Attach_L_-_1_PP_Relevant_Contracts_Sheet.docx

W9124R-15-R-0001

SECTION L, ATTACHMENT 1 (L-1)

PAST PERFORMANCE SPECIFIC RELEVANT CONTRACTS SHEET

Solicitation W9124R-15-R-0001 Installation Support Services Directorate of Public Works, Yuma Proving Ground, Yuma, AZ

The offeror shall provide documentation outlining the offeror’s past performance with contracts, as a prime or major subcontractor, that is the same or similar in nature of work, size, qualifications, experience, and complexity to the services being procured under this Solicitation. The submittal shall include the rationale supporting your assertion of relevance and how it was determined, that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the work specified by this Solicitation. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate.

Contract Information

Contract Number:

Award Date:

Contract Type:

Name of Contract Holder:

Prime or Subcontractor?

Price/Cost

Original:

Final (or projected final, if contract is current)

Delivery Schedule

Original:

Final (or projected final, if contract is current)

Point Of Contact Information

Officer (ACO) Government or Commercial Technical Representative or COR

Name:

Office:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

E-Mail:

Narrative Explanation

Identify in specific detail for each contract listed, why or how you consider that effort relevant or similar to the effort required by this Solicitation. In determining relevancy, consideration must be given but not limited to such things as product/service similarity of requirements, product/service, size and complexity, contract type, contract environment, qualifications, and subcontractor interaction. Some Examples of relevant performance and experience are performing Facility Support Services on a Government facility, and the process of recruiting and maintaining qualified personnel associated with these types of requirements.

On each contract listed describing the objectives achieved and the following data: any cost growth or schedule delays encountered.

For any Government contracts which did not/do not meet original requirements with regard to cost, schedule, or technical performance, a brief explanation of the reason(s) for such shortcomings and any demonstrated corrective actions taken to avoid recurrence.

Offerors may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a limited or a no confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered.

The offeror is required to demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. This may allow the offeror to be considered acceptable where a negative without resolution may be considered an unacceptable rating.

The offeror is required to demonstrate that they do not have any performance that they have been rated, or remarks filed that they could or should not be awarded or hired to perform the same or similar work.

No responses to this will be considered neutral in rating, and will therefore be considered acceptable.

Negative Performance Documentation

A copy of any cure notices, show cause letters, or contract discrepancy reports received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action by the offeror or proposed subcontractor.

Completion Date/Delivery Schedule

The contractor shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary.