Attachment_39-_Past.Present_Performance_Questionnaire_-_no_date.pdf

For Official Use Only

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

Section L Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire-Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements (SABER) FA4855-18-R-0003

For Official Use Only Page 1 of 7

The 27 Special Operations Contracting Squadron of the Air Force Special Operations Command is in the process of competitively selecting a source for a SABER IDIQ 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. In order to meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than 17 January 2018.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to sarah.muraco@us.af.mil or by hand and faxed to (575)-784-4791, Attention: Ms. Sarah Muraco).

Please call Ms. Sarah Muraco at 575-784-0535 prior to fax transmission or 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.

Attachment :

1. Past Performance Questionnaire

Attachment 39 FA4855-18-R-0003 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

For Official Use Only Page 2 of 7

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. 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):

H. 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):

I. Description of work performed:

J. Was this a competitively awarded contract? ☐ Yes ☐ No

K. 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):

For Official Use Only Page 3 of 7

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.

For Official Use Only Page 4 of 7

The Contractor: E V S M U N/A

1. How well did the Contractor provide experienced managers and supervisors with the technical and administrative abilities needed to meet contract requirements?

Respondent’s Comments:

2. How proficient was the Contractor Demonstrate the ability to hire, maintain, and replace, if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period?

3. How well did the Contractor delegate authority to project managers and supervisors commensurate with contract requirements?

4. How effective was their home office responsive while in solving significant problems?

5. How well did the contractor follow their approved quality control plan?

6. How aligned was the Contractor’s quality control plan and/or inspection procedures to the contract requirements?

7. How timely and effectively were deficiencies corrected pursuant to their quality control procedures?

8. To what degree of proficiency; did they provide timely resolution of contract discrepancies?

For Official Use Only Page 5 of 7

The Contractor: E V S M U N/A

9. How well did the contractor communicate problems as they occurred?

10. How well did the contractor provide suggestions and alternative approaches to problems that arose during the period of performance?

11. To what degree, did the contractor display initiative to solve unforeseen problems?

12. How realistic were progress schedules that were submitted by the contractor?

13. How well did the contractor maintain their project schedules?

14. If required, how timely was the resolution of warranty issues?

15. How responsive was the contractor to contract changes?

16. How well did the contractor provide adequate project supervision?

17. How willing was the contractor to obtain consent of surety for increases in bonding as work-in-progress increased?

For Official Use Only Page 6 of 7

The Contractor: E V S M U N/A

18. How timely were subcontractors/suppliers paid?

19. How would you rate the company’s business interactions with Government personnel after award?

20. How would you rate the contractor's overall performance on this contract?

21. Was the contractor ever issued a cure or show cause notice under the referenced contract? If yes, explain.

EXPLANATION:

22. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain.

EXPLANATION:

☐ Yes

☐ No

For Official Use Only Page 7 of 7

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:

Mailing Address:

Ms. Sarah Muraco

110 E. Alison Ave

Cannon AFB, NM 88103-5321

FAX to: 575-784-4791

E-Mail to: sarah.muraco@us.af.mil

Attachment 39 FA4855-18-R-0003