N63394-17-R-0039_-_Attachment_2_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.doc

N63394-17-R-0039

N63394-17-R-0039

Attachment 8

Recent and Relevant Past Performance Questionnaire

COVERSHEET

FROM: ASSESSOR INFORMATION

Name:

Title:

Address:

Phone Number:

E-Mail Address:

TO: (PHD NSWC)

Attn: Cynthia Uribe (Code 0231)

Building 456, Aberdeen Avenue White Sands Missile Range, NM 88002 E-Mail: cynthia.uribe@navy.mil

SUBJECT: PAST PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT FOR SOLICITATION N63394-17-R-0039

CONTRACTOR:

1. Past Performance Assessment. The Naval Surface Warfare Center Port Hueneme Division Naval Surface Warfare Center (PHD NSWC), is soliciting for the procurement, fabrication, assembly, final acceptance and delivery of Vertical Launching System (VLS) MK

170 Sill Assembly Adapter part number 6658779-19.

It is requested that you complete this questionnaire and provide via email to the below listed individual no later than the closing date and time of the solicitation.

(PHD NSWC)

Attn: Cynthia Uribe (Code 0231)

Building 456, Aberdeen Avenue

White Sands Missile Range, NM 88002

E-Mail: cynthia.uribe@navy.mil *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. If you have any questions, please contact the Contract Specialist at the above e-mail address.

2. Contract Information. Please complete the following:

Contractor:

Contract Number:

Period of Performance:

Dollar Amount at Award:

Dollar Amount at Completion (or Current Dollar Amount, if not Completed):

Contract Type: Fixed-Price; Labor Hour or Time and Material; Cost-Reimbursement (CPFF, CPAF, CPIF, etc.)

Describe the Products or Services:

3. Contract Relevancy. For comparison with the size and scope of the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Port Hueneme Division (NSWC PHD) MK 170 Sill Assembly Adapters, please provide the following information pertaining to the contract identified in Section 2 above:

a) Size: $________ per year in contract services.

b) Scope: Check all that apply:

· Bonded ablative to steel;

· Conducted porta-shear test;

· Welding;

· Applied epoxy-polyamide paint;

· Other Support (please describe:_________________________)

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).

Comments:

b. Schedule. Rate the contractor’s ability to deliver according to the agreed-to schedule. What were the causes of any schedule variances?

Comments:

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

Comments:

d. Quality. Rate the contractor’s ability to provide a product or service 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.)

Comments:

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).

Comments:

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.

Comments:

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.

Comments:

h. Management of Key Personnel. Assess the contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting, and replacing—when necessary—key personnel.

Comments:

i. 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.

Comments:

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.

PAGE