Download - 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
Past Performance Evaluations (cont)
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.
Past Performance Evaluations (cont)
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)
Past Performance Evaluations (cont)
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.
Past Performance Evaluations (cont)
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
ContractRegistration
Enter ProposedRatings
Validate ProposedRatings
Review ContractorComments
Reviewing OfficialComments
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
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
ContractRegistration
Enter ProposedRatings
Validate ProposedRatings
Review ContractorComments
Reviewing OfficialComments
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
ContractRegistration
Enter ProposedRatings
Validate ProposedRatings
Review ContractorComments
Reviewing OfficialComments
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
ContractRegistration
Enter ProposedRatings
Validate ProposedRatings
Review ContractorComments
Reviewing OfficialComments
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
ContractRegistration
Enter ProposedRatings
Validate ProposedRatings
Review ContractorComments
Reviewing OfficialComments
ContractorComments
Assessing Official
Review Contractor Comments
Close CPAR
Modify CPAR
Send to Reviewing Official (if applicable)
Requirements
Review Contractor Comments
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.
Review Contractor Comments
WorkflowNote
52
CPARS Workflow
ContractRegistration
Enter ProposedRatings
Validate ProposedRatings
Review ContractorComments
Reviewing OfficialComments
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
ContractRegistration
Enter ProposedRatings
Validate ProposedRatings
Review ContractorComments
Reviewing OfficialComments
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
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