Attachment_6_Past_Performance_Guidance_to_Offeror.pdf

PAST PERFORMANCE GUIDANCE TO OFFEROR

PAST PERFORMANCE. Limited to no more than 3 pages per contract listed. Only references for same or similar type contract desired. Offeror will send Past Performance Surveys to references for completion. References will send completed Past Performance Surveys directly to the Contracting Office. The past performance survey to be completed is located in Attachment 5.

(a) Quality and Satisfaction Rating for Contracts Completed in the Past Three

Years: Provide any information currently available (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) which demonstrates customer satisfaction with overall job performance and quality of completed product for same or similar type contract. In addition, explain corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems such as cost overruns, extended performance periods, numerous warranty calls, etc.

(b) Performance Surveys: The government will evaluate the quality and extent of offeror's performance deemed relevant to the requirements of this RFP. The Government will use information submitted by the offeror and other sources such as other Federal Government offices and commercial sources, to assess performance. Provide a list of three (3) to five (5), of the most relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies and commercial customers within the last five (5) years. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving Static Display Washing, Inspection, Maintenance and Painting services that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude, and complexity to the effort described in the solicitation. Relevancy is also defined as below:

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past effort involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Past/Present performance contractual effort involved some of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Past/Present performance effort did not involve any of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

The evaluation of past performance information will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition. Furnish the following information for each contract listed:

(i) Company/Division name

(ii) Product/Service

(iii) Contracting Agency/Customer

(iv) Contract Number

(v) Contract Dollar Value

(vi) Period of Performance

(vii) Verified, up-to-date name, address, FAX & telephone number of the contracting officer

(viii) Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

(ix) Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions.

If a teaming arrangement is contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement, including any relevant and recent past performance information on previous teaming arrangements with same partner. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past relevant contracts.

(c) Subcontractor Consent: Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Provide with the proposal a letter from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor.

(d) Financial Institution Information: Complete attached Financial Institution Reference Sheet (Attachment 7) and return with the proposal.

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: This is a competitive best value source selection in which competing offerors' past and present performance history will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than price. By submission of its offer an in accordance with the instructions provided in clause FAR 52.212-1, Instruction to Offerors, the offerors accedes to the terms of this contract and all such offers shall be treated equally except for their price and performance records. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

A. Price Evaluation. Initially, the government shall rank all Acceptable offers (and Unacceptable proposals that are correctable) by price including option years. An offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by the Source Selection Team/Price Evaluation Team by multiplying the quantities identified in Section B by the proposed unit price for each Contract Line Item Number to confirm the extended amount for each. If there is any difference between the offerors total price submitted in the proposal and the total price the source selection team computes, then the source selection team will ask the contractor to clarify pricing. The offeror’s total evaluated proposed price determination will include evaluation of the six month extension.

The six month extension price will be determined by calculating 50% of Option Year Four pricing of the offerors proposal.

B. Performance Confidence Assessment. The contracting officer shall seek relevant past performance information on all offerors based on (1) the past efforts provided by the offeror and

(2) data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources.

Relevant performance includes performance of Static Display Washing, Inspection, Maintenance and Painting Services that are similar in scope and magnitude and complexity of the effort described in the solicitation. The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the government to assess the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements based on the offeror’s demonstrated past performance.

The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence, or Unknown Confidence as defined in DoD Source Selection Procedures. Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will not be rated as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror. Offerors with no recent/relevant performance history or if the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating "Unknown Confidence," meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably (neutral). The government will evaluate a Substantial and Satisfactory rating higher than a Neutral Confidence Rating. The government reserves the right to seek information on higher priced offeror’s if none of the lower priced offerors receives a Substantial Confidence performance assessment. The confidence assessment ratings are defined in the Performance Confidence Assessment on the following page.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Rating Description

SUBSTANTIAL

CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

SATISFACTORY

CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has an expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

LIMITED CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NO

CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

UNKNOWN

CONFIDENCE

No performance record is identifiable or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

D. In evaluating past performance, the Government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this RFP.

E. If the lowest priced evaluated acceptable offer is judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance confidence assessment, that offer represents the best value for the government and the evaluation process stops at this point. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

F. If the lowest priced offeror is not judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance confidence assessment, the next lowest priced offeror will be evaluated and the process will continue (in order by price) until an offeror is judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment or until all offerors are evaluated. The Contracting Officer shall then make an award decision.