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 Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. 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 34.1. The Contractor is subject to an annual performance evaluation to be conducted by NYCDOT pursuant to the PPB Rules.

  • Performance Rating Describes the Educator’s performance on each performance standard and overall. There shall be four performance ratings:  Exemplary: the Educator’s performance consistently and significantly exceeds the requirements of a standard or overall. The rating of exemplary on a standard indicates that practice significantly exceeds proficient and could serve as a model of practice on that standard district-wide.  Proficient: the Educator’s performance fully and consistently meets the requirements of a standard or overall. Proficient practice is understood to be fully satisfactory.

  • Contractor Performance Evaluations The Contract Administrator will evaluate Contractor’s performance as often as the Contract Administrator deems necessary throughout the term of the contract. This evaluation will be based on criteria including the quality of goods or services, the timeliness of performance, and adherence to applicable laws, including prevailing wage and living wage. City will provide Contractors who receive an unsatisfactory rating with a copy of the evaluation and an opportunity to respond. City may consider final evaluations, including Contractor’s response, in evaluating future proposals and bids for contract award.

  • EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Purpose: To provide the policy and procedures for assessing employee performance and communicating the results of assessment to the employee and to others using assessment information in personnel decisions, and further to express the mutual commitment of the parties to the University’s values.

  • Employee Performance Evaluations Any employee performance evaluation shall be prepared by the employee's supervisor who has the responsibility and authority to prepare such reports. Employee performance evaluation reports shall be discussed with the employee prior to finalization of each category of the report. An employee will receive an appointment with his/her department's reviewing officer to discuss the evaluation by signing the evaluation form in the space provided. Each department shall make a reasonable effort to ensure that the reviewing officer for this purpose has not been a party to the preparation of the evaluation. In no case shall the reviewing officer sign the evaluation form until a review has occurred. Any regular or special evaluation with a rating of "unsatisfactory" shall include plans for employee development. Except in cases of termination, release from probation, or leave of absence, employees who receive an unsatisfactory performance evaluation must receive a follow-up evaluation. The follow-up evaluation shall cover a period of time no greater than ninety (90) calendar days from the date of the final review of the initial unsatisfactory evaluation. An employee shall have the right to submit written comments regarding any evaluation and to have such comments included in his/her personnel file along with the evaluation.

  • 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.

  • Performance Measurement Satisfactory performance of this Contract will be measured by:

  • 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).

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