Past Performance Evaluation Ratings Sample Clauses

Past Performance Evaluation Ratings. As a result of the recency, relevancy and quality assessments of the contracts evaluated, one of the ratings as described in the DoD Source Selection Procedures will be assigned to the Past Performance factor. The performance confidence assessment ratings are excerpted below. Adjectival Rating Definition Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance. Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance and will be assigned a performance confidence rating of “Neutral”. A strong record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than a “Neutral Confidence” rating.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

  • Annual Performance Evaluation On either a fiscal year or calendar year basis, (consistently applied from year to year), the Bank shall conduct an annual evaluation of Executive’s performance. The annual performance evaluation proceedings shall be included in the minutes of the Board meeting that next follows such annual performance review.

  • Performance Evaluation The Department may conduct a performance evaluation of Contractor’s Services, including Contractor’s Subcontractors. Results of any evaluation may be made available to Contractor upon request.

  • Performance Evaluations The Contractor is subject to an annual performance evaluation to be conducted by NYCDOT pursuant to the PPB Rules.

  • Performance Levels (a) The Performance Levels which apply to the performance by the respective Parties of their obligations under this Agreement are set out in Part 1 of Schedule 5. A failure by either Party to achieve the relevant Performance Level will not constitute a breach of this Agreement and the only consequences of such failure as between the Parties shall be the consequences set out in this Clause 5.6. (b) If the Operator does not comply with the Operator Performance Level then the Access Holder must pay to QR Network the amount determined in accordance with Schedule 5 as part of the invoice issued by QR Network for Access Charges and other charges for the Billing Period immediately following QR Network becoming entitled to that amount. Where there is no next Billing Period, the Operator must pay such amount to QR Network within fourteen (14) days after receipt of a Tax Invoice from QR Network. (c) If QR Network does not comply with the QR Network Performance Level then QR Network will credit to the Access Holder the amount determined in accordance with Schedule 5 by way of a deduction from the invoice issued by QR Network for Access Charges and other charges for the Billing Period immediately following the Access Holder becoming entitled to that amount. Where there is no next Billing Period, QR Network must pay such amount to the Access Holder within fourteen (14) days after receipt of a Tax Invoice from the Access Holder. (d) The Parties must, if requested by either Party, meet to review the Performance Levels subject to such review not occurring within six (6) Months after the Commitment Date or any previous review of the Performance Levels. If either Party notifies the other that it considers that the Performance Levels are no longer appropriate, the Parties may agree on varied Performance Levels and any associated variations to the Agreement including the Base Access Charges and the Train Service Description. If the Parties are unable to agree to such variations, then the existing Performance Levels shall continue to apply unless varied by QR Network in accordance with the provisions of Clause 5.6(e). (e) In the event that the Access Holder and/or the Operator (i) does not comply in any material respect with the Train Service Description; and (ii) the Access Holder fails to demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of QR Network when requested to do so, that the Access Holder will consistently comply with the Train Service Description for the remainder of the Term then, following consultation with the Access Holder, QR Network will be entitled to: (iii) vary the Train Service Description to a level it reasonably expects to be achievable by the Access Holder for the remainder of the Term having regard to the extent of previous compliance with the Train Service Description (ignoring, for the purpose of assessing previous compliance, any non-compliance to the extent that the non-compliance was attributable to a Railway Operator (other than the Access Holder) or to QR Network); and (iv) vary the Agreement (including, without limitation, the Operator Performance Level and the Base Access Charges) to reflect the impact of the change in the Train Service Description. (f) The Access Holder shall be entitled to dispute any variation proposed by QR Network pursuant to Clause 5.6(e) and such dispute will be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 17.3.

  • Performance Measurement The Uniform Guidance requires completion of OMB-approved standard information collection forms (the PPR). The form focuses on outcomes, as related to the Federal Award Performance Goals that awarding Federal agencies are required to detail in the Awards.

  • 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).

  • Annual Performance Review The Employee’s performance of his duties under this Agreement shall be reviewed by the Board of Directors or a committee of the Board of Directors at least annually and finalized within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the annual audited financial statements. The Board of Directors or a committee of the Board of Directors shall additionally review the base salary, bonus and benefits provided to the Employee under this Agreement and may, in their discretion, adjust the same, as outlined in Addendum B of this Agreement, provided, however, that Employee’s annual base salary shall not be less than the base salary set forth in Section 4(A) hereof.

  • Staffing Levels To the extent legislative appropriations and PIN authorizations allow, safe staffing levels will be maintained in all institutions where employees have patient, client, inmate or student care responsibilities. In July of each year, the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of each agency will, upon request, meet with the Union, to hear the employees’ views regarding staffing levels. In August of each year, the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of Budget and Management will, upon request, meet with the Union to hear the employees’ views regarding the Governor’s budget request.

  • Historical Performance Information To the extent agreed upon by the parties, the Sub-Advisor will provide the Trust with historical performance information on similarly managed investment companies or for other accounts to be included in the Prospectus or for any other uses permitted by applicable law.

  • 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.

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