# Presentation: 276421

## The Pony Express:  Delivering Feedback on Contract Performance

Moderator – Julia Wise, OFPP or Cecelia Davis, GSA

Speakers:
Patrick Bradfield, Department of Education
Robert Best, National Institute of Health
Alan Chvotkin, Professional Services Council

**Moderator **– Julia Wise, OFPP or Cecelia Davis, GSA
**Speakers:**
**Patrick Bradfield, Department of Education**
**Robert Best, National Institute of Health**
**Alan Chvotkin, Professional Services Council**
*  *

## Learning Objectives

- Identify different contract monitoring techniques - Pat
- Understand quality assurance plans - Pat
- Learn how to assess and access  past performance information and draft evaluations – Robert
- Industry’s perspective on the Delivery of Past Performance Assessments, Evaluations and Feedback - Alan

## Performance Evaluations

- FAR Subpart 42.15 – Past performance guidance
- Used for future source selection purposes
- Evaluates contractor’s conformance to contract requirements, schedules, control of cost, cooperative behavior, commitment to customer satisfaction, etc.
- Conducted annually.
- Input comes from the technical office, contracting office, and end-user of the products or service.
- Any past performance systems can be used.
- Past performance is retained 3 years after the completion of contract performance.

## Performance Reviews

- Contract management performance reviews or assessments - keeps the project on course, measures performance levels.
- Reviews are conducted regularly** - **more than the annual "past performance" reviews required by regulation.
- For most contracts, monthly or bi-monthly performance reviews would be appropriate. More frequent meetings may be required.
- Acquisition Team especially the program manager should be involved in these reviews.

## Past Performance InformationRoles and Responsibility

- Acquisition planning
- 2.  Award
- 3.  Post Award - Contract Administration

## Monitoring contract performance

- Methods used to monitor contract performance include contract reviews, meeting, visits to the contract site, inspection of the service or product required.
- Tools used to ensure the contractor performs:
- Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan
- Contract Quality assurance provisions  that require the contractor    to perform such as
- 	Inspection and Acceptance
- 	Warranty
- 	Guarantee
- 	Payment – Withhold payment for performance issues
- 	Stop Work
- 	Termination for Convenience, Termination Default, etc.

## Accessing Past Performance Information

- Past Performance Information Retrieval System
- (PPIRS) functions as the central warehouse
- for receipt of performance assessment
- reports from the following Federal
- performance evaluation collection systems:
- PPIRS and the collection systems do
- provide access to evaluations, access that
- otherwise would be haphazard.

**Notes:**
When FASA was passed in 1994, various methods were used to obtain contractor performance evaluations (phone, fax, letter, email).

Difficulty in tracking down information led to development of electronic systems to provide compatible, consistent, and more easily accessible  evaluations.

## Past Performance Information Systems

- Federal regulations require that report cards be completed annually  by customers during
- the life of the contract. PPIRS functions as the central warehouse for performance
- assessment reports received from the following Federal performance information
- Collection systems:
**Contractor Performance System (**_[CPS](http://cps.od.nih.gov/)_**) **_[http://](http://cps.od.nih.gov/)__[cps.od.nih.gov](http://cps.od.nih.gov/)__[/](http://cps.od.nih.gov/)_**  **
- Totally automated system used by civilian agencies (Multiple Agency,
- Shared file system).  Supports acquisition activities in all fity states and over
- 100 foreign countries.  Supports evaluations on Research and Development,
- ADP, Architect and Engineering, Construction and Service and Supply
- contracts. Data collected on a contractor’s performance includes Quality of
- Product or Services, Cost Control, Timeliness of Performance and Business
- Practices.
**Past Performance Data Base (**_[PPDB](http://www.ppirs.gov/ppirsfiles/links.htm#nasa)_**)**
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration Past Performance Data Base.
- Tracks contractor’s performance on NASA contracts.  [No web site, but contact
- NASA Headquarters at 202-358-1279]

**Notes:**
Now go back to the title of this session – Delivering Feedback on Contract Performance.  Consider that we will use the evaluation in source selection. Think in terms of sitting across the table from an offeror that has lost the competition and wants to know why.  To the extent that past performance has played a role in that decision, how will you be able to directly and clearly explain why the information used is valid?
The most easily verified information comes from the PPIRS and its collection systems.  As indicated, though, it is not the only past performance information.
Solicitations can and do ask for sources with performance information that the offeror thinks is relevant.  Follow up with those sources, using a set of questions common to all, is a recommended way of handling this.  
Regardless of whether a ranking of past performance in proposal evaluation is based on personal contact, PPIRS, sources identified by offerors, and/or information obtained directly from one of the collection systems, that information must conform to and be used in accordance with the evaluation criteria of the solicitation.
One final comment about the importance of meaningful narratives in past performance evaluations.  Appropriate use of the narrative in making and defending a source selection, and use of responses to questions asked of sources identified by the offeror, are responsibilities that make acquisition an art as well as a professional discipline.  So, don’t be afraid to learn and practice your art, and do it in harmony with your acquisition knowledge and 

## Past Performance Information Systems

**Past Performance Information Management System (**_[PPIMS](https://apps.altess.army.mil/ppims/prod/ppimshp.cfm)_**)  http://cpars.navy.mil/cparsfiles/ppims/ppimsnotify.htm **
- PPIMS has been the Army’s central respository for the collection and utilization of Army
- wide contractor Past Performance Information (PPI).  Available to authorized
- Government personnel, PPIMS has been used to support both the Contracting
- Performance Review process and future award decisions.  PPIMS also has been used by
- the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) to collect DISA contractor’s past
- performance information.  **Effective March 23, 2007 PPIMS was no longer available**
**for user data input and migration to CPARS is nearly complete.  See the url above**
**for more information on that transition.**
**Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support System (**_[ACASS](http://www.cpars.navy.mil/acassmain.htm)_)
- _[http://](http://cpars.navy.mil/acassmain.htm)__[cpars.navy.mil/acassmain.htm](http://cpars.navy.mil/acassmain.htm)_** **
- ACASS is a web-enabled application that supports the completion, distribution and retrieval of Architect
- Engineer (A-E) contract performance evaluations (DD Form 2631).  ACASS is for Unclassified use only.
- Evaluations are based on objective facts and supported by contract management data, such as quality of
- A-E services by discipline, and assessments of the attributes of the engineering services as to accuracy,
- thoroughness, schedules, cost constraints, technical capability and other performance requirements.

## Past Performance Information Systems

**Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS)**
**http://cpars.navy.mil/ccassmain.htm **
- CCASS is a web-enabled application that supports the completion and retrieval
- of Construction contract performance evaluations (DD Form 2626).  CCASS is
- for Unclassified use only. Evaluations are based on objective facts and
- supported by contract management data, such as contract performance elements that
- evaluate quality, timely performance, effective management and compliance with contract
- terms, labor standards and safe standards.
**Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) **
**http://cpars.navy.mil/  **
- CPARS is a web-enabled application that collects and manages the library of automated
- CPARs.  CPARS is for Unclassified use only. CPAR assesses a contractor’s performance
- and provides a record, both positive and negative, on a given contract during a specific period of time.
- Each is based on objective facts and supported by contract management data, such as cost
- performance reports, customer comments, quality reviews, technical interchange meetings, financial
- solvency assessments, construction/production management reviews, contractor operations reviews,
- functional performance evaluations, and earned contract incentives.

## How to assess past performance

**What is put into an evaluation?  Let’s use the CPS format as an example. **
**Numerical Ratings and Supporting Narrative on:**
- - Quality of Product or Services- Cost control- Timelines of Performance. - Business Practices
- - Comments on Subcontracts/Socioeconomic Goals - Comments on Key Personnel - Determination of Commitment to Customer Service
**Rating Scale:**
- - 0 Unsatisfactory - 1 Poor - 2 Fair - 3 Good - 4 Excellent - 5 Outstanding
- Note:  Mere use of scores is insufficient because scores can tend to be grouped more toward the
- middle of the scale.   _**Narrative**_ becomes essential to helping CO understand the rating, and to
- distinguishing among similar scores.  Need partnership between CO and COTR to encourage and
- sustain a forthright narrative.
- Suggestion: Ask COTR whether they would want to select that contractor again.  If not, why not.  If so,
- why.  Use technical documents, correspondence, deliverables, site visit reports, meeting minutes, cost
- analyses, changes anything that has been done to monitor, assess, direct, and otherwise administer
- the contract.  Ideally, a past performance evaluation should rely on the everyday activities of making
- sure the Government gets what it paid for.

## How to use evaluations

- Before we talk about that, we have to ask if the systems give us what we need?  Some shortcomings are:
- PPIRS may be incomplete and inaccurate.  It is only as good as the feeder systems. It would help if all agencies mandated use of a data collection system.
- Negative reports may be limited in number, and there is inconsistency in among rankings in the middle.
- Personal contact with COs and COTRs is limited in today’s environment; this can be a drawback.
- Past performance does not translate well to R&D contracts.
- However, despite any shortcomings past performance is a key element in many source selections and will continue to be.

## Industry’s Perspective on the Delivery of Contract Performance Feedback

- Past Performance Assessments are important and should be communicated frequently to the contractor.
- Past Performance Evaluations must be done annually.
- Leads to future business opportunities
- Helps to improve performance.
- Open and frequent communication with the contractor
- personnel is the key to success on your contracts.

## Question and Answer Session