Attachment_19_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

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

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

The 611th Air Support Squadron at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER) is in the process of selecting a contractor for the “Installation Support Services 2 (ISS2) for Geographically Separated Locations (GSLs)” requirement. The Air Force requires installation support services associated with managing self-sufficient, isolated communities providing airfield operations for refueling, divert locations, and a base for search and rescue operations within Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) (e.g., Eareckson Air Station, Shemya, Alaska; King Salmon Airport, King Salmon, Alaska; and Wake Island Airfield, Wake Island, US Territory). Additional mission support is provided to numerous agencies throughout the Government with the most significant support going to the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) and 21st Space Wing (SW) in support of COBRA DANE operations. The requirement for the envisioned contract is to support the operation, maintenance and repair of utility systems, vehicles, equipment, aircraft arresting systems, and real property. The contract will also provide a broader scope such as maintenance of roads and infrastructure systems, provision and performance of industrial security, fire protection services, environmental management, snow removal, weather observations, logistics support, billeting services, dining hall services, and third-party contractor support.

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.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to all of the following individuals:

Kevin.sweet.2@us.af.mil

Daniel.morphew@us.af.mil

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.

Kevin Sweet, Capt, USAF

766 SCONS/PKD

ISS2 Past Performance Evaluation Team Chairperson

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017 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 mailto:Anthony.Torres.17@us.af.mil mailto:Daniel.morphew@us.af.mil

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

PAST/PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ)

WHEN FILLED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION IAW FAR 2.101 & 3.104

SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

A. Contractor: ________________________________________________________________________

B. Contractor CAGE Code: _________________________________

C. Contract number: ______________________________________

D. Contract type: ______________________________

E. Was this a competitive contract? Yes _____ No _____

F. Period of performance: _________________________________________________________

G. Initial contract cost: $____________________________

H. Current/final contract cost: $_______________________________

I. Annual contract cost: $___________________________________

J. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs:

K. Detailed description of service provided (please address scope of effort):

SECTION 2: CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION

A. Customer or agency name: __________________________________________________________

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017 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

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable): __________________________________________

C. Geographic description of services under this contract, i.e. local, nationwide, worldwide, arctic, tropical, multi-site, other commands:

SECTION 3: EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION

A. Evaluator's name: __________________________________________________________________

B. Evaluator's title: ___________________________________________________________________

C. Evaluator's phone/fax number/email address:_____________________________________________

Length of time (number of years/months) evaluator worked on subject contract: ____________________

SECTION 4: EVALUATION

Please indicate your satisfaction with the Contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:

CODE PERFORMANCE RATING

E EXCEPTIONAL – During the entire period, the Contractor met and exceeded many of the requirements of the contract and consistently performed at a superior level.

Performance was accomplished with very few minor problems, and the Contractor took immediate and effective corrective actions for those problems that did occur.

V VERY GOOD – During the entire period, the Contractor met and exceeded some of the requirements of the contract and consistently performed very well. Performance was accomplished with some minor problems, and the Contractor took timely and effective corrective action for those problems that did occur.

S SATISFACTORY – During the entire period, the Contractor met the requirements of the contract and consistently performed at an acceptable level. Performance was accomplished with some problems, and the Contractor took effective corrective action for those problems that did occur.

M MARGINAL – During the entire period, the Contractor did not always meet some of the requirements of the contract and intervention was required to continue performance.

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

There were instances where performance was at a less than acceptable level; performance was accomplished with some problems and some corrective actions appeared to be only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

U UNSATISFACTORY – During the entire period, the Contractor did not meet the requirements of the contract and performance was at an unacceptable level. There were a number of serious problems that required extensive oversight and involvement, and corrective actions were either ineffective or non-existent.

N/A NOT APPLICABLE – Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect, or information was not available. Do not know.

Note: Please discuss each response for which you indicated V (very good) or lower rating (use additional sheets, if necessary).

General Y N

G1 - Was the contract location(s) in a remote environment?

G2 - Was the contract location(s) in an arctic environment?

G3 - Was the contract location(s) in a tropical environment?

G4 - Did the Contractor independently perform facilities support services?

G5 - Did the Contractor independently perform airfield operations?

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

Transition to Full Operational Capability E V S M U N/A

T1 - How would you rate the Contractor’s transition into the contracted location(s) that minimized impact to continuing Government operations?

T2 - How would you rate the Contractor’s ability to preposition, store, and/or transport Contractor equipment that enabled Contractor readiness upon contract start?

T3 - How would you rate the Contractor’s performance during the conduction of a joint inventory and assessment of Government furnished equipment/property/facilities?

T4 - Overall, how would you rate the Contractor’s transition performance?

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

Logistics E V S M U N/A

L1 - How effective was the Contractor’s comprehensive management program that assured critical mission and life sustainment parts/supplies?

L2 - How effective was the Contractor at providing multi-modal transportation, advanced lead time requirements for the various transportation modes, understanding the challenges faced at remote site resupply/passenger transportation, and understanding the importance of advanced lead time coordination?

L3 - How effective was the Contractor at providing food to include monitoring, handling, and transportation while providing visitor support (such as billeting services)?

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

Logistics E V S M U N/A

L4 - Overall, how would you rate the Contractor’s performance of logistics?

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

Power Production E V S M U N/A

P1 - How effective were the Contractor’s procedures for power production that included the following: daily operations, identifying deficiencies, responding to failures, failure mitigation, maintenance/repair scheduling, maintaining power to installation facilities, quality assurance, and safety relating to power production?

P2 - How well did the Contractor operate, manage, and analyze data that supported lifecycle optimization, efficiency, and overall power production performance?

P3 - How well has the Contractor integrated modern power generation equipment with older systems for proper operation and reliability?

P4 - How well did the Contractor mitigate load demand over multiple inputs to effectively balance load for fuel and lifecycle saving measures?

P5 - Overall, how would you rate the Contractor’s performance relating to power production?

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

Environmental E V S M U N/A

E1 - How effective was the Contractor’s environmental plan and execution that ensured all operations complied with applicable statutes, regulations, guidance and permits?

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

Airfield Operations/Navigational Aids E V S M U N/A

A1 - How would you rate the Contractor’s ability to provide an efficient and effective airfield?

A2 - How effective was the Contractor in addressing daily operations, identifying deficiencies, responding to failures, mitigating failures, scheduling maintenance/repair, and maintaining navigational aids?

A3 - Overall, how would you rate the Contractor’s performance of airfield operations/navigational aids?

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

Quality Control E V S M U N/A

Q1 - How effective was the Contractor’s quality control program?

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

Facilities Maintenance E V S M U N/A

M1 - How effective was the Contractor in maintaining and sustaining site facilities?

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

Manning E V S M U N/A

M1 - How effective was the Contractor at hiring/retaining a qualified workforce for this effort?

M2 - Overall, how effective was the Contractor’s ability to maintain staffing levels?

Comments:___________________________________________________________________________

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

Overall Performance E V S M U N/A

O1 - Overall, how would you rate the Contractor’s performance as a whole?

Overall Performance Comments:

Additional Comments:

3. Government Contracts Only: Was this contract partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations?

Yes___ Default___ Convenience___ Pending Terminations___

No ___

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules).

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY

Would you have any reservations about soliciting this Contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs?

Please provide any additional comments concerning this Contractor’s performance, as desired.

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017

Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment

Evaluator’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

Kevin Sweet: kevin.sweet.2@us.af.mil

Daniel Morphew: daniel.morphew@us.af.mil

Section J, Attachment 19

FA5215-17-R-9002

3/9/2017 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 mailto:kevin.sweet.2@us.af.mil mailto:daniel.morphew@us.af.mil