PPQ.pdf

PRESENT/PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

RFP Number: SPRHA1-21-R-7000

Notice: Upon completion this questionnaire will be considered

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Aviation is currently in the process of preparing our proposal for the F-16 BCSR; Solicitation Number SPRHA1-21-R-7000. As part of the Offeror’s proposal submitted to DLA Aviation, they identified Company/Organization: and Point of Contact as a reference for performance, based on their work performed on contract .

Input on the Offeror’s performance is therefore requested from the individual identified (or a suitable alternate) on behalf of Offeror: .

Please provide the following information about yourself:

Name/Signature and Role Relative to Contract (e.g. Buyer, Program Manager):

Agency or Business:

Address:

Telephone Number: Email Address:

Return your completed questionnaire electronically by email to:

Ryan Peacock Contract Specialist

DLA Aviation Ogden Phone Number: 385-519-8650 ryan.peacock@us.af.mil

PART I. CURRENT AND/OR HISTORICAL CONTRACT INFORMATION:

Contractor (Offeror) Name: CAGE Code:

Role in the Program/Work Performed As: __ Prime __Subcontractor Vendor/Supplier Contract Number: Number of Years: Basic: Option:

Period of Performance (Original Schedule/Current Schedule & Rational for schedule changes):

Contract Dollar Value (Original MAX Contract $ Value OR Current MAX $ Value (assuming all options exercised) AND any the primary cause of any changes (if applicable):

Contract Type(s)- list applicable contract types (i.e. Firm-Fixed-Price, Time & Materials, Cost, & etc.):

Program Title and Brief Description:

mailto:kyle.swaner@us.af.mil

Program Task Description:

A = Applicable (Offeror performed the work for this task) N/A = Not Applicable (task was not applicable OR the Offeror did not perform the task on this contract) L/C = Low Complexity (work performed met a basic definition of this task) H/C = High Complexity (work performed met a dynamic & multifaceted definition of this task)

Program Tasks Type of Work A N/A LC HC

1. System design to adapt/modify commercial items using specification external to the Offeror OR design a new/modified-new item to meet specification external to the Offeror (if N/A go to 17)

1 (a). Management 1 (b). System Architecture and Performance 1 (c). Reliability and Maintainability

2. Develop a new/modified-new commercial design to meet a specification external to the Offeror OR develop a new/modified-new design to meet a specification external to the Offeror (if N/A go to 18)

2 (a). Management 2 (b). System Architecture and Performance 2 (c). Reliability and Maintainability

3. Qualification (if N/A go to 19) 3 (a). Management 3 (b). System Architecture and Performance 3 (c). Reliability and Maintainability

4. Production (if N/A go to 20) 4 (a). Management 4 (b). System Architecture and Performance 4 (c). Reliability and Maintainability

5. Sustainment 5 (a). Management 5 (b). System Architecture and Performance 5 (c). Reliability and Maintainability

Program Tasks- Additional Comments/Explanations:

PART II. EVALUATION. Please evaluate the Offeror utilizing the guide below. Explanatory narratives for as many responses as possible would be appreciated. These narratives need not be lengthy, just detailed. Attach additional pages if more space is needed.

Evaluation Definitions – The following definitions should be used in the assessment of Offeror’s performance:

EXCEPTIONAL Performance EXCEEDS MOST contractual requirements. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns.

VERY GOOD

Performance EXCEEDS SOME contractual requirements. The performance of areas being assessed was accomplished with few minor issues or concerns, for which the Offeror’s corrective actions were highly effective.

SATISFACTORY

Performance MEETS contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed contains minor issues or concerns, for which corrective actions taken by the Offeror were effective.

MARGINAL

Performance MEETS SOME contractual requirements. The performance of the areas being assessed includes significant problems, issues, or concerns for which corrective actions taken by the Offeror were only somewhat effective.

UNSATISFACTORY

Performance DOES NOT MEET contractual requirement. The performance of the areas being assessed includes serious problems, issues, or concerns for which the Offeror’s corrective actions were ineffective.

NOT APPLICABLE (N/A) Performance information not recent or relevant as defined in the Solicitation.

Unable to provide assessment.

Past Performance Evaluation

Question 1. Quality

Assessment of the Offeror’s ability to meet quality standards/requirements:

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

Quality

Comments, if any.

Questions 2. Schedule

Assessment of the Offeror’s ability to provide items/performance in a timely manner?

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A

Schedule

Question 4. Management

Assessment of the Offeror’s ability to meet contract/requirement(s)?

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory N/A Contract/Requirement

Management

Question 5. Overall Rating of Offeror’s performance

What is your overall rating of Offeror’s performance (requirements, schedule, and price) on contract being assessed?

Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory

Has action been initiated to cancel or terminate the contract for default? Have there been any disputes/claims relative to the contract? If yes, explain.

If given a choice, would you award to this Offeror again? If not, please explain.

General Comments:

Summation - Additional Remarks: