**PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PLAN**

**FOR THE**

**MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SERVICES II/B**

**(MSES II/B)**

######## CONTRACT NNG07CA22C

**WITH**

**BASTION TECHNOLOGIES**

**FEBRUARY 1, 2007**

CONCURRENCE:

500/Director, Applied Engineering & Technology Date

Fee Determination Official

APPROVAL:

Valorie A. Burr Date

200/Associate Director for Acquisition

**FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY**

**[TABLE OF CONTENTS]{.underline}**

I.  INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

II. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES FOR AWARD FEE . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    . . . . . . 5

ADMINISTRATION

III. EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
     . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

IV. METHOD FOR DETERMINING AWARD FEE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    . . . . . . . . . .10

V. CHANGES IN PLAN COVERAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

VI\. ATTACHMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Attachment A: Evaluation Periods and Available Award Fee . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 15

A.1 Services Task Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 15

> A.2 End-Item Task Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> . . . . . . . . . . 16

Attachment B: Performance Areas and Evaluation Criteria . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 17

B.1 Technical Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 17

B.2 Cost Control Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 19

B.3 Program and Business Management Performance . . . . . . . . . . 20

Attachment C: Award Fee Grading Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

> Attachment D: Actions and Schedules for Award Fee Determinations . . .
> . . . . . . . . 23

Attachment E: General Instructions for Evaluation and Monitoring . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 24

of Performance

**I. INTRODUCTION**

> This plan covers the administration of the award fee provisions of
> Contract

NNG07CA22C dated February 1, 2007 with Bastion Technologies, Inc. The
purpose of this plan is to establish a general framework for evaluating
the Contractor's performance. Accordingly, all fee determinations shall
be based on the guidelines found herein. The plan is unilaterally
established by the Government and may be revised at any time to redirect
emphasis. The contract was awarded in accordance with the provisions of
Request for Proposal (RFP)-NNG06140050R.

The following matters, among others are covered in the contract:

> A. The contract provides for engineering services for the Applied
> Engineering and Technology Directorate, Code 500, and other areas of
> the Goddard Space Flight Center. The principal purpose of this
> contract is to provide engineering services for the formulation,
> design, development, fabrication, integration, testing, verification,
> and operations of space flight and ground support hardware, including
> development and validation of new technologies to enable future space
> technology and science missions under task ordering arrangements. This
> contract contains NFS Clauses 1852.216-76, *"Award Fee for Services
> Contract,"* and 1852.216-77*, "Award Fee for End Item Contracts."*
> Each task order issued will clearly state whether it is a "service" or
> "end-item" task and which clause applies. Under "service" task orders,
> the award fee determination each period is final. Under "end-item"
> task orders, the award fee determination each period is considered
> interim pending the final award fee determination made at the end of
> each end-item task order.

## 

## B. The effective ordering period is five years from the effective date of the IDIQ contract as specified in Clause F.2 *\"Effective Ordering Period.\"* 

> C. The minimum ordering value of the contract is \$1,000,000 and the
> maximum ordering value of this contract is \$200,000,000 as specified
> in Clause B.2 *"Minimum/Maximum Amount of Supplies or Services."* The
> award fee percentage is **7.7 percent** and shall be used to calculate
> the maximum available award fee dollars on all task orders issued in
> accordance with the "Task Ordering Procedure" clause of this contract.
> Due to the IDIQ characteristics of this contract, the award fee
> available amount may fluctuate as task orders are issued and/or
> modified during performance. Award fee will be distributed based on
> the task order type (service versus end-item) during the evaluation
> periods that coincide with the period of performance of the task
> order. The estimated cost and maximum available award fee of each task
> order is subject to equitable adjustments rising from changes or other
> contract modifications. Of the \$200 million potential maximum
> ordering value of this contract, \$14,298,979.00 is the maximum award
> fee that could be made available.

D.  Provisional award fee payments will be made under this contract
    pending the determination of the amount of fee earned for an
    evaluation period. If applicable, a provisional award fee payment
    will be made to the Contractor per period after each month
    completed. The total amount of award fee available in an evaluation
    period that will be provisionally paid is the lesser of 80 percent
    of that evaluation period's available award fee or the prior
    period's evaluation score.

#########  E. The award fee payable will be determined periodically by the Fee Determination

> Official (FDO) in accordance with this plan.

F.  The Government may unilaterally change this plan, as covered in
    Section V and not otherwise requiring mutual agreement under the
    contract, provided the contractor receives notice of the changes at
    least 30-days prior to the beginning of the evaluation period to
    which the changes apply.

###### The unearned award fee in any given period shall not be carried forward or "rolled-over" into subsequent periods.

G.  The determination and the methodology for determining award fee
    earned are unilateral decisions made solely at the discretion of the
    Government.

#### ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES FOR AWARD FEE ADMINISTRATION

The following organizational structure is established for administering
the award provisions of the contract:

A. [Procurement Officer (PO)]{.underline}

1\. The PO is located at the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), in

Greenbelt, MD

> 2\. The PO is the approval authority for any substantive changes to
> this plan.

B. [Fee Determination Official (FDO]{.underline})

> The FDO for this contract is the Code 500 Director, Applied
> Engineering & Technology Directorate (AETD) at the NASA/GSFC in
> Greenbelt, Maryland. The FDO may designate an Alternate FDO when
> appropriate.

The primary FDO responsibilities are:

> 1\. Establish the Performance Evaluation Board (PEB).

2.  Consider the PEB findings for each evaluation period and discuss it
    with the PEB chair and, if appropriate, with others such as the
    contractor.

3.  Determine the Award Fee earned and payable for each evaluation
    period as addressed in Section IV and ensure that the amount and
    percentage of award fee earned is commensurate with and accurately
    reflects the contractor\'s performance. Any variance between the PEB
    recommendation and FDO determination must be justified and
    documented in the official contract file.

4.  Issue and sign the award fee determination letter for the evaluation
    period, specifying the amount of award fee determined and the basis
    for that determination.

5.  Approves changes proposed to the Performance Evaluation Plan (PEP)
    as addressed in Section V, as appropriate.

6.  Appoint the voting members of the PEB by memorandum.

C. [Performance Evaluation Board]{.underline} (PEB)

> The PEB primary responsibilities of the Board are to:

1.  Conduct ongoing evaluations of contractor performance based upon
    Performance

> Monitor Reports and such additional performance information as may be
> obtained from the contractor and other sources. The PEB will evaluate
> the contractor\'s performance according to the standards and criteria
> stated in this performance evaluation plan.

2.  Submit an award fee letter to the FDO covering the PEB\'s findings
    and recommendations for each evaluation period.

3.  Recommend for approval by the FDO proposed changes in the
    performance evaluation plan and the PO for significant changes.

D. [PEB Chairperson]{.underline}

> The PEB Chairperson is the Associate Chief, Mechanical Systems
> Division at NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, MD. The primary responsibilities of
> the PEB Chairperson are to:
>
> 1\. Appoint non-voting members, if appropriate, to assist the PEB in
> performing its
>
> functions, e.g., a recording secretary.

2.  Appoint performance monitors for the contract effort and assure that
    they are providing appropriate instructions and guidance.

3.  Request and obtain performance information from other units or
    personnel involved in observing contractor performance, as
    appropriate.

4.  Call on personnel from various organizational units to consult, as
    needed, with the PEB.

5.  Assume responsibility for the actual preparation and approval of the
    award fee letter and other documentation such as PEB minutes.

6.  Ensure the timeliness of award fee evaluations.

7.  Recommend appropriate changes in this plan for consideration, as
    addressed in Section V.

8.  Meet with the contractor during the evaluation period to provide
    preliminary performance feedback.

E. [Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR)]{.underline}

> The COTR will be located at the NASA/GSFC facility in Greenbelt, MD*.*

The primary responsibilities of the COTR are to:

1.  Receive and analyze the Performance Monitor Reports submitted by the
    Performance Monitors.

2.  Monitor, evaluate, and assess Contractor performance.

3.  Prepare the Contract Performance Summary Report for the Contracting
    Officer (CO).

4.  Attend all PEB meetings, record the findings of the PEB, and prepare
    the award fee determination letter for the FDO's review and
    signature in coordination with the CO.

5.  Complete the technical portion of the annual NF 1680, Evaluation of

Performance.

6.  Recommend appropriate changes in this plan for consideration, as
    addressed in

> Section V.

F. [Performance Monitors]{.underline}

> Performance Monitors will be designated by the PEB Chairperson to each
> performance area to be evaluated. Generally, the task initiator for
> each issued task order will be the Performance Monitor for that task.
>
> The primary responsibilities of the Performance Monitor are to:

1.  Monitor, evaluate, and assess contractor performance in assigned
    areas and in

> accordance with this award fee plan.

2.  Periodically prepare a Performance Monitor Report (PMR) for the PEB
    that will be submitted to the COTR, as described in Section II.E, or
    others as appropriate.

3.  Recommend appropriate changes in this plan for consideration, as
    addressed in

Section V.

G. [Functional Monitor/Performance Evaluation Coordinator]{.underline}

> The Functional Monitor (FM) will be the contract specialist or
> contracting officer who is responsible for Contract No. NNG07CA22C at
> the NASA/GSFC facility in Greenbelt, MD*.*
>
> The primary responsibilities of the FM are to:

1.  Advise the PEB on Cost-Plus-Award-Fee rating standards, policies,
    and procedures and ensure the consistent application of Agency
    policy in these matters.

2.  Receive and analyze the Performance Monitor Reports submitted by the
    Performance Monitors via the assigned COTR.

3.  Monitor, evaluate, and assess Contractor performance.

4.  Consider changes to this plan and recommend those determined
    appropriate for presentation to the FDO.

5.  Attend all PEB meetings and assist the COTR in preparing all PEB
    correspondence for the FDO.

##### EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS

The applicable evaluation requirements are included as attachments to
this Performance Evaluation Plan. They are as follows:

[Attachment Title Attachment]{.underline}

Evaluation Periods and Maximum Available Award Fee A

Services Task Orders A.1

End-Item Task Orders A.2

Performance Areas and Evaluation Criteria B

Technical Performance B.1

Cost Control Performance B.2

Program and Business Management Performance B.3

Award Fee Grading Table C

Actions and Schedules for Award Fee Determination D

General Instructions for Evaluation and Monitoring E

of Performance

The percentage weights indicated in Attachment B and the grading table
in Attachment C are quantifying devices. Their sole purpose is to
provide guidance in arriving at a general assessment of the amount of
award fee earned. In no way do they imply an arithmetical precision to
any judgmental determination of the Contractor\'s overall performance
and amount of award fee earned.

**IV. METHOD FOR DETERMINING AWARD FEE**

A determination of the award fee earned for each evaluation period will
be made by the FDO and provided to the contractor not later than
forty-five (45) calendar days after the end of the period. The method to
be followed in monitoring, evaluating, and assessing Contractor
performance during the period, as well as for determining the award fee
earned or paid, is described below. Attachment D summarizes the
principal actions and schedules involved.

A.  The PEB Chairperson will ensure that a monitor is assigned for each
    performance

evaluation factor to be evaluated under the contract. Monitors will be
selected on the

basis of their expertise relative to prescribed performance area
emphasis. The PEB

Chairperson may change monitor assignments at any time without advance
notice to the

Contractor. The PEB Chairperson will notify the Contractor promptly of
all monitor

assignments and changes.

B. The PEB Chairperson will ensure that each monitor receives the
following:

\(1\) A copy of this plan along with any changes made in accordance with
Section V.

\(2\) Appropriate orientation and guidance.

(1) Specific instructions applicable to the monitors\' assigned
    performance areas.

C. Monitors will evaluate and assess Contractor performance and discuss
the results with

Contractor personnel as appropriate, in accordance with the General
Instructions for

Evaluation and Monitoring of Performance, Attachment E, and the specific
instructions

and guidance furnished by the PEB Chairperson.

D.  Monitors will submit semi-annual Performance Monitor Reports and, if
    required, make verbal presentations to the PEB.

E. The Contractor may submit self-evaluation summaries of its own and
subcontractor

> performance to the COTR for technical performance and the CO for
> program and cost control and program and business management
> performance. Any such self-evaluations must be submitted for the
> period no later than seven (7) calendar days following the end of a
> performance period. Contractor self-evaluations will be forwarded
> through the appropriate Performance Monitors, who will reconcile
> differences between their reports and the Contractor self-evaluations
> prior to the PEB meeting. Such self-evaluation summaries will be
> included in the PEB package.

F. Promptly after the end of each evaluation period, the PEB will meet
to consider all the

performance information it has obtained. As requested by the PEB Chair,
monitors and other personnel involved in performance evaluation will
attend the meeting and participate in discussions. At the meeting, the
PEB will summarize its preliminary findings and recommendations for
inclusion in the award fee letter and other documentation such as PEB
minutes.

G. The COTR, in coordination with the FM/CO, will prepare the award fee
determination letter for the period, which will be reviewed by the PEB
Chairperson and then submitted to the FDO for use in determining the
award fee earned. The letter will include an adjectival rating and a
recommended performance score with supporting documentation.

H. The FDO will consider the recommendations of the PEB, information
provided by the

Contractor, if any, and any other pertinent information in determining
the amount of the

> award fee to be paid for the period. The FDO\'s determination of the
> amount of award fee
>
> earned and the basis for this determination will be stated in the
> award fee determination letter.

I. The Contractor will be notified by the Contracting Officer of the
FDO\'s determination. The contractor may request a debriefing from the
PEB Chairperson.

J. All end-item task award fee evaluations, with the exception of the
final evaluation of each end-item task order, will be interim
evaluations. All interim fee payments made under end-item task orders
will be superseded by the final fee determination made at the end of the
task order. No award fee will be paid to the Contractor if the final
end-item task award fee evaluation is \"poor/unsatisfactory.\"

**V. CHANGES IN PLAN COVERAGE**

A. Right to Make Unilateral Changes

Any matters covered in this plan not otherwise requiring mutual
agreement under the contract, may be changed unilaterally by the FDO
prior to the beginning of an evaluation period by timely notice to the
Contractor in writing at least 30 calendar days prior to the start of
the relevant evaluation period. Significant changes to the plan will
require the approval of the Procurement Officer. The changes will be
made without formal modification of the contract.

B. Steps to Change Plan Coverage

The following is a summary of the principal actions involved in changing
plan coverage for an evaluation period (actions may be modified to
reflect different approval or notification levels).

[Action Schedule]{.underline}

PEB members draft proposed revisions to PEP Ongoing

PEP revisions submitted to CO for drafting Ongoing

######  FDO reviews and approves\* revisions to PEP Prior to end of each period

FDO/CO notifies the Contractor regarding Not later than 30 days prior to
start

revisions to PEP of period

\* If significant changes are made to the plan, the Procurement Officer
will approve the revised plan after FDO review.

The PEB will establish lists of subsidiary actions and schedules
necessary to meet the above schedules.

C. Method for Changing Plan Coverage

The method to be followed for changing the plan coverage is described
below:

(1) Personnel involved in the administration of the award fee provisions
    of the contract are encouraged to recommend plan changes with a view
    toward changing management emphasis, motivating higher performance
    levels, or improving the award fee determination process.
    Recommended changes should be sent to the CO for PEB consideration
    and drafting.

> \(2\) Prior to the end of each evaluation period, the PEB will submit
> its recommended
>
> changes, if any, applicable to the next evaluation period for review
> and approval by the FDO with appropriate comments and justification.
> If the changes are considered significant by the CO, the revised plan
> must be sent to the Procurement Officer for approval after the FDO\'s
> review.
>
> \(3\) At least thirty (30) calendar days before the beginning of each
> evaluation period, the cognizant Contracting Officer will notify the
> Contractor in writing of any changes to be applied during the next
> period. If the Contractor is not provided with this notification, or
> if the notification is not provided within the agreed number of work
> days before the beginning of the next period, then the existing plan
> will continue in effect for the next evaluation period.

## 

## **VI. ATTACHMENTS** 

**ATTACHMENT A**

**EVALUATION PERIODS AND AVAILABLE AWARD FEE**

A.1 [Services Task Orders]{.underline}

Services Maximum

# Period Number Start Date End Date Available Award Fee

1 FEB 01, 2007 JUL 31, 2007 \$ TBD\*

2 AUG 01, 2007 JAN 31, 2008 \$ TBD\*

3 FEB 01, 2008 JUL 31, 2008 \$ TBD\*

4 AUG 01, 2008 JAN 31, 2009 \$ TBD\*

5 FEB 01, 2009 JUL 31, 2009 \$ TBD\*

6 AUG 01, 2009 JAN 31, 2010 \$ TBD\*

7 FEB 01, 2010 JUL 31, 2010 \$ TBD\*

8 AUG 01, 2010 JAN 31, 2011 \$ TBD\*

9 FEB 01, 2011 JUL 31, 2011 \$ TBD\*

10 AUG 01, 2011 JAN 31, 2012 \$ TBD\*

\*Due to the IDIQ nature of this contract, the award fee pool for each
potential period will vary based upon the task orders issued against the
contract. Award fee will be distributed during the evaluation periods
that coincide with the period of performance of the task order.

A.2 [End-Item Task Orders]{.underline}

End-Item Maximum

# Period Number Start Date End Date Available Award Fee

1 FEB 01, 2007 JUL 31, 2007 \$ TBD\*

2 AUG 01, 2007 JAN 31, 2008 \$ TBD\*

3 FEB 01, 2008 JUL 31, 2008 \$ TBD\*

4 AUG 01, 2008 JAN 31, 2009 \$ TBD\*

5 FEB 01, 2009 JUL 31, 2009 \$ TBD\*

6 AUG 01, 2009 JAN 31, 2010 \$ TBD\*

7 FEB 01, 2010 JUL 31, 2010 \$ TBD\*

8 AUG 01, 2010 JAN 31, 2011 \$ TBD\*

9 FEB 01, 2011 JUL 31, 2011 \$ TBD\*

10 AUG 01, 2011 JAN 31, 2012 \$ TBD\*

##  

## 

\*Due to the IDIQ nature of this contract, the award fee pool for each
potential period will vary based upon the task orders issued against the
contract. Award fee will be distributed during the evaluation periods
that coincide with the period of performance of the task order.

## **ATTACHMENT B**

**PERFORMANCE AREAS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA**

The performance factors to be evaluated are identified below. The
evaluation criteria for each factor are specified in the indicated
section of this attachment.

[Factor Weight Section]{.underline}

######  **Technical Performance 55% B.1**

**Cost Control Performance 25% B.2**

**Program and Business Management 20% B.3**

**Performance**

\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*

**B.1 [Technical Performance]{.underline}**

Factor Weight: 55%

Description of Factor: For each semi-annual evaluation period, technical
performance is broadly assessed as the work performed in meeting the
technical requirements of assigned tasks, including a variety of
subfactors related to how the work was accomplished, as indicated below:

Subfactors Considered for Evaluation:

1.  Technical Requirements -- The Contractor shall be evaluated on
    effective and efficient performance based services to meet the
    technical requirements and schedules as described in the Statement
    of Work and issued services and end-item task orders. This includes
    a subjective assessment of the quality of performance based services
    provided, i.e., thoroughness, accuracy of contractor performance in
    providing services, the timely completion of key milestones and
    tasks identified, and anticipating and resolving problems; recovery
    from delays; reaction time and appropriateness of response to
    changes. Also to be considered is the quality of technical monthly
    progress reports and other required deliverables as outlined in the
    task orders. The Government will make evaluations only on services
    that have been requested/ordered.

Evaluation of technical requirements shall also consider the following:

a\. Assessment of the ability to meet the functional and performance
requirements of each task;

b\. Assessment of the ability to meet the schedule requirements of each
task;

c\. Assessment of the Contractor's ability to identify risks; analyze
their impact and prioritize them; develop and carry out plans for risk
mitigation, acceptance, or other action; track risks and the
implementation of mitigation plans; support informed, timely, and
effective decisions to control risks and mitigation plans; and assure
that risk information is communicated among all levels of the program.

2.  Personnel Management -- The Contractor shall be evaluated on the
    ability to provide staffing at appropriate skill levels to provide
    effective and efficient performance based services.

3\. Thoroughness - The Contractor shall be evaluated on its appropriate
analysis and evaluation of alternative methods, processes, or procedures
to accomplish overall requirements within schedule and budget.

4\. Safety - The Contractor shall be evaluated on the provision of a
safe work environment, including inspections and processes for accident
and incident files, mishap reporting, and training. A major breach of
safety consists of an accident, incident, or exposure resulting in a
fatality or mission failure; or in damage to equipment or property equal
to or greater than \$1 million; or in any \"willful\" or \"repeat\"
violation cited by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration
(OSHA) or by a state agency operating under an OSHA approved plan. **For
all Services Task Orders,** **in no case shall any award fee be earned
by the Contractor in any evaluation period in which there is a major
breach of safety. For all End-Item Task Orders, the Contractor shall not
earn any interim evaluation period in which there is a major breach of
safety and the overall maximum available award fee pool for that
end-item task order shall be reduced by the amount of the fee available
for the evaluation period in which the major breach occurred.**

5\. Security - The Contractor shall be evaluated on how well it manages
and controls security. Security is the condition of safeguarding against
espionage, sabotage, crime (including computer crime), or attack. A
major breach of security may arise from any of the following: compromise
of classified information; illegal technology transfer; workplace
violence resulting in criminal conviction; sabotage; compromise or
denial of information technology services; damage or loss greater than
\$250,000 to the Government; or theft. **For all Services Task Orders,**
**in no case shall any award fee be earned by the Contractor in any
evaluation period in which there is a major breach of security. For all
End-Item Task Orders, the Contractor shall not earn any interim
evaluation period in which there is a major breach of security and the
overall maximum available award fee pool for that end-item task order
shall be reduced by the amount of the fee available for the evaluation
period in which the major breach occurred.**

Basis for Measuring Performance: Using the above subfactors and a
standard of reasonable performance for them, the COTR and the
Performance Monitors will prepare a report that addresses each task and
the associated performance metrics specified in the task orders issued
for which they were the technical initiator. On the basis of those
evaluations, each semi-annual Performance Monitor Report will be
assigned a rating of \"Excellent,\" \"Very Good,\" \"Good,\"
\"Satisfactory\" and/or \"Poor/Unsatisfactory,\" as specified in
Attachment C, Award Fee Grading Table. For each task, the Performance
Monitor report will characterize it as having major or minor impacts on
overall performance in related areas and will describe any extraordinary
circumstances relating to the task performance. These impact statements
will be used by the PEB to weigh the inclusion of specific issues in the
award fee determination letter.

**B.2 [Cost Control Performance ]{.underline}**

Factor Weight: 25%

Description of Factor: Cost Control includes the measure of the
contractor\'s success in controlling actual costs against the negotiated
estimated cost of all the active task orders. The Cost Control
Performance Award Fee, termed Cost, for each period shall be evaluated
and determined as described below.

Subfactors Considered for Evaluation:

1.  Cost -- Accuracy and ability to maintain cost performance as
    negotiated on individual task orders shall be evaluated. The cost
    performance shall be evaluated based on how the Contractor\'s (and
    subcontractors) actual incurred costs, contained in the monthly NASA
    Form 533s, compared to the total negotiated estimated cost of the
    individual task orders issued or active within an award fee
    evaluation period. The analysis of negotiated cost control
    performance will give consideration to changed support requirements,
    changed statutory requirements, and/or changes beyond the
    Contractor's control which impact contract costs.

Evaluation of cost control shall also consider the following guidelines:

a\. Normally, the Contractor should be given a score of 0 for cost
control when there is a significant cost overrun within its control.
However, the Contractor may receive higher scores for cost control if
the overrun is insignificant. Scores should decrease sharply as the size
of the overrun increases. In any evaluation of Contractor overrun
performance, the Government will consider the reasons for the overrun
and assess the extent and effectiveness of the Contractor\'s efforts to
control or mitigate the overrun.

b\. The Contractor should normally be rewarded for individual task order
under-runs within its control up to the maximum score allocated for cost
control, provided the average numerical rating for all other award fee
evaluation factors is 81 or greater. An under-run shall be rewarded as
if the Contractor has met the estimated cost of the contract when the
average numerical rating for all other factors is less than 81 but
greater than 60.

> c\. The Contractor should be rewarded for meeting the estimated cost
> of the individual task orders, but not to the maximum score allocated
> for cost control, to the degree that the Contractor has prudently
> managed costs while meeting contract requirements. No award shall be
> given in this circumstance unless the average numerical rating for all
> other award fee evaluation factors is 61 or greater.

Basis for Measuring Performance: Using the above subfactors and a
standard of reasonable performance for them, the GSFC Resource Analyst
and the Performance Monitors will prepare a report that addresses the
above performance metrics. On the basis of those evaluations, each
semi-annual Performance Monitor Report will be assigned a rating of
\"Excellent,\" \"Very Good,\" \"Good,\" \"Satisfactory\" and/or
Poor/Unsatisfactory,\" as specified in Attachment C, Award Fee Grading
Table. The Performance Monitor report will characterize it as having
major or minor impacts on overall performance in related areas and will
describe any extraordinary circumstances relating to the cost control.
These impact statements will be used by the PEB to weigh the inclusion
of specific issues in the award fee determination letter.

**B. 3 [Program and Business Management Performance ]{.underline}**

Factor Weight: 20%

Description of Factor: Program and Business Management is the manner in
which the Contractor plans, organizes, and controls work under the
contract and implements contract provisions. It includes personnel,
inter-organizational interfaces, work flow, property and materials
controls, and financial management.

Subfactors Considered for Evaluation:

1\. Compliance with contract provisions - The Contractor shall be
evaluated on the overall administration of the contract. This shall
include accuracy and timeliness of all reporting requirements (e.g.,
task order proposal submissions, subcontract consent documentation,
On-Site Personnel Reports, property reports, financial management
reporting requirements, etc.) and overall compliance of all terms and
conditions of the contract. The Contractor\'s responsiveness to requests
for change proposals/task plans will be evaluated. This evaluation will
include the submission of timely, complete proposals and cooperation in
negotiating the change.

2\. Subcontracting - The Contractor will be evaluated on their overall
effectiveness of managing subcontracts. This will include the business
relationship between the prime and subcontractor, the level of
cooperation between the two parties and the Contractor\'s ability to
ensure quality performance based services from subcontractors.

3\. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) -- The Contractor shall submit
SF-100 entitled, \"Employer Information Report EEO-1\" to GSFC\'s Code
120 15 days prior to closing of the evaluation period. Information
regarding completion of this report is available from
<http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/jobpat/elinstruct.html>. Provide the date and
results of the most recent EEO compliance review. Describe the
deficiencies (if known) from compliance reviews by OFCCP and what the
Contractor\'s goals are to correct these deficiencies. Discuss
Contractor\'s efforts in community outreach, special events, awards, and
other. Additionally, the Contractor shall provide data depicting
terminations, promotions, and new hires by job category, number of
employees, gender and race. An assessment shall be performed on the
EEO-1 form in regards to changes from last performance period and
comparison to census data (Washington SMSA) as well as a review of all
other data and contractor efforts.

4\. Program planning and organizational management - The Contractor
shall be evaluated on the use of personnel; recognition and correction
of critical problem areas; cooperation and working relationships with
other organizations\' personnel; labor relations; management actions
related to performance and productivity; and response to unexpected
situations.

5\. Business Management - The Contractor shall be evaluated on their
local and corporate

F.  business management. This area shall include an evaluation of the
    overall ability and effectiveness to respond to operational and
    management problems of the Contractor. The Contractor shall be
    evaluated on the overall effectiveness of their equipment
    management. This will include maintenance and availability at time
    of need of Contractor owned equipment.

Basis for Measuring Performance: The Contracting Officer and the
Performance Monitors will prepare a report for each of the Subfactors
listed above which includes a rating assigned in accordance with the
adjectival rating scale contained in Attachment C, Award Fee Grading
Table. For each Subfactor, the Performance Monitor report will
characterize it as having major or minor impacts on overall performance
and will describe any extraordinary circumstances relating to
performance. These impact statements will be used by the PEB to weigh
the inclusion of specific issues in the award fee determination letter.

**ATTACHMENT C**

**AWARD FEE GRADING TABLE**

Range of

Adjectival Performance

# Rating Points Description

Excellent 100-91 Of exceptional merit; exemplary performance in a
timely, efficient

and economical manner; very minor (if any) deficiencies with no

adverse effect on overall performance

Very Good 90-81 Very effective performance, fully responsive to contract

requirements; contract requirements accomplished in a timely,

efficient, and economical manner for the most part; only

minor deficiencies

Good 80-71 Effective performance; fully responsive to contract
requirements;

reportable deficiencies, but with little identifiable effect on overall

performance

Satisfactory 70-61 Meets or slightly exceeds minimum acceptable
standards; adequate

results; reportable deficiencies with identifiable, but not

substantial, effects on overall performance

Poor/ 60-0 Does not meet minimum acceptable standards in one or more

Unsatisfactory areas; remedial action required in one or more areas;
deficiencies in one or more areas which adversely affect overall
performance

Any factor receiving a grade of poor or unsatisfactory (less than 61
points) will be assigned zero performance points for purposes of
calculating the award fee amount. The contractor will not be paid any
award fee when the total award fee score is \"Poor/Unsatisfactory\"
(less than 61 points). In order to earn a total overall rating of
\"Excellent,\" the contractor must be under cost, on or ahead of
schedule, and be rated \"Excellent\" for Technical Performance.

**ATTACHMENT D**

**ACTIONS AND SCHEDULES FOR AWARD FEE DETERMINATIONS**

The following is a summary of the principal actions involved in
determining the award fee for the evaluation periods. The PEB will
establish lists of subsidiary actions and schedules as necessary to meet
the schedule for principal actions.

[Action Schedule]{.underline}

PEB Chairperson and members appointed Prior to first period

PEB Chairperson appoints Performance Monitors Prior to first period

and informs Contractor

Monitors receive orientation and guidance Prior to first period

Performance Monitors assess performance Ongoing

and discuss results with Contractor

###### Performance Monitors submit Performance Not later than (NLT) 20

Monitor Reports to PEB days after end of period

PEB meets to discuss performance reports NLT 30 days after end of

and prepare preliminary findings and period

recommendations

PEB forwards findings and summary NLT 40 days after end of

recommendations to FDO in award fee period

determination letter

FDO reviews and signs the award fee NLT 45 days after end of

letter. CO forwards award fee letter period

and executed contract modification to

Contractor

Award fee payment made to Contractor NLT 60 days after end of

via modification period

####### ATTACHMENT E

**GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS**

**FOR EVALUATION AND MONITORING OF PERFORMANCE**

1.  Performance Monitors will prepare outlines of their assessment plans
    and coordinate

them with the PEB Chairperson. Upon agreement with the PEB Chairperson,
the

Performance Monitor will discuss the plans with appropriate Contractor
personnel to

assure complete understanding of the evaluation and assessment process.

2.  Performance Monitors will conduct all assessments in an open,
    objective, and cooperative manner so that a fair and accurate
    evaluation is obtained. This will ensure that both the Performance
    Monitor and the Contractor receive accurate and complete information
    from which to prepare assessments and to plan improvements in
    performance. Positive performance accomplishments will be emphasized
    just as readily as negative ones and extraordinary circumstances
    will be noted in reports.

3.  Performance Monitors will discuss their assessments with the
    appropriate Contractor

> personnel, noting observed accomplishments, deficiencies, or unusual
> circumstances. This affords the Contractor an opportunity to clarify
> possible misunderstandings regarding areas of poor performance and to
> correct or resolve deficiencies in a timely manner.

4.  Performance Monitors will conduct their contacts and visits with
    Contractor personnel

> within the context of official contractual relationships. They will
> avoid activities or associations, which might cause, or give the
> appearance of, a conflict of interest on either part.

5.  Performance Monitor contacts with Contractor personnel will not be
    used to instruct,

> direct, or supervise or control these personnel in the performance of
> the contract. The role of the monitor is to monitor, assess, and
> evaluate, not to manage the Contractor\'s effort.

6\. Performance Monitors will document assessments of Contractor
performance in their reports that they will submit to the PEB at the end
of each evaluation period.