20100210_NGW_Section_J_Attachment_J_PCA_Questionnaire.doc
DOC document 114 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Military Sealift Command Next Generation Wideband Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- HC1013-09-R-2004
- Issued by
- Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
Attachment J-Performance Confidence Assessment Quesitonnaire
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Military Sealift Command Next Generation Wideband has more files on GovTribe.
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
ATTACHMENT J
PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE
When filled in this document is source selection sensitive information iaw FAR 3.104
SECTION 1: CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION (to be completed by the offeror) A. Contractor: ______________________________________________________________________________
B. Cage Code of contractor contract was awarded to: _________________________________
C. Contract number: _______________________________________
D. Contract type: ______________________________
E. Was this a competitive contract? Yes _____ No _____
F. Period of performance: _________________________________________________________
G. Initial contract cost: $____________________________
H. Current/final contract cost: $_______________________________
I. Reasons for differences between initial contract cost and final contract costs: _____________________________________ J. Description of service provided:____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SECTION 2. CUSTOMER OR AGENCY IDENTIFICATION (to be completed by the offeror) A. Customer or agency name: _________________________________________________________________
B. Customer or agency description (if applicable): _______________________________________________________________
C. Geographic description of services under this contract, i.e., local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands:
SECTION 3. EVALUATOR IDENTIFICATION (to be completed by the evaluator) A. Evaluator's name: _________________________________________________________________________________
B. Evaluator's title: ______________________________________________________________________________________
C. Evaluator's phone/fax number: ___________________________________________________________________
D. Number of years evaluator worked on subject contract: _____________________
SECTION 4. EVALUATION (to be completed by the evaluator) Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:
CODE
PERFORMANCE LEVEL
B BLUE/EXCEPTIONAL - The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many (requirements) to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.
P PURPLE/VERY GOOD- The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some (requirements) to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.
G GREEN/SATISFACTORY – The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.
Y YELLOW/MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.
R RED/UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problems for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.
N NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score.
System Performance:
| The contractor: |
| B |
| P |
| G |
| Y |
| R |
| N |
| SP1 |
| Provided voice and data communications capacity in an efficient and cost effective manner |
| SP2 |
| Provided a solution that maintained full service among users in a dynamic environment (i.e. changing locations, adverse weather) |
| SP3 |
| Provided a solution capable of supporting unanticipated growth |
| SP4 |
| Effectiveness of terminals and other related equipment |
Operations and Maintenance:
| The contractor: |
| B |
| P |
| G |
| Y |
| R |
| N |
| OM1 |
| Installed a SATCOM solution on platforms located globally with some occurring simultaneously |
| OM2 |
| Required minimal operator intervention for day-to-day SATCOM sustainment activities |
| OM3 |
| Applied Department of Defense (DoD) IA requirements to commercial products |
| OM4 |
| Presented a policy for warranties and a process for addressing parts obsolescence, including periodic technology updates for commercial hardware and software changes through the operational life of the system |
| OM5 |
| Effectively centralized SATCOM management |
| OM6 |
| Managed commercial satellite bandwidth and terrestrial circuits |
| OM7 |
| Provided end-to-end satellite and terrestrial, commercial communications services for at least 25 terminals concurrently |
| OM8 |
| Provided LES services or performance and/or monitoring of end-to-end services |
Transition Plan
| The contractor: |
| B |
| P |
| G |
| Y |
| R |
| N |
| TP1 |
| Efficient approach to deliver capability within deadlines |
| TP2 |
| Effectively utilization of government and contractor resources |
| TP3 |
| Defined and mitigated transition risk |
| TP4 |
| Clear understanding of clients operational and mission requirements and how they impacted the transition |
Management Approach
| The contractor: |
| B |
| P |
| G |
| Y |
| R |
| N |
| MA1 |
| Adhered to contract schedule |
| MA2 |
| Defined and mitigated schedule risk |
| MA3 |
| Delivered quality goods and services |
| MA4 |
| Conformed to contract specifications |
| MA5 |
| Is committed to customer satisfaction |
Small and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation
| The contractor: |
| B |
| P |
| G |
| Y |
| R |
| N |
| SB1 |
| Met or exceeded small business and small disadvantaged business goals set forth in the approved subcontracting plan |
| SB2 |
| Effectively managed small business participation to meet technical performance |
2. Please discuss each and every response for which you indicated B/E (Blue/Exceptional), P/VG (Purple/Very Good), Y/M (Yellow/Marginal) or R/U (Red/Unsatisfactory) in response to the questions above (use additional sheets, if necessary).
3. Government Contracts Only: Has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations?
Yes___ Default___ Convenience___ Pending Terminations___ No ___
If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules, etc).
SECTION 5: NARRATIVE SUMMARY
Would you have any reservations about soliciting this contractor in the future or having them perform one of your critical and demanding programs? To what extent would you recommend this contractor for additional contracts? Rate on the following scale:
5 = Yes, definitely; 4 = Yes, likely; 3 = Maybe, 2 = No, not likely; 1 = No, not ever; 0 = N/A.
Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.
Evaluator’s Signature: ______________________________
Date: ___________________________ Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!
Please return this completed questionnaire to:
DISA/DITCO-Scott (PL8222), 2300 East Drive, Scott AFB, IL 62225-5406
Attn: MSC NGW Past Performance Team, E-Mail: lori.walker@disa.mil, or
Fax to (618) 229-9356/DSN 779
PAGE
Section J, Attachment J: Performance Confidence Assessment Questionnaire v 1.0
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .