(U) 00. HADES_Section L_20260721_v3.9_Attach-1.docx

HYBRID ARCHITECTURE AND DEVELOPMENT FOR EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEMS (HADES) SERVICES

PART IV – REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITION AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

ATTACHMENT 1

PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

FA8809-26-R-B002

space systems command (ssc) systems delta 89 (syd89) innovation and prototyping delta (SD) Innovation and Prototyping division ground (SDG) Kirtland afb, nm

21 JULY 2026

UNCLASSIFIED

Distribution Statement A. Approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited.

Destruction Notice: For unclassified, limited documents, destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of the contents or reconstruction of the document.

i

UNCLASSIFIED

Innovation and Prototyping Division Ground

SSC/SYD89/SDG

Kirtland AFB, NM 7/21/2026

HYBRID ARCHITECTURE AND DEVELOPMENT FOR EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEMS (HADES) SERVICES

PART IV – REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITION AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

ATTACHMENT 1

PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

(U) Contents

ii

ATTACHMENT 1 – (U) PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE.

Performance Questionnaire

Privacy Act Statement The information requested is authorized under 10 U.S.C. 3206. This information will be used to evaluate past (and present) performance of Offerors. Providing this information is voluntary; however, failure to provide complete information may result in an incomplete past performance evaluation. Responses may be shared with the contractor for verification purposes.

1. (U) INSTRUCTIONS TO EVALUATORS

This Questionnaire is part of the Source Selection process for the HADES procurement. Your candid assessment of the contractor's past/present performance is critical to the Government's evaluation. Please complete all sections that apply to the contract being evaluated.

This questionnaire is organized into the following categories that align with the HADES evaluation criteria:

1. Program Management: Includes workforce management, external coordination, personnel hiring/staffing/retention, skills mix, security clearances, transition management, and prime contractor oversight.

2. Systems Engineering: Includes concept exploration, requirements definition, MUS development, troubleshooting, testing, training/certification, architecture analysis, design, implementation, and transition to operations. Skip this section if the contract DID NOT include Systems Engineering work.

3. Cost & Schedule Performance: Includes cost control, estimate accuracy, cost communication, delivery schedule adherence, and schedule risk management.

Important Guidance:

· Rating Requirements: Please provide brief comments with specific examples when rating performance as Exceptional, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory. Concrete examples are more valuable than general statements (e.g., "Completed system integration 2 months ahead of schedule" rather than "Did a good job").

· Not Applicable (N/A): If the contract did not include work in a particular area, select "N/A" for those questions. N/A ratings will not factor into the evaluation for that contract.

· Information Sharing: Your responses may be shared with the contractor for verification purposes as part of the past performance evaluation process.

· Timeframe Focus: When providing narrative responses, focus on performance within the last 3 years or the most recent performance period.

· Cost/Schedule Context: When evaluating cost and schedule performance, please consider the contract type (FFP, T&M, CPFF, etc.) and any significant changes in scope or requirements that may have impacted the contractor's ability to meet original estimates.

(U) CONTRACT INFORMATION

☐ Technical Lead ☐ Other: ____________________

Brief Description of Work Performed [ Type response here ]

*Note: Contract information to be pre-populated by Offeror.

(U) PERFORMANCEQUALITY RATING SCALE

Table 1. (U) Quality Assessment Rating

EXCEPTIONAL (E)

[BLUE]

During the contract period, contractor performance is meeting (or met) all contract requirements and consistently exceeding (or exceeded) many. Very few, if any, minor problems encountered. Contractor took immediate and effective corrective action.

VERY GOOD (VG)

[PURPLE]

During the contract period, contractor is meeting (or met) all contract requirements and consistently exceeding (or exceeded) some. Some minor problems encountered. Contractor took timely corrective action.

SATISFACTORY (S)

[GREEN]

During the contract period, the contractor’s performance is meeting (or met) all contract requirements. For any problems encountered, contractor took effective corrective action.

MARGINAL (M)

[YELLOW]

During the contract period, contractor performance is not meeting (or did not meet) some contract requirements. For problems encountered, corrective action appeared only marginally effective, not effective, or not fully implemented. Customer involvement was required.

UNSATISFACTORY (U)

[RED]

During the contract period, contractor performance is failing (or fail) to meet most contract requirements. Serious problems encountered. Corrective actions were either ineffective or non-existent. Extensive customer oversight and involvement was required.

NOT APPLICABLE (N/A)

[WHITE]

Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect. Do not know.

(U) SECTION 1: PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

This section should be completed by all evaluators regardless of contract scope.

(U) Workforce Management and Staffing How effectively did the contractor maintain appropriate staffing levels with qualified and cleared personnel?

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A Comments (required if E, M, or U):

[ Type response here ]

(U) External Coordination and Responsiveness How effectively did the contractor coordinate with stakeholders and respond to changing requirements?

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

(U) Transition Management How effectively did the contractor manage transitions while maintaining operational continuity?

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

(U) Maintenance and Sustainment How effectively did the contractor perform maintenance/sustainment activities, minimize system downtime, and ensure operational availability?

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

(U) SECTION 2: SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

Note: Skip this section if the contract did not include Systems Engineering work.

(U) Requirements Analysis and Solution Development How effectively did the contractor analyze requirements and develop viable solutions within time/cost constraints?

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

(U) Design, Implementation and Integration How effectively did the contractor design and implement solutions that met requirements within estimates?

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

(U) Testing and Problem Resolution How effectively did the contractor test solutions, troubleshoot issues, and implement corrective actions?

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

(U) Transition to Operations How effectively did the contractor conduct transition planning and execution for moving capabilities into operations to include any operational impacts during or after deployment, usability of operator documentation, quality of training, and post deployment support?

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

(U) SECTION 3: COST AND SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE

(U) Cost Performance How well did the contractor manage costs, provide accurate estimates, and communicate cost issues?

Note: Please consider the contract type and any significant scope changes when evaluating cost performance.

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

(U) Schedule Performance How well did the contractor meet delivery schedules and manage schedule risks?

Note: Please consider any Government-caused delays or significant requirement changes when evaluating schedule performance.

Rating: ☐ E ☐ VG ☐ S ☐ M ☐ U ☐ N/A

(U) SECTION 4: OVERALL ASSESSMENT

(U) Significant Problems or Unsatisfactory Performance Describe any significant problems or unsatisfactory performance and the effectiveness of corrective actions.

Note: Please focus on performance within the last 3 years or most recent performance period.

Explanation: [ Type response here ]

(U) Exceptional Performance Describe any exceptional performance or areas where the contractor exceeded expectations.

Note: Please focus on performance within the last 3 years or most recent performance period.

(U) Future Award Recommendation Would you have any reservations about awarding this contractor a similar contract in the future?

Provide a brief explanation for whichever decision you make below:

☐ No reservations ☐ Minor concerns ☐ Significant concerns ☐ Would not recommend

CERTIFICATION

I certify that the information provided in this questionnaire is accurate and based on my direct knowledge of the contractor's performance.

Signature: _________________________________ Date: ______________

EVALUATOR INFORMATION:

Evaluation Information

QUESTIONNAIRE SUBMISSION

Please return the completed questionnaire within five (5) calendar days to the PCO, identified below. Ensure both email addresses listed below are utilized to return completed questionnaires.

Primary Contact:

Lt Col John Purcell (PCO) Phone: (505) 853-7664 Email: john.purcell.3@spaceforce.mil

Secondary Contact:

Ms. Alyssa Phillips (Contract Manager) Phone: (505) 853-7664 Email: alyssa.phillips.4@spaceforce.mil

Due Date: [ INSERT DATE ]

Questionnaires may be submitted via email or DoD Safe. For files larger than 5MB or containing CUI, please use DoD Safe above.

Questions regarding this questionnaire should be directed to the contacts listed above.

End of Performance Questionnaire Thank you for your time and assistance in completing this performance evaluation.

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank image1.png image2.png