II_1 ATTACHMENT D - Past Performance Questionnaire (TCJA).docx
DOCX document 40 KB Posted
- Attached to
- LB&I International Tax Modeling Tool
- Solicitation number
- 2032H520R00039
About this file
This document contains a past performance questionnaire for a federal solicitation. The Internal Revenue Service is seeking a commercial off-the-shelf software tool to enable employees to perform scenario modeling of U.S. international tax provisions, including provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The solicitation number is 2032H5-20-R-00039 and involves a base period of 12 months plus two 12-month option periods. Quotes are due by September 3, 2020 and the associated NAICS code is 511210. The past performance questionnaire requires contractors to have references from previous government clients complete a form assessing quality, timeliness, cost control, business relationships, and management performance on a relevant prior contract. Information provided will be used to evaluate bidders' past performance.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Questions Responses LBI International Tax Modeling Tool.pdf | ||
| II_1 RFQ 2032H5-20-R-00039 TCJA Modeling.pdf | ||
| II_1 ATTACHMENT A - Pricing Template (TCJA).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| II_1 ATTACHMENT B - applicable-provisions-and-testing-DID (082119).doc | DOC document | |
| II_1 ATTACHMENT C - WCAG 2.0 Guidelines.docx | DOCX document |
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 D
PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
LB&I International Tax Modeling Tool RFQ Number: 2032H5-20-Q-00103
The Offeror shall complete Section 1 of this Attachment and provide a separate form to each Agency/Organization who are serving as their past performance references. The Agency/Organization shall complete Section 2 of this form and respond by sending the completed form via e-mail to the IRS Contracting Officer (CO), Beverly Johnson at Beverly.Johnson@irs.gov. Any forms submitted directly by the Offeror will not be accepted. Completed forms should be received no later than the time and date stated in the solicitation.
Section 1 – Contract Information (to be completed by the Offeror) Prime Contractor Company Name:
Subcontractor Company Name:
Program/Project Title:
Contracting Agency/Company:
Contract Number:
Brief Contract Description:
(include magnitude and level of complexity as compared to PFS’s project requirements)
Contract Type:
(e.g., firm-fixed-price, time-and-materials, cost plus)
Period of Performance:
Contract Value:
Program/Project Manager:
Section 2 – Reference Information (to be completed by Agency/Organization) Note: To assist in providing relevant performance feedback, the following is a brief description of the IRS requirement:
LB&I International Tax Modeling Tool The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Large Business and International (LB&I) division, Cross Border Activities (CBA) Practice Area, needs contractor support to provide and assist with implementing a commercial off the shelf (COTS) software tool that would enable employees to perform scenario modeling of U.S. international tax provisions, including provisions of the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act (TCJA). This assistance would include training and consulting with IRS employees on how to use the tool and maximize its effectiveness in interacting with existing IRS databases and IT systems.
Name:
Agency/Company:
Position Title:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Mailing Address:
Length of Time Involved with the Contract:
Questionnaire Completion Date:
Please rate the Contractor’s performance using the following scale:
| RATING |
| DESCRIPTION |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| Very Good |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective. |
| Satisfactory |
| 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. |
| Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated 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 |
| 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. |
Assessments should reflect only contract performance for which the Contractor is responsible. If an unsatisfactory rating is given, please provide more details in the comments section.
| Rating Scale: E=Exceptional, VG=Very Good, S=Satisfactory, M = Marginal, U = Unsatisfactory |
| E |
| VG |
| S |
| M |
| U |
QUALITY
| 1. |
| Overall quality of the project |
| 2. |
| Qualifications and quality of performance of key management/personnel to perform the requirements of the project |
| 3. |
| Accuracy of the recordkeeping and standard procedures |
| 4. |
| Procedures that ensured that the level of quality remained constant throughout the life of the project |
| 5. |
| Adequacy, relevance, and reasonableness of the quality control approach, procedures, documentation, and methods |
| 6. |
| Ability to implement effective corrective actions and improvements |
| 7. |
| Qualifications of subcontractors and/or teaming partners |
| 8. |
| Quality of products, materials, and services received for the price paid |
| 9. |
| Ability to prepare accurate and timely reports |
Comments:
TIMELINESS
| 10. |
| Timeliness in completing the overall project |
| 11. |
| Provide requisite expertise resulting in the completion of tasks/milestones/deliverables within the established or set time schedule under the current contract |
Comments:
COST CONTROL
| 12. |
| Quality of cost management processes |
| 13. |
| Demonstrated financial stability during the project performance period |
| 14. |
| Demonstrated effectiveness in reducing project costs from the baseline cost estimate, if applicable |
| 15. |
| Demonstrated reasonableness of proposed modification costs, if applicable |
| 16. |
| Reasonableness of labor and other direct costs, if applicable |
Comments:
BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
| 17. |
| Relationship with client technical and functional personnel |
| 18. |
| Relationship with Contracting Office |
| 19. |
| Relationship with subcontractors |
| 20. |
| Cooperation and innovation in problem solving |
| 21. |
| Compliance with the terms of the contract |
Comments:
MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE
| 22. |
| Detailed and complete management plan |
| 23. |
| Adequacy of Contractor’s processes and metrics for the evaluation of its own overall management performance |
| 24. |
| Adequacy of subcontractor management procedures |
| 25. |
| Availability and accessibility of Contractor organization’s key personnel |
| 26. |
| Availability and accessibility of Contractor organization’s senior management personnel |
| 27. |
| Demonstrated ability to lead your organization through the cultural transformation changes required by the implementation of new systems and processes |
| 28. |
| Turnover rate of Key Personnel |
| 29. |
| Turnover of Contract Personnel on the project |
| 30. |
| Demonstrated effectiveness of configuration management processes for managing and controlling change (e.g., hardware, software, and documentation; change control process; etc.) |
| 31. |
| Quality of risk/issue identification, escalation and mitigation/resolution procedures |
Comments:
| QUESTIONS |
| Y |
| N |
| REMARKS |
If you had a choice, would you contract with this contractor again? If no, why not? If yes, does the contractor have any particular performance strong points?
Did the end product or services meet contractual requirements, particularly with respect to the quality provided?
Did the contractor make contractual and administrative deliveries on time? If not, why not, and what specific delivery dates were not met?
Did the contractor complete the effort within the budget? If not, were the cost growth or other cost control problems due to contractor inefficiency or lack of expertise? (Does not apply to fixed price contracts)
Were contract changes made because of the manner of the contractor’s performance, particularly with respect to delivery times and contract specifications?
Was the contractor cooperative and responsive to your needs?
If there were problems, did the contractor act promptly to resolve them?
Additional Comments: Please include any other pertinent information such as awards the Contractor may have earned, ability to meet subcontracting plans, any incentive/disincentives earned/penalized, etc.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .