part of this questionnaire.

Program Management AF TENCAP Information Technology Integration OT&E Space Education Training

SECTION 2: RESPONDENT INFORMATION

Evaluator’s name: _____________________________________________________________________________ Organization and/or office symbol: ________________________________________________________________ Phone number/fax number: ______________________________________________________________________ E-mail address: ________________________________________________________________________________ Dates of involvement in program/contract: __________________________________________________________ Evaluator’s role on subject contract: _______________________________________________________________

SECTION 3: DESCRIPTION OF CONTRACT EFFORT

Description (scope and magnitude) of services provided under this contract: _______________________________ THIS QUESTIONNAIRE, WHEN COMPLETED, MUST BE TREATED AS SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (FAR) 2.101 AND 3.104 AND MUST NOT BE DISCLOSED TO ANYONE OUTSIDE THE U.S. GOVERNMENT

Contractual responsibility involved the following management requirements:

Prime or subcontractor on the referenced contract? PRIME SUBCONTRACTOR

1. Management of multiple subcontractor/team members

1. Staffing with personnel that require TS/SCI clearances

1. Cost control and matrixing personnel and requirements

1. Contract type: ________________________ (firm-fixed-price, fixed-price with performance incentives, cost-plus-fixed-fee, etc.)

SECTION 4: RESPONDENT EVALUATION

For each question below, please rate the contractor’s quality of performance from unsatisfactory to exceptional (as defined below) and please provide the basis for your rating. A rating of N/A should be used if either the question is not applicable or the answer is unknown.

EXCEPTIONAL (E): Performance met contractual requirements and EXCEEDED MANY to the client’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

VERY GOOD (VG): Performance met contractual requirements and EXCEEDED SOME to the client’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

SATISFACTORY (S): Performance MET contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or was satisfactory.

MARGINAL (M): Performance DID NOT MEET SOME contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed reflected a serious problem for which the contractor has not identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear or were only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

UNSATISFACTORY (U): Performance DID NOT MEET MOST contractual requirements and recovery is not likely or was not in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contained serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

NOT APPLICABLE (N/A): Not applicable or unknown. Did not observe performance in this area.

SECTION 5: SPECIFIC CONTRACT ELEMENTS

Element I – Program Management

1.1. How well did the contractor utilize personnel/resources among various mission areas to control cost while meeting requirements?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

1.2. For the elements identified in Section I, how well did the contractor recruit and retain personnel with the required experience, education and certifications while maintaining continuity of critical positions?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A _____________________________________________________________________________________________

1.3. For the elements identified in Section I, how well did the contractor recruit and retain personnel with the required security clearances while maintaining continuity of critical positions?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A _____________________________________________________________________________________________

1.4. How well did the contractor operate, maintain, and protect a classified facility and information?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

1.5. How well did the contractor perform and integrate security disciplines (i.e. personnel, physical, industrial and information system security) into a cohesive program to safeguard classified information and equipment?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

1.6. How well did the contractor coordinate the efforts of subcontractors with customers to accomplish tasks and resolve problems?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A _____________________________________________________________________________________________

1.7. How well did the contract Program Manager meet the needs of the customer?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

Element II – Air Force Tactical Exploitation of National Capabilities (AF TENCAP)

2.1 In which Intelligence Disciplines did the contract provide service?

Check All Applicable:

Measures and Signatures Intelligence (MASINT) Communications Intelligence (COMINT) Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) Imagery Intelligence (IMINT) Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) N/A

2.2. How well did the contractor execute rapid (24 months or less) research and developmental projects in support of SIGINT, MASINT, COMINT, ELINT, and IMINT. Projects can be defined as Quick Reaction Capabilities (QRC), Joint Capabilities Technologies Demonstrations (JCTD), proof of concepts, etc. This includes managing cost, schedule, performance, and acceptance testing.

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

2.3. How well did the contractor execute rapid (24 months or less) research and developmental projects in support of ISR. Projects can be defined as QRC, JCTD, proof of concepts, etc. This includes managing cost, schedule, performance, and acceptance testing.

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

2.4. How well did the contractor execute rapid (24 months or less) research and developmental projects in support of resolving deficiencies or enhancing capabilities for United States; joint fighter, bomber, attack aircraft, munitions, etc. Projects can be defined as QRC, JCTD, proof of concepts. This includes managing cost, schedule, performance, and acceptance testing.

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

Element III – Information Technology

3.1. How was the contractor’s quality and innovation in developing technical solutions while designing new or changes to existing network capabilities? Technical solutions include definition, design, and implementation of desired network architecture (hardware/software) utilizing existing or new equipment.

Please provide example(s): U M S VG E N/A

3.2. Within established capabilities and costs, how well did the contractor respond to unexpected changes in priorities during heavy workload periods? Unexpected changes could include reconfiguration, recovery, and repair of computer equipment.

Please provide example(s): U M S VG E N/A

3.3. How well did the contractor ensure the effective and efficient day-to-day operation of networked and stand alone systems at the Unclassified, Secret and Top Secret-SCI classification levels? Day-to-day operations include trouble shooting software/hardware (repair/replace) and connectivity issues, etc.

Please provide example(s): U M S VG E N/A

3.4. How well did the contractor perform vulnerability assessments and information assurance duties? Information Assurance includes, developing and maintaining certification and accreditation package at all classified levels. Vulnerability assessments include network and system scans, updates, patches, and NOTAMs.

Please provide example(s): U M S VG E N/A

3.5. How well did the contractor integrate multiple systems of like classification as well as complying with system's security requirements? Examples of multiple systems include but are not limited to; Global Command and Control System with Processing and Display System Migration, National Wargame Simulator - Next Generation on LANs/WANs.

Please provide example(s): U M S VG E N/A

Element IV – Integration

4.1. How well did the contractor operate multiple systems across a wide area network (distributed operations)? Distributed operations include accomplishing objectives involving data, information and players, from geographical diverse locations across a joint or service centric wide area network.

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

4.2. How well did the contractor plan, design and execute modeling and simulations for exercises? Modeling and simulation tools (e.g. National Wargame Simulator - Next Generation and Missile Defense and Space Warning Tool) can involve injection of real-time operational information using computers to generate inputs, data, and displays to enable players to determine courses of action.

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

4.3. How well did the contractor support constructive/virtual exercise planning and execution, exercises can be joint or service-level such as Blue Flag, Unified Engagement and Key Resolve.

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

4.4. How well did the contractor operate Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4I) systems (i.e. Global Command and Control System (GCCS), Command and Control Personal Computers (C2PC), Portable Flight Planning System (Falcon View) and Processing and Display Subsystem Migration (PDSM)) in support of air and space operations centers (i.e. Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) and Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC)?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

Element V – Space Education & Training

6.1 At which Instructional Systems Development (ISD) levels did the contract provide instruction?

Check Applicable: Knowledge Comprehension Application Analysis Synthesis Evaluation.

6.2. How well did the contractor develop relevant course material and instruct at the various ISD levels of training?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

6.3. How well did the contractor provide qualified and effective instructors that prepare, present, and interact with students to meet course objectives?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

Element VI – Operational Test & Evaluation (OT&E)

5.1. How well did the contractor plan, execute, and report on Developmental or Operational Test and Evaluations? Planning, executing, and reporting can cover such as Critical Operation Issues (COIs), Operational Capabilities (OC), Measure of Effectiveness and Suitability's (MOE/MOS) and Measures of Performance of major and minor hardware/software upgrades to systems.

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

SECTION 6: OVERALL ASSESSMENT

1. How effectively did the contractor implement corrective actions for marginal or unsatisfactory performance?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A _____________________________________________________________________________________________

2. How well did the contractor manage, report, and control contract costs?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

3. How well did the contractor define program risk areas and implement corrective actions to mitigate the risk?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

4. How well did the contractor accurately estimate its costs?

Basis for rating: U M S VG E N/A

5. Given the opportunity, would you hire this contractor again?

Definitely Would Probably Would Might or Might Not Probably Would Not Definitely Would Not

Please explain: _____________________________________________________________________________________________