Att_L-2__PPQ.docx

Attachment L-2 Past Performance Questionnaire

Responses shall be in Times New Roman font, size 12 and not be bold.

Instructions to offeror: Send the questionnaire to the: 1. Contracting officer, 2. Program manager, 3. Technical lead, 4. Additional points of contact (POC) that can provide an assessment on your proposed past performance effort. Please provide all data requested in Parts I. and II. of the questionnaire. When completed, email the questionnaire to the POC and copy rafael.soberal@navy.mill and Richard.Steinfeld@navy.mil.

I. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATIVE DATA (To be completed by the Offeror)

Offeror Name:

Contract Number/Task Order:

Contract Name:

Period of Performance:

Contract Type:

Offeror Role in Contract: (Prime or other – state other) Dollar Value of Contract:

Dollar Value of Offeror Role in Contract:

Dollar Value of Effort as it Relates to the Instant Effort: (e.g. Instant effort is for contractor operations and maintenance services (COMS) and contract instructional services (CIS).

Administrative Place of Contract:

Cage Code:

DUNS:

Customer:

Contracting Agency:

II. POINT OF CONTACT (POC) Data (To be completed by the Offeror. When complete email to POC and copy rafael.soberal@navy.mill and Richard.Steinfeld@navy.mil.)

Name:

Position or role:

Agency:

Address:

Phone:

Email:

Other:

III. INFORMATION TO THE PPQ POC

Your assistance is requested in support of a source selection. Please complete the assessment below and send all pages of this questionnaire to rafael.soberal@navy.mill and Richard.Steinfeld@navy.mil. within two weeks of receipt from offeror listed above.

Assessment: (To be completed by the PPQ POC)

Instructions to complete the assessment: Please provide responses to, 1. through 7., that are listed below the assessment rating system table. Place an “X” in the rating that best assesses the offeror’s performance in the areas listed below. Then provide examples (two examples are requested) to substantiate your rating. Please complete and forward all pages of this questionnaire to rafael.soberal@navy.mill and Richard.Steinfeld@navy.mil. within two weeks of receipt from offeror listed on page 1.

Rating System Table:

A common five level assessment rating system is used to evaluate a contractor's performance. Ratings range from Unsatisfactory to Exceptional. Here's a breakdown of each category:

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government's benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government's benefit. The element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Satisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements. The element being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions.

Unsatisfactory

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

1. Given what I know today about the contractor's ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I DEFINITELY WOULD or PROBABLY WOULD award to him today given that I had a choice.

2. Contract Changes: Assess promptness and effectiveness of the contractor's response to Request For Proposals (can the contractor meet changing requirements on time or does negotiation tend to be difficult).

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

Provide examples that substantiate rating:

3. Business Relations: (Assess contractor's business orientation (focus on meeting customer needs first, profit first, proactive and aggressive pursuit of problem solving, delays in acting on program needs - a good business partner?). Does the contractor meet end-user needs promptly without demands for contract changes? (This does not refer to work that is clearly out-of-scope). Examples might include movement of instruction hours, tours, student walk-ins, specialized scenario development to name a few.)

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

4. Management Satisfaction: (Indicate your overall level of satisfaction with the contractor's management (at the local site level, program office, and headquarters))

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

5. Disruption Free Performance: (Assess the contractor’s ability to provide and sustain disruption free performance of services (e.g., instruction) and the contractor’s ability to rapidly adapt to and implement contract changes (e.g., increases or decreases in scope, meeting schedules, predicting and preparing for change). Assess the contractor's performance at consistently having all instructors available for missions.)

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

6. Management of Key Personnel: (Assess how well the contractor provided and retained qualified personnel with the appropriate skills, training and security clearance to meet the contract requirements? How effective is the contractor at rapidly filling personnel vacancies, quality of replacements (knowledge, skills, experience), and training up to effectiveness in support?)

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE

SEE FAR 3.104 and 2.101