Factor 4, Past Performance Sample Clauses

Factor 4, Past Performance. (i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE FOR EACH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO FACTOR 1, IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1, Corporate Experience. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE. IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (provided as an attachment), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, via email at xxxxxxxx.x.xxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx (with a copy to Xxxx Xxxxxxx at xxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx) prior to the proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) using all CAGE/Entity Identifier numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror.
Sample 1See All (5)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Factor 4, Past Performance. The past performance evaluation provides an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the RFP requirements. The past performance evaluation considers the Offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the intent of this RFP’s requirement. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to this RFP requirement. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The Government will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment.
Sample 1Sample 2
Factor 4, Past Performance. The Government will evaluate how well the Offeror has performed on contracts that have been determined to be both recent and relevant to the PWS. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality of performance: Step 1 Recency. The first step is to evaluate the recency of each of the Offeror’s past performance projects. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. Performance of each reference must be completed within the previous three (3) years of the proposal due date to be considered recent. Projects which are not recent will not be further considered and will not be factored into the Offeror’s overall Performance Confidence Assessment Rating.
Sample 1
Factor 4, Past Performance. Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine whether the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. This assessment shall be based on the offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information pertaining to the services outlined in the solicitation and a determination of how well the offeror performed on those contracts. The Past Performance Factor will be assigned a rating of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable.”
Sample 1
Factor 4, Past Performance. Each offeror’s past performance proposal will be rated as either “Acceptable or Unacceptable” and is based on an assessment of the past performance submitted by the offeror and the Government’s expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. This assessment is based on the offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the services described in the solicitation. The Government will evaluate whether the offeror’s present/past performance is relevant or not relevant to the services the prime or major subcontractor is expected to perform as described in the solicitation. The Government will also evaluate how well the offeror performed on the contracts detailed in the offeror’s proposal. Offerors shall submit the same efforts under the Past Performance Factor that are identified and submitted under the Experience Factor. DRAFT Note: In order for an Offeror to rely on the past performance of the Offeror’s parent, sister, subsidiary or an affiliate company, the Offeror shall identify the relevant parent, sister, subsidiary company or affiliate company as Major Subcontractor in its proposal and identify what portion of the work that entity will perform under this contract (must be at least ten (10) percent (%) or more of the total proposed price for this effort). The Experience factor will be evaluated as “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”. The Government will focus its evaluation on the forms and questionnaires provided by the offeror in its proposal and may consider data obtained from third parties or other sources. This includes data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance in performing Government contracts for same or similar services that are relevant and recent. Under this factor, the Government may evaluate third party references provided as to each Offerors and major subcontractor’s relevant and recent efforts, to verify the probability of successful accomplishment of the required effort. Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar in scope and complexity to the portion(s) of the PWS that the prime offeror or applicable major subcontractor is proposing to perform. Recent efforts are defined as those performed during the last five (5) years, from the issue date of this RFP. Offerors shall be deemed to have satisfied requirements of the past performance factor wh...
Sample 1
Factor 4, Past Performance. M.3.6.1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s and its teaming partner’s recent and relevant past performance to determine the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, general trends in contractor’s performance, and compliance with FAR 52.219-8 and FAR 52.219-9 (as applicable) shall be considered. Proposals that do not contain the information requested in this section risk rejection or a less than acceptable performance rating by the Government. All past performance comments received will be taken into account and could affect the overall rating. The overall past performance evaluation is a subjective decision based on the whole of all data received. These are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each Offeror. M.3.6.2. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the Offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed those past contracts. M.3.6.3. Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, KOs; and the Defense Contract Management Agency. M.3.6.4. There are three (3) aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).
Sample 1

Related to Factor 4, Past Performance

  • Past Performance The Government will evaluate the contractor's performance on the NETCENTS-2 Orders provided in Exhibit B, CDRL B001. The PCO will determine the quality of the work performed based on an integrated assessment of data obtained in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting Systems (CPARS) and information obtained from Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) channels, interviews with customers, program managers and/or contracting officers for NETCENTS-2 task orders. Based on the contractor performance records above, the PCO will determine if there is an expectation that the contractor will successfully perform the required efforts under the unrestricted NetOps and Infrastructure Solutions contract.

  • Ongoing Performance Measures The Department intends to use performance-reporting tools in order to measure the performance of Contractor(s). These tools will include the Contractor Performance Survey (Exhibit H), to be completed by Customers on a quarterly basis. Such measures will allow the Department to better track Vendor performance through the term of the Contract(s) and ensure that Contractor(s) consistently provide quality services to the State and its Customers. The Department reserves the right to modify the Contractor Performance Survey document and introduce additional performance-reporting tools as they are developed, including online tools (e.g. tools within MFMP or on the Department's website).

  • Prompt Performance All actions required to be taken (including payments) by any party under this Agreement shall be performed within the time prescribed for performance in this Agreement, or if no period is prescribed, such actions shall be performed promptly.

  • Continuing Performance (a) The obligations under this Agreement continue until satisfied in full and do not merge with any action performed or document executed by any Party for the purposes of performance of this Agreement. (b) Any representation in this Agreement survives the execution of any document for the purposes of, and continues after, performance of this Agreement. (c) Any indemnity given by any Party under this Agreement: (i) constitutes a liability of that Party separate and independent from any other liability of that Party under this Agreement or any other agreement; and (ii) survives and continues after performance of this Agreement.

  • Product Performance Contractor hereby warrants and represents that the Products acquired by the Authorized User under the terms and conditions of this Contract conform to the specifications, performance standards and documentation in the Authorized User Agreement., and the documentation fully describes the proper procedure for using the Products. Contractor further warrants and represents that if the Products acquired by the Authorized User pursuant to an Authorized User Agreement under this Contract include software application development, software application customization, software programming, software integration or similar items (“Software Deliverables”) then such Software Deliverables shall be free from defects in material and workmanship and conform with all requirements of the Contract and Authorized User Agreement for the warranty period of one (1) year from the date of acceptance of the completed project (“Project warranty period”). Contractor also warrants that the Products, in the form provided to the Authorized User, do not infringe any copyright, trademark, trade secret or other right of any third party.

  • KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 10.1 The Supplier shall at all times during the Framework Period comply with the Key Performance Indicators and achieve the KPI Targets set out in Part B of Framework Schedule 2 (Goods and/or Services and Key Performance Indicators).

  • Due Performance Each party to this Agreement undertakes the obligation that the other's expectation of receiving due performance will not be impaired. When reasonable grounds for insecurity arise with respect to the performance of either party, the other may, in writing, demand adequate assurance of due performance and until such written assurance is received may, if commercially reasonable, suspend any performance for which the agreed return has not been received.

  • Work Performance Xxxxxx agrees that all Services performed hereunder shall be performed on a best effort basis by employees, students, faculty, graduate assistants and staff having an appropriate experience and skill level and in compliance with the statement of work.

  • Non-Performance The obligation of ECOLOGY to the RECIPIENT is contingent upon satisfactory performance by the RECIPIENT of all of its obligations under this Agreement. In the event the RECIPIENT unjustifiably fails, in the opinion of ECOLOGY, to perform any obligation required of it by this Agreement, ECOLOGY may refuse to pay any further funds, terminate in whole or in part this Agreement, and exercise any other rights under this Agreement. Despite the above, the RECIPIENT shall not be relieved of any liability to ECOLOGY for damages sustained by ECOLOGY and the State of Washington because of any breach of this Agreement by the RECIPIENT. ECOLOGY may withhold payments for the purpose of setoff until such time as the exact amount of damages due ECOLOGY from the RECIPIENT is determined.

  • Contract Performance C19.1 The Contractor shall ensure that: C19.1.1 the Goods conform in all respects with the Specification and, where applicable, with any sample or performance demonstration approved by the Authority; C19.1.2 the Goods operate in accordance with the relevant technical specifications and correspond with the requirements of the Specification and any particulars specified in the Contract; C19.1.3 the Goods conform in all respects with all applicable Laws; and C19.1.4 the Goods are free from defects in design, materials and workmanship and are fit and sufficient for all the purposes for which such Goods are ordinarily used and for any particular purpose made known to the Contractor by the Authority.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!