Sec_L_-_Attachment_7_-_PPQ.docx
DOCX document 34 KB Posted
- Attached to
- MQ-1 and MQ-9 Pilot and Sensor Operators Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8620-15-R-4005
About this file
Attachment 7 - Past Performance Questionaire
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 41
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
SECTION L ATTACHMENT
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ) COVER LETTER
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
| The Medium Altitude Unmanned Aerial Surveillance Office is in the process of competitively selecting a source to provide Production Acceptance and Developmental Test aircrew and Unit Level support personnel to support ground and flight testing at AFLCMC/WII DET 3 OL. |
| 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. Our schedule is extremely tight and we desire your written response no later than 15 calendar days after your receipt of this letter. This schedule will allow us sufficient time to analyze the data prior to the start of evaluations. |
| To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to john.purcell.3@us.af.mil or shane.hemmerich@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. |
| John A. Purcell |
| Contracting Officer |
SECTION L ATTACHMENT 5
PAST/PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ)
WHEN FILLED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION IAW FAR2.101 & 3.104
I. CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
A. Contractor (Company/Division): _____________ B. Cage Code: ________________ C. Contract Number: ________________________________ D. Contract Type (e.g., FFP, FPIF, CPIF, CPFF): ____________________________________________ E. Program Title:
F. Brief Program Description: ___ _____________ G. Program Phase: (e.g., Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD)) ____________________ H. Period of Performance:
II. RESPONDENT(S) TO QUESTIONNAIRE
A. Name(s):
B. Phone Number(s): ______ C. Position (e.g., Program Manager, PCO/ACO):
D. Other suggested points of contact: ______
III. GENERAL COMMENTS
IV. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Please indicate your performance rating for the contractor’s by circling or place an “X” over the appropriate code using the performance evaluation scale below. Ratings are defined as follows:
| CODE | PERFORMANCE RATING | |
| B | BLUE/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. | |
| P | PURPLE/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. | |
| G | GREEN/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. | |
| Y | YELLOW/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. There were instances where performance was at a less than acceptable level; performance was accomplished with some problems and some corrective actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. | |
| R | RED/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. |
Respondents should explain their rating in the remarks section for any rating of Blue, Yellow or Red and ratings that might contradict official Past Performance documentation (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs)). If more space is needed, remarks may be continued on separate pages. Please identify Factor and Sub-factor and question number.
A. TECHNICAL FACTOR - Rate the Offeror’s performance for the following sub-factors:
1. Sub-factor - System/Subsystem Performance How well did the contractor meet system/subsystem performance requirements? (Identify any waivers/deviations that were required.) B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
2. Sub-factor - Management/Schedule
| a. | How well did the contractor perform against the delivery schedules of the contract (or IMP/IMS if prior to delivery)? In the remarks, specify if the contractor met, exceeded, or failed to meet contractual delivery dates (or IMP/IMS if prior to delivery) and, if schedule slips occurred, state the number of slips and cumulative schedule variance. | ||||
| B | P | G | Y | R | N/A |
REMARKS:
b. How successful was the contractor with timely award and effective management of subcontracts? In the remarks, discuss how well the contractor met participation goals for small/small disadvantaged businesses, historically black colleges and universities, minority institutions, and woman-owned business. B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
3. Sub-factor - Systems Engineering
| a. | How well did the contractor develop, and execute test and evaluation efforts? | ||||||
| B | P | G | Y | R | N/A |
REMARKS:
b. How well did the contractor develop, manage, and control system and subsystem interface requirements and communicate and manage system and subsystem requirements to the subcontractor? B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
c. 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? B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
d. How well did the contractor use modeling, simulation and analysis to assist in the System Engineering process? B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
4. Sub-factor - Systems Architecture and Software
a. How well did the contractor adhere to its software development approach and managing complex software efforts to meet program schedule? B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
| b. | How well did the contractor implement open systems architecture design and development? | ||||||
| B | P | G | Y | R | N/A |
REMARKS:
c. How effective was the contractor in achieving actual software re-use amount compared to the proposed estimate and controlling software requirements growth?
B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
d. How well did the contractor flow-down software requirements and processes to software subcontractor(s)? B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
5. Sub-factor - Product Support
a. How well did the contractor execute the technical manual/order program to meet overall program schedules? B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
b. How well did the contractor provide Training and Training Systems to support the program? B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
B. COST/PRICE FACTOR
How accurate was the contractor in proposing and forecasting contract cost/price? B P G Y R N/A
REMARKS:
Please provide the following information regarding cost/price:
| (1) Original Contract Cost or Price | $_____________________ | |||
| (2) Value of Negotiated Contract Changes | $_____________________ | |||
| (3) Actual/Projected Cost to Complete | $_____________________ | |||
| (4) Baseline Estimate at Completion | $_____________________ | |||
| (5) Total Negotiated Changes EAC | $_____________________ | |||
| (6) Cost Under run/Over run (-) | $_____________________ |
REMARKS:
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
| definitely would_____ | probably would _____ | might or might not _____ | |
| probably would not _____ | definitely would not _____ |
award to him today given that I had a choice.
REMARKS:
Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
Please return this completed questionnaire to:
| Mailing Address: | 2530 Loop Road West, BLDG 560 | |
| Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7106 |
| E-mail to: | John.Purcell.3@us.af.mil | |
| Shane.Hemmerich@us.af.mil |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .