Past Performance Questionnaire.docx

Controlled Unclassified Information When completed, this document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104.

Section L Attachment: Past Performance Questionnaire – FA702226R0003 The Det 2 OL/A Patrick SFB of the Air Force ACC/AMIC is in the process of competitively selecting a source for a AMIC CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION SUPPORT SERVICES (ACASS) program. Contract Administration Support Services to include; cost/price analysis, preparation of determinations and justifications, synopsis, solicitations, price negotiation memoranda, and the contractor shall provide assistance with and document proposal evaluations and will receive technical evaluations as well as contractor submitted technical/cost proposals for review and use in the contract formation process.

One of the considerations in proposal evaluation is the verification of the offerors' past performance on contracts or other work efforts which reflect the offeror's ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from organizations such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with the offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror's performance on those contracts or work efforts.

Our areas of interest regarding the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. In order to meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than 1 May 2026. This schedule will allow us sufficient time to analyze the data prior to the start of negotiations.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed to danny.austin.3@us.af.mil or david.dike.2@us.af.mil. Please call Danny Austin at 321-494-8133 if you have any questions. Your completed questionnaire will become a part of the official Source Selection records.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated, and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this Source Selection.

Danny D Austin Contracting Officer AMIC DET 2 OL/A Patrick SFB

1 Atch Past Performance Questionnaire

Section 1: Contract Identification

A. Contractor (Company/Division):

B. Contractor Cage Code:

C. Contract Number:

D. Contract Type (e.g., FFP, FPIF, CPIF, CPFF, etc.):

E. Program Title:

F. Brief Program Description:

G. Program Phase (e.g., Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD)):

H. Period of Performance

1. Original Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

2. Current Schedule (assuming all options exercised):

Beginning Date _________ through ____________

3. Reason for difference (if applicable):

I. Contract Dollar Value

1. Original maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

2. Current maximum contract dollar value (assuming all options exercised): $

3. Reasons for difference between original and current contract dollar value (if applicable):

J. Description of work performed:

K. Was this a competitively awarded contract? ☐ Yes ☐ No

L. Contractor’s Role: ☐ Prime Contractor ☐ Subcontractor ☐ Key Personnel

Section 2: Customer or Agency Identification

A. Customer or agency name:

B. Customer or agency description (if applicable):

C. Geographic description of services under this contract (i.e., local, nationwide, worldwide, other Commands):

Section 3: Respondent Identification

A. Respondent’s name:

B. Respondent’s title:

C. Respondent’s phone number / fax number / e-mail address:

D. Respondent’s position (e.g., Program Manager, PCO/ACO, etc.):

E. Length of time (number of years/months) respondent worked on subject contract and description of responsibility/position/role:

F. Other suggested points of contact:

Section 4: Performance Information

In the tables below, indicate your rating for the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block to the right of each question. Provide supporting information for each response in the space provided. Attach additional pages if more space is needed. The performance rating scale is defined as follows:

Code Performance Rating

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

V VERY GOOD – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

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

M MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance 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.

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

N/A NOT APPLICABLE – Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect, performance was not observed, or information was not available. Do not know.

T1. How well did the contractor meet the technical requirements of the specification?

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

T2. How was the quality of contracting work being performed?

T3. How was the quality/integrity of technical data/report preparation efforts?

T4. How adequate/effective was the Quality Program Plan?

T5. How well did the contractor implement current quality processes, standard practices for eliminating future errors and/or rework?

T6. How well did the contractor implement current standard practices for maintaining certifications, training and implementation of changes to process and procedures along with government regulations?

P1. How effective was overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage, control and workload)?

P2. How reasonable and cooperative was the contractor when dealing with contracting office and the program office in support of contracting acquisition processes (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes)?

P3. How timely and effectively did the contractor resolve contracting problems without extensive customer guidance?

P4. How well did the contractor understand/comply with contracting and program office objectives and technical requirements?

P5. How successfully did the contractor respond to emergency and/or surge situations?

P6. Of what benefit to the customer were contractor proposed alternative methods/processes that reduced cost to the contract acquisition, improved maintainability, decrease delivery schedule, or other factors?

P7. To what degree did the contractor implement responsive/flexible processes to improve quality and timeliness of support?

TP1. How smoothly did the contractor transition resources and personnel?

TP2. How effective was the contractor in maintaining continuity of mission support while transitioning/phasing in resources and personnel to support other efforts?

E1. How effectively was the contractor able to hire/apply a qualified workforce to this effort?

E2. How effectively was the contractor able to retain a qualified workforce on this effort?

Government Contracts Only: Was this contract partially or completely terminated for default or convenience, or are there any pending terminations?

☐ Yes ☐ Default ☐ Convenience ☐ Pending Terminations ☐ No

If yes, please explain (e.g., inability to meet cost, performance, or delivery schedules).

SECTION 5: GENERAL COMMENT

Given what I know today about the contractor’s ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I [ click and select an item ] award to him today given that I had a choice.

REMARKS:

Please provide any additional comments concerning this contractor’s performance, as desired.

[click and pick the date]

Respondent’s Signature Date

Thank you for your prompt response and assistance!

Please return this completed questionnaire to:

E-Mail to: Danny D Austin danny.austin.3@us.af.mil and David C Dike david.dike.2@us.af.mil

Controlled Unclassified Information Page 8 of 8