Atch_07_SCS_Past_Performance_Relevancy_Baseline.pdf
PDF 136 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 guidelines for evaluating past performance references for a solicitation from the United States Special Operations Command. Offerors will be rated on recency of relevant past performance examples from the last five years involving contracts valued at $7 million or more for non-personal services requiring management of subcontracting for both services and products across multiple locations, at least one of which mandated compliance with International Traffic in Arms Regulations. Ratings will assess relevancy of scope, magnitude, and complexity of prior efforts. Confidence assessments will consider the offeror's record of successful performance to determine the government's expectation for successful performance of the required work. The related federal contract opportunity notice describes the SOF Core Support requirement as a re-competition of expiring IDIQ contracts to provide mission support services to USSOCOM. Tentative dates are provided for release of a draft RFP on January 31, 2019 and submission of comments/questions by the end of April 2019.
Updated Past Performance Relevancy Baseline, dated 21 May 2019.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
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, Supplies) Non-Personal Services Contract Mix of Non-Personal Services and
Personal Services Contract Personal Services 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 michael.longdon Highlight
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .