J-10 HHPC2 Performance Evaluation Plan.pdf

80JSC025R7001

Attachment J-10 Human Health and Performance Contract 2

Human Health and Performance Contract 2

(HHPC2)

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PLAN

Attachment J-10

Contract No.: 80JSC025R7001

I. Introduction

In accordance with the provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), NASA FAR Supplement (NFS), the NASA Award Fee Handbook, and in accordance with JSC Policy and Procedures, a performance evaluation procedure is hereby established for determination of fees payable under this contract. The Contractor’s performance will be evaluated by NASA in accordance with the procedures below.

The fee arrangement outlined in this plan has been established to motivate the contractor to strive for excellence in the quality and timeliness of performance, small business subcontracting goals, safety, and cost. The payment of any award fee is contingent upon compliance with contractual requirements and performance.

The evaluation to be performed by NASA will be based on NASA’s assessment of the Contractor’s accomplishment of the various areas of work covered by the Statement of Work (SOW), in accordance with the criteria, weightings, procedures, and other provisions below. The evaluation process will include both objective and subjective assessments of Contractor performance.

This contract includes clause H.26, Option To Transition From Award-Fee To Fixed- Fee, which may be unilaterally exercised at NASA’s discretion. Initial performance will be evaluated utilizing the provisions listed under Section III Evaluation Procedures.

Should NASA choose to evaluate performance under Fixed-Fee as opposed to Award- Fee, this decision shall be made no later than 60 days into a fee evaluation period. NASA has the sole discretion to make the decision to switch back to Award- Fee evaluations at any time during the contract period in accordance with clause H.27, Option To Transition From Fixed-Fee To Award-Fee.

II. ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE

A. Performance Evaluation Board Integration Team: The Performance Evaluation

Board Integration Team (PEB-IT) will be composed of NASA’s contract management team. The COR will be the focal point for the accumulation and development of award fee evaluation technical reports, reviews, and presentations. The CO will be the focal point for Contractor performance evaluations relating to contract management. The PEB-IT will evaluate

Contractor performance using the evaluation factors listed in Section IV, Evaluation Criteria and Weighting, of this plan.

i. The PEB-IT will provide the Contractor interim performance evaluations. The intent of these interim evaluations is to discuss specific areas where future performance improvement is necessary or where performance has excelled.

The interim evaluation will not include any adjective rating or numerical score and will be reviewed by the Performance Evaluation Board (PEB) chair out-of-board.

ii. The PEB-IT will conduct final performance evaluations as provided below in Section III, Evaluation Procedures, of this plan, and prepare an evaluation report for review by the Performance Evaluation Board (PEB) at the end of each evaluation period. This report will include a recommended adjective rating and numerical score representing the Contractor’s performance for the period evaluated.

B. Performance Evaluation Board (PEB): A PEB, comprised of selected NASA technical and administrative personnel, will evaluate the Contractor’s performance after each evaluation period to determine whether and to what extent the Contractor’s performance during the evaluation period is deserving of the payment of award fee. The Board, at the end of each evaluation period, will prepare a summary of the evaluations for review by the Fee Determination Official (FDO). This summary will include a recommendation to the FDO as the adjective rating and numerical score to be assigned for the Contractor’s performance in the preceding evaluation period.

C. Fee Determination Official (FDO): The FDO, a senior NASA official, will determine the Contractor’s performance score in accordance with the procedures set forth below. After considering available and pertinent information and recommendations, the FDO will make a performance determination for each period. The FDO shall appoint the PEB Chairperson and members.

III. EVALUATION PROCEDURES

Award fee evaluation periods are specified in B.3 CONTRACT VALUE. NASA will conduct an interim and final evaluation during each period. Phase-in will be evaluated with Period 1. NASA reserves the right to change the length of the award fee periods at its sole discretion. NASA may provide Contractor performance feedback to the Contractor at any time during the evaluation period.

A. The Contractor may recommend areas of emphasis (AOE) for consideration by

NASA to be used for the ensuing evaluation period no later than 45 days prior to the start of each award fee evaluation period (for the first evaluation period this shall be construed as 30 days prior to the end of the phase-in period).

Consideration will be given to the Contractor’s recommendations; however, it is NASA’s responsibility to establish the specific areas of emphasis for each evaluation period.

B. NASA may unilaterally identify selected areas of emphasis and prioritize their relative importance (including those proposed by the Contractor). These areas of emphasis will be communicated to the Contractor by the CO in writing as required for each evaluation period. NASA will communicate AOEs no later than 60 days after the start of an evaluation period. These areas of emphasis may not cover the entire spectrum of performance that will be evaluated in determining award fee dollars earned.

C. The Contractor shall provide a self-evaluation report to the CO within 5 days after the end of a performance period. The Contractor is also encouraged to provide an advance draft copy 15 days in advance of the end of the performance period. The PEB-IT will not submit its recommendation to the PEB until (1) the Contractor’s self-evaluation final report has been received and considered, (2) the Contractor has provided written notification that a self-evaluation report will not be submitted, or (3) the deadline for its submission has expired.

D. Promptly after the end of each evaluation period, the PEB-IT shall meet to consider all of the performance information it has obtained. The PEB-IT will evaluate Contractor performance using the evaluation factors listed in Section IV, Award Fee Evaluation Criteria and Weighting, using the Evaluation Definitions in Appendix 1 as reference. At the meeting, the PEB-IT will summarize its preliminary findings and recommendations in the Performance Evaluation Board Integration Team Report (PEB-ITR). Included with the report will be an adjective rating and a recommended performance score. The report, adjective rating, and recommended performance score will be presented to the PEB.

E. The PEB shall meet subsequent to the PEB-IT and consider all of the performance information it has obtained. At the PEB meeting, the contractor may provide a self- evaluation presentation (a copy of which shall be provided to the PEB) not to exceed 30 minutes in length.

F. The PEB will summarize its preliminary findings and recommendations in the

PEB Report. Included with the report will be an adjective rating and a recommended performance score. The report, adjective rating, and recommended performance score will be presented to the FDO.

G. The FDO will consider the recommendations of the PEB-IT, the PEB, the PEB

Report, and any other pertinent information in determining performance scores.

The FDO’s determination of the final evaluation score and adjectival rating will be stated in a written Award Fee Determination and provided to the Contractor by the CO.

H. The Contractor will be provided the final score and a summary of the findings.

The Contractor shall provide a written response to the CO within 5 calendar days stating acceptance or indicating a need for further FDO consideration. If the Contractor takes exception to the findings, such exception shall be stated in writing and provided to the CO within 5 working days from the date that the findings were provided to the Contractor.

I. The Contractor shall submit to the CO a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for each identified weakness noted in the PEB Report or adverse objective performance metric identified by NASA as part of the evaluation. The CAPs shall be submitted within 15 working days after the final performance determination for each evaluation period for concurrence by the CO and the COR.

IV. AWARD FEE EVALUATION CRITERIA AND WEIGHTING

A. The criteria for evaluation of Contractor performance for determination of award fee is defined below. NASA may unilaterally modify the award fee performance evaluation factors and performance evaluation areas applicable to the evaluation period. The CO shall notify the Contractor in writing of any such changes prior to the start of the relevant evaluation period.

Evaluation Criteria Weighting Evaluation Criteria Weight

Score 1 Technical and Management Performance including but not limited to:

Program Management Quality of Work Schedule Performance Technology, Innovation, and Process Improvements

50%

2 Safety and Health 15% 3 Small Business Goals (Objective Metric) 10% 4 Cost Performance (Objective Metric) 25%

B. Notwithstanding any of the above in Section IV.A, a major breach of safety or security, as defined by NFS clause 1852.223-75, Major Breach of Safety or Security, of this contract, may result in an award fee score of zero for the affected evaluation period.

C. The performance level definition adjective ratings and corresponding numerical scores that will be used in evaluating performance are defined in FAR 16.401(e)(3)(iv). The numerical score is the percentage of fee that the Contractor earns for the evaluation period per NFS 1816.405-275. In order to earn any award fee, the Contractor must receive a numerical score of 50 or greater.

V. FIXED FEE PROVISIONS

When the Contractor is performing in an excellent manner, NASA may choose to exercise the option in clause H.26, Option To Transition From Award-Fee To Fixed- Fee. Should the option be exercised, NASA will utilize the Fixed Fee Provisions under this section.

For each evaluation period, the Contractor will earn the fixed fee negotiated with NASA. Each fee period is considered to be final and fee from previous periods cannot be moved into subsequent fee periods. (Services only)

When there is a major breach of safety or security as defined in NFS 1852.223-75, Major Breach of Safety or Security, the Contractor will not be eligible for any fixed fee for the subject evaluation period, and an overall Contractor Performance Reporting Systems (CPARS) rating below satisfactory will be given in Safety.

A. Fixed Fee Evaluation Procedures

Contractor performance will be reported via annual CPARS evaluation. This information will be provided to the Contractor for corrective actions and performance improvement. The CO may provide Contractor performance feedback to the Contractor at any time.

The Contractor’s shall provide a self-evaluation report within 5 days after the evaluation period has ended.

The CO may define Areas of Emphasis (AOEs), within 60 days after the start of an evaluation period.

APPENDIX 1 EVALUATION DEFINITIONS

Adjective Rating

Range of Points

Description

Excellent 91%-100% Contractor has exceeded almost all of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period.

Very Good

76%-90%

Contractor has exceeded many of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured

Good

51%-75%

Contractor has exceeded some of the significant award-fee criteria and has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured

Satisfactory

50%

Contractor has met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period.

Unsatisfactory

<50%

Contractor has failed to meet overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract in the aggregate as defined and measured