Attachment_B_-Past_Performance_Questionnaire.docx

OFFEROR’S PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Solicitation Number:

Project Title: Trade and Quote (TAQ) data

The Office of Financial Research (OFR) requires the trade and quote data (TAQ) found on the Consolidated Tape and its Over The Counter counterpart corresponding to the OTC/UTP data feed, Tape C which is the single consolidated source of data for NASDAQ listed securities. The Consolidated Tape is an electronic program that provides continuous, real-time data on trading volume and price for exchange-traded securities. Through the consolidated tape, numerous major exchanges, including the NASDAQ, the Chicago Board Options Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange, report their trades and quotes. Securities often trade on more than one exchange and the consolidated tape reports a security's trading activity for all of these exchanges, not just its primary exchange. Historical trade and quote data is required up from 1993 to the time of data purchase (one time purchase only). Current trade and quote data is required daily.

Please complete the following questionnaire:

Instructions: The completed questionnaire shall be delivered to the Bureau of the Public Debt (BPD) via email at psb3@bpd.treas.gov (Attn: BBurnworth), and shall not be returned directly to the vendor. The completed questionnaire shall be received by [insert the same time as when the proposal is due] on [insert the same date as when the proposal is due]. Questions concerning this request shall be emailed to the same location.

The following questions pertain to the contractor’s record of current and/or past (within the last three years) performance. The information that you provide will be used in the awarding of a federal contract. Therefore, it is important that the information you provide be as factual and accurate as possible.

Work was performed as a Prime________ or Sub_________ Contractor? (check correct one)

DESCRIPTION OF PRODUCT/SERVICE: _____________________________________________

CONTRACT SPECIFICS (to be completed by the Offeror prior to providing to its reference; the reference is to validate the information below is correct):

1. Contract Number: __________________________________

2. Contract Type: __________________________________

3. Period of Performance: __________________________________

4. Original Contract $ Value (base & all options): _______________________________

5. Current Contract $ Value (base & all options): _______________________________

6. If amounts for 4 and 5 are different, provide a brief description of the reason.

Comments/Remarks:

To be completed by Offeror’s reference:

REFERENCE POINT OF CONTACT:

1. Company/Agency: _____________________

2. Name: _______________________________

3. Title: ________________________________

4. Office: _______________________________

5. Email: _______________________________

6. Telephone: ____________________________ Please circle or underline the rating that best describes the product/service you received from the vendor. The rating guidelines are found on the following pages. Comments are appreciated for all ratings; however, if providing an Unsatisfactory or Outstanding rating, comments are exceptionally helpful.

Quality of Product or Service 0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; or 5=Outstanding Comments/Remarks:

Cost Control – not applicable in fixed price awards 0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; or 5=Outstanding Comments/Remarks:

Timeliness of Performance 0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; or 5=Outstanding Comments/Remarks:

Business Relations 0=Unsatisfactory; 1=Poor; 2=Fair; 3=Good; 4=Excellent; or 5=Outstanding Comments/Remarks:

Customer Satisfaction Is/was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction? Yes ___ No___ Would you recommend the selection of this firm again? Yes___ No ___

Comments/Remarks:

Rating Guidelines

Quality of Product or Service

Unsatisfactory (0) Non-conformances are jeopardizing the achievement of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, it constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards containing similar requirements.

Poor (1) Overall compliance requires significant Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.

Fair (2) Overall compliance requires minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.

Good (3) There are very minimal, quality problems, and the Contractor has met the contract requirements.

Excellent (4) There are no quality issues, and the Contractor has substantially exceeded the contract performance requirements without commensurate additional costs to the Government.

Outstanding (5) The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as “Excellent.”

Cost Control

Unsatisfactory (0) Ability to manage cost issues is jeopardizing performance of contract requirements, despite use of Agency resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, this level of ability to manage cost issues constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards.

Poor (1) Ability to manage cost issues requires significant Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.

Fair (2) Ability to control cost issues requires minor Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.

Good (3) There are very minimal, cost management issues and the Contractor has met the contract requirements.

Excellent (4) There are no cost management issues and the Contractor has exceeded the contract requirements, achieving cost savings to the Government.

Outstanding (5) The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where the contractor achieved cost savings and performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent."

Timeliness of Performance

Unsatisfactory (0) Delays are jeopardizing the achievement of contract requirements, despite use of Company/Agency resources. Recovery is not likely. If performance cannot be substantially corrected, it constitutes a significant impediment in consideration for future awards.

Poor (1) Delays require significant Company/Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.

Fair (2) Delays require minor Company/Agency resources to ensure achievement of contract requirements.

Good (3) There are minimal delays that impact achievement of contract requirements.

Excellent (4) There are no delays and the contractor has exceeded the agreed upon time schedule.

Outstanding (5) The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent."

Business Relations

Unsatisfactory (0) Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues is not effective. If not substantially mitigated or corrected it could constitute a significant impediment in considerations for future awards.

effective.

Good (3) Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues are consistently effective.

Excellent (4) Response to inquiries and/or technical, service, administrative issues exceed Government expectation.

Outstanding (5) The contractor has demonstrated an outstanding performance level that justifies the score. It is expected that this rating will be used in those rare circumstances where contractor performance clearly exceeds the performance levels described as "Excellent."

General Comments. Provide any other relevant performance information.

1. Have you issued a cure notice, show cause notice, suspension of progress payments or other letters directing the correction of a performance problem in the past 3 years? [ ] YES [ ] NO If yes, please explain.

2. Have you terminated this Contractor for default within the past 3 years, or are there any pending termination actions? [ ] YES [ ] NO If yes, please explain.

3. Based on the Offeror’s overall performance, would you award them another contract?

[ ] YES [ ] NO If no, please explain.

4. Have you discussed any adverse past performance problems with the Offeror and given them an opportunity to comment? [ ] YES [ ] NO Please explain

Thank you for your assistance.

Typed or Printed Name