Attachment_0017_Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

Attachment 17 Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Form

RFP W58RGZ-17-R-0043, Common Helmet Mounted Display Production

OFFEROR NAME and

CAGE:

SECTION I – GENERAL GUIDANCE

Introduction: Under solicitation W58RGZ-17-R-0043, the Army Contracting Command is obtaining past performance information. The completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) serves as a source of information to evaluate the Offerors recent and relevant performance of the submitted contract reference (listed in Section II B.

below) as it relates to the solicitation.

Instructions:

• Offerors shall – o Complete Section II A. and II B., then email entire PPQ to the intended respondent.

o Instruct the PPQ respondent to complete Section III.

• Respondents to the PPQ shall – o Complete Section III entirely, to include comments (if any) o Send the completed PPQ to Christopher B. Williams, 256-842-5032, christopher.b.williams94.civ@mail.mil.

o Use a recommended format for email Subject: “Completed PPQ for W58RGZ-17-R-0043, [Offeror Name or Abbreviation]-[referenced contract number]”.

o Use a recommended PPQ electronic document filename: “[Offeror Name or Abbreviation]_PPQ_ W58RGZ-17-R-0043contract reference number].doc” or “.docx” or “.pdf”.

o Send the completed PPQ to the Contracting Officer identified above. DO NOT send a copy of the completed PPQ to the Offeror.

o Reference contract efforts conducted within the last 3 years

In addition to the submitted PPQ email response, respondents may receive follow-up phone calls for clarification purposes from an US Government Official. This is a critical acquisition and as such comments are appreciated for all ratings as applicable.

RATING DESCRIPTION NOTES

Excellent Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

Satisfactory Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

SECTION II (To be completed by the Offeror: Blocks A, 1-6 and B, 1-9)

A. RESPONDENT IDENTIFICATION

1. Name & Job Title:

2. Organization:

3. Address:

4. Phone No:

5. Email:

6. Date:

B. CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION

1.

CAGE and Company (if other than a prime contract holder and first tier subcontractor)

2. Contract Name:

3. Contract Identification Number:

4. Order Number(s) (if applicable):

5. Date of Contract Award and total contract value:

6. Average Annual value of the Contract (provide the number of years used to calculate the average):

(if any) Estimated Products Value:

7.

Period of Actual Contract Performance

8.

CONUS and/or OCONUS locations:

9. Describe the products and/work the work effort performed on this referenced contract or as a subcontractor. Word count is limited to no more than 500 words maximum:

THE FOLLOWING IS TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PPQ RESPONDENT.

SECTION III. CONTRACT PERFORMANCE

1. Name and Respondent’s Job Title (e.g. COR, Contracting Officer, etc.)

COMMENTS:

2.

Indicate your satisfaction with Offeror’s performance in providing hardware and software products and related deliverables that were compliant with stated requirements, met expectations established in their original proposal, and were configured / maintained up to standards of good workmanship.

Exceptional ____

Very Good ____ Satisfactory ____

Marginal ____

Unsatisfactory )___

3.

Indicate your satisfaction with the Offeror’s performance obtaining, installing, configuring, and delivering integration efforts with significant production in a timely manner.

Exceptional ____

Very Good ____

Satisfactory ____

Marginal ____

Unsatisfactory ___

COMMENTS:

4.

Indicate your satisfaction with Offeror’s performance in providing services/efforts and related deliverables including post-production support and maintenance including tear-down, inspect, repair, and return that were appropriate to the work effort required to meet specifications, and effective at developing, testing, operating, and maintaining systems in accordance with predetermined performance standards and objectives.

Exceptional ____

Very Good ____

Satisfactory ____

Marginal ____

Unsatisfactory ___

COMMENTS:

5.

Indicate your satisfaction with the Offeror’s performance managing critical project variables such as schedule, reporting, human resources, risk identification and mitigation, and change management.

Exceptional ____

Very Good ____

Satisfactory ____

Marginal ____

Unsatisfactory ___

6.

Taking into consideration the original performance timelines and scheduling influences outside of the Offeror’s control; indicate your satisfaction with the Offeror’s performance in establishing, maintaining, and executing tasks based on a resource allocated schedule.

Exceptional ____

Very Good ____

Satisfactory ____

Marginal ____

Unsatisfactory __

7.

Indicate your satisfaction with the Offeror’s effectiveness at consistently accounting, reporting, and billing for allowable costs on mixed type contracts (contracts with Firm Fixed Price and Cost Reimbursable line items).

Exceptional ____

Very Good ____

Satisfactory ____

Marginal ____

Unsatisfactory ___

COMMENTS:

8.

Indicate your satisfaction with the Offeror’s effectiveness of developing, implementing, and improving financial forecasting and cost control measures for Firm Fixed Price and Cost-Reimbursable elements.

Exceptional ____

Very Good ____

Satisfactory ____

Marginal ____

Unsatisfactory ___

9.

Indicate your satisfaction with the Offeror’s methodology for creating and maintain a professional relationship with business partners, customers, and stakeholders that aligns to the customer’s interests and while fostering a mutually beneficial relationship.

Exceptional ____

Very Good ____

Satisfactory ____

Marginal ____

Unsatisfactory ___

THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESPONSES

10. Please provide any other relevant performance information that you think would be important for the Government to consider as part of this assessment:

11. Are you aware of other relevant past efforts by this company? If yes, please provide the name and telephone number of a point of contact:

Name Email Address Telephone Number