Atch_07_SCS_Past_Performance_Relevancy_Baseline.pdf

PDF 130 KB Posted

Attached to
SOF Core Support Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
H9240019R0003
Issued by
United States Special Operations Command

About this file

This document provides guidance on evaluating past performance for a forthcoming solicitation from the United States Special Operations Command. It outlines four relevancy ratings and five confidence ratings to assess offerors' recent and relevant contract experience. Very relevant performance involved essentially the same scope, magnitude, and complexities as required by this solicitation. Relevant performance involved similar but not identical requirements. Somewhat relevant performance addressed only some of the scope. A not relevant rating signifies the effort involved little to none of the required scope. To receive a substantial confidence rating, past performance demonstrates a high expectation of successful performance. Satisfactory confidence indicates a reasonable expectation, while limited confidence represents a low expectation. No confidence means no expectation of success. The document also defines evaluation criteria for contract value, type, personnel levels, business systems, performance locations, and labor categories to determine relevancy ratings.

Atch 07 SCS Past Performance Relevancy Baseline

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to SOF Core Support, newest first.
File Type Posted
Atch_07_SCS_Past_Performance_Relevancy_Baseline.pdf PDF
01_SOF_Core_Support_SOW_(Draft_20190521).docx DOCX document
01_SOF_Core_Support_SOW_(Draft_20190515).docx DOCX document
05_SCS_2nd_Q-A_Consolidated_(20190510).pdf PDF
04_Section_M_(Draft_20190510).docx DOCX document
02_Section_H_(Draft_20190510).docx DOCX document
03_Section_L_(Draft_20190510).docx DOCX document
01_SOF_Core_Services_Support_SOW_(Draft_20190510).docx DOCX document
Atch_09_Past_Performance_Information_Sheet_(PPI).docx DOCX document
Atch_12_SCS_Past_Performance_Relevancy_Baseline.pdf PDF
04_Section_M_(Draft_20190329).pdf PDF
Atch_11_Client_Authorization_Letter.docx DOCX document
03_Section_L_(Draft_20190329).pdf PDF
Atch_08_Preaward_Accounting_System_Checklist.pdf PDF
Atch_07_OCI_Disclosure_Form.docx DOCX document
02_Section_H_(Draft_20190329).pdf PDF
Atch_10_Subcontractor_Consent_Letter.docx DOCX document
01_SOF_Core_Services_Support_SOW_(Draft_20190329).pdf PDF
05_SCS_Q-A_Consolidated_(20190329).pdf PDF
Networking_List.pdf PDF
SCS_Industry_Day_Briefing_(20190304)_Final.pptx PPTX presentation
SCS_Industry_Day_Agenda_(5_Mar_19).pdf PDF
SCSS_Draft_RFP_Questions_Format.docx DOCX document
H9240019R0003_(Draft_-_Pre-decisional).pdf PDF
Show all 24

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

Recency 5 years from the date of proposal submission

Adjectival Rating Description Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Adjectival Rating Description Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Relevancy

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Method

Past Performance Factor Ratings

Section L4.5 Very Relevant Relevant Somewhat Relevant Not Relevant

Awarded Contract Value (not just ceiling value)

$7M+ $5M+ $3M+ Less than $3M

Contract Type

Multiple Award IDIQ with Time and Materials (FAR 16.6) and/or

Labor Hour (FAR 16.5) with fixed-price (FAR 16.2) and cost-reimbursement (FAR 16.3)

Single Award Contract with Time and Materials (FAR 16.6) or Labor Hours (FAR 16.5) with fixed-price

(FAR 16.2) and cost-reimbursement (FAR 16.3)

Non-IDIQ with mix including fixed-price (FAR 16.2) and cost-reimbursement (FAR 16.3)

Non-IDIQ all fixed-price (FAR 16.2)

Contract Type (Personal Services, Non-Personal Services

Supply, R&D) Non-Personal Services Contract Non-Services Contract

Number of Contracted Personnel 50+ 25+ 10+ <10

Diversity of required expertise/volume of subcontractors and teaming required

Requires extensive subcontract management experience; Required to manage numerous subcontracting requirements with multiple teaming partners for services

(>5)

Requires substantial subcontract management experience; Required to manage multiple subcontracting requirements teaming partners for services and/or products (3-5)

Required to manage some subcontracting requirements

(2)

Required to manage very little subcontracting requirements

(1)

Required Business Systems At a minimum the contractor was required to have an adequate accounting system

Effort required no acceptable business systems

Performance Locations and Geographical requirements

Performance required in 5 or more locations with a minimum of 1 which require ITAR compliance

Less than 5/more than 3 locations with a minimum of 1 which requires ITAR compliance

Performance required at one location Onsite Performance not required

Variety of Labor Categories >10 labor categories 7-10 5-6 <5

Type of Service Performance required in Education and Training Services as defined in

SOW 5.1

Performance required in 1 or more Requirement categories identified in SOW 5.2 - 5.6

Performance required in Professional Services outside those defined in SOW 5.1 - 5.6

Effort required no performance of Professional Services

DoD and OGA Support DoD Other Government Agencies only Commercial only

SECTION L - Attachment 7 - SCS Past Performance Relevancy Baseline

Magnitude and Contract Type

Complexity

Similarity of the Scope

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .