NASA Procedures and Guidelines
This Document is Obsolete and Is No Longer Used. Check the NODIS Library to access the current version: http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov
NPR 8831.2D Eff. Date: July 25, 2001 Cancellation Date: November 18, 2008	Facilities Maintenance Management w/ Change 1 (4/21/04)
| TOC | Change | Preface | Chp1 | Chp2 | Chp3 | Chp4 | Chp5 | Chp6 | Chp7 | Chp8 | Chp9 | Chp10 | Chp11 | Chp12 | AppdxA | AppdxB | AppdxC | AppdxD | AppdxE | AppdxF | AppdxG | AppdxH | AppdxI | Fig12-2 | FigC-6 | FigC-7 | FigC-8 | FigD-1 | FigD-2 | FigD-3 | FigD-4 | FigD-5 | FigD-6 | FigD-7 | FigD-8 | FigD-9 | FigD-10 | FigD-11 | FigD-12 | ALL |

APPENDIX I. Draft Award Term Evaluation Plan

Plum Brook Operational Services

Award Term Evaluation Plan

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 In accordance with Clause H-10, Award Term, the contractor can earn additional performance periods through optimum contract performance. This Award Term Evaluation Plan describes the process the Government will utilize to evaluate performance and administer the contract's award term provisions.

1.2 The objective of the Award Term provisions is to incentivize the contractor to perform at an optimum manner by offering the opportunity to earn additional contract performance periods. If the contractor successfully incorporates this into daily operations, the Government will receive improved services at a reasonable cost and the contractor will receive additional contract performance periods.

1.3 The Government will formally evaluate the contractor's performance every six-months against the criteria established in the Award Term Evaluation Plan. The Government will provide the contractor with an informal mid-point (3-month) performance evaluation during each evaluation period. At the mid-point review, the Government will provide the contractor with written performance information that, as a minimum, details performance weaknesses identified during the period.

1.4 At the conclusion of each 6-month evaluation period, the Performance Evaluation Committee (PEC) will formally evaluate the contractor's overall performance against the performance evaluation criteria defined in this Plan. The PEC will recommend to the Award Term Determination Official (ATDO) a performance rating, commensurate with overall performance. The ATDO will consider the input provide by the PEC and make the performance rating in accordance with this Plan.

1.5 The Government will average the performance ratings for two consecutive 6-month periods for any Award Term decisions. The first contract year will be evaluated but no award term determination will be made. This will allow both the contractor and the Government to acclimate to the new contract. Except for contract year one, an award term decision will be made annually utilizing two consecutive six-month performance ratings. A rating of "Very Good" or better is needed to earn contract years 4 and 5. A rating of "Excellent" is needed to earn contract years 6 through 10.

1.6 ³ The results of award term determinations are subject to the Disputes Clause.

2. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR AWARD TERM ADMINISTRATION

The Performance Evaluation Committee (PEC) evaluates the contractor's overall performance for each evaluation period and recommends a performance rating to the Award Term Determination Official (ATDO). The Committee is comprised of the Chief of the Procurement Division and the Chief of the Plum Brook Management Office. The PEC is chaired by the Director of Engineering and Technical Services who shall serve as the Award Term Determination Official.

³Code G, General Counsel, September 7, 2000.

The ATDO will determine the contractor's six-month performance rating and the annual Award Term decision. The ATDO will transmit the "Notice of Performance Rating" letter to the contractor.

The Plum Brook Management Office and the Contracting Officer will provide performance evaluation information to the Performance Evaluation Committee.

3. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA

Four factors will be used to evaluate the contractor's performance: technical performance, safety, quality, and cost and schedule management. Details are provided in Attachment A. The performance evaluation criteria are provided in Attachment B.

4. METHOD FOR DETERMINING AWARD TERM

4.1 Within 15 days after the completion of the evaluation period, the Plum Brook Management Office and the Contracting Officer will summarize the contractor's performance and provide a "Performance Letter" to the contractor.

4.2 Within 5 days after receipt of the "Performance Letter", the contractor may provide a response that includes a contractor self-assessment.

4.3 Within 30 days after the completion of an evaluation period, the PEC will convene to review the contractor's overall performance during the period. Consideration shall be given to the information presented by the Plum Brook Management Office and the contractor's response to the "Performance Letter". If this is a 6-month interim review, the PEC recommends a performance rating to the ATDO. If this is a 12-month final review, the PEC recommends a 6-month performance rating and a 12-month average rating to the ATDO.

4.4 Within 3 days after the PEC review and award term determination meeting, the ATDO will prepare a "Notice of Performance Rating " letter for transmittal to the contractor.

5. CHANGES IN PLAN COVERAGE

The Government may unilaterally change the evaluation criteria of this Performance Evaluation Plan by providing the contractor written notification 30 calendar days prior to the commencement of an evaluation period.

ATTACHMENT A - PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FACTORS

Factor No. 1: Technical Performance Weight 25%

Description:

This factor evaluates the contractor's ability to effectively manage the technical aspects of this contract. It will be evaluated via internal and external customer surveys that will cover the evaluation criteria listed below.

Evaluation Criteria:

• Meeting the technical requirements of the Statement of Work and each task order, e.g., task preparation, task execution, facility shutdown, design reviews, written procedures, equipment maintenance, and institutional support
• Ability to provide innovations that will improve the project approach

Factor No. 2: Safety Weight 25%

Description:

This factor evaluates the contractor's participation in OSHA's Voluntary Protection Program (VPP).

Evaluation Criteria:

• Results of independent safety inspections and audits determine support for obtaining and maintaining OSHA's VPP Star or Merit certification
• Renewal of OSHA's VPP Star certification each year

Factor No. 3: Quality Weight 25%

Description:

This factor evaluates the contractor's assistance with maintaining Plum Brook's ISO 9001 registration.

Evaluation Criteria:

• Results of internal (Glenn Research Center and surveillance (ISO registrar) audits

Factor No. 4: Cost and Schedule Management Weight 25%

Description:

This factor evaluates the contractor's ability to effectively manage the cost and schedule processes to produce a work product that is "within budget" and "on time". It will be evaluated via internal and external customer surveys that will cover the evaluation criteria listed below.

Evaluation Criteria:

• Adequacy of the work plans
• Timeliness and usefulness of weekly financial and schedule reports
• Ability to control cost and schedule variances
• Ability to manage indirect costs within stated contract ceilings

ATTACHMENT B - PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA

DISTRIBUTION:
NODIS