Next_Gen_Past_Performance_Questionnaire_FINAL.docx

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 The Department of the Air Force (AF), Warner Robins Air Logistics Complex is in the process of competitively selecting a source for a Next Gen All Aluminum Pallet. The contract strategy is to establish a 10 year-Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract for purchase of the Next Generation Pallet. The contract will support United States Air Force (USAF) and Foreign Military Sales (FMS). A competitive acquisition will be accomplished utilizing trade-off source selection procedures, in accordance with FAR 15.3 as supplemented by the DoD Source Selection Procedures (Apr 2016) to make a best value award decision.

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 30 calendar days after your receipt of this letter. 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 timothy.hudson@us.af.mil and melissa.broaddus@us.af.mil or by hand delivered to the address below:

AFLCMC/WNKAC

ATTN: Timothy Hudson or Melisa Broaddus 235 Byron St., Suite 19A Robins AFB, GA 31098

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.

Timothy Hudson, 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. Deliveries

4. Were SURGE deliveries required? ☐ Yes ☐ No

5. If yes, what was the SURGE quantity? ____________

6. If yes, what was the delivery period? ____________

7. Did the contractor meet the SURGE delivery deadline? ☐ Yes ☐ No

8. If deadline was not met, provide explanation:

J. Please provide the following information regarding cost/price:

REMARKS:

K. Description of work performed:

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

M. 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 questions below, indicate your rating for the contractor’s performance by checking the appropriate box under 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.

A. TECHNICAL FACTOR – Rate the Offeror’s performance for the following subfactors:

1. Friction Stir Welding Performance

a. Did the contractor provide friction stir welding products or services? ☐ Yes ☐ No

b. If yes, which of these descriptions did the product or service meet?

☐ Friction stir weldments of 96” or longer, multi-void, thin wall (0.125 in or less) 6000 series aluminum extrusions, 500/month or more ☐ Friction stir weldments of 6000 series aluminum extrusions, 500/month or more ☐ Friction stir weldments of aluminum in quantities of 250 or more per month.

☐ Other.

c. How well did the contractor meet the requirements of the welding specifications?

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

d. How well did the contractor perform friction stir welding to meet the quality specifications required?

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

2. Aluminum Extrusion Performance

a. Did the contractor provide aluminum extrusion products or services? ☐ Yes ☐ No

b. If yes, which of these descriptions did the product or service meet?

☐ Production of minimum 96” length by 15” profile width, multi-void, thin wall (0.125 in or less) aluminum extrusions, 500/month or more ☐ Production of minimum 10” profile width, multi-void, thin wall (0.125 in or less) aluminum extrusions, 100/month or more ☐ Production of aluminum extrusions.

c. How well did the contractor meet the requirements of the extrusion specifications?

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

d. How well did the contractor meet the quality specifications of the extruded product?

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

3. Program Management/Integration

a. Did the contractor provide Program Management/Integration services? ☐ Yes ☐ No

b. If yes, which of these descriptions did the product or service meet?

☐ Managed at least 4 sub-contractors on a supply type contract of value 50 million dollars or more ☐ Managed at least 2 sub-contractors on a supply type contract of value greater than 25 million dollars but less than 50 million dollars ☐ Managed one or no sub-contractors on a supply type contract of value greater than 5 million dollars ☐ Other.

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

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

4. Management/Schedule

b. How was the quality/integrity of technical data/report preparation efforts?

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

c. How successful was the contractor with timely award and effective management of subcontracts? In supporting information, discuss how well the contractor met participation goals for small/small disadvantaged businesses, historically under-utilized business zone small businesses, woman-owned businesses, and service-disabled veteran owned businesses?

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

5. Systems Engineering

How well did the contractor define and implement a System Engineering Master Plan and execute the System Engineering process and manage system and subsystem configuration data?

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

6. Product Support

a. How well did the contractor integrate the logistics support elements to provide effective support planning? (e.g., LRIP and/or fielded assets, CLS, ICS, Type 1 Training, and Life Cycle Cost visibility, provisioning) ☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

b. How well did the contractor execute the technical manual/order program to meet overall program schedules?

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

B. COST / PRICE FACTOR (If other than FFP contract)

a. How accurate was the contractor in proposing and forecasting contract cost/price?

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

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

☐ E ☐ V ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

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).

Did this contract include FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

☐ Yes ☐ No

If yes, did the contractor comply with the clause? Please explain.

Did this contract include FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns?

☐ Yes ☐ No

If yes, did the contractor comply with the clause? Please explain.

C. GENERAL COMMENT (Choose one of the following and explain your choice in the remarks)

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:

[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:

AFLCMC/WNKAC

ATTN: Timothy Hudson or Melisa Broaddus 235 Byron St., Suite 19A Robins AFB, GA 31098

E-Mail to: timothy.hudson@us.af.mil and melissa.broaddus@us.af.mil For Official Use Only Page 1 of 9