Atch_15_-_Incentive_Option.pdf

FA8621-15-R-6328

6 April 2015

Attachment 15 – Incentive Option

In addition to the terms set forth elsewhere in the contract, this attachment describes the specific criteria and procedures used by the Government to assess the Contractor’s performance during the respective evaluation periods to determine the Contractor’s eligibility for award of future option periods, “Incentive Options”.

(a) Monitoring of Performance. The Contractor's performance of the contractual requirements related to each Evaluation Criteria listed below is continually monitored during each respective Evaluation Period by the program Contracting Officer’s Representatives (CORs). The CORs’ findings are reported to the Government’s Incentive Option Review Board (IORB).

a. Evaluation Criteria: (all criteria have the same weighting)

i. On-Time Graduation and Student Throughput: Percentage of students graduating from each course on-time. Calculation will be made based on student graduation dates, for each course completed, within each evaluation period. A 95% on-time graduation rate will be viewed as satisfactory performance.

ii. Site Availability: Percentage of Site Availability, for all assets, within each evaluation period. A 95% CLS site availability will be viewed as satisfactory performance.

iii. DR/DCR: Percentage of DR/DCRs completed on-time. 90% of DR/DCRs completed on time based upon original due date and completion of remaining DR/DCRs within 30 days of original due date will be viewed as satisfactory performance.

iv. TCPs: Percentage of TCPs completed on-time. 90% of TCPs completed on time based upon original due date and completion of remaining TCPs within 30 days of original due date will be viewed as satisfactory performance.

b. Evaluation Periods:

(b) Evaluation.

a. IORB. The IORB reviews the CORs’ findings for each Evaluation Criteria, assigns an Evaluation Rating for each Evaluation Criteria, and presents their ratings to the KDAM ATARS PCO serving as the Determining Official (DO) to determine if the Contractor has earned the minimum points required to become eligible for the applicable Incentive Option period.

i. IORB Members:

1. KDAM ATARS Program Management Office (PMO)

2. KDAM ATARS AETC/ACC/AFGSC User Representatives

3. DCMA Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)

4. Additional KDAM ATARS personnel as required

b. Points. Points are earned based upon the Evaluation Rating assigned to each Evaluation Criteria resulting from the IORB’s assessment of the Contractor’s performance during each respective evaluation period. The points earned in each evaluation period are the sum of the points associated with each Evaluation Rating assigned to each Evaluation Criteria. The maximum possible points earned in a single Evaluation Period are 800.

c. Evaluation Ratings/Definition and Point Values:

Evaluation Period Start End 1 1-Oct-16 1-Jun-17 2 2-Jun-17 1-Jun-18 3 2-Jun-18 1-Jun-19 4 2-Jun-19 1-Jun-20 5 2-Jun-20 1-Jun-21

FA8621-15-R-6328

6 April 2015

(c) Eligibility Requirements.

a. The Contractor’s performance during evaluation periods 1 and 2 shall determine their eligibility for option period 4 (Incentive Option #1); the Contractor’s performance during evaluation period 3 shall determine their eligibility for option period 5 (Incentive Option #2); the Contractor’s performance during evaluation period 4 shall determine their eligibility for option period 6 (Incentive Option #3); and the Contractor’s performance during evaluation period 5 shall determine their eligibility for option period 7 (Incentive Option #4).

b. For the Contractor to be eligible for Incentive Option #1, the Contractor must earn a minimum of

600 cumulative points during evaluation periods 1 and 2. To be eligible for each successive Incentive Option, the Contractor must earn a minimum of 400 cumulative points during the respective Evaluation Period. Each successive Evaluation Period shall be summed independently with no carryover from previous Evaluation Periods.

c. The requirements of FAR 17.207 -- Exercise of Options must be met.

(d) Eligibility Determination. The DO will review the CORs’ findings, the IORB’s recommended Evaluation Ratings for each Evaluation Criteria, and all other pertinent information and make the final determination regarding the rating of the Contractor’s performance and whether the Contractor has earned the eligibility for award of the applicable Incentive Option.

a. If it is in the Government’s best interest, the Government reserves the right to award the respective

Incentive Option period even if the Contractor does not meet the minimum points requirement.

b. If the Contractor receives an unsatisfactory performance Evaluation Rating in any Evaluation Criteria and still obtains the minimum point value to be eligible, the Government reserves the right to determine the Contractor ineligible for award of the next respective Incentive Option.

c. The DO will notify the Contractor within 45 days of the end of each Evaluation Period of the DO’s determination. The DO’s determination serves to notify the Contractor of the Government’s intent to make the award of the respective Incentive Option, but the DO’s determination does not create an enforceable entitlement.

(e) Disputes. All DO decisions regarding the Incentive Option, including but not limited to: the

Contractor's eligibility; and the nature and success of the contractor's performance, are within the sole discretion of the DO and shall not be subject to the "Disputes" clause nor review by any Board of Contract Appeals (BCA), court, or other judicial entity.

Evaluation Rating Definition Points

Exceptional Performance meets contractural requirements and exceeds many to the Government's benefit.

The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good Performance meets contractural requirements and exceeds some to the Government's benefit.

The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractural requirements. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractural requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which actions taken by the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions.

-50

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractural requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The element being assessed contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

-200