Attachment_J_-_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.doc

Attachment J

Past Performance Questionnaire RFP No. SECHQ1-16-R-0002 The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission requires reporting, video and transcription services throughout the continental United States ("CONUS"), as well as Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico ("outside the CONUS"), and foreign locations when required.

In order to accurately evaluate the Offerors’s past performance, your assistance is requested in obtaining and verifying the past performance history of this Offeror.

Two forms are provided to complete the evaluation: 1) Performance Rating Form and 2) Supplemental Comment Form. Upon completion of this form, please submit it as an e-mailed attachment to Robert Witherspoon (Contract Specialist) at WitherspoonR@sec.gov and Gabriel Aviles (Contracting Officer) AvilesG@sec.govat . Please make the subject line of the e-mail read “SECHQ1-16-R-0002 - Past Performance Questionnaire – Insert Evaluated Company’s Name (indicate if Prime or Subcontractor).”

The following standards shall be used in arriving at the rating.

Unacceptable

The Offeror’s record of past performance, as applicable, suggests that the Government may expect unsatisfactory performance and customer satisfaction for this effort. The Offeror’s performance record, as applicable, suggests a high degree of risk.

Neutral

A "Neutral" rating indicates an Offeror without a record of past performance or for whom information on relevant past performance is not available.

Performance Rating Form

NAME OF COMPANY EVALUATED:

ADDRESS OF COMPANY EVALUATED:

CONTRACT NUMBER

CONTRACT PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

CONTRACTING OFFICER NAME,

ADDRESS, FAX AND TELEPHONE NUMBER, AND EMAIL ADDRESS

TYPE OF SERVICES PERFORMED (ACTIVITY):

Additional Comment Form

Please provide any additional comments regarding your performance element ratings in the space below. Please add additional pages as necessary.

Performance Element

Outstanding

Very Good

Acceptable

Marginal

Unacceptab le

Neutral

1. QUALITY OF TECHNICAL APPROACH

(For example:

Were the services comprehensive, complete, and feasible?

(Met needs, performed successfully, accommodated changing requirements.)

2. UNDERSTANDING OF REQUIREMENTS

(For example:

Did contractor show an understanding of scope requirements an appreciation complexity requirements?

And did contractor effectively identify flaws, inconsistencies other inaccuracies in your technical direction?)

3. EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT USE OF

RESOURCES

(For example: Was the contractor able to obtain in a timely manner the amount and type of personnel resources required to support the project, effectively train personnel to perform the work required for the project, and maintain the required workforce throughout the term of the contract?)

4. TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE

(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic schedules, monitoring performance, completing work on time, and implementing corrections/changes in a timely manner?)

5. QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE/CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION

(For example: Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?)

6. BUSINESS BEHAVIOR

(For example: Was the contractor reasonable and cooperative at the corporate and program levels in response to changes in technical direction, correcting errors, poor performance, criticism/rejection of contract deliverables and other quality issues?)

7. COMMUNICATION

(For example: Did the contractor work and communicate well with contracting officers, contracting officer’s technical representatives, end users, other contractors, subcontractors, and in-house staff?)

8. COST CONTROL

(For example: Was the contractor successful in planning and proposing realistic costs, monitoring performance, operating at or below budget, and implementing corrections/changes in a cost effective manner?)

NO

9.

Given the choice, would you do business with this contractor again?

YES

FOR #9, PLEASE ANSWER “Yes” or “No”, as appropriate

Cost Control l

Timeliness of Performance

Quality / Customer Satisfaction

Technical Performance (Quality of Product or Service)

PAGE