Attachment_L-2_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.docx

Attachment L-2 Past Performance Questionnaire

SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

Contractor: ___________________________ Contract number and/or program title: ______________________________________________________________ Period of performance: _______________________________ 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

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: _______________________________________________________________ Contract/Task Order value at award: _______________ Final/current value: ________________ Highest Annual Contract/Task Order Value: ________________

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

Page 2 of 9 FA2550-16-R-8001 Attachment 2

Contractual responsibility involved the following management requirements:

Prime or subcontractor on the referenced contract? PRIME SUBCONTRACTOR

1. Management of multiple subcontractor/team members

1. Number of subcontractors/teammates: _______________

1. Staffing with personnel that require TS/SCI or SAP 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 (Basis for Rating is required!)

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 and security clearance while maintaining continuity of critical positions?

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

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

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

1.4. 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

1.5. 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 _____________________________________________________________________________________________

1.6. 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) (Basis for Rating is required!)

For this section, rapid research and developmental projects can be defined as Quick Reaction Capabilities (QRCs), Joint Capabilities Technologies Demonstrations (JCTDs), prototyping, proof of concepts, experiments, demonstrations, etc. Execution includes managing cost, schedule, performance and acceptance testing.

2.1.a. In which Intelligence Disciplines did the contractor execute rapid (24 months or less) research and developmental projects?

Check All Applicable:

Measures and Signatures Intelligence (MASINT) Communications Intelligence (COMINT) Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) Imagery Intelligence (IMINT) Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) None

2.1.b. How well did the contractor execute rapid (24 months or less) research and developmental projects incorporating SIGINT, MASINT, COMINT, ELINT, and IMINT technologies and processes to meet Warfighter requirements?

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

2.2.a. In support of which Service or Joint requirements did the contract execute rapid (24 months or less) research and developmental projects?

Check All Applicable:

2.2.b. How well did the contractor execute rapid (24 months or less) research and developmental projects incorporating above Service(s) or Joint requirements?

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

2.3.a. With which National Intelligence Community (IC) organization(s) did the contractor provide experience working rapid research and development projects?

Check All Applicable:

Other (Specify)__________________ None

2.3.b. How well did the contractor work with the National IC (NSA, NRO, NGA, CIA, etc.) to execute rapid (24 months or less) research and developmental projects meeting IC or Warfighter requirements? 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 other not previously specified rapid (24 months or less) research and developmental projects?

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

2.5. How well did the contractor recruit and retain subcontractor/team members with National IC (i.e., NRO, NSA, NGA, CIA) program management and technical experience.

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

Element III – Information Technology (Basis for Rating is required!)

3.1. How well did the contractor ensure the effective and efficient day-to-day maintenance, operations and administration of networked and stand-alone systems? Day-to-day operations include trouble shooting software/hardware (repair/replace) and connectivity issues, etc.

3.2. How well did the contractor develop 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.

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

3.3. How well did the contractor perform vulnerability assessments and information assurance duties? Information Assurance includes, developing and maintaining certification and accreditation packages at all classified levels. Vulnerability assessments include network and system scans, updates, patches and Notices To Airmen (NOTAMs).

Check all applicable network security levels: Unclassified Secret Top Secret Basis for rating: 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 Local Area Networks (LANs)/Wide Area Networks (WANs).

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

Element IV – Distributed Mission Operations (Basis for Rating are required!)

4.1. How well did the contractor plan, design and execute modeling and simulations for exercises? Modeling and simulation tools (e.g., National Wargaming System - Next Generation (NWARS-NG) and Missile Defense Space Warning Tool (MDST)) 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

4.2. How well did the contractor support constructive/virtual exercise (e.g., Blue Flag, Key Resolve and Global Thunder/Lightning) planning and execution?

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

4.3. 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 geographically diverse locations across a Joint or Service centric wide area network.

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 (e.g., Global Command and Control System (GCCS), Command and Control Personal Computers (C2PC), Portable Flight Planning Software (PFPS) (Falcon View) and Processing and Display Subsystem Migration (PDSM))?

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

Element V – Operational Test & Evaluation (OT&E) (Basis for Rating is required!)

5.1 Which test analyst techniques did the contractor utilize:

Check All Applicable:

Design of Experiments Produced Descriptive statistics Applied parametric statistics Combinatorial testing Applied non-parametric statistics Developed, administered and analyzed surveys Used statistical software tools (e.g., MATLAB, JMP, Design Expert, etc.)

5.2.a. In which domain(s) did the contractor perform Test Analyst function(s)?

Check All Applicable:

5.2.b. How well did the contractor perform Test Analyst function(s) for the above domains:

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

5.3.a. For which organization(s) did the contractor perform Test Analyst function(s)?

Check All Applicable:

US Government (non DOD) US Government (DOD) Other________________

5.3.b. How well did the contractor perform Test Analyst function(s) for the above organization(s):

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

5.4.a. What types of test did the contractor perform Test Analyst function(s)?

Check All Applicable:

OT&E DT&E

5.4.b. How well did the contractor perform Test Analyst function(s) for the above test types:

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

5.5. How well did the contractor plan, execute and report on DoD, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) or NASA Developmental or Operational Test and Evaluations? Planning, executing and reporting can cover items such as Critical Operational Issues (COIs), Objectives, Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs), Measures of Suitability (MOSs) and Measures of Performance (MOPs) of major and minor DoD, NOAA or NASA 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 estimate 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: _____________________________________________________________________________________________