Attachment_8_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

N00039-17-R-0005

Attachment 8

Recent and Relevant Past Performance Questionnaire

1. Past Performance Assessment. The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command

(SPAWAR), is soliciting competitive offers from industry for the design and demonstration of full duplex optical communications payloads to communicate between an aircraft and undersea systems for Program Executive Office - Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and

Intelligence (PEO C4I), Undersea Integration Program Office (PMW 770).

It is requested that you complete this questionnaire and provide via email to the below listed individual no later than 23 October 2017 at 1000 hours, Pacific Standard Time, the closing time for receipt of offers.

Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR)

Attn: Patricia Pacheco, Contract Specialist

4301 Pacific Highway

San Diego, CA 92110

E-Mail: patricia.pacheco@navy.mil and kate.mccoy@navy.mil

RETURN THIS COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO THE REQUESTING

CONTRACTOR IN ADDITION TO THE CONTRACTING SPECIALIST.

*NOTE: IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OFFEROR TO ENSURE ALL PAST

PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES ARE SUBMITTED TO THE GOVERNMENT

BY THE CLOSING DATE AND TIME IF DATE IS DIFFERENT THAN ABOVE.

If you need more space than that provided, please attach additional pages. Responses will be treated as source selection sensitive information. If you have any questions, please contact the

Contracting Officer at the above e-mail address.

mailto:patricia.pacheco@navy.mil mailto:kate.mccoy@navy.mil

2. Contract Information. Please complete the following:

Contractor:

Contract Number:

Period of Performance:

Describe the Contract Work:

3. Contract Relevancy. Describe the relevancy of the scope of the contract performed to this

RFP.

4. Performance Assessment Values.

5 - Outstanding. Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements, to the Government’s benefit. Contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

4 - Excellent. Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements, to the Government’s benefit. Contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

3 – Good. Performance meets contractual requirements. Contractual performance of the element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

2 - Satisfactory. Performance barely meets some contractual requirements. Contractual performance of the element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

1 - Unsatisfactory. Performance does not meet some or most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. Contractual performance of the element being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

0 - Not Applicable. Unable to provide a score. Performance in this area not applicable to effort assessed.

5. Assessment Elements. Please select/circle the appropriate performance assessment value for each item on the questionnaire and provide supporting narrative.

a. Cost Control. Rate the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling cost (including reporting and analyzing variances) and ability to deliver at the agreed-to cost/price. Provide reasons for changes to the contract value (e.g., scope changes, overrun/underrun, Government-imposed schedule changes).

5 4 3 2 1 0

Comments:

b. Schedule. Rate the contractor’s ability to deliver according to the agreed-to schedule.

What were the causes of any schedule variances?

c. Mission Requirements. Rate the contractor’s ability to provide a product or service that met your mission requirements.

d. Quality. Rate the contractor’s ability to provide a product that met your required level of quality. Assess the contractor’s conformance to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship (e.g., commonly accepted technical, professional, environmental, or safety and health standards.)

e. Socioeconomic Goals. Rate the contractor’s ability to meet any applicable subcontracting goals for utilization of Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB), Women-

Owned Small Businesses (WOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business

(SDVOSB), HUBZone and Historically Black Colleges and Universities/Minority Institutions

(HBCU/MI).

f. Subcontract Management. Rate the contractor’s ability to meet the goals of the subcontracting plan, to include the ability to timely award and manage subcontracts.

g. Business Relations. Rate the contractor’s ability to integrate and coordinate all activities needed to execute the contract, specifically the timeliness, completeness, quality of problem resolution, corrective action plans, the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, customer satisfaction, and its ability to submit accurate invoices in a timely manner.

h. Recommendation. To what extent would you recommend this contractor for additional contracts? Rate on the following scale: 5 = Yes, definitely; 4 = Yes, likely; 3 = Maybe, 2 = No, not likely; 1 = No, not ever; 0 = N/A.

6. Other References. If you are aware of any other contract or a Point of Contact (POC) who is familiar with the contractor’s performance under this contract, please identify.

Name, Phone, and E-Mail

Address:

7. Assessor Information. Please provide the following information about yourself:

Name:

Title:

Address:

Phone Number:

E-Mail Address:

Thank you for your assistance.