J.P-6 Past Performance Rating Form (Amendment 0008)

ATTACHMENT J.P-6

PAST PERFORMANCE RATING FORM

PAST PERFORMANCE PROJECT IDENTIFICATION (To be filled out by the Offeror):

CONTRACTOR NAME:

CONTRACT NUMBER:

ORDER NUMBER (if applicable):

PROJECT TITLE:

PROJECT VALUE:

TOTAL PERIOD OF

PERFORMANCE, INCLUDING

OPTIONS (MM/YYYY - MM/YYYY or

MM/YYYY – Present):

PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCE INFORMATION (To be filled out by the Rater):

NAME:

TITLE:

AGENCY / CUSTOMER:

PHONE:

E-MAIL:

SIGNATURE OF RATER (Rating must
be provided by the Contracting Officer,
Contracting Officer’s Representative,
Contracting Officer’s Technical
Representative, other Government
employee or Corporate Officer/Official of the
customer with cognizance over the
submitted Project):

For each of the five (5) criteria listed below, the rater must choose one (1) Adjectival Rating by checking the box, as applicable. At a minimum, for any rating that is checked Marginal or Unsatisfactory, please submit additional comments to substantiate the rating. For any rating that is checked “Not Applicable,” please explain why it does not apply.

1. Technical (QUALITY OF SERVICE)

Rating

Adjectival
Rating

☐

Exceptional

☐

Very Good

Definition
Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s/customer’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/customer’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or subelement being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

☐

Satisfactory

☐

Marginal

☐
☐

Unsatisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or subelement 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.
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