C-26_PWS_APPENDIX_E_PERFORMANCE_METRICS.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 16 KB Posted
- Attached to
- C-26 CLS Draft RFP (N00019-15-R-0089)
- Solicitation number
- N00019-15-R-0089
About this file
Appendix E- Performance Metrics
View the file
Other files
Show all 33
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
Metrics
| Description | RFP/PWS Ref | Performance Standard Quality Measurements | Surveillance Method/Measure | Incentives | |
| Objective | Marginal | ||||
| Maintain Mission Capable Rate of 85% (MC Rate) | PWS para 5.7.3 | Requirements and objectives met when the aircraft is Mission Capable 85% of the time (See Calculations tab for instructions) | Requirements and objectives met when the aircraft is Mission Capable 80% to 84% of the time | Surveillance by COR | (+) Contractor receives a positive assessment on CPAR, appropriate for quality of service provided |
(-) Contractor receives a negative assessment on CPAR, appropriate for the quality of service provided
| Provide aircraft for scheduled launch window | |||||
| (Launch Window) | PWS para 5.1.9.3 | Requirements and objectives met when the aircraft is ready for launch one hour prior to schedule time, 95% of the time | Requirements and objectives met when the aircraft is ready for launch one hour prior to schedule time 90% to 94% of the time | Surveillance by COR | (+) Contractor receives a positive assessment on CPAR, appropriate for quality of service provided |
(-) Contractor receives a negative assessment on CPAR, appropriate for the quality of service provided
| Provide real-time accurate aircraft, engines and funds information and documentation | |||||
| (WIS Performance) | PWS para 3.12 | Requirements and objectives are met when the data is uploaded to the WIS on time 95% of the time | Requirements and objectives are met when the data is uploaded to the WIS on time 90% to 94% of the time | Surveillance by COR | (+) Contractor receives a positive assessment on CPAR, appropriate for quality of service provided |
(-) Contractor receives a negative assessment on CPAR, appropriate for the quality of service provided CDRL Delivery RFP Exhibit A CDRL, 95% of content acceptable on first submission to Government; submission delay less than 2 days; 100% acceptable on final submission to the Government CDRL, 90% to 94% of content acceptable on first submission to Government; submission delay less than 2 to 4 days; 100% acceptable on final submission to the Government Surveillance by COR (+) Contractor receives a positive assessment on CPAR, appropriate for quality of service provided
(-) Contractor receives a negative assessment on CPAR, appropriate for the quality of service provided C-26 Special Mission Radar equipment PWS para 5.1 RANSAC Surveillance Radar shall be fully operational during radar-specific missions to achieve aircraft fully mission capable status C-26 aircraft failing to meet radar-specific mission requirements shall be reported as non-mission capable for that period Surveillance by COR (+) Contractor receives a positive assessment on CPAR, appropriate for quality of service provided
(-) Contractor receives a negative assessment on CPAR, appropriate for the quality of service provided Contract Funds Status Report PWS para 6.3 CDRL, 95% of content acceptable on first submission to Government; submission delay less than 2 days; 100% acceptable on final submission to the Government CDRL, 90% to 94% of content acceptable on first submission to Government; submission delay less than 2 to 4 days; 100% acceptable on final submission to the Government Surveillance by COR (+) Contractor receives a positive assessment on CPAR, appropriate for quality of service provided
(-) Contractor receives a negative assessment on CPAR, appropriate for the quality of service provided Aircraft (Engine) Daily Status Report Para 3.12.2 CDRL, 95% of content acceptable on first submission to Government; submission delay less than 2 days; 100% acceptable on final submission to the Government CDRL, 90% to 94% of content acceptable on first submission to Government; submission delay less than 2 to 4 days; 100% acceptable on final submission to the Government Surveillance by COR (+) Contractor receives a positive assessment on CPAR, appropriate for quality of service provided
(-) Contractor receives a negative assessment on CPAR, appropriate for the quality of service provided
N00019-15-R-0089 Attachment 1, Appendix (E) Performance Metrics 27 May 2015
Calculations (Example) MC Computation Example (Aircraft #1):
The reporting period was 30 days: 30 X 24 hours = 720 hours Reporting Time (RT) The allowable Non-Reporting Time (NRT) for aircraft #1 was 7 days The Not or Non Mission Capable (NMC) time for aircraft #1 for the reporting period was 113 hours:
MC Rate Example Calculation:
30 days x 24 hours = 720 hours………………….……….Total RT hours 7 days NRT x 24 hours = 168 hours..…………………….Total NRT hours 720 (RT) – 168 (NRT) = 552 hours..……………….……..Total Possible MC hours 552 (Possible MC hrs) – 113 (NMC) = 439 hrs.………….Actual MC hours 470 (Actual MC hrs) ÷ 552 (Possible MC hrs) = .85 .85 x 100 = 85% MC for aircraft #1
MC Computation Example (Aircraft #2):
The reporting period was 30 days: 30 X 24 hours = 720 hours Reporting Time (RT) The allowable Non-Reporting Time (NRT) for aircraft #2 was 12 days The Not Mission Capable (NMC) time for aircraft #2 for the reporting period was 24 hours:
MC Rate Example Calculation:
30 days x 24 hours = 720 hours………………….……….Total RT hours 12 days NRT x 24 hours = 288 hours……………………Total NRT hours 720 (RT) – 288 (NRT) = 432 hours..……………………..Total Possible MC hours 432 (Possible MC hrs) – 24 (NMC) = 408 hours..………Actual MC hours 408 (Actual MC hrs) ÷ 432 (Possible MC hrs) = .94 .94 x 100 = 94% MC for aircraft #2
N00019-15-R-0089 Attachment 1, Appendix (E) Performance Metrics 27 May 2015
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .