Attachment_2_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.docx

For Official Use Only When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire The 763d Specialized Contracting Squadron (763 SCONS) is in the process of competitively selecting a source for Joint Exercise Program (JEP). Required support includes Mobility Air Forces (MAF) C2, Air Evacuation, Lotistics, etc. and knowledge of Joint Operational Planning and Execution System (JOPES) and AMC C2 systems of record.

One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offeror’s 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. Our schedule is extremely tight and we request your written response two calendar days prior to the date for receipt of proposals. This schedule will allow us sufficient time to analyze the data prior to the start of negotiations.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to keely.webb@us.af.mil and raissa.kliatchko.1@us.af.mil. Please call Maj Raissa Kliatchko at (618) 229-0193 or Ms. Keely Webb at (618) 256-9955 if you have any questions. 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.

Raissa Kliatchko Contracting Officer

Attachment:

Past Performance Questionnaire

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 ☐ Key Personnel

Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of work performed under this contract (i.e., local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands):

Section 3: Respondent Identification

A. Respondent’s name:

B. Respondent’s title:

C. Respondent’s phone/fax number/e-mail address:

D. Length of time (number of years/months) respondent worked on subject contract and description of responsibility/position/role:

E. Other suggested points of contact:

Section 4: Performance Information

In the table 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.

T1. How would you rate the contractor's capability, knowledge, and expertise in designing, developing, and fielding process plans for software development?

Remarks:

T2. How would you rate the contractor's capability, knowledge, and expertise in identifying, tracking, and scheduling requirements for tasks?

T3. How would you rate the contractor's capability, knowledge, and expertise in managing multiple system configuration baselines and fielding strategies?

T4. How would you rate the contractor's capability, knowledge, and expertise in developing, maintaining, and executing quality control processes?

T5. Were there any penalties for non-performance assessed against the contractor and if so, to what extent?

T6. How would you rate the contractor’s overall technical approach and ability to meet the Performance Work Statement/Statement of Work requirements?

T7. How effective was overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage, control and deliver on-time)?

T8. How effective were the types of personnel (skill and expertise) used by the contractor in accomplishing the effort without Government intervention?

T9. Did the contractor provide replacement personnel of the same quality and skills of vacancies with minimum disruption to the support effort?

T10. How effective was the contractor in maintaining continuity of mission support while transitioning/phasing in resources and personnel?

T11. How effective was the contractor in managing subcontractors to ensure effort requirements were met?

T12. How accurately did the contractor forecast contract costs?

T13. How well did the contractor meet forecasted costs and perform within contract costs?

T14. How successfully did the contractor alert the Government of unforeseen costs before they occurred?

T15. How sufficient and timely was the contractor’s cost reporting?

IF THIS WAS A GOVERNMENT CONTRACT:

Did this contract include FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

☐ Yes ☐ No

If yes, did the contractor comply with the clause? Please explain.

Did this contract include FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns?

☐ Yes ☐ No

If yes, did the contractor comply with the clause? Please explain.

Additional remarks:

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

E-Mail to: keely.webb@us.af.mil For Official Use Only Page 1 of 6