J3_Contractor Performance Self-Assessment Template.pdf
PDF 206 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 75P00123R00048
About this file
This document provides a template for contractors to conduct self-assessments of their own performance on federal contracts. The template includes sections for contractors to rate and comment on quality, schedule, cost control, management, small business subcontracting, regulatory compliance, and other areas as specified by the contracting officer. Ratings are on a scale of Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory. The template also includes definitions of these rating levels. Upon completion, contractors should provide the assessment to their contracting officer.
The related federal contract opportunity is a solicitation from the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration for executive services and consulting support for the HHS Office of Civil Rights. The solicitation number is 75P00123R00048 and is titled "HHS Office of Civil Rights Executive Services & Consulting." No other details are provided about required products or services, response dates, or other salient information.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 75P00123R00048 Amendment 02.pdf | ||
| J6 Revised Questions and Answers.pdf | ||
| J7 SF1449.pdf | ||
| J1_Past Performance Questionnare.docx | DOCX document | |
| J8 Wage Determination 2015-4281.pdf | ||
| J6 Questions and Answers.pdf | ||
| 75P00123R00048 Amendment 01.pdf | ||
| J4 Revised IDIQ - Executive Services Consulting - SOW - TO1.pdf | ||
| J5 Revised Pricing Scenario.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| J5 Pricing Scenario.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Synopsis solicitation 75P00123R00048 r1.pdf | ||
| J2 OCR Separation Checklist.docx | DOCX document | |
| J1_Past Performance Questionnare.docx | DOCX document | |
| J4 IDIQ - Executive Services Consulting - SOW - TO1.pdf |
Show all 14
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
This document is provided for offeror awareness only. This is a post award document applicable only to the recipient of the contract. This should not be used for the purposes of providing past performance pursuant to the solicitation sections L and M.
CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE SELF-ASSESSMENT
INSTRUCTIONS: Provide a detailed narrative and rating for each of the relevant evaluation areas. Narratives must substantiate your rating selection. The contractor should use the Guidance for the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to assist in preparation of the self-assessment. If further direction is required on how to complete this self-assessment or where to submit it, please contact your Contracting Officer.
CONTRACTOR
CONTRACT
NUMBER
ADDRESS
ORDER
NUMBER
CITY / STATE/ ZIP
PERIOD OF
PERFORMANCE
BEING
ASSESSED
FROM TO
CONTRACTING
OFFICER’S REP
CONTRACTING
OFFICER
1. Quality N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
COMMENTS:
2. Schedule N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
3. Cost Control N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
4. Management N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
5. Small Business Subcontracting N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
6. Regulatory Compliance N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
7. Other Area:
N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
8. Other Area:
N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
9. Other Area:
N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
10. Other Area:
N/A Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory
Additional comments to support your response to any item above.
Completed by:
Name:
Title:
Phone Number:
Email Address:
Signature:
Date:
EVALUATION RATING DEFINITIONS
RATING
DEFINITION
NOTE
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.
To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.
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 were effective.
To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.
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.
To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order.
There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.
Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed 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.
To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government.
A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).
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.
To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .