Writing Quality Past Performance Evaluations Print Transcript

Federal Acquisition Institute

Writing Quality Past Performance Evaluations

Print Transcript

Federal Acquisition Institute | FAC 089 Writing Quality Past Performance Evaluations 2

Screen 0 of 42: Welcome

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) [Writing Quality Past Performance Evaluations Brought to you by the Federal Acquisition Institute Select Next to begin.]

Course Introduction

Screen 1 of 42: Welcome to Writing Quality Past Performance Evaluations

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD)

In this course, you will learn about writing quality past performance evaluations and the impact good writing can have on how the Government selects contractors to perform future work. You will also learn the components of a good past performance evaluation narrative, and how to evaluate a contractor’s performance. At the end of this course, you will be able to:

• Construct a comprehensive Contract Effort Description; • Evaluate contractor performance using the rating chart in the Federal Acquisition

Regulation, or FAR, 42.1503, and justify ratings accordingly; and • Apply the assessment criterion for the evaluation factors in FAR 42.1503 to write a

quality evaluation narrative. This course should take you approximately 1 hour to complete. Upon successful completion of this course and the assessment, you will earn 1 continuous learning point. Select Next to continue.

Screen 2 of 42: Introduction to Navigation Help

There are several features to help guide you through this course. A brief explanation of these features can be accessed through the “Help” link, located in the upper right corner of the screen above the page number. You may access “Navigation Help” at any time throughout the course. Select Next to continue.

NAVIGATION HELP POPUPS

Menu Select the Menu button to see a list of all topics covered during this course. Please note: You will only be allowed to return to screens that you have previously visited.

Resources Select Resources to access information, references, and a print version of the course.

[Resources include: • Writing Quality Past Performance Evaluations Print Transcript • OFPP Memoranda (https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/management/office-federal-

procurement-policy/) • Federal Acquisition Regulation (https://acquisition.gov) • Table 42-1 (PDF of FAR 42.1503 Table 42-1) • Table 42-2 (PDF of FAR 42.1503 Table 42-2)]

Help Select the Help button for a brief explanation of the course’s navigation features.

Exit Select the Exit button to exit the course.

Screen Number This feature indicates what screen number you are on relative to the total number of screens in the current course.

Volume Select the Volume button to open a slider that controls the volume of the course audio.

Closed Captioning Select the Closed Captioning button to show or hide closed captioning in the course.

Play/Pause Select the Play/Pause button to stop or resume the current screen.

Seekbar The Seekbar displays the duration of each screen’s timeline. You can select any point on the Seekbar to jump to that point on the timeline, or click and drag to move back and forth along the timeline.

Replay Select the Replay button to replay the current screen from the beginning.

Back Select the Back button to navigate to the previous screen.

Next Select the Next button to proceed to the next screen. If Next is dim, be sure to follow all the instructions on the screen in order to continue.

Screen 3 of 42: Overview of Past Performance Evaluations

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) [Optional: Select the link to learn more.] Past performance evaluations are essential to the Federal acquisition process, as these unbiased assessments of contractor performance are critical in assisting future source selection officials to make informed business decisions when awarding Federal contracts. Meaningful performance evaluations are critical to ensuring that the Government spends taxpayer dollars wisely by doing business with companies that can perform in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract. The Office of Federal Procurement Policy, or OFPP, has issued several memoranda which emphasize the importance of reporting timely performance information and using past performance information effectively and the Government Accountability Office, or GAO, has reported a continued need for improvement in the quality of written evaluations, as they oftentimes do not contain sufficient detail to be useful during source selection. This course is designed to help you write detailed and sufficient past performance evaluations. Select Next to continue.

Memoranda https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/management/office-federal-procurement-policy/

Lesson 1: Writing Contract Effort Descriptions

Screen 4 of 42: Lesson 1 Objectives

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) The Contract Effort Description is a key component of past performance evaluations. This lesson covers the critical importance of writing detailed Contract Effort Descriptions so that source selection officials can locate relevant contracts when reviewing past performance information for potential contractors. In this lesson, you will learn how to:

• Identify the key components of a Contract Effort Description, and • Determine the sufficiency of a Contract Effort Description, given an example.

Select Next to continue.

Screen 5 of 42: Writing the Contract Effort Description

A Contract Effort Description is a clear, non-technical description of the principle purpose of the contract or order as required and described in. FAR 42.1503(b)(1). A detailed Contract Effort Description is of critical importance so that future source selection officials can locate relevant contracts when reviewing past performance information for potential contractors. It’s important to be as descriptive as possible and include details about the contract or order such as:

• A detailed descriptions of key technologies, components, subsystems, and agencies involved;

• The complexity and overall technical risk associated with accomplishing the effort; and • Spelled out acronyms and defined technical terms.

The Statement of Work, or SOW, Performance Work Statement , or PWS, Statement of Objectives, SOO, requirements documents, and the Acquisition Plan are all good sources to reference when writing a Contract Effort Description. Remember to review the Contract Effort Description to ensure that you have addressed each of these areas completely. The Contract Effort Description is entered into the Government wide evaluation reporting tool only once at the time that the first performance evaluation is entered, although, if the scope of work changes significantly, the Contract Effort Description should be updated accordingly. A well-written description will enable future source selection officials to determine if the past performance evaluation is relevant to their procurement. Select Next to continue.

Screen 6 of 42: Sample Contract Effort Description 1

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Let’s look at a sample Contract Effort Description. “The contractor provides maintenance and support of VFED for the General Services Administration.”

• Does this look like a complete, detailed, and thorough Contract Effort Description? • Is it easily understandable by source selection officials who are not familiar with the

specific program? • Do you think that this contract effort description is sufficient?

Select the best response. No! This Contract Effort Description is not sufficient. It has four main flaws.

1. It fails to provide sufficient detail and description of the scope of the contract. Is this maintenance and support for a software program or is this maintenance for a piece of equipment or hardware?

2. It does not address the complexity of the contract. Is the contractor providing support for software or equipment that is commonly used and reliable or supporting software or equipment that is prone to technical issues due to its complexity?

3. It fails to describe the key technologies. What specific types of software or equipment are being maintained and supported?

4. It does not define acronyms. What does VFED stand for and mean? Go to the next screen to see the revised version! Select Next to continue.

Screen 7 of 42: Revised Sample Contract Effort Description 1

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Now, take a look at this revised version of the Contract Effort Description. [The contractor provides maintenance and technical support for General Services Administration’s Very Fancy Engine Database (VFED). VFED manages 24,000 engines and nearly 2 million serially tracked, life-limited, critical engine parts and components supported and maintained on a daily basis. This database is used for asset tracking, inventory management, tracking hours in flight, maintenance and repair records, warranty information, parts lists, and engine configuration. The contractor is responsible for the maintenance of the Oracle database and Apache software. VFED was developed by the previous incumbent. The contractor is responsible for requirements analysis, upgrades, configuration management, and help desk technical support for approximately 5,000 help desk requests.] [Clipboard appears with text:

• Defomes acronyms • Addresses complexity • Provides details and descriptions • Describes key technology]

These additional details will help source selection officers determine if a contractor has the expertise necessary and the ability to take on a job of the scale they are procuring. Select each item on the clipboard to learn more, and then select Next to continue.

POPUPS

Defines Acronyms [Bold for emphasis “Very Fancy Engine Database (VFED)”] The Acronym VFED is spelled out: Very Fancy Engine Database.

Addresses Complexity [Bold for emphasis “manages 24,000 engines and nearly 2 million serially tracked, life-limited, critical engine parts and components supported and maintained on a daily basis” and “for approximately 5,000 help desk requests”] The description notes the contract was for maintenance and support of software, and the contractor was responsible for managing a complex database. The description also includes the volume of helpdesk requests.

Provides Details and Descriptions [Bold for emphasis “asset tracking, inventory management, tracking hours in flight, maintenance and repair records, warranty information, parts lists, and engine configuration” and “developed by the previous incumbent”] The description describes the volume of records the software handles. The description also states the VFED was developed by a previous incumbent; the current contractor’s role did not include software development beyond scheduled upgrades or resolving programming issues.

Describes Key Technologies [Bold for emphasis “Oracle database and Apache software”] The revision includes the specific technology used.

Screen 8 of 42: Sample Contract Effort Description 2

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Let’s look another sample Contract Effort Description. “The contractor provided support services and related work to the AETD and related organizations for the study, design, development, fabrication, etc. of multiple system hardware and software, including development and validation of new technologies to enable future missions as noted in the contract award.”

• Does this look like a complete, detailed, and thorough Contract Effort Description? • Is it easily understandable by source selection officials who are not familiar with the

specific program? • Do you think that this contract effort description is sufficient?

Select the best response. No! This Contract Effort Description is not sufficient and has four main flaws.

• It does not mention the specific agency (or agencies) the work was done for. • It does not define acronyms. [Bold for emphasis “AETD”] What does AETD stand for and

mean? • It fails to provide sufficient detail and description of the scope of the contract. [Bold for

emphasis “study, design, development, fabrication, etc. of multiple system hardware and software”] What specifically is being studied, designed, developed, fabricated, etc.?

• It does not address the complexity of the contract. [Bold for emphasis “future missions”]. What are the expected missions?

Go to the next screen to see the revised version! Select Next to continue.

Screen 9 of 42: Revised Sample Contract Effort Description 2

Now, take a look at this revised version of the Contract Effort Description. Then, select each item on the clipboard to learn more. When you’re finished, select Next to continue. [The contractor provided electrical engineering support services and related work for the Goddard Space Flight Center’s Applied Engineering and Technology Directorate (AETD) and related organizations for the study, design, development, fabrication, integration, testing, verification, and operations of space flight, airborne, and ground system hardware and software, including development and validation of new technologies to enable future space and science missions, including Project Daedalus and the Discovery Jupiter Mission.] [Clipboard appears with text:

• Identifies the specific agency • Defines Acronyms • Provides details and descriptions of the scope of the contract • Addresses the complexity of the contract]

POPUPS

Identifies the Specific Agency [Bold for emphasis “Goddard Space Flight Center’s”] The description identifies the primary agency the work was done for.

Defines Acronyms [Bold for emphasis “Applied Engineering and Technology Directorate (AETD)”] The description defines the acronym AETD, Applied Engineering and Technology Directorate.

Provides Details and Descriptions of the Scope of the Contract [Bold for emphasis “study, design, development, fabrication, integration, testing, verification, and operations of space flight, airborne, and ground system hardware and software”] The description provides specifics about the scope of the contract as well as additional details and descriptions.

Addresses the Complexity of the Contract [Bold for emphasis “development and validation of new technologies to enable future space and science missions”] The revision includes the complexity of this project and the missions being served.

Screen 10 of 42: Things to Remember

After you have written your Contract Effort Description, remember to check these questions as you review your work.

• Does it include a detailed description of key technologies, components, subsystems, and agencies involved?

• Are acronyms spelled out and technical terms defined? • Does it describe the complexity and risk involved in performing the work? • And, is your Contract Effort Description written in a clear, non-technical manner?

If you have addressed these questions, then your Contract Effort Description is complete and you’re ready to begin writing the evaluation to include ratings and narratives. Select Next to continue..

Screen 11 of 42: Knowledge Check 1 of 3

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Now, let’s check your knowledge. Select the best response, and then select Submit. What information is NOT included in the Contract Effort Description?

a) Contractor’s effort performance rating b) The complexity of the contract or risk c) Acronyms spelled out d) Definitions of all technical terms

Correct Answer: a) Contractor’s effort performance rating Feedback: That’s correct! The Contract Effort Description includes key technologies, components, and subsystems; the complexity of the contract or risk; acronyms spelled out; and definitions all technical terms.

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Select the best responses, and then select Submit. When is the Contract Effort Description entered into the Governmentwide evaluation reporting tool? Select the TWO correct statements below.

a) Once at the time the first performance evaluation is entered b) Annually during the performance period of the contract or order c) When the scope of work changes significantly d) At the beginning of work by the contractor

Correct Answers: a) Once at the time the first performance evaluation is entered; c) When the scope of work changes significantly Feedback: That’s correct! The Contract Effort Description is entered into the Governmentwide evaluation reporting tool only once at the time that the first performance evaluation is entered, although, if the scope of work changes significantly, the Contract Effort Description should be updated accordingly.

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Select the best response, and then select Submit. For whom is a detailed Contract Effort Description of critical importance?

a) Congressional committee staffers b) Source selection officials c) Potential contractors d) Contracting officer’s representative

Correct Answer: b) Source selection officials Feedback: That’s correct! A detailed Contract Effort Description is of critical importance so that future source selection officials can locate relevant contracts when reviewing past performance information for potential contractors.

Lesson 2: Evaluation Factors

This lesson covers the evaluation factors and performance ratings you’ll use to write your narratives. In this lesson, you’ll learn how to:

• Summarize the factors to consider when evaluating a contractor’s past performance data;

• Recommend an appropriate performance rating for a contractor, given a scenario; • Provide ample justification for each performance rating; and • Relate the events that occurred throughout the period of performance to the contractor’s

performance rating. Remember, as you go through this lesson, you can access the FAR in the Resources menu. Select Next to continue.

Screen 15 of 42: Evaluation Factors

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) [Select each evaluation factor to learn more.] A past performance evaluation assesses the contractor’s performance by comparing the requirements in the Contract Effort Description with the contractor’s actual work, deliverables, and efforts. FAR 42.1503(b)(2) lists the six evaluation factors that must be considered in writing performance evaluations:

• Technical, or Quality; • Cost Control; • Schedule and Timeliness; • Management or Business Relations; • Small Business Subcontracting; and • Regulatory Compliance and Other items

You can access the FAR from the Resources menu. Remember: Cost Control is not evaluated on fixed-price contracts. Select each evaluation factor to learn more. Then, select Next to continue.

POPUPS

Technical/Quality When evaluating the Technical aspect, or the quality of the product or service, there are several questions to consider:

• Does the product or service meet the requirements and specifications of the contract? For example: A contract to provide ships capable of achieving speeds of 35 knots – Are the delivered ships able to do that?

• Does the product or service conform to standards of good workmanship? For example: A contract for web-based software with a requirement to work on three different browsers – Does it actually work on those browsers? A contract for web-based training – Did the training incorporate material correctly and present it in an appropriate manner?

• Are the reports and/or data accurate? For example: There are many types of reports that should be considered such as status reports, Contract Data Requirements Lists, or CDRLs, as well as other data deliverables such as software code.

• What degree of Government technical direction was required to solve problems that arose during performance?

Cost Control When evaluating Cost Control, rate areas including:

• Forecasting Cost, • Managing Cost, • Controlling Cost, • Overrun, and • Underrun.

In writing the Cost Control narrative, think about how well the contractor kept within the total estimated contract cost. Compare the budgeted contract costs to actual expenditures in order to provide objective, factual information in the narrative. Consider whether the contractor did anything innovative that resulted in cost savings, such as the implementation of a new manufacturing process that reduced costs due to rework and high scrap rates. Finally, address the contractor’s billing process and identify if invoices were current, accurate, and complete. Note: Cost Control is only evaluated on time-and-material and cost-reimbursement contracts and should never be evaluated on fixed-priced type contracts.

Schedule and Timeliness When evaluating Schedule and Timeliness, consider the following questions:

• Were deliverables provided or program milestones achieved ahead of schedule, on time, or late?

• If deliverables provided or program milestones achieved were late, was it due to a Government-caused delay or was the contractor at fault?

• Were there any schedule problems to be overcome and were corrective actions promptly identified and followed through?

• In addition, consider the timeliness of completion with respect to delivery schedules or other administrative requirements, and track any evidence or objective metrics to support your rating.

Management or Small Business Relations When evaluating Management and Business Relations, consider whether the contractor proactively identified problems and issues or if a great amount of Government oversight was required. This can be broken down further into specific questions.

• Did the contractor correct problems when they happened or did they take steps to prevent the same problem from occurring again?

• Did the contractor respond to concerns in a timely manner and with sufficient attention from management?

• If a proposal for a contract modification was made, was it accurate, thorough, and timely?

• Is there evidence of customer satisfaction such as surveys or direct feedback? • How well did the contractor manage performance of subcontractors? • If the contract included a key personnel clause, how well did the contractor retain key

personnel who met the required qualifications?

Small Business Subcontracting When evaluating Small Business Subcontracting, it is important to answer the question: Were small businesses given meaningful innovative work directly related to the project? For example, on a contract for engineering services, were small businesses given engineering work to do, or were they hired for peripheral work such as landscaping or cleaning offices instead? If a contractor was unable to meet their small business participation goals, have they demonstrated a good faith effort to meet their goals through outreach events or advertisements in trade publications? Finally, were the contractor’s Individual Subcontracting Reports, or I-S-R’s, and Summary Subcontracting Reports, or S-S-R’s, accurate and timely? Note: The Small Business Subcontracting factor is only evaluated when the contract includes a subcontracting plan.

Regulatory Compliance/Other When evaluating regulatory compliance, evaluate the contractor’s compliance with applicable regulations and codes as required by the clauses in the contract. In addition, other areas can be evaluated.

• Does the contractor have an accurate cost accounting system? • Has the contractor charged and properly allocated allowable costs to the contract,

especially if the contractor is working on multiple contracts at the same facility and using the same resources?

• Has the contractor followed applicable environmental regulations and codes, such as the Clean Air Act?

• Has the contractor implemented Affirmative Action and Equal Employment Opportunity requirements?

• Has the contractor complied with all Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA, requirements?

• Has the contractor had any labor relations issues? • Does the contractor have any trafficking violations? • Does the contractor have issues with tax delinquency? • Did the contractor fail to report in accordance with contract terms and conditions? • Is there defective cost and pricing data? • Did the contractor experience any terminations, suspensions, and/or debarments?

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Now, let’s check your knowledge. Select the best responses, and then select Submit. What are key factors for evaluation? Select the SIX correct responses.

a) Technical/Quality b) Labor and Safety Compliance c) Subcontractor Payment d) Small Business Subcontracting e) Regulatory Compliance f) Schedule and Timeliness g) Management or Business Relations h) Failure to report in accordance with contract terms and conditions i) Cost Control

Correct Answers: a, b, d, e, f, g, i Feedback: That’s correct! The key factors are: Technical/Quality, Cost Control, Schedule and Timeliness, Management or Business Relations, Small Business Subcontracting, and Regulatory Compliance.

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Select the best response, and then select Submit. [True or False?] Cost Control is only evaluated on time-and-material and cost-reimbursement contracts, and should never be evaluated on fixed-priced type contracts.

o True o False

Correct Answer: True Feedback: That’s correct! Cost Control is not applicable for fixed-priced type contracts.

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Select the best response, and then select Submit. [True or False?] Always evaluate Small Business Subcontracting in a performance evaluation.

o True o False

Correct Answer: False Feedback: That’s correct! Small Business Subcontracting is evaluated only when there is a subcontracting plan.

Screen 19 of 42: Ratings and Narratives

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) [Optional: Select the link to learn more.] Before you begin writing the narratives for your evaluations, it’s important to review the evaluation ratings defined in FAR 42.1503 Table 42-1 at acquisition.gov. The definition for Table 42-1 is available in the Resources menu. Evaluation ratings are:

• Unsatisfactory, • Marginal, • Satisfactory, • Very Good, and • Exceptional.

We’ll start with the Exceptional rating. Select Next to continue.

Acquisition.gov https://acquisition.gov

Screen 20 of 42: Exceptional

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) For a contractor to earn an Exceptional rating, their performance must not only meet contractual requirements but also exceed a major contract requirement or many requirements, resulting in a benefit to the Government with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. For example, you are rating the performance of a contract for aircraft engines. The weight of those engines has been an ongoing issue. The contractor engineered a new manufacturing process for those engines using lighter-weight materials, and as a result, those engines were able to make the aircraft fly farther and faster using less fuel resulting in the aircraft being able to perform more effectively. This is a case where the contractor has exceeded a major contract requirement with an innovative solution and therefore an Exceptional rating is justified. In another example, you are rating the performance of a contract that allows for up to 5% of the parts delivered to fail inspection and the Government will still accept the delivery. However, the contractor experienced problems with its quality assurance process and 7% of the parts were failing inspection. The contractor recognized this as an issue, developed a new quality assurance plan, and as a result now only 0.5% of deliverables are failing inspection. This is an example of a highly effective corrective action where a rating of Exceptional would be justified. Select Next to continue.

TABLES

Table 1 Definition of Exceptional: 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. Note: 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.

Screen 21 of 42: Summary: Exceptional

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were a benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it constitutes an Exceptional rating. In addition, there should have been no significant weaknesses identified during the performance period. The Government is not necessarily expecting perfect contractor performance. However, in order to achieve an Exceptional rating, problems should have been few and minor and the contractor should have implemented highly effective corrective actions. It’s important to remember that the decision of whether to exceed a contract requirement in order to achieve an Exceptional rating is the contractor’s choice. At no time should the Government be requesting out-of-scope work or asking the contractor to perform additional tasks without payment. Doing so is a serious violation of contracting regulations and could result in a contract claim. The Government is only allowed to require performance in accordance with those requirements stated in the contract. Select Next to continue.

Screen 22 of 42: Very Good

For a Very Good rating, contractor performance must meet contractual requirements and exceed some to the Government’s benefit, with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. It’s important to remember that in order to justify a Very Good rating, you must be able to identify the benefit to the Government. For example, you’re rating the performance of a contract for the delivery of food to a ship at the time of its deployment. The food was the last delivery that the Government was waiting for prior to the ship’s deployment. If the food was delivered early and the ship could deploy ahead of schedule in order to better meet its mission, it would be appropriate to choose a rating of Very Good for the Schedule evaluation area because the early delivery resulted in a benefit to the Government. However, if the ship was not ready to deploy and the food was delivered early, resulting in the Government having to rent a refrigerated warehouse in order to accept the food, resulting in incurred storage costs, it would not be appropriate to rate performance as Very Good because the early delivery did not result in any benefit to the Government. In another example, you’re rating the performance of a contract where one of the key personnel left the contractor during a critical period of contract performance, causing a work stoppage. However, the contractor was able to quickly hire and train another qualified individual so that performance could be resume promptly before any serious schedule or quality impacts occurred. Select Next to continue.

TABLES

Table 1 Definition of Very 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 were effective. Note: 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.

Screen 23 of 42: Summary: Very Good

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. Small businesses should be given meaningful and innovative opportunities to participate as subcontractors for work directly related to the contract, and opportunities should not be limited to indirect work such as cleaning offices, providing supplies, or landscaping services. There should be no significant weaknesses identified during the performance period. It is also important to note that a contractor can still receive a Very Good rating even if there are some minor performance problems. Select Next to continue.

Screen 24 of 42: Satisfactory

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) For a Satisfactory rating, contractor must meet the requirements and be able to satisfactorily take corrective actions for minor problems. Any major problems must be recoverable and without impact to the contract or order, and no significant weaknesses can be identified. It’s important to note that a contractor will not be given a rating lower than Satisfactory for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract or order. For example, you are rating the performance of a contract for computers. The computers were delivered to Government on the correct day, they were inspected by the Government and determined to be the correct models with the correct software, and the contractor submitted an accurate and timely invoice. In this case, the contractor neither exceeded nor failed to fulfill the contract requirements, and so a rating of Satisfactory would be appropriate. In another example, you’re rating the performance of a contract for product deliveries but those deliveries fell slightly behind schedule at one point during the evaluation period. The contractor was able to implement a new management plan to bring deliveries back on schedule. This issue was minor and the contractor was able to address the delivery issues with acceptable, satisfactory corrective actions. Select Next to continue.

TABLES

Table 1 Definition of 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. Note: 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.

Screen 25 of 42: Summary: Satisfactory

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems were addressed and the contactor made corrective actions. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified during the performance period. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract or order. It’s also important to recognize that the Government does not necessarily expect performance under every contract to be perfect. Due to the nature of much of the work for which the Government contracts, it’s expected that the contractor will at times encounter problems and issues. Select Next to continue.

Screen 26 of 42: Marginal

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) A Marginal rating indicates that the contractor did not meet some of the contract requirements and the contractor did not yet identify corrective actions or their proposed corrective actions were only marginally effective or not fully implemented resulting in a negative impact to the Government. For example, you’re rating the performance of a contract for development of software and the associated user training. The contractor experienced a cost-overrun on the software development line item, and as a result, the training piece of the contract had to be de-scoped to cover the increased development costs in order to ensure that a working software product could be delivered. In this case, a rating of Marginal in the Cost Control evaluation area would be appropriate due to the fact that the cost ceiling requirement was not met, resulting in a negative impact on the Government’s ability to provide training to software users. In another example, you’re rating the performance of a contract that ran behind schedule, but was delivered on time. The contractor took corrective actions, but those corrective actions were only marginally effective or not fully implemented, such as when a contractor provided training to its employees to reduce the number of safety violations. The number of safety violations were reduced, but the number of safety violations still occurred at an unacceptable level, indicating that the corrective action was only marginally effective. In this case, a rating of Marginal is justified because the contractor had significant trouble overcoming an event, resulting in a contractual deficiency. Select Next to continue.

TABLES

Table 1 Definition of 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. Note: 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).

Screen 27 of 42: Summary: Marginal

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) To justify a Marginal rating, the contractor must not have met some of the contract requirements, resulting in a negative impact to the Government. Occurrences such as late deliveries, cost overruns, and quality control issues could all result in a Marginal rating. In the case of Marginal performance, there may have been major problems, but recovery is still possible. Select Next to continue.

Screen 28 of 42: Unsatisfactory

An Unsatisfactory rating is justified when contractor performance does not meet most of the contractual requirement and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. For example, you’re rating the performance of a contract for the replacement of a roof on a Federal office building. A welder is working on the roof and used a torch too close to the building’s ceiling, thus setting the roof on fire and causing the building to become uninhabitable for a significant period of time. This resulted in the Government having to lease space in a private office building while repairs were made. The Government had to pay to move its equipment and employees into the new facility, and operations were significantly disrupted during the relocation period. A rating of Unsatisfactory in the Quality evaluation area would be appropriate because the contractor failed to follow appropriate safety standards, resulting in a major negative impact to the Government. In another example, you’re rating the performance of a contract where the contractor had a large cost over-run that the project had to be cancelled and the contract terminated. In this case, the contractor may have attempted corrective actions, such as hiring a new management team, but those actions were ineffective because costs were already so far out of control. Select Next to continue.

TABLES

Table 1 Definition of 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. Note: 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).

Screen 29 of 42: Summary: Unsatisfactory

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, multiple significant events that the contractor had trouble overcoming are identified. You must be able to state how it impacted the Government. However, a singular problem could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an Unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the actions taken by the Government to notify the contractor of the deficiencies. With an Unsatisfactory rating it’s important to remember it must be justified by specifically describing which requirements were not met and the associated impact to the Government. In such cases, it is particularly important to have documentation, such as cure notices, show cause notices, and written communications with the contractor, in order to provide solid justification for the rating. Select Next to continue.

Screen 30 of 42: Small Business Subcontracting Evaluation Factors

When a large business has a small business subcontracting plan, as outlined in FAR 52.219-9, you’ll need to identify and evaluate the benefits of small business sub-contracting utilization using FAR 42.1503 Table 42-2. These ratings also follow the Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory scale. You would then use Table 1 to address the remaining evaluation factors. If you don’t have a Small Business Plan, then you don’t have to worry about Table 42-2. The definitions for Tables 1 and 2 are available in the Resources menu. Select Next to continue.

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Try this knowledge check. Match the rating with its qualities, and then select Submit. Identify the narrative that should be rated as Very Good.

a) Identifies only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order.

b) Identifies multiple significant events or a singular event of such magnitude, and states how they were a benefit to the Government.

c) Identifies a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. d) Identifies a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming

and state how it impacted the Government. Correct Answer: c) Identifies a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. Feedback: Correct! A narrative that should be rated as very good identifies a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government.

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Select the best response, and then select Submit. [True or False?] An Exceptional rating requires multiple significant events that benefitted the Government.

o True o False

Correct Answer: False Feedback: That’s correct! A singular benefit could be of such magnitude that it constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Lesson 3: Writing Quality Evaluation Narratives

This lesson covers each component of good and bad past performance evaluation narratives. In this lesson, you’ll learn how to:

• Compare and contrast the qualities of good and bad narratives, and • You’ll also learn how to construct a good past performance evaluation narrative.

Screen 34 of 42: Important Considerations

When we’re examining whether a narrative is good or not, there are few questions we ought to keep in mind, like:

• Is the narrative detailed enough to support a source selection decision? • Is the narrative fair? • Are there metrics to justify the rating? • Is the narrative consistent with the rating? • And, does the narrative adequately describe the scope of work?

The evaluation should include clear relevant information that accurately depicts the contractor’s performance, and be based on objective facts supported by program and contract or order performance data. The evaluations should be tailored to the contract type, size, content, and complexity of the contractual requirements. Select Next to continue.

Screen 35 of 42: Narrative Example 1

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Let’s take a look at an example narrative in which the “Exceptional” rating is given. [The contractor is exceptional. They continue to provide high quality support and database services. They do good work and are very helpful. We will use this contractor whenever we have database problems in the future.] Is this narrative:

• Detailed? • Fair? • Written with metrics to justify the rating? • Consistent with its rating? • Adequately describing the scope of work?

Select “Continue” after you have read the narrative. No. This narrative is insufficient for several reasons. The narrative fails to specify the way in which the contractor exceeded the requirements and the benefits derived by the Government. The narrative states that “high quality support and database services were provided”, but provides no detail as to what the contract requirements for these services were, and no metrics to demonstrate how they can be judged as being “high quality.” The narrative also fails to mention specific tasks that were done by the contractor. Overall this example is too vague and wouldn’t be helpful for future source selection officials. Go to the next screen to see the revised version! Select Next to continue.

Screen 36 of 42: Revised Narrative Example 1

Now take a look at this revised narrative in which the “Exceptional” rating is given. How does this narrative differ from the previous one? Why is this narrative sufficient? [The contractor has provided exceptional quality in support of Very Fancy Engine Database (VFED). The contract required a system backup and disaster recovery plan that was put to the test after a malicious code/virus attack. The contractor was proactive with a successful recovery, implemented an innovative solution to prevent future attacks, and enhance system security. The contractor also initiated a system analysis identifying a security loophole previously overlooked at the time of database development by the prior incumbent. The contractor was able to recommend a Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) product to resolve security issues saving custom development time and cost. The contractor staff assisted in conducting an analysis of alternatives, market research, and application acquisition package recommendation in finding the COTS bolt-on. The contractor experienced report generation errors resulting in unscheduled downtime after a three week period, however, they resolved the performance issue by scheduling report runtime during times of minimal system usage and optimized the reports to require less memory.] Select “Continue” after you have read the narrative. The revised narrative:

• Has a contract requirement of a “backup and a disaster recovery plan.” The narrative goes on to evaluate the quality of this plan by stating that it led to a “successful recovery” following a “malicious code/virus attack.”

• Is thorough in its identification of the attack as a problem that the contractor had to overcome.

• Describes The contractor’s “innovative solution” and how they went above and beyond the contract requirements to fight the virus attack, thus helping to justify the Exceptional rating. [bold for emphasis “implemented an innovative solution to prevent future attacks”]

• Cites the benefit derived by the Government due to the contractor’s innovative solution in the form of “enhanced system security.”

• Is fair in that it does not penalize the new contractor for existing software problems on a system which it did not develop. [bold for emphasis “previously overlooked at the time of database development by the prior incumbent.”]

• Identifies the contractor’s strength in the systems analysis area by noting the fact that they discovered something which the previous contractor overlooked. [bold for emphasis “system analysis identifying a security loophole”]

• Elaborates on the full range of tasking performed by the contractor. This information is relevant for source selection officials because it describes the range of contractor capabilities.

Screen 37 of 42: Narrative Example 2

Now take a look at a second example narrative in which a “Very Good” rating was given. Is this narrative:

• Detailed? • Fair? • Written with metrics to justify the rating? • Consistent with its rating? • Adequately describing the scope of work?

[In our opinion, the contractor deserves a Very Good rating because he has done really well in terms of schedule. The Systems Security Manager, Jack Jones is pleasant and easy to work with. He adapts to our schedule changes amazingly and never complains. He also went above and beyond and assembled our Smart Board and projector without charging the Government and he continued to meet all the contract objectives in the interim. Great job!] Select “Continue” after you have read the narrative. No!

• [Bold for emphasis “deserves a Very Good rating”] The narrative is missing details to support the Very Good rating.

• The narrative does not include any documentation or metrics to support the rating. • [Bold for emphasis “Jack Jones”] The narrative uses an individual’s name which is both

outside the contract scope, but also raises questions about fairness. • [Bold for emphasis “In our opinion”, “done really well”, “pleasant and easy to work with”,

“never complains”, and “Great job!”] And finally, the narrative also uses too many

subjective phrases such as “In our opinion,” “done really well,” and “Great job” which again, raises questions about fairness.

Go to the next screen to see the revised version! Select Next to continue.

Screen 38 of 42: Revised Narrative Example 2

Now let’s examine a revised narrative in which the “Very Good” rating is given. How does this narrative differ from the previous one? Why is this narrative sufficient? [Contractor successfully executed system recovery, exceeding requirements, and deployments of new releases were on schedule for this period. Per the Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) the contractor had a 7 day timeframe for full restoration after sustaining the attack, but was able to recover and bring on-line within 4 days resulting in cost and time benefits for not having to manually track data. This early recovery eliminated a work stoppage on engine configuration management at the customer sites. The contractor experienced a turnover with the senior developer during a development phase of the first upgrade, however, due to a replacement with a highly skilled senior developer that was able to program more quickly and efficiently, the contractor was able to bring the final release deployment back on track and no impact to the schedule.] Select “Continue” after you have read the narrative. The revised narrative:

• [Bold for emphasis “7 day timeframe,” “within 4 days resulting in cost and time benefits,” and “more quickly and efficiently”] Justifies the Very Good rating by noting how the contractor exceeded requirements and the benefits to the Government;

• Provides documentation of benefits to justify the rating; • Avoids using personal information and subjective phrasing giving the overall narrative a

stronger sense of fairness; and

• [Bold for emphasis “experienced a turnover,” “replacement with a highly skilled senior developer,” and “back on track and no impact to the schedule”] Identifies the contractor’s ability to make successful corrective actions when an issue arises.

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Let’s check your knowledge. Select the best response, and then select Submit. According to the FAR, all of these are things you MUST take into consideration when writing a past performance evaluation EXCEPT:

a) The amount of detail given. b) The contractor’s past performance. c) The narrative is consistent with its rating. d) The fairness of the evaluation.

Correct Answer: b) The contractor’s past performance Feedback: That’s correct! You should not consider the contractor’s past performance on other projects when writing your narrative.

TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO DESCRIPTION (AD) Select the best response, and then select Submit. Which of these brief sentences gives an adequate description of a contractor’s responsibilities?

a) The contractor must see to it all that tasks given herein are completed. b) The contractor is tasked with implementing a robust anti malware program to help future

cyber attacks. c) The contractor experienced report generation errors resulting in unscheduled downtime

after a three week period. d) The contractor was in charge of overseeing different operations.

Correct Answer: b) The contractor is tasked with implementing a robust anti malware program to help future cyber attacks. Feedback: That’s right! This sentence lists the responsibility of implementing anti malware software.

Summary and Conclusion

Screen 41 of 42: Summary

Congratulations on completing the Writing Quality Past Performance Evaluations course! You should now be able to:

• Construct a comprehensive Contract Effort Description; • Evaluate contractor performance using the rating chart in FAR 42.1503 and justify

ratings accordingly; and • Apply the assessment criterion for the evaluation factors in FAR 42.1503 to write a

quality evaluation narrative. Select Next to continue.

Screen 42 of 42: Conclusion

In support of your agency needs, you may wish to review this course as you consider an implement the concepts presented. [Writing Quality Past Performance Evaluations Brought to you by The Federal Acquisition Institute] You have now completed the course. Select the Exit link above to exit the course.

Writing Quality Past Performance Evaluations Print Transcript

Documents

Approaches Different resources used to identify regulatory promoter motifs: Transcript data from detailed lab studies Transcript data from past experiments

Assistance · Web viewUF teaching evaluations for the past 10 years will auto-populate in this section. For cases involving only promotion, include evaluations only since your last

NAVIGATING ADVERSE PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS · Importance of Past Performance Evaluations It is crucial that contractors maintain their image Past Performance as an evaluation

Media evaluations

COLD ROLLING OILS. Introduction Mechanism of Roll Lubrication Requirements of a Rolling Oil Trends (Past/Present/Future) Evaluations of Rolling Oil Our

Personal evaluations

Routing Evaluations

Transcript Evaluations - ARTSYS MDTranscript Evaluations This tutorial is on using the Transcript Evaluations function for ARTSYS. First, we will focus on the two methods that can

Fear Effect - Sony Playstation - Manual - gamesdatabase...FEAR Copy af Transcript from Jin to Hana. Transcript of flashMail — Augo-Prtnt voice your past, Hana. I important valuable

Subjective Performance Evaluations, Collusion, and ...web.business.queensu.ca/faculty/vthiele/Subjective Evaluations and... · Subjective Performance Evaluations, ... and Organizational

Evaluations Lamy

The Jewels of the Nile: Transcript Evaluations from the ... hendrickson-ppt... · The Jewels of the Nile: Transcript Evaluations from the Nile Basin ... Master of Dental Sciences

Evaluating Foreign Transcripts: TheA-Z Manual · 2019-12-19 · transcript evaluations. x Compile and maintain a list of personnel within each Region who can translate foreign transcripts

DFID COUNTRYPROGRAMME EVALUATIONS SYNTHESISOF2006/2007 EVALUATIONS · 2016-03-29 · DFID COUNTRYPROGRAMME EVALUATIONS SYNTHESISOF2006/2007 EVALUATIONS Julian Barr and CharlotteVaillant

The Nature of the Past Hypothesis · The Nature of the Past Hypothesis David Wallace (This is a lightly edited and referenced transcript of the author’s talk at the Philosophy of

Evaluations 030312

Mini Evaluations

YOURCLINICALCOMPETENCYCOMMITTEES AREBUSY ... · Multi-sourceEvaluations …puttingitalltogether! Self Evaluations Nursing Evaluations Peer Evaluations Patient Evaluations Student

—02 : Transcript I Transcript 1 Transcript 2 Transcript 4 ...hbtu.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/IMPORTANT-INSTRUCTION-F… · 1 Transcript 2 Transcript 4 (Marksheet) Transcript

The Jewels of the Nile: Transcript Evaluations from the ... · Grading Scales, page 1 • Secondary and Tertiary Level (EDGE) Grade Description Translation US Grade 90-100 Excellent