Draft Atch 3 - Past and Present Performance Questionnaire.pdf

HQ0147-09-R-0006

Attachment 3

Past and Present Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3)

Background Information (for person filling out the survey):

Name: Rank and Service, if Military:

Title: Organization:

Phone (commercial, not DSN): FAX:

E-Mail Address: Dates of Involvement

From: To:

Mailing Address:

Contract Information (for the contract involved):

Company Being Rated: Contract Number:

Division, if any: Total Contract Value: $

Brief Description of Work: Complete

Ongoing

Award date: End Item Description(s) (In addition to describing end item deliverable, please indicate any significant products/service delivered in the past five years):

Any Major Milestones (Ex: Developmental, Acceptance, Integration, Operational, Flight Tests - list only those which have occurred in the past 5 years):

Cost: Below

Estimate

On

Target

Above

Estimate by

Schedule: Behind

On

Ahead by months

Signature (Print Name and Sign):

Date:

Based on your knowledge of the contract identified above, please provide your assessment of how well the contractor performed on each of the following topics. Only performance in the past 5 years is relevant. (Please check the appropriate rating and comment on all responses other than those rated Satisfactory or N/A)

Performance Rating Definitions:

Exceptional (1) Very Good (2) Satisfactory (3) Marginal (4) Unsatisfactory (5) N/A

Indicates performance clearly exceeded requirements. Area of evaluation contains few minor problems for which corrective action appears highly effective

Indicates performance exceeded some requirements. Area of evaluation contains few minor problems for which corrective action appears effective

Indicates performance clearly meets contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains some minor problems for which the corrective actions appear satisfactory

Indicates performance meets contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains a serious problem for which corrective actions have not yet been identified, appear only marginally effective, or have not been fully implemented

Indicates the contractor is in danger of not being able to satisfy contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The area of evaluation contains serious problems for which the corrective actions appear ineffective

Not Applicable

Mission Support

For contracts that support airborne sensor operations; to include pre-mission planning, mission execution and post mission data processing, analysis and reporting.

PAST PERFORMANCE

ELEMENT

PERFORMANCE RATING COMMENTS

Contractor effectively identified and analyzed mission readiness problems and provided adequate and timely corrective actions.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor consistently provided viable mission alternatives to new requirements within the time specified by the customer.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor refines mission requirements to ensure customer needs are met.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor demonstrated effective response to problems and changes to mission requirements.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor demonstrated understanding/ability to perform complex post-mission data processing and reporting.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Mission Assurance

For contracts that perform mission operations and sustainment (O&S) and improvement and modernization (I&M) activities; including but not limited to configuration management, risk management, software development and logistics support

PAST PERFORMANCE

ELEMENT

PERFORMANCE RATING COMMENTS

Contractor used established, efficient system engineering processes.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor’s system engineering processes were responsive to changes in the mission.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor consistently provided viable system engineering alternatives to new requirements.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor refines system engineering requirements to ensure customer needs are met.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor demonstrated effective response to problems and changes in system engineering requirements

Technical Development

For contracts that support the development of aircraft modification and/or complex airborne sensor technology platforms.

PAST PERFORMANCE

ELEMENT

PERFORMANCE RATING COMMENTS

Contractor effectively identified and analyzed conceptual problems and provided adequate and timely corrective actions.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor consistently provided viable alternative concepts to new requirements within the time specified by the customer.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor refines concepts to ensure customer needs are met.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor demonstrated effective response to problems and changes in concepts.

Management Approach/Facilities

For all contracts.

PAST PERFORMANCE

ELEMENT

PERFORMANCE RATING COMMENTS

Contractor used established, efficient business processes.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor’s business processes were responsive to changes in the mission.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor used an integrated management approach successfully in performance of the contract (i.e. tied cost, schedule, and technical performance together).

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor proactively informed the customer of activities status and potential concerns.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor chose a subcontractor(s) who added value to the program.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor maintained effective communication with and management of subcontractors.

Management Approach/Facilities continued

Contractor effectively integrated their subcontractor(s) into the program.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor effectively managed multiple Delivery Order/Task

Orders.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor provided adequate facilities

Transition

For all contracts that acquired follow-on services.

PAST PERFORMANCE

ELEMENT

PERFORMANCE RATING COMMENTS

Contractor effectively planned and executed the contract transition.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor’s plan allowed your unit to maintain a high level of performance during the transition period.

Staffing

PAST PERFORMANCE

ELEMENT

PERFORMANCE RATING COMMENTS

Contractor was able to apply proper resources (e.g. staffing, skill mix, tools, etc.) to resolve problems in a timely manner.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor provided adequate documentation and training.

Cost

PAST PERFORMANCE

ELEMENT

PERFORMANCE RATING COMMENTS

Contractor accurately forecasted contract costs, including future costs.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor developed and met realistic project cost estimates.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor displayed initiative and resourcefulness in controlling fringe benefit costs.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor promptly alerted

Government of unforeseen costs before they occurred.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor effectively handled unforeseen cost increases.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor provided cost reporting that was accurate and timely.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor provided accurate, complete, and timely cost proposals reflecting all aspects of work for the required effort.

1 2 3 4 5 NA

Contractor employed an Earned

Value Management System

(EVMS), provided accurate

EVMS reporting, and effectively used EVMS to manage the contract.

37 I would hire this Offeror again.

YES or NO

(Comments, if any)