12 RFP 25R0001 - PPI Rel Base (r1 20250408).XLSX
XLSX spreadsheet 34 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Warrior Care Global Support RFP
- Solicitation number
- H9240025RE001
- Issued by
-
United States Special Operations Command
About this file
The file is a Past Performance Information (PPI) Matrix detailing evaluation criteria for the Warrior Care Global Support RFP (Solicitation H9240025RE001). The matrix provides a comprehensive scoring methodology for assessing past performance, with relevancy ratings ranging from "Not Relevant" (0 points) to "Very Relevant" (10 points), based on multiple factors including contract value, number of contracted personnel, and similarity of organizational structures and management expertise.
The evaluation matrix includes detailed performance confidence assessments with ratings such as "Substantial Confidence," "Satisfactory Confidence," and "No Confidence," which measure the government's expectation of successful contract performance. Key scoring criteria include contract magnitude (ranging from less than $3M annually to $8M annually), personnel count (from 5-6 to 75+ personnel), and a point range of 0-70 for overall past performance evaluation. This matrix will be used to assess potential contractors for the U.S. Special Operations Command's Warrior Care Program, which provides non-clinical case management and advocacy services for Special Operations Forces wounded, ill, or injured service members.
View the file
Other files
Show all 38
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
Factor 3 PPI Matrix Info
| Past Performance Factor Ratings | ||||
| Recency | 3 years from the date of issuance of the solicitation | Performance Rating Definitions | Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Method | Criterion Relevancy Score |
(Each criterion will be assessed by rating. Each rating assigns the score value identified) Exceptional/Blue Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.
| Adjectival Rating | Description | Rating | Very Relevant | Relevant | Somewhat Relevant | Not Relevant | |||||||
| Relevancy | Very Good/Purple | Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective. | 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. | Score Value | 10 Points | 6 Points | 3 Points | 0 Points | ||||
| Adjectival Rating | Description | Satisfactory/Green | Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. | 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. | ||||||||
| Very Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. | Yellow/Marginal | Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. | 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. | Relevancy Ratings Ranges |
(Calculated by sum of the individual score values assessed to each criterion)
| Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. | Unsatisfactory/Red | Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. | 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. | Rating | Very Relevant | Relevant | Somewhat Relevant | Not Relevant |
| Somewhat Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. | 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. | Overall Score | 53-70 | 36-53 | 18-35 | 0-17 | ||
| Not Relevant | Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. |
PP Relevancy Matrix
| SECTION L - Table 2. Past Performance Relevancy Criteria Baseline | |||||
| Section L4.5 | Very Relevant (10) | Relevant (6) | Somewhat Relevant (3) | Not Relevant (0) | changes made as part of Amendment 1- Solicitation H9240025RE0010001 |
| Similar Magnitude and Complexity- Which requires similar organizational structures, management expertise, and business processes required by this solicitation | |||||
| Point Range | 53-70 | 36-53 | 18-35 | 0-17 | |
| Magnitude and Contract Type | |||||
| Current Contract Value (excluding unexercised options) | $8M Annually | $5M+ Annually | $3M+ Annually | Less than $3M Annually | |
| Number of Contracted Personnel | 75+ | 50+ | 25+ | <25 | |
| Complexity | |||||
| Security Classification Requirements Personnel | TS/SCI Pers Cleared | TS Pers Cleared | Secret only Pers Cleared | No personnel with clearance | |
| Performance Locations and Geographical requirements | Performance required in 10+ locations with a minimum of 2 OCONUS locations | Performance required in 5+ locations with a minimum of 1 OCONUS location | More than one CONUS/OCONUS location | Performance required at one location | |
| Similarity of the Scope | |||||
| Variety of Labor Categories | >7 labor categories | 5-6 | 3-4 | <3 | |
| SOF, DoD, and OGA Support | Substantial SOF (Special Mission Unit) and some DoD or OGA | Some SOF and some DoD or OGA | No SOF, just DoD or OGA | Commercial only | |
| Scope Required in the PWS/Diversity of Requirements | Required the recruitment and retention of personnel for same services. (i.e. RCC, Benevolence, Career Transition, MASP) | Required the recruitment and retention of personnel for a similar service. (ie, family support, mental health, reintegration, etc.) | Required the recruitment and retention of personnel for a service contract. | Non-Services Contract |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .