FMT RFP Attachment 05 Relevancy Matrix.pdf
PDF 352 KB Posted
- Attached to
- FMT DRAFT RFP Request for Feedback
- Solicitation number
- W900KK25RA0003_Draft
About this file
This is a Past Performance Relevancy Matrix that defines how contractors' past performance will be evaluated for the Family of Maintenance Trainers Product Line (FMT PL) solicitation W900KK25RA003. The matrix establishes four levels of relevancy (Very Relevant, Relevant, Somewhat Relevant, and Not Relevant) across two main factors: Technical Complexity/Scope and Program Management Complexity/Scope.
The matrix specifies that Very Relevant past performance requires experience with both desktop virtual training systems and physical fidelity hands-on training systems, with projects greater than 2 years in duration. Technical evaluation focuses on system engineering, configuration management, and hardware/software development for military or commercial maintenance training systems. Program Management evaluation examines experience in program management, risk management, and quality assurance. Lesser relevancy levels (Relevant and Somewhat Relevant) allow for experience with either virtual or physical training systems, shorter performance periods, and non-training military applications. The matrix includes detailed checklists for both Technical and Management domain evaluations to ensure consistent assessment of contractor experience.
View the file
Other files
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
W900KK25RA003
Attachment 05
FMT PL Past Performance Relevancy Matrix
The Government will use the following matrix as a guide to assess how your past performance is relevant to the Technical and Program Management Factors for maintenance training systems. Maintenance training systems includes desktop Diagnostic Troubleshooting Trainers (DTTs), Part Task Trainers (PTTs) and Hands-On Trainers (HOTs) for Federal agencies and commercial customers. Specifically describe and compare the type of work and scope of effort (including number of sites and trainers and Period of Performance). Note: It is not the Government’s intent to analyze or associate any dollar values to the contract references provided in terms of defining magnitude of effort.
Relevancy Description Magnitude Factor 1: Technical
COMPLEXITY/SCOPE
Factor 2: Program Management
COMPLEXITY/SCOPE
Very Relevant
Present/Past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Period of Performance for each referenced project is greater than 2 years
1) Contractor has performed and managed system engineering and configuration management processes, and hardware and software design and development on military or commercial maintenance training systems.
2) The scope of the contractor’s experience encompasses both desktop virtual training systems and physical fidelity hands-on training systems.
1) Contractor has managed a military maintenance training system or commercial maintenance training system program that includes all of the following: Program Management, Risk Management, and Quality Assurance.
2) The scope of the contractor’s experience encompasses both desktop virtual training systems and physical fidelity hands-on training systems.
Relevant
Present/Past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Period of Performance for each referenced project is greater than 1.5 years
1) Contractor has performed and managed system engineering and configuration management processes, and hardware and software design and development on military or commercial training systems.
2) The scope of the contractor’s experience encompasses either desktop virtual training systems or physical fidelity hands-on training systems, or both.
1) Contractor has managed a military or commercial training system program to include all of the following: Program Management, Risk Management, and Quality Assurance.
2) The scope of the contractor’s experience encompasses either desktop virtual training systems or physical fidelity hands-on training systems, or both.
Relevancy Description Magnitude Factor 1: Technical
COMPLEXITY/SCOPE
Factor 2: Program Management
COMPLEXITY/SCOPE
Somewhat Relevant
Present/Past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Period of Performance for each referenced project is greater than 1 year
1) Contractor has performed and managed system engineering and configuration management processes, or hardware design and development, or software design and development on military or commercial training systems, or on other military systems or applications (non-training).
2) The scope of the contractor’s experience encompasses desktop virtual training systems, physical fidelity hands-on training systems, non-training software applications, or non-training hardware/software integrated systems.
1) Contractor has managed a training system program (or other military system or application) to include all of the following: Program Management, Risk Management, and Quality Assurance.
2) The scope of the contractor’s experience encompasses either software applications or hardware/software integrated systems.
Not Relevant
Present/Past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
Period of Performance for any referenced project is less than 1 year
Contractor has performed little to no training system development, upgrades or modifications, and little to no experience with design and development of other military systems or applications.
Contractor has performed little to no Program Management, Risk Management and Quality Assurance functions.
PAST EXPERIENCE CHECKLIST - TECHNICAL
RELEVANCY ENGINEERING DOMAIN SYSTEM TYPES
Very Relevant
System Engineering and Configuration Management Processes
Hardware Design & Development
Software Design & Development
(ALL OF THE ABOVE)
Military Maintenance Training
Commercial Maintenance Training
(EITHER OF THE
ABOVE)
Desktop Virtual Training Systems
Physical Hands-On Training Systems
(BOTH OF THE ABOVE)
Relevant
System Engineering and Configuration Management Processes
Hardware Design & Development
Software Design & Development
(ALL OF THE ABOVE)
Military Training
Commercial Training
(EITHER OF THE
ABOVE)
(EITHER OF THE ABOVE)
Somewhat Relevant
System Engineering and Configuration Management Processes
Hardware Design & Development
Software Design & Development
(ONE OF THE ABOVE)
Military Training
Commercial Training
Military Non-training Software applications
Military Non-training Software/Hardware Integrated Systems
(ONE OF THE
ABOVE)
Desktop Virtual Training Systems
Physical Hands-On Training Systems
Military Non-Training Software Applications
Military Non-Training Software/Hardware Integrated Systems
(ONE OF THE ABOVE)
Not Relevant Contractor has performed little to no training system development, upgrades or modifications, and little to no experience with design and development of other non-training military systems or applications.
PAST EXPERIENCE CHECKLIST - MANAGEMENT
RELEVANCY MANAGEMENT DOMAIN STSTEM TYPES
Very Relevant
Program Management
Risk Management
Quality Assurance
(ALL OF THE ABOVE)
Military Maintenance Training
Commercial Maintenance Training
(BOTH OF THE ABOVE)
Relevant
Program Management
Risk Management
Quality Assurance
(ALL OF THE ABOVE)
Military Training
Commercial Training
(EITHER OF THE ABOVE)
Somewhat Relevant
Program Management
Risk Management
Quality Assurance
(ALL OF THE ABOVE)
Military Training
Commercial Training
Military systems or applications (other than training)
Military Non-Training Software Applications
Military Non-Training Software/Hardware Integrated Systems
Not Relevant Contractor has performed little to no Program Management, Risk Management and Quality Assurance functions.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .