7. past performance_seminar

Past Performance

Seminar

27 April 2010Jo Green

1

Purpose of the Federal Acquisition System

Pre-Award

Accomplishment of Market Research

Past Performance

Performance Standards

Applicability for Commercial Acquisitions

General Past Performance Information

Evaluations

Commercial

Non-Commercial

Post-Award

Past Performance Reporting Systems

Regulations

Roles and Responsibilities

Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)

Agenda

2

The vision for the Federal Acquisition System is to deliver the best value product or service in a timely basis, while maintaining the public’strust and fulfilling public policy objectives.

The focus of the Federal Acquisition System --

(1) Satisfy the customer in terms of cost, quality, and

timeliness of the delivered product or service by --

(i) Maximizing the use of commercial products and services

(ii) Using contractors who have a track record of successful past performance or who demonstrate a current superior ability to perform

(iii) Promoting competition

(2) Minimize administrative operating costs

(3) Conduct business with integrity, fairness, and openness

Federal Acquisition System

3

PRE-AWARD

4

The Government will communicate with the industry as early as possible in the acquisition cycle to help the Government determine the capabilities available in the marketplace.

This is accomplished through market research.

Market Research

5

Market research is conducted to arrive at the most suitable approach to acquire and support supplies and services

As part of acquisition planning agencies conduct market research for all acquisitions in order to –

(1) Provide for acquisition of items and services suitable to meet the agency’s needs (2) Promote competition (3) Determine small business capabilities to meet the specified requirements (4) Determine subcontracting possibilities

Market Research (cont)

6

Ultimately, conducting market research improves opportunities for small, small disadvantaged, women-owned, veteran-owned, HUBZone, and service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns to obtain a fair proportion of Government contracts

Market research is accomplished to help identify the capabilities of small business to provide requiredservices and products -- Sources Sought postings -- Request for Information (RFI) postings -- Central Contractor Registration (CCR) search -- Direct contact

Market Research (cont)

7

Past contract performance of an offeror is one of the relevant factors that a contracting official of an executive agency should consider in awarding a contract.

It is appropriate for a contracting official to consider past contract performance of an offeror as an indicator of the likelihood that the offeror will successfully perform a contract to be awarded by that official.

Past Performance

8

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)12.206 states past performance should be an important element of every evaluation and contract award for commercial items and dataregarding past performance should belooked at from a wide variety of sources both inside and outside the Federal Government.

Past Performance Applicability forCommercial Acquisitions

9

Where an evaluation is based only on price and past performance (Performance Price Trade-Off (PPT)),award will be made based on whether the lowest priced of the offers, having the highest past performance rating, represents the best value when compared to any lower priced offer.

Past Performance - General

10

-- The content and format of performance evaluations are established in accordance with agency procedures and should be tailored to the size, content, and complexity of the contractual requirements

-- These procedures shall require an assessment of contractor performance against, and efforts to achieve, the goals identified in the small business subcontracting plan when the contract includes Clause 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

Past Performance – General (cont)

11

A past performance evaluation is required for contract awards in accordance with Director of Defense Procurement Class Deviation 99-O0002 dated January 29, 1999.

Requirement thresholds are: -- $5 million for systems and operations support -- $1 million for services, information technology

-- $100,000 for fuels or health care.

Past Performance Evaluations

12

Past performance evaluations result in an assessment of the government’s confidence in the offeror’s ability to fulfill the solicitation requirements while meetingschedule, budget, and performance qualityconstraints

Past performance evaluation considers each offeror's demonstrated record of performance in supplying products and services that meet users' needs.

Past Performance Evaluations (cont)

13

Past performance information is obtained from : -- The Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) -- Questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of the acquisition -- Defense Contract Management Agency -- Interviews with program managers and contracting officers -- Information from previous source selections or contractor capability assessments, if the information is recent and relevant -- Other sources known to the government

The recency and relevancy of the past performance information is important in determining what contracts/programs/effort are evaluated

Recency and relevancy definitions are individually tailored for each acquisition


14

The evaluation should take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the acquisition.

Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or the offeror’s performance record is so limited that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonable assigned will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably.


15

If adverse past performance information, to which the contractor has had no opportunity to respond, is the reason an offeror may not receive an award without discussions or be excluded from the competitive range -- The offeror must be provided an

opportunity to address the information -- This exchange occurs through the issuance of a “Clarification” or “Communications” evaluation notice (EN)


16

“Performance confidence assessment” is an evaluation of the likelihood (or government’s confidence) that the offeror will successfully complete the solicitation’s requirements; based upon past performance.

The performance confidence assessment is established through an integrated analysis of those positive performance indicators and negative performance indicators identified at the Mission Capability subfactor and Cost/Price factor level as determined by the offeror’s recent, current and relevant contract performance.

A performance confidence rating is normally assessed at an overall factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to mission capability sub-factors and cost or price.


17

Past Performance Confidence Ratings

.

SUBSTANTIAL CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

SATISFACTORY CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has an expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

LIMITED CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NO CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

UNKNOWN CONFIDENCE

No performance record is identifiable or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. IG 5.5.2.2

Past Performance Relevancy Definitions

VERY RELEVANT: Past/present performance programs involved essentially the same magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires

RELEVANT: Past/present performance programs involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires

SOMEWHAT-RELEVANT: Past/present performance programs involved some of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires

NOT RELEVANT: Past/present performance programs did not involve any magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires

Past Performance Quality Definitions

BLUE/EXCEPTIONAL - The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many (requirements) to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective

PURPLE/VERY GOOD- The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some (requirements) to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective

GREEN/SATISFACTORY – The contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory

YELLOW/MARGINAL – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented

RED/UNSATISFACTORY – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective

NOT APPLICABLE - Unable to provide a score.

52.212-1 -- Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial Items -- Past performance information, when included as an evaluation factor, to include recent and relevant contracts for the same or similar items and other references (including contract numbers, points of contact with telephone numbers and other relevant information)

Commercial Clauses

21

52.212-2 -- Evaluation -- Commercial ItemsThe Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:___________________________________________[Contracting Officer shall insert the significant evaluation factors, such as (i) technical capability of the item offered to meet the Government requirement (ii) price (iii) past performance (iv) small disadvantaged business participation

The relative order of importance of the evaluation factors will be specified.Technical and past performance, when combined, are __________ [Contracting Officer state, in accordance with FAR 15.304, the relative importance of all other evaluation factors, when combined, when compared to price.]

Commercial Clauses (cont)

22

Using the uniform contract format

Section L, Instructions to Offerors - Directs offerors to supply the information the source selection team will need, in the format they need, to conduct their evaluation and award contracts to successful offeror

Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award - This section forms the basis for evaluating offerors' proposals and is the only section of the solicitation that communicates to offerors the criteria the Government will use to make the best value award decision

Except when a officer documents the reason past performance is not an appropriate evaluation factor for an acquisition, past performance shall be evaluated in all source selections for negotiated competitive acquisitions expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold ($100k)

Non-Commercial Evaluations

23

POST-AWARD

24

IAW FAR 42.1502(a), agencies shall prepare an evaluation of contractor performance for each contract that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold at the time the work under the contract is completed

-- Interim evaluations should be prepared as specified by the agencies to provide current information for source selection purposes, for contracts with a period of performance, including options, exceeding one year

-- This evaluation is generally for the entity, division, or unit that performed the contract.

Past Performance

25

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 42.1501 Past performance information is relevant information, for future source selection purposes, regarding a contractor’s actions under previously awarded contracts. It includes: -- Contractor’s record of conforming to contract requirements and to standards of good workmanship -- Contractor’s record of forecasting and controlling costs -- Contractor’s adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance -- Contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction -- Contractor’s record of integrity and business ethics -- Contractor’s business-like concern for the interest of the customer

Past Performance

26

Why Evaluate Contractor Performance?

DoD Directed Collection and Use of PPI in 1998

Office of Federal Procurement Policy and Federal Acquisition Regulations Require:

Collection and Maintenance of Past Performance Information (PPI) for Use in the Award Decisions for Competitive Acquisitions

27

Past Performance Information Retrieval System

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System

ACASS/CCASS

Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support Systems

Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System

28

PPIRS

CPARS Regulatory Requirements

FAR 42.1502: Agencies Shall Prepare an Evaluation of Contractor Performance

FAR 15.304: Past Performance Shall be Evaluated in All Source Selections for Negotiated Competitive Acquisitions

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)

CPARS Shall be Used to Prepare Contractor Performance Evaluations

PPIRS Shall be Used as a Source of Past Performance Information in Source Selections

AcquisitionRegulation Supplements

29

ACASS/CCASS Regulatory Requirements

FAR 36.201: Contracting Activities Shall Evaluate Contractor Performance & Prepare Performance Reports for Construction Contracts

FAR 36.604: Contracting Activities Shall Evaluate Contractor Performance & Prepare Performance Reports for Architect-Engineer Contracts

Collection of Contractor Past Performance Information

FAR 15.304: Past Performance Shall be Evaluated in All Source Selections for Negotiated Competitive Acquisitions (Includes Construction)

FAR 36.602: Selection of Firms for Architect-Engineer Contracts (Agency Must Consider Offeror Past Performance)

Source Selections and OfferorPast Performance Information

30

Past Performance Process Overview

ACASSCCASSCPARS

Contractor Representative

Gov’t Assessing Officials(Team Input)

PPIRS

Gov’t Source Selection Officials

Contractor SeniorManagement

31

Pre-Decisional in Nature Protected Throughout Life Cycle

Accessible By:◦ Government Personnel with Need to Know◦ Contractor who is Subject of Evaluation

ACASS/CCASS Evaluations Retained for 6 Years in PPIRS After Completion by Reviewing Official

CPARS Retained for 3 Years in PPIRS After Contract Completion

CPARS Assessments

Treated as Source Selection Sensitive Information IAW FAR 3.104

32

CPARS Reporting Thresholds

Business Sector Dollar Threshold

Systems > $5,000,000

Ship Repair & Overhaul > $500,000

Services > $1,000,000

Health Care > $100,000

Operations Support > $5,000,000

Fuels > $100,000

Information Technology > $1,000,000

33

ACASS/CCASS Reporting Thresholds

Construction > $550,000*

Terminated for Default >$10,000

Architect-Engineer> $30,000*

All Terminations

34

• Initial Report

Required if Period of Performance > 365 Days

• Intermediate Reports

Required Every 12 Months

• Out of Cycle Report

-- Written if Significant Change in Performance

• Final Report

-- Required at Contract Completion

Reporting Frequency

35

Reporting Frequency

All CPARs Are Due Within 120 Days After the End of the Assessment Period

36

Automated Workflow

ContractRegistration

Enter ProposedRatings

Validate ProposedRatings

Review ContractorComments

Reviewing OfficialComments

ContractorComments

EvaluationComplete

Sent to PPIRS

&

CPARS Workflow






ContractorComments

Manual:Focal PointContract Data EntryAssessing OfficialAssessing Official Rep

Automated:Focal Point

Requirements

Focal Point Only

Auto Register Within 30 Days of Contract Award

Auto Register ONCE per Contract

Must Complete APM Field

Automated Contract Registration

39

https://199.208.242.232/CPARSPS/SilverStream/Pages/pgCPRshrLogin.html

Requirements

Register Within 30 Days of Contract Award

Register ONCE per Contract

Enter Basic Contract Information

Must Complete Mandatory Fields

Note: Local policy will determine assignment of the Contract Registration function.

Manual Contract Registration

40

CPARS Workflow






ContractorComments

Assessing Official Rep(s) Assessing Official

Technical Experts

Contract Specialists

Contracting Officer

Contracting Officer’s Representative

Task / Order Monitor

Assessing Official Rep Examples

Enter Proposed Ratings

GovernmentOnly!

42

Ratings & Narratives

Ratings and Narrativesare the most importantpart of the CPAR!

43

Services / Information Technology / Operations Support

Quality of Product or Service

Schedule

Cost Control

Business Relations

Management of Key Personnel

Small Business Utilization

Elements Assessed

44

Ratings & Narratives

RatingContract

RequirementsProblems Corrective Actions

Dark Blue(Exceptional)

Exceeds Many – Gov’t Benefit

Few Minor Highly Effective

Purple (Very Good)

Exceeds Some – Gov’t Benefit

Some Minor Effective

Green (Satisfactory)

Meets All Some Minor Satisfactory

Yellow (Marginal)Does Not Meet

SomeSerious: Recovery

Still PossibleMarginally Effective;

Not Fully Implemented

Red (Unsatisfactory)

Does Not Meet Most

Serious: Recovery Not Likely

Ineffective

Rating Definitions

CPARS Workflow






ContractorComments

Assessing Official

Requirements

Review Admin Info (Blocks 1 – 17)

Validate Ratings & Narratives (Blocks 18 & 20)◦ Modify Ratings & Narratives (if necessary)◦ Return to AOR for Corrections◦ 16,000 Character Limit (approximately 3 pages)

Name and Title (Block 21)

Send to Contractor Rep

Validate Proposed Ratings

Perform Quality Review Prior to Sending

47

CPARS Workflow






ContractorComments

Contractor Rep

30 Days to Respond ◦ System Generated Weekly Email Notifications

7 Days to Request Meeting to Discuss CPAR

Review Admin Info (Blocks 1-17) , Ratings and Narratives

Provide Clear and Concise Responses (Block 22)◦ 16,000 Character Limit (approximately 3 pages)

Provide Concurrence / Non-Concurrence, Name & Title (Block 23)

Send to Assessing Official

Requirements

Contractor Comments

49

CPARS Workflow






ContractorComments

Assessing Official

Review Contractor Comments

Close CPAR

Modify CPAR

Send to Reviewing Official (if applicable)

Requirements


51

If the Contractor fails to respond to the CPAR within 30 days, the Assessing Official has the option to pull back the CPAR and continue theprocess by sending it to the Reviewing Official.


WorkflowNote

52

CPARS Workflow






ContractorComments

Reviewing Official

Required

If the CPAR is Contentious

If the Contractor Does Not Respond

If Local Policy Mandates

Reviewing Official Comments

Note: Local policy guidance regarding assignment of the Reviewing Official function may vary.

54

Review CPAR◦ Blocks 1-23 (read only format)

Input Comments (Block 24)

◦ Acknowledge Discrepancies Between Government Ratings / Narratives and Contractor Comments

◦ 16,000 Character Limit (approximately 3 pages)

Name and Title (Block 25)

Close CPAR

Requirements

Reviewing Official Comments

GovernmentOnly!

55

CPARS Workflow






ContractorComments

PPIRS

Communicate with Contractor◦Provide Feedback

Document Performance Regularly ◦Status Reports ◦Earned Value Management Data◦Monthly Certificates of Service◦Award Fee Evaluations◦Program Reviews◦Earned Contract Incentives

During Performance Period

Helpful Hints

57

Facilitates Communication / Cooperation Between Government and Industry

Provides Past & Current Performance Information- Contains Ratings & Narrative by Government - Contains Narrative by Industry

Motivates Improved Performance

Used in Source Selection to Support Best Value Decisions - Information Retrieved from PPIRS

CPARS Summary

58

PPIRS

www.ppirs.gov

59

Federal Repository for Completed Assessments

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)

Architect – Engineer Contract Administration Support System (ACASS)

Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Past Performance Data Base (PPDB)

National Institute of Health (NIH) Contractor Performance System (CPS)

PPIRS

www.ppirs.gov

60

◦Controlled through Central Contractor Registration (CCR) Process

◦Visit www.ccr.gov for More Information

◦View Completed Evaluations at www.ppirs.gov Select “PPIRS-RC Logon”

Contractor Access

PPIRS

www.ppirs.gov

61

http://www.ccr.gov/

http://www.ppirs.gov/

Benefits of the program include: Facilitating government-contractor communication Motivating improved contractor performance Preparing contractor report cards to be used in

support of Government source selections

Topics to be covered during the seminar: CPARS policy Workflow process Automation New features Helpful hints for using the system

One Day Training Seminar

62

Education

7. past performance_seminar