Desktop version

Home arrow Management arrow The cor/cotr answer book

What are the five sample rating factors and their associated scores?

The OFPP sample contractor performance report form suggests that each rated area be assigned one of the following five ratings/scores:

Unsatisfactory 1

Marginal 2

Satisfactory 3

Very Good 4

Exceptional 5

"Unsatisfactory" Contrasted with "Exceptional" Ratings

An "unsatisfactory" rating may indicate:

Most performance requirements were not met

Significant cost overruns

Many late deliveries

Delinquent responses and lack of cooperative spirit

An "exceptional" rating may indicate:

The contractor met all performance requirements

Significant cost reductions while meeting all requirements

The contractor exceeded delivery requirements by making many early deliveries

Highly professional, responsive, and proactive contractor conduct

The "comments" section of the performance evaluation report should clearly explain why the contractor earned a particular rating, enabling source selection boards to understand the rating and give proper credit to the contractor in their evaluation (i.e., when reviewing contractors' past performance ratings before choosing a contractor). An exceptional rating may be given for any single area of performance, or the rating may be based on overall contract performance.

An exceptional rating allows the source selection team the discretion to give an appropriate amount of "extra credit" to the exceptional contractor in its evaluation, commensurate with the anticipated additional value of such performance. Such recognition is important, as these top-rated contractors are those with whom the government should continue doing business.

Notifying Interested Parties Regarding Contractor Performance

What steps does the COR take to notify interested parties regarding contractor performance?

The COR should follow these steps to ensure that all interested parties are adequately informed regarding the contractor's performance:

1. Provide appropriate information to the contractor.

2. Notify the CO of recurring performance problems.

3. Assist the CO in preparing reports to debarment officials.

1. Providing appropriate information to the contractor

Copies of the agency evaluation should be provided to the contractor as soon as practicable after completing the evaluation. The contractor should be given at least 30 days to comment on the evaluation. If the contractor disagrees with the evaluation, the COR should contact the CO for further guidance. CORs may be asked to assist the CO in evaluating a contractor's rebuttals. If the contractor fails to provide a response by the established deadline, the appropriate official should sign the form in the appropriate block and the government's comments can stand alone.

A review of the contractor's comments must be conducted by an individual at least one level above the CO. The decision resulting from this review must be in writing and must be issued within 15 working days from receipt of a rebuttal statement from the contractor.

2. Notifying the CO of recurring performance problems

The COR needs to include the following in such a notification:

A description of the performance problems

Discussion of mitigating or extenuating circumstances, if any

Indexed file or related documents documenting performance problems

An analysis of the impact that the contractor's performance problems have had on:

- Overall cost

- Delays in obtaining needed supplies and services

- Mission accomplishment.

3. Assisting the CO in preparing reports to debarment officials

The CO may have to determine whether to report a contractor's malperformance or non-responsibility to the debarment official. The debarring official may debar a contractor for a conviction of or civil judgment for:

Commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public contract or subcontract

Violation of federal or state antitrust statutes relating to the submission of offers

Commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, tax evasion, or receiving stolen property

Intentionally affixing a "Made in America" label to a foreign-made product

Commission of any other offense indicating a lack of business integrity that directly affects the present responsibility of a government contractor.

The debarring official may debar a contractor, based upon a preponderance of evidence, for:

Willful refusal to perform in accordance with the terms of one or more contracts

History of failure to perform or unsatisfactory performance of one or more contracts

Violation of the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988, as evidenced by:

- Failure to comply with the requirements of FAR clause 52.2236, entitled "Drug-Free Workplace"

- Repeated convictions of contractor employees for violations (occurring in the workplace) of criminal drug statutes.

Commission of an "unfair trade practice," as defined in FAR 9.403.

Maintaining Evaluations

What is the COR's role in maintaining evaluations?

The COR, as instructed by the CO, should employ the following steps to ensure adequate and proper maintenance of evaluations:

1. Retain past performance evaluations.

2. Release information to other government officials.

3. Properly dispose of past performance records, as required.

1. Retaining past performance evaluations

The following documents should be filed in the contract file, agency-specific file, or a database:

- Performance evaluations

- Any end item evaluations or test results

- Contractor responses to evaluations

- An agency review of contractor rebuttals, if any exist.

The documents should be marked "source selection information" and should be readily accessible to contracting office personnel.

2. Releasing information to other government officials

The past performance evaluation should be released only to other government personnel with a bona fide need to know and to the contractor whose performance is being evaluated. Disclosure of such information to anyone else could harm both the government (it would be a violation of the Procurement Integrity Act to divulge procurement-sensitive information) and the competitive position of the contractor being evaluated. The agency's prescribed procedures for releasing the evaluations should be followed. The contractor's rebuttal statement and agency review of any contractor rebuttals must be attached to the performance evaluation report and must be provided to source selection officials requesting a reference check.

3. Properly disposing of past performance records, as required

Past performance records are to be disposed of in accordance with agency procedures within three years after completion of contract performance.

 
Found a mistake? Please highlight the word and press Shift + Enter  
< Prev   CONTENTS   Next >

Related topics