The Pony Express: Delivering Feedback on Contract Performance - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 15
About This Presentation
Title:

The Pony Express: Delivering Feedback on Contract Performance

Description:

Patrick Bradfield, Department of Education. Robert Best, National Institute of Health. Alan Chvotkin, Professional Services Council. Learning Objectives ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:48
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 16
Provided by: fai94
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: The Pony Express: Delivering Feedback on Contract Performance


1
  • 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

2
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
  • Industrys perspective on the Delivery of Past
    Performance Assessments, Evaluations and Feedback
    - Alan

3
Performance Evaluations
  • FAR Subpart 42.15 Past performance guidance
  • Used for future source selection purposes
  • Evaluates contractors 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.

4
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.

5
Past Performance InformationRoles and
Responsibility
  • Acquisition planning
  • 2. Award
  • 3. Post Award - Contract Administration

6
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.

7
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.

8
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/
  • 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 contractors
    performance includes Quality of
  • Product or Services, Cost Control, Timeliness of
    Performance and Business
  • Practices.
  • Past Performance Data Base (PPDB)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    Past Performance Data Base.
  • Tracks contractors performance on NASA
    contracts. No web site, but contact
  • NASA Headquarters at 202-358-1279

9
Past Performance Information Systems
  • Past Performance Information Management System
    (PPIMS) http//cpars.navy.mil/cparsfiles/ppims/pp
    imsnotify.htm
  • PPIMS has been the Armys 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 contractors 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//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,

10
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 contractors 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.

11
How to assess past performance
  • What is put into an evaluation? Lets 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.

12
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
    todays environment this can be a drawback.
  • Past performance does not translate well to RD
    contracts.
  • However, despite any shortcomings past
    performance is a key element in many source
    selections and will continue to be.

13
(No Transcript)
14
Industrys 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.

15
Question and Answer Session
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com