ESSCA_RFP_Attachment_L-5_Past_Performance_Interview_Questionnaire_Form.docx

NNM16568754R ATTACHMENT L-5

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION (NASA)

ENGINEERING SERVICES AND SCIENCE CAPABILITY AUGMENTATION (ESSCA)

Attachment L-5 Past Performance Interview/Questionnaire Form

PAST PERFORMANCE INTERVIEW/QUESTIONNAIRE FORM

This evaluation should be completed by the Contracting Officer (CO) and Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), Task Monitor (TM), or other person identified in the contract by the appropriate Contracting Officer or business manager with monitoring the Contractor’s compliance with the requirements of the contract.

In compliance with the direction in the FAR, the information contained in this evaluation is not subject to view by anyone other than the designated source selection evaluation personnel.

INSTRUCTIONS, DEFINITIONS, AND RATING GUIDELINES

Instructions

This evaluation is to be completed as indicated below. For purposes of these evaluations, the term “project” is intended to mean “contract.” This package consists of the following:

For each contract selected, two separate assessments are required, an assessment by the appropriate CO and one by the cognizant COR or other designee.

In addition, the Offeror is responsible for completing Section I of Form D3 before forwarding the questionnaire to the appropriate CO/COR for the evaluations required. The Offeror shall request the CO/COR to complete the remainder of the questionnaire and email directly to Anita Ayers at anita.j.ayers@nasa.gov. If hard copy submission is utilized, seal the submittals and mail them directly to the Source Evaluation Board (SEB) at the address specified below.

NASA/George C. Marshall Space Flight Center ATTN: PS22/Anita J. Ayers Building 4203, Basement/SEB Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812

Any questions concerning completion of this form should be addressed to Anita Ayers at (256) 961-2117 or anita.j.ayers@nasa.gov.

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE REPORT

Section I

To be completed by Contractor requesting evaluation

1. Contractor Name and Address:

2. Name of prime contractor/Joint Venture submitting proposal on this effort:

3. This past performance questionnaire is relevant to the following ESSCA Work Areas (identify specific PWS section):

4. Contractor DUNS Number:

5. Contractor Cage Code:

6. During the contract performance being evaluated, this firm was a:

_____ Prime _____ Team Member _____ Subcontractor _____ Other (explain)

If the firm performed work under this contract as a team member or subcontractor, information about the subcontract, in addition to the prime information, shall be provided in the following blocks:

7a. Prime Contract Number:

7b. If the prime contract number is a BPA or IDIQ, list the Task Order(s) the team member or subcontracted effort was performed under:

7c. Prime Contract Period of Performance:

7d. Team Member or Subcontract Period of Performance:

8a. Prime Contract Type:

8b. Team Member or Subcontract contract type:

8c. Contract Value (with options):

8d. Team Member or Subcontract contract value:

9. Contract name and description of contract or subcontract requirements.

Section II

To be completed by Government and/or Industry Customer performing the evaluation

1. Evaluator’s Name:

2. Evaluator’s Title:

3. Evaluator’s Email Address:

4. Evaluator’s Phone Number:

5. Evaluator’s Role in Program/Contract:

6. Evaluator’s Length of Involvement in this Contract:

7. Date:

Section III

To be completed by Government and/or Industry Customer performing the evaluation

Definitions and Rating Guidelines

The Factors/Ratings tables on the next page summarize Contractor performance in each of the following rating areas. Each criterion should be assigned a rating, from highest to lowest, of Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory. If a particular criterion is not applicable, it should be rated in the far right column as N/A. However, the evaluator is encouraged to provide comments on any rating to further support a particular rating.

The following definitions and instructions should be used as guidance to aid in evaluating the criteria in the Factors/Ratings tables. Please read the definitions and instructions before rating any criteria to be sure that each criterion is graded in the context of the definitions. Also, please ensure that this assessment is consistent with any other assessments that have been done for the same Contractor for the same work, such as for payment of fee purposes, exercise of option, other past performance requests, etc.

Technical Performance

· Compliance with contract requirement

· Appropriateness of personnel

· Technical excellence

· Product excellence

· Responsive to technical direction

· Effective Contractor recommended solutions

· Within budget (over/under target costs)

· Current, accurate, and complete cost reporting and billings

· Cost efficiencies

· Met interim schedule milestones

· Contract administrative activities performed timely

· On-time delivery of products

· Quick turnaround capability

· Reliable

· Pro-active

· Reasonable and cooperative

· Innovative

· Prompt notification of problems

· Accuracy and thoroughness of reports

· Contract management

· Proposal accuracy

· Cooperation

· Responsiveness

· Documentation and deliverables

· Purchasing and subcontract management

The five headings above relate to the actual ratings defined on the following pages.

Control

Issues

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor was highly effective.

Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor was effective.

Satisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element 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 contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The Contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

PAST PERFORMANCE INTERVIEW/QUESTIONNAIRE FORM

Item

Factors/Ratings

Technical Performance (Please complete if you are/were an end user of the Contractor’s product or service or involved in quality assurance evaluation)

Provide additional comments on Technical Performance below:

Cost Control (Please complete if you are/were an end user of the Contractor’s product or service or involved in cost analysis or resources management)

Provide additional comments on Cost Control below:

Timeliness of Performance (Please complete if you are/were an end user of the Contractor’s product or service)

Provide additional comments on Technical Performance below:

Management Effectiveness (Please complete if you are/were an end user of the Contractor’s product or service)

Provide additional comments on Management Effectiveness below:

Contractual Issues (Please complete if you were the contract specialist/officer/administrator)

Provide additional comments on Contractual Issues below:

Overall Ratings (Please complete if you were the contract specialist/officer/administrator)

PAST PERFORMANCE FORM LETTER EXAMPLE

(This form letter is provided with the RFP for Offerors to use in transmitting the Past Performance questionnaire to customers)

Engineering Services and Science Capability Augmentation

RFP NNM16568754R

CLIENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER: FORMAT

[Date of Letter] [Name and Address of proposed Offeror's customer] Attention: [Name and Designation of Customer’s Contract Manager or Appropriate Contact]

Dear [Contact Name]:

We are currently responding to the NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center, Request for Proposal (RFP) entitled Engineering Services and Science Capability Augmentation (ESSCA). NASA is requesting that clients of entities responding to its solicitation be identified and their participation in the evaluation process requested. In the event you are contacted for information on work we have performed, you are hereby authorized to respond to those inquiries. Your cooperation with this effort is greatly appreciated. Please direct any questions to Anita Ayers at anita.j.ayers@nasa.gov or 256-961-2117.

(a) We have included our work for your agency as a past performance reference. A Past Performance Questionnaire is enclosed. Please complete Sections II and III of the enclosed evaluation and return the completed document to:

NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center Attention: PS22/Anita J. Ayers Procurement Office Bldg. 4203, Basement SEB Email: anita.j.ayers@nasa.gov Phone: 256-961-2117 MSFC, Alabama 35812

(b) Please forward the completed evaluation to NASA at the above address to ensure it is received in accordance with the provision entitled “Due Date for Receipt of Proposals.” In order to maintain the integrity of this process, please DO NOT return the questionnaire to us. Return it to NASA/MSFC at the address listed above.

Sincerely, [Name of Signer] [Designation of Signer]

L-5-10 image1.png