Attachment_7_Past_Performance_Questionaire.pdf

RFP FA8553-19-R-0002

ATTACHMENT 7

Past Performance Questionnaire

Department of the Air Force (AF), Warner Robins Air Logistics Complex is in the process of competitively selecting a source for the Afghanistan CLS 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 _____________(Offeror needs to fill in date to match the Proposal due date). This schedule will allow us sufficient time to analyze the data prior to the start of negotiations.

Exchanges of source selection information between government and questionnaire respondents will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. Email may be used to transmit such information only if the email can be sent and encrypted, and must include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line of the email. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted emails, a questionnaire respondent must use MS Outlook email configured to support encryption, or, a different email product that is S/MIME compatible and configured to support encryption. If you intend to submit your completed questionnaire via an encrypted email, you will need to contact the Buyer/Contracting Officer indicated below, prior to that first submittal, in order to exchange certificates used for encryption.

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.

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 /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. If supporting documentation is not provided for ratings that are other than “satisfactory,” the ratings will be considered to be unsubstantiated and will be interpreted as satisfactory. 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.

Technical Performance E V S M U N/

A

T1. How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the C-130* specification? Specifically: Performing/performed maintenance for a C-130* in a US Government designated hostile environment (excludes Contract Field Team).

*NOTE: C-130 could be any model/configuration.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

T2. How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the C-130* specification? Specifically: Performing/performed logistics for a C-130*, in a US Government designated hostile environment.

T3. How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the C-130* specification? Specifically: Performing/performed ferry flight operations support for a C-130*, to and from a US Government designated hostile environment.

T4. How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the C-130* specification? Specifically: Performing/performed CLS in a US Government designated hostile environment.

T5. How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the C-130* specification? Specifically: Performing/performed Contract Field Team Maintenance in a US Government designated hostile environment.

Program Management E V S M U N/

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?

Program Management E V S M U N/

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?

P10. To what degree did the contractor implement responsive/flexible processes to improve quality and timeliness of support?

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

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/

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/

S1. 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?

S2. How effectively did the contractor manage small business participation to meet technical performance?

Cost Performance E V S M U N/

C1. How accurately did the contractor forecast contract (i.e., material and travel) costs?

Cost Performance E V S M U N/

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 COMMENTS

Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I would/would not award to them again (Please circle one).

REMARKS:

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

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

To ensure the process is working correctly, send a test encrypted message first (without including any source selection information). Email to: Trey Evans, john.evans.37@us.af.mil or Valerie Toler, valerie.toler@us.af.mil.

If mailing, mail directly to:

AFLCMC/WLNKB

ATTN: Trey Evans, Contracting Officer or Valerie Toler, Contracting Specialist

235 Byron Street, Suite 19A Robins AFB GA 31098-1670

If mailing, the outside envelope must be marked as follows:

NOTE: TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY

The completed questionnaires should be contained in a second envelope marked with the mailing address and the following legend:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

mailto:john.evans.37@us.af.mil mailto:valerie.toler@us.af.mil