J.2 PERFORMANCE_BASED_AWARD_FEE_EVALUATION_CRITERIA_3-25-2021.pdf

PERFORMANCE BASED AWARD FEE EVALUATION CRITERIA

I. Purpose of a Cost Plus Award Fee Contract (CPAF)

The overall purpose of the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) mode of contracting is to encourage maximum performance by the Contractor. All evaluations will be performed with this thought in mind. Criticism will be constructive in all points and will be directed toward improvement of operations in conformance with Government objectives and requirements.

The purpose of this section is to establish the procedures for evaluating the Contractor's achievement, including technical performance, technical management, and business management in providing comprehensive analytical support to NIOSH.

II. Award Fee Mechanism

The award fee evaluation will be conducted semiannually at a NIOSH designated site or virtually as appropriate. It will be based upon evaluation of the Contractor's performance by the Fee Evaluation Board which consists of the following five individuals or designees:

Director and Representative, Health Effects Laboratory Division (HELD) (Chairperson)

NIOSH Office of the Director

Director, Respiratory Health Division (RHD)

Director, Division of Field Studies and Engineering (DFSE)

The Board will evaluate achievement based on the Contractor's summary evaluation of the award fee period, presented at the CPAF meeting, and on the documentation and awareness of the Contractor's performance, gained through all sources available, including the Project Officer, Quality Assurance Manager, Contract Officer, Lab Coordinator, and Field Coordinators. Their evaluations will be made by rating the Contractor's technical performance, technical management, and business management as noted in the following paragraphs. Although some of these paragraphs list a suggested numerical evaluation, the Board is the absolute authority and may assign points at their discretion, including extra points for outstanding effort in areas such as method development, high sample load, publications, methods produced for the NIOSH Manual of Analytical Methods (NMAM), or extensive data review.

The total points allotted will not exceed 100 points. The suggested point distribution is based on 100 points distributed over the following areas:

III. Performance Criteria and Suggested Evaluation Points

Performance Criteria Specific Area Points

Suggested Evaluation Points

A. Quality Assurance 30

(1) AIHA Proficiency Analytical Testing 20

(2) Internal Quality Control 10

B. Technical Performance 55

(1) Management Commitment 15

(2) Method Development Projects 15

(3) Average Sample Turnaround Time/Routine Analysis 10

(4) Analytical Reports Quality and Completeness 15

C. Business Management 15

(1) Business Operations 5

(2) Cost Management 5

(3) Organizational Commitment 5

GRAND TOTAL 100

A. Quality Assurance 30 points

(1) Proficiency Analytical Testing Program (20 points)

The Contractor will participate in all American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) proficiency testing that corresponds to samples required for analysis in this contract. Maintenance of proficient rating will involve careful and accurate analysis of reference samples supplied by the AIHA programs.

NIOSH will analyze the results obtained from the analyses. Evaluation of performance will be based on these results. In addition, maintenance of a proficient rating in all additional proficiency testing programs, both external and internal, will be expected. NIOSH will assess the results obtained from these analyses. Audit samples may also be supplied by the Chemical and Biological Monitoring Branch (CBMB) QA Manager.

A report of any audit results will be issued by the CBMB QA Manager to the Project Officer who will forward a copy to the Contractor. When a set is ruled out of control, it is expected that the Contractor and NIOSH will work together to establish the cause of the problem. Unless the problem can be identified as beyond the Contractor's responsibility, for evaluation purposes, the sample set will be considered out of control.

Table A-1 gives the suggested evaluation points on proficiency testing sample sets analyzed during the evaluation period.

If the source of a problem cannot be identified or clearly attributed to the Contractors, for purposes of evaluation, the board may defer consideration of that set until the next period.

(2) Internal Quality Control (10 points)

Internal quality control (QC) is implemented according to the Contractor's initiative and concern for the analytical results. This area includes proper instrument maintenance and performance checks, proper application of calibration solutions, replicate analyses of a representative number of field samples, submission of QC reports, plus analytical reports, maintenance of a proper sample logging system, maintenance of proper sample logging in the HELD Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS), submittal and completion of corrective action reports, and general good QC practices. Record keeping is important to this aspect of the Contractor's performance. Examination of these records will provide the prime indicator of making a determination of performance in this area.

B. Technical Performance 55 points

(1) Management Commitment (15 points)

Technical commitment is evaluated as a summary of all activities conducted during the evaluation period without regard to specific milestones. This section of the evaluation will cover the qualities of management, initiative, cooperation, communication, and timeliness in overall technical management.

While all aspects of technical contract management will be reviewed, particular emphasis will be placed on implementation of new methods (developed by NIOSH), as well as method development projects.

(2) Method Development Projects (15 points)

Contractor will be assigned method development projects requiring varying degrees of technical expertise during the contract period. The contractor will be graded on criteria such as responsiveness to request, cooperation with individual NIOSH project officers, and the progress and results of the final method development product.

(3) Average Sample Turnaround Time for Routine Analyses (10 points)

The average sample turnaround time refers to the Contractor's responsiveness to submitted samples for analysis and the preparation and distribution of analytical reports. The turnaround time begins one day after a complete sample set is received in the laboratory, continues through each calendar day including weekends and holidays, and ends on the day the analytical results are reported out of the laboratory.

Table B-1 lists the suggested evaluation points.

(4) Analytical Reports Quality and Completeness (15 points)

The quality and completeness of analytical reports and any method development projects submitted for review will be evaluated for clarity of methodology, accuracy and precision of results, QC, discussion of problems encountered, and promptness of reporting. The frequency of amended reports will be evaluated.

C. Business Management 15 points

Business management is evaluated as a summary of all activities conducted during the period. The evaluation rating for each business management criterion is awarded for the Contractor's performance, based upon the following standards. Three categories of Business Management will be evaluated: (1) Business Operations, (2) Cost Management, and (3) Organizational Commitment.

(1) Business Operations (5 points)

Business Operations will be evaluated for Procurement, Personnel, and Overall Business Management and Contract Compliance. Procurement will be evaluated by the effectiveness and compliance of purchasing policies and procedures, and emphasis will be placed on awards to small and disadvantaged business. The Personnel evaluation will consider compliance with personnel policies and procedures, labor relations, and Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) compliance. The Overall Business Management and Contract Compliance will consider timely, accurate, and complete business and cost reports; effectiveness of the contract's business management; comprehension of the contract’s business requirement at all management levels; property control and administration; overall management response to the needs of the Government; compliance with the terms and conditions of the Contract; and completeness and speed of response to Contract Officer’s inquiries.

(2) Cost Management (5 points)

The Contractor will be evaluated in the area of cost including use of resources and variance between negotiated amounts and rates, versus actual amounts and rates. Particular attention will be placed on reduction of labor and other direct charges during slack periods. All areas of cost will be evaluated, including labor, overhead, G & A material, travel, and equipment. The Contractor should provide reasons for variances between actual and negotiated costs. Information should be provided on measures the organization has taken to reduce G&A and overhead cost, and on measures the Contractor has taken to reduce overall cost to the Government.

(3) Organizational Commitment (5 points)

Middle and upper level management will place emphasis on meeting the needs of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), NIOSH. Commitment can be demonstrated by acquiring and maintaining state-of-the-art equipment, cross-training of personnel, ability to hire and retain qualified personnel, and ability to perform difficult tasks in a timely and cost-effective manner.

IV. Post Board Evaluation

Upon completion of the Board’s evaluation, the Board Chairperson will verbally inform the Contractor of the Board’s decision at the end of the CPAF meeting. These remarks should reflect the typical performance trends throughout all or a significant portion of the project evaluation. Specific examples of performance should be used for clarification and emphasis. The Contracting Officer will inform the Contractor in writing of the amount of the award fee payable semi-annually, accompanied by a narrative explanation of the basis for the award fee. The payment of the fee will be made after a written administrative change order is prepared and signed by the Contracting Officer and an invoice is received from the Contractor for such fees. If the Contractor disagrees with the award fee payment, objections may be expressed in writing to the Contracting Officer. The Contractor's comments will be taken into consideration in the subsequent evaluation; however, the previous evaluation and fee determination will not be changed or amended, and the decision of the Contracting Officer will be final.

Definition of Ratings

Award-Fee Adjectival Rating

Award-Fee Pool Available To Be Earned

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 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 as defined and measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period.

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 as defined and measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period.

Satisfactory No Greater Than 50%.

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

Unsatisfactory 0% Contractor has failed to meet overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements of the contract as defined and measured against the criteria in the award-fee plan for the award-fee evaluation period.

Table A-1, Proficiency Testing Evaluation Points (20 points maximum)

Proficiency Testing Evaluation Points 95% to 100% of results in control 16 to 20 points 90% to 95% of results in control 12 to 16 points 85% to 90% of results in control 8 to 12 points 80% to 85% of results in control 4 to 8 points 75% to 80% of results in control 1 to 4 points Less than 74% of results in control 0 points

Table B-1, Average Sample Turnaround Time Evaluation Points (10 points maximum)

Average Sample Turnaround Time (Days)

Evaluation Points

1 to 10 10 11 to 12 9 13 to 14 8 15 to 16 7 17 to 18 6 19 to 20 5 21 4 22 3 23 2 24 1 25 0