Attachment 6 - Past Performance Information_PMOSS_Rev1.docx
DOCX document 39 KB Posted
- Attached to
- J6 Program Management Office Support Services
- Solicitation number
- H9241526RE002
- Issued by
-
United States Special Operations Command
About this file
This is a Past Performance Information (PPI) questionnaire template for the J6 Program Management Office Support Services (PMOSS) RFP (H9241526RE002) issued by United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). The document serves as an evaluation tool to assess offerors' past performance on relevant contracts and is mandatory for inclusion in proposals.
The questionnaire is divided into two parts: Part One requires offerors to complete contract identification details including contracting and technical points of contact, contract numbers, period of performance, total contract value, security requirements, and a description of how the cited project relates to J6 PMOSS requirements; Part Two requires government agency or company representatives to rate contractor performance across nine specific elements including compliance with SOW and specifications, schedule adherence, personnel recruitment and retention, security clearance onboarding, problem identification and resolution, working relationships, subcontractor management, technical expertise of staff, and overall performance assessment. Ratings are scored as Excellent, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory, with narrative comments mandatory for Excellent or Unsatisfactory ratings. Completed questionnaires must be returned to Ms. Regina Farrell at regina.farrell@socom.mil by the proposal due date of July 8, 2026 at 2:00 PM EDT, with the email subject line clearly indicating the offeror name.
View the file
Other files
Show all 17
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
ATTACHMENT 6 - PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION (PPI)
In support of Request for Proposal (RFP) H92415-26-R-E002 for J6 Program Management Office Support Services (PMOSS)
OFFEROR NAME/CAGE/UEI: __________________________________
Introduction: Under the RFP, titled J6 Program Management Office Support Services (PMOSS), United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) is obtaining past performance information with respect to each Offeror. The contract resulting from this procurement will provide USSOCOM with IT program support, encompassing strategic planning, resource planning, quality assurance development/reporting, requirements document review, strategic resource planning support (POM submissions/Spend Plans), budget execution (funding document processing/invoice review), and technical and application assessment support. The completed PPI serves as a source of information to evaluate the Offerors recent and relevant performance of the submitted past performance citation as it relates to the RFP’s Statement of Work (SOW).
Instructions:
· Offeror – complete Part 1, Sections I.A. and I.B. and include as part of the Volume III – Past Performance proposal. Additionally, send the entire PPI to the Technical and Contracting POCs identified in Part 1, Section I.A. and also to the USSOCOM Contract POC listed below.
· POCs (listed in Part 1, Section IB) – complete Part 2, Sections II entirely, to include comments, then send the completed PPI to the USSOCOM Contract POC listed below. In addition to this questionnaire, you may receive a follow-up phone call to confirm or clarify information submitted. This is a critical acquisition being conducted by USSOCOM and your support is sincerely needed and appreciated. Narrative comments are appreciated and mandatory for EXCEPTIONAL or UNSATISFACTORY ratings. We thank you in advance for your time, effort, and cooperation in responding to this questionnaire.
Return PPI via email to: Ms. Regina Farrell, regina.farrell@socom.mil by the due date established for receipt of the proposals. The e-mail “Subject” line shall clearly indicate: J6 PMOSS RFP - PPI Submission for [provide OFFEROR name here].
PART ONE – (to be completed by the Offeror)
Section I. OFFEROR PAST PERFORMANCE CITATION INFORMATION:
| A. | CONTRACTING POC – AGENCY & RESPONDENT IDENTIFICATION: |
| 1 | |
| Name & Title: |
(i.e. Contract Spec, COR, COTR, etc.)
| 2 |
| Organization: |
| 3 |
| Address: |
| 4 |
| Phone No. (Commercial & DSN) |
| 5 |
| E-mail: |
TECHNICAL POC – AGENCY & RESPONDENT IDENTIFICATION:
| 1 |
| Name & Title: |
(i.e. Program Manager, COR, COTR, etc.)
| 2 |
| Organization: |
| 3 |
| Address: |
| 4 |
| Phone No. (Commercial & DSN) |
| 5 |
| E-mail: |
B. CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
| 1 |
| Offeror Name: |
| 2 |
| Contract Number and Order Number (If applicable): |
| 3 |
| Performed as Pime or Subcontractor: |
| 4 |
| Project Title and Service Description, to include relevance to J6 PMOSS requirements (Add rows if needed): |
| 5 |
| Type of Contract (i.e. Base with Option, IDIQ, etc.): |
| 6 |
| Pricing Type (i.e. Fixed Price, Time and Materials, Cost Reimbursable, other): |
| 7 |
| Competitive (Y/N): |
| 8 |
| Date of Award: |
| 9 |
| Total Estimated Contract Dollar Value (w/Options): |
| 10 |
| Current Awarded/Obligated Contract Dollar Value to Date: |
| 11 |
| Final Subcontract Value (if applicable) |
| 12 |
| Period of Performance: |
| 13 |
| Place of Performance: |
Identify all Place(s) of Performance
| 14 |
| Number of Full-Time Equivalents (FTE) supporting this contract for each place of performance: |
| 15 |
| Security Requirements (i.e. Top Secret, TS/SCI, Secret, etc.): |
PART TWO - (To be completed by the POCs from I.B. above)
Please use the following rating in scoring the performance elements below (assessments should reflect only contractor-liable performance):
| RATING |
| DESCRIPTION |
| Excellent |
| The Offeror's past 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 were highly effective. REQUIRES A NARRATIVE |
| Very Good |
| The Offeror's past 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 were effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| The Offeror's past performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. |
| Marginal |
| The Offeror’s past performance did not meet contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The Contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective, or were not fully implemented. |
| Unsatisfactory |
| The Offeror's past performance did not meet contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contained serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions were ineffective. REQUIRES A NARRATIVE |
Section II. CONTRACT PERFORMANCE How Would You Rate This Contractor With Respect To:
A. Compliance with the SOW and specifications; conformance to standards of good workmanship, and responsiveness to technical direction:
| Rating |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Check
Comment:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
B. Adherence to the contract schedule and/or milestones:
| Rating |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Check
Comment:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
C. Contractor’s ability to recruit and retain qualified personnel with minimal gaps in service ( > 95% retention rate and/or no more than 21 day gap in service for unfilled billet):
| Rating |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Check
Comment:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
D. Contractor’s ability to onboard contractor personnel in accordance with contract security requirements (i.e. obtaining security clearances, CACs, etc.):
| Rating |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Check
Comment:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
E. Contractor’s ability to identify and resolve problems and prevent or mitigate potential problems in a timely manner:
| Rating |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Check
Comment:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
F. Working relationship with Contracting Officer, COR, and other program personnel, to include other contractors:
| Rating |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Check
Comment:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
G. Contractor’s ability to effectively manage subcontractors and/or team members:
| Rating |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Check
Comment:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
H. Rate the level of technical expertise of the contractor’s staff:
| Rating |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Check
Comment:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I. In summary, please give your overall assessment of this contractor’s performance.
| Rating |
| Excellent |
| Good |
| Satisfactory |
| Marginal |
| Unsatisfactory |
Check
Comment:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Please provide any additional comments regarding this contractor’s performance?
Performance Information provided by:
Name & Title:
Govt. Agency or Company:
E-Mail:
Phone: DSN: / Commercial:
Date:
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .