2.4.3.4  Past Performance Factor and Performance Confidence Assessment

Past Performance is a mandatory evaluation factor in all Air Force source selections above the thresholds established in FAR 15.304(c)(3) and Director of Defense Procurement Class Deviation 99-O0002 dated January 29, 1999.  Normally the Past Performance Factor should be a significant evaluation factor.  Teams should assign an appropriate level of importance to the Past Performance Factor based on the circumstances and risk assessment results for their acquisition.  Consider the importance of past performance during acquisition strategy development.  Its importance should be addressed as an individual topic during the Acquisition Strategy Panel (ASP).  Air Force source selection teams may assign any appropriate level of importance to past performance as the team and ASP deem essential.  Teams no longer have to make the past performance factor at least as important as the most important non-cost factor.  The Past Performance Factor shall receive one of the Performance Confidence Assessments identified in the AFFARS MP5315.3, paragraph 5.5.2.2, Table 3 and provision M002 of the template.

The Past Performance evaluation is a structured treatment of present and past performance.  It is a confidence measure that assesses the offeror's present and past work record in order to assess the offeror's probability of successfully performing the proposed effort.

-  PCAG (Sub-paragraph not in Template)

Performance Confidence is assessed by the Performance Confidence Assessment Group (PCAG), which is chaired by an experienced, senior level individual and consists solely of Government personnel.  The PCAG's evaluation and confidence assessment decisions will generally focus on how well the offeror is expected to perform the proposed effort in terms of the Mission Capability subfactors and cost.  The PCAG's integrated Performance Confidence Assessment is a single rating at the factor level.  It is the PCAG's responsibility to analyze the data collected, determine its relevancy, and to perform an independent past performance evaluation.  For information on how to establish a PCAG, how it operates, the forms that are used, and how the evaluation is made and reported, see IG5315.305(a)(2), Past Performance Evaluation Guide.  Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) are available to the Government evaluation team.  Dialogue with the U.S. Navy, U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps, or other Government agencies may be necessary through the use of personal contact to the appropriate program manager, contracting officer, or Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) listed in the Past Performance Volume.  Submission of past performance information may be requested (or required) as early as 15 days after issuance of solicitation.

In assessing Performance Confidence, the PCAG must perform an independent determination of the relevancy of the past performance information obtained.  PCAG may decide to spell out specific relevance criteria, describing the magnitude and complexity, which would have to be met to reach each level of relevance.  In considering how relevant an offeror's present or recent past performance history is to the instant acquisition, the PCAG may assign relevance ratings or categories, such as the following (tailor to fit the circumstances of your acquisition):

•  VERY RELEVANT:  Past/present performance programs involved essentially the same magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

•  RELEVANT:  Past/present performance programs involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

•  SOMEWHAT-RELEVANT: Past/present performance programs involved some of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

•  NOT RELEVANT:  Past/present performance programs did not involve any magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

In addition to the above example definitions for relevancy, PCAG may also identify other specific definitions that identify more pertinent aspects of the acquisition that will be used to determine relevancy.  (See IG5315.305(a)(2), Past Performance Evaluation Guide (PPEG) for example definitions of relevancy.)

The PCAG may consider the relevancy of an offeror's performance in aggregate in addition to on an effort-by-effort basis.  For example, an offeror's work on three recent past efforts may represent only "Somewhat-Relevant" effort.  However, if all three efforts are/were performed concurrently (in part or in whole) and are assessed in aggregate, the work may more accurately reflect a "Very Relevant" effort.  This approach may be applicable on large, combined services acquisitions where no single prior contract includes all functional areas being acquired.

If relevance ratings or categories and/or aggregate considerations of relevancy are contemplated, ensure the Evaluation Factors provision in Section M reflects the planned approach.