15R4006_Attachment_6_Past_Perf_Complete.doc

Attachment 6

PAST PERFORMANCE INDIVIDUAL EVALUATION FORM

Ref

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

O1

O2

Overall Relevancy (consider all projects to scope):

O=Other and may include PPMIS

Currency

Overall Trend

Relevancy

SSEB COMMENTS ON TRENDS ETC.

Ratings: N/NA= Neutral/NA E= Exceeded Req' M= Met Req' X= Did Not Met Req'

QUALITY OF PRODUCT OR SERVICE

#1 The Contractor provided a product or service that conformed to contract requirements, specifications, and standards of good workmanship.

#2 The Contractor submitted accurate reports

#3 The Contractor utilized personnel that were appropriate to the effort performed.

COST CONTROL

#1 The Contractor performed the effort within the estimated cost/price.

#2 The Contractor submitted accurate invoices on a timely basis

#3 The Contractor demonstrated cost efficiencies in performing the required effort.

#4 The actual costs/rates realized closely reflected the negotiated costs/rates.

SCHEDULE

#1 The tasks required under this effort were performed in a timely manner and in accordance with the period of performance of the contract.

#2 The Contractor was responsive to technical and/or contractual direction.

BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS

#1 The Contractor demonstrated effective management over the effort performed.

#2 The Contractor maintained an open line of communication so that the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and/or Technical Point of Contact (TPOC) were apprised of technical, cost, and schedule issues.

#3. The Contractor presented information and correspondence in a clear, concise, and businesslike manner.

#4 The Contractor promptly notified the COR, TPOC, and/or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent issues.

#5 The Contractor cooperated with the Government in providing flexible, proactive, and effective recommended solutions to critical program issues.

#6 The Contractor made timely award to, and demonstrated effective management of, its subcontractors.

#7 The Contractor demonstrated an effective small/small disadvantaged business subcontracting program.

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

#1 The products/services provided adequately met the needs of the program.

#2 The Contractor was able to perform with minimal or no direction from the COR or the TPOC.

#3 I am satisfied with the performance of the Contractor under this effort.

KEY PERSONNEL

#1 The labor turnover in key personnel labor categories was minimal and did not adversely affect Contractor performance.

#2 The Contractor proposed qualified personnel to fulfill the requirements of the contract.

OTHER:

#1 Would you award this firm another contract? ( ) Yes ( ) No If “No,” please provide an explanation.

#2 Was the contract terminated for default? ( ) Yes ( ) No. If “Yes,” please provide an explanation

COMMENTS:

Q1:

Q2:

Q3:

Q4:

Q5:

c. Sub-factor Management Effectiveness was rated LOW RISK based on Respondent Identification and Rating Questionnaires received from project owners with an overall rating trend of very good for the elements listed under Management Effectiveness. Past project evaluations included one very relevant project with exceptional rating and another very relevant and relevant projects with a mix a ratings; some very good and others only satisfactory. These ratings reflected an overall trend in Management Effectiveness that was between low risk and moderate risk. The board decided the trend leaned greater towards the low risk. (Section 00120, para 2.2.7.3)

c. Sub-factor Management Effectiveness was rated LOW RISK based on Respondent Identification and Rating Questionnaires received from project owners with an overall rating trend of very good for the elements listed under Management Effectiveness. Past project evaluations included one very relevant project with exceptional rating and another very relevant and relevant projects with a mix a ratings; some very good and others only satisfactory. These ratings reflected an overall trend in Management Effectiveness that was between low risk and moderate risk. The board decided the trend leaned greater towards the low risk. (Section 00120, para 2.2.7.3)

Insert RW from above