EXHIBIT_B_Past_Perf_Cvr_14Sep17.docx

DOCX document 49 KB Posted

Attached to
National Technical Nuclear Forensics II (NTNF II) Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
FA7022-17-R-0008
Issued by
Department of the Air Force Air Combat Command

About this file

Question #1: The Past Performance questionnaire is not editable/fillable for distribution and completion by our references. Will the government provide an electronically fillable Exhibit B for distributing to our client references? Alternatively, will the government accept offeror creating an editable version to supply our references for ease of completion? RESPONSE #1: See the attached "word" version of EXHIBIT B for ease of completion.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to National Technical Nuclear Forensics II (NTNF II), newest first.
File Type Posted
_5_NTNF_II_Q&A.pdf PDF
Amendment_Clarification_(NTNF_II).pdf PDF
No._4_NTNF_II_Q&A.pdf PDF
Amendment_1.pdf PDF
_3_NTNF_II_Q&A.pdf PDF
No_2_NTNF_II_Q&A.pdf PDF
ATCH_4_Labor_Rates_for_Task_Orders.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
ATCH_6_Total_Evaluated_Price_(TEP).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
ATCH_7_PWS_(TO_1)_10_May_17.pdf PDF
ATCH_5_Total_Estimated_Price_(Labor).xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
ATCH_3_Labor_Category_Descriptions.pdf PDF
ATCH_1_PWS_(Basic)_15_Aug_17.pdf PDF
EXHIBIT_B_Past_Perf_Cvr_Quest.pdf PDF
Solicitation_RFP_5_Sep_17.pdf PDF
EXHIBIT_A_CDRLS.pdf PDF
ATCH_2__DD_Form_254.pdf PDF
Show all 16

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

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 EXHIBIT B The Acquisition Management and Integration Center (AMIC) DET 2 OL/PKA (Patrick AFB FL) is in the process of competitively selecting a source for the National Technical Nuclear Forensics (NTNF) II program.

The services to be acquired are primarily concerned with operation and maintenance (O&M), and research and development (R&D) in support of the NTNF II mission; both on site (Patrick AFB, FL), and off-site (Contractor's facility). The contractor must be able to support day-to-day operations for AFTAC's Nuclear Treaty Monitoring Mission using highly-skilled, multi-disciplined and technically trained personnel.

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 20 Sep 2017. 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 michelle.raines@us.af.mil. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records. If unable to email the questionnaire, please see the mailing address at the end of this questionnaire.

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.

//signed// MICHELLE RAINES Contracting Officer

1 Atch 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 services 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 number / fax number / e-mail address:

D. Respondent’s position (e.g., Program Manager, PCO/ACO, etc.):

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

F. Other suggested points of contact:

Section 4: Performance Information

In the tables 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.

Note: The following are SAMPLE questions. Past Performance evaluation teams MUST construct a simple and concise Past Performance Questionnaire, tailored to seek out key information tied to the significant aspects of the planned acquisition. Avoid questions that can be answered with a “yes” or “no” but instead include probing and direct questions to draw out the required information desired.

Technical Performance
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

T1. How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the specification?

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

T2. How was the quality of technical system operations & maintenance testing and certification efforts?

Program Management
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

P1. How effective was overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage, control and deliver on-time)?

P2. How reasonable and cooperative was the contractor when dealing with program staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)?

P3. How timely and effectively did the contractor resolve contract problems without extensive customer guidance?

P4. How well did the contractor understand/comply with customer objectives and technical requirements?

P5. How successfully did the contractor respond to emergency and/or surge situations?

P6. How well did the contractor manage quality/effectiveness of subcontracted efforts?

P7. How effective was the contractor’s material management (including Government Furnished Property or Material)?

P8. How effective was the contractor’s acquisition management?

P9. Of what benefit to the customer were contractor proposed alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors?

Transition / Phase-in
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

TP1. How smoothly did the contractor transition resources and personnel?

TP2. How effective was the contractor in maintaining continuity of mission support while transitioning/phasing in resources and personnel to support other efforts?

Employee Retention / Attraction
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

E1. How effectively was the contractor able to hire/apply a qualified workforce to this effort?

E2. How effectively was the contractor able to retain a qualified workforce on this effort?

E3. How effective was employee compensation towards quality of work?

Small and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

S1. If the contract included FAR 52.219-9, to what degree was the contractor able to meet or exceed small business and small disadvantaged business goals set forth in the approved subcontracting plan?

(Please state if FAR 52.219-9 was not included in the contract)

S2. If the contract included FAR 52.219-8, how effectively did the contractor manage small business participation to meet technical performance?

(Please state if FAR 52.219-8 was not included in the contract)

Cost Performance
E
V
S
M
U
N/A

C1. How accurately did the contractor forecast contract costs?

C2. How well did the contractor meet forecasted costs and perform within contract costs?

C3. How successfully did the contractor alert the Government of unforeseen costs before they occurred?

C4. How sufficient and timely was the contractor’s cost reporting?

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 5: GENERAL COMMENT

Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I [ click and select an item ] award to him today given that I had a choice.

REMARKS:

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

[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: AMIC DET 2 OL/PKA

ATTENTION: MICHELLE RAINES 10989 SOUTH PATRICK DRIVE PATRICK AFB, FL 32925

E-Mail to: michelle.raines@us.af.mil cc: charlotte.simon@us.af.mil

For Official Use Only Page 8 of 8

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .