RFP_Attach_2_Past_Perf_Info_Sheet.docx

RFP Attachment 2 Present/Past Performance Information Sheet

TO BE COMPLETED BY OFFEROR / JOINT VENTURE PARTNER

FA8202-18-R-1001

Highlighted areas - Please delete, remove highlighting formatting, and then overwrite with info where applicable. Note: Typical Past Performance Information sheets include: NAME OF CONTRACTING ACTIVITY OR CUSTOMER, CONTRACT TYPE, CONTRACT $ VALUE, BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF EFFORT, PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE. The offeror shall utilize the PPI Tool to provide this information.

Complete a separate FACTS Sheet for each relevant contract. See Section L of this RFP for detailed instructions and limits on number and recency of contracts. Provide frank, concise comments regarding present/past performance on the program identified in B. below.

A. IDENTIFICATION

Name (Company/Division)

B. PROGRAM TITLE and CONTRACT NUMBER Program Title Contact Number

C. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EFFORT

Offerors shall provide detailed information specific to each contract to cover the list below and show the connections in design/complexity/process expected in the effort solicited: Specific examples, detailed data, graphics, drawings, etc. Offerors shall make clear their ownership of the task (e.g. If Non-metallic Composite Structure was relevant to the product, what role did the Prime/Joint Venture Partner/Critical Sub take in its design, production, installation etc.) Within the Past Performance Information Sheet, offerors/joint venture members or critical subcontractors may mention efforts by subcontractors as long as it is made clear what the subcontractor accomplished independently, what the contractor accomplished independently, what the contractor and subcontractor accomplished together, and whether the subcontractor will be used in the proposed effort. This is in addition to qualifying critical subcontractors for the current effort (as specified in the updated Section L) being able to provide one past performance information sheet providing past performance data for tasks they will execute under the proposed ATTACK contract.

1. Mandatory Relevancy: Nature of Business Management and Production of Wing with a metallic spar/rib and skin/stiffener both monolithic machined and mechanically fastened wing box design.

Answer

2. Optional Relevancy: Weight Weight of deliverables and number of parts (not including fasteners).

Answer

3. Optional Relevancy: Production Rate/Quantity Average rate, maximum production rate, and total production quantity.

Answer

4. Optional Relevancy: Bonded Metallic Composite Structure Type of metallic composite structure, demonstrate contour, and internal process and tooling example. Sub-contractor qualification plans, processes and results also acceptable.

Answer

5. Optional Relevancy: Bonded Non-metallic Composite Structure Type of non-metallic structure, demonstrate contour and internal process and tooling example. Sub-contractor qualification plans, processes and results also acceptable.

Answer

6. Optional Relevancy: Flight Controls Components and Systems Type of flight control component, e.g., fixed/ integrated system, etc., and internal process and tooling example. Sub-contractor qualification plans, processes and results also acceptable.

Answer

7. Optional Relevancy: Integrated Avionics, Hydraulics, and Fuel System Components Types of hydraulic components, fuel system components, and avionic/electrical components contained in the wing assembly.

Answer

8. Optional Relevancy: Integral Fuel Tank Types of integral fuel tank, wet wing sealing processes, e.g., injection, fay, fillet, fastener, etc.

Answer

9. Optional Relevancy: Fracture and Fatigue Critical Items and CSI Management Demonstrate internal and sub-tier qualification Fracture and Fatigue and Critical Items CSI quantities as well as management processes used on the contract asset.

Answer

10. Optional Relevancy: Manufacturing Processes and Controls Examples of stringent manufacturing tolerances, type and description of I&R interface control and example of traceability and certification of materials and processes.

Answer

11. Optional Relevancy: Quality Assurance Processes Example of the internal level of production planning to produce the asset, example of a sub-tier vendor qualification effort, example of a rejection tag used on the asset, example of the documented MRB process on the asset.

Answer

12. Optional Relevancy: Model Based Definition Experience Show that 3D model/MBD was used to control manufacturing processes in the asset and demonstrate a proper understanding of MBD.

Answer

D. DESCRIPTION OF DELIVERY EFFECTIVINESS

1. On-time delivery Answer

2. Technical quality Answer

3. Cost control Answer

E. SMALL BUSINESS

This program was executed as:

X Small Business X Large Business This program was compliant to the following:

X FAR 52.219-9 (Small Business Subcontracting Plan) X FAR 52.219-8 (Utilization of Small Business Concerns) X Neither

If you are a large business compliant to FAR 52.219-9 (Small Business Subcontracting Plan), complete the following table regarding subcontracting goals and status-to-date.

Explain any shortcomings or non-compliance here.

If you are small business, or if you are a large business and FAR 52.219-9 (Small Business Subcontracting Plan) was NOT required by this effort, indicate your compliance with FAR 52.219-8 (Utilization of Small Business Concerns). That is, when subcontracting possibilities existed on this effort, did you award subcontracts to small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance? If applicable, complete the following table:

Explain any non-compliance here.

If FAR 52.219-8 or FAR 52.219-9 was NOT included in this effort, whenever subcontracting possibilities existed in the performance of this effort, address whether or not it was your policy to utilize small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance. If applicable, complete the following table:

F. PROGRAM UNIQUITY

Use this space to address any aspect about this program considered unique. Describe quality awards or certifications that indicate the offeror possesses a high-quality process for developing and producing the product/service required. Note: In the case of Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), if your input has already been provided and the rationale/ circumstances have not changed, DO NOT repeat them here.

G. PROGRAM ISSUES

Summarize contract issues relative to the number and severity of quality deficiencies recorded/contract discrepancy reports issued, cure notices, show cause letters, termination for default or cause, disputes, claims, latent defects; and, corrective actions taken for the contract listed in paragraph B. above. Note: In the case of Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), if your input has already been provided and the rationale/ circumstances have not changed, DO NOT repeat them here.

H. UNFAVORABLE PAST RATINGS

Additionally, for those efforts where you are cognizant of unfavorable and/or marginal past performance ratings/reports previously assessed by customers or clients, but feel that significant progress has been made but not yet credited or formally documented, provide the program name, contract number, customer location and a narrative explaining "fixes" made to date, or any other information regarding the unfavorable/marginal assessment. It is not presumed that performance has been perfect. Rather, the proposal should contain evidence of your ability to isolate the root causes of problems and should describe programs or actions taken to resolve those causes. Demonstrated corrective actions (not just planned or promised), and the overall work record will be considered. Problems not addressed, but found by the Government during the evaluation of the information in this volume, will be assumed to still exist. Note: In the case of Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), if your input has already been provided and the rationale/ circumstances have not changed, DO NOT repeat them here.

PLEASE NOTE: The Government is not bound by the offeror's opinion of relevancy. The Government will perform an independent assessment of relevancy of the data provided or obtained.