DRAFT RFP N6134021R0001_Att L-2 Vol 4 CPAQ_07.20.21.docx

DRAFT SOLICITATION FTSS V MAC N6134021R0001

Attachment L-2 – VOLUME 4

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

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

Instructions to offeror: Send the questionnaire to the: 1. Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), 2. Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), 3. Program Manager (PM), 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 Ms. Janet Fondriest at Janet.Fondriest@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:

Dollar Value of Contract:

Dollar Value of Offeror Role in Contract:

Dollar Value of Effort as it Relates to the Instant Effort:

Administrative Place of Contract:

Cage Code:

DUNS:

Customer:

Contracting Agency:

II. POINT OF CONTACT (POC) Data (To be completed by the Offeror)

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: Janet.Fondriest@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 4, 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 Ms. Janet Fondriest at Janet.Fondriest@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 perform in accordance with this contract or order’s most significant requirements, I WOULD or WOULD NOT recommend them for similar requirements in the future.

2. Quality: (Assess contractor's day-to-day performance and conformance to contract/order requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship (e.g., commonly accepted technical, professional, environmental, or safety and health standards. Does the service provided meet the specifications of the contract/order? Was the contractor able to successfully support fielded equipment? Did the contractor meet contractual turn-around-time to service/maintain the system(s)? Are reports/data accurate? Does the contractor’s work measure up to commonly accepted technical or professional standards? What degree of Government technical direction was required to solve problems that arose during performance? Is the site manager allowed to operate autonomously (as appropriate and within reason) on some administrative and other matters?)

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

Provide examples that substantiate rating:

3. Schedule: (Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect schedule variance). Does the contractor routinely have difficulty meeting availability or scheduled requirements? Is the contractor responsive, at the site management level, to short notice additional instruction or premium time government requests? Does the contractor participate in the planning process to provide feedback to the government in terms of scheduling and other efficiencies?

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

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

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

5. 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? Are you aware of any difficulties between the contractor and the labor union that have impacted contract performance? If so, how were they resolved by the contractor?)

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

6. Small Business Subcontracting: (Assess the contractor’s compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order relating to Small Business participation (including FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Businesses and FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (when required). What was the contractor’s performance in setting and achieving small business development goals? Did the contractor achieve each individual goal stated within the contract/order or subcontracting plan? Did the contractor demonstrate a good faith effort if the goal was not achieved?)

Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory

N/A

Signature _____________________________________________ Date _____________ Please note that electronic signatures are acceptable. An e-mail from the originator of this document will suffice. Signatures (electronic or hand written) verify that the signator completed this form and agrees with the information contained within it.