This session is sponsored by the
Federal Acquisition Institute
The primary organization providing knowledge
and support to the federal civilian acquisition
workforce.
For more information about FAI, please visit
our website at www.fai.gov
Contractor Past Performance
Information And How It Contributes
To Your Success
Jan Wisor
Director Acquisition Management & Support Division
Office of Procurement Operations, DHS
GSA Training
Conference
and Expo 2010
AGENDA
 History
 Terminology
 Why Do We Collect and Report Past Performance Information?
 Regulatory Requirements
 Responsible Parties
 Common Problems
 Systems in Use
 CPARS
 Best Practices
 Questions & Answers
 References
TERMINOLOGY
 CPARS – Contractor Performance Assessment
Reporting System
 COTR – Contracting Officer Technical
Representative
 DHS OPO – Department of Homeland Security/Office
of Procurement Operations
 PPI – Past Performance Information
 PPIRS (rhymes with jeepers) Past Performance
Information Retrieval System
HISTORY
FASA – 1994
 Required OFPP to establish standards for
evaluating PP: cost, schedule, compliance and other
relevant performance factors
 All federal departments and agencies required to
initiate procedures to record PPI and use PPI in
source selection
 Ensure offerors are afforded opportunity to
submit relevant information on PP.
 Established period PPI would be maintained
HISTORY
FASA – 1994 (cont’d)
 Neutral - If no past performance, offeror cannot be
evaluated favorably or unfavorably for the factor
FARA - Renamed Clinger-Cohen Act of
1996
 Provides guidance to ensure a fair and open competitive
process
 FARA gives contracting officers more discretion when
making competitive range determinations
 Permits the use of Simplified Acquisition Procedures in the
acquisition of commercial items up to $5 M.
HISTORY
2008 DoD IG Report “Contractor Past Performance
Information" (No. D-2008-057
Examined CPARS
39 % of systems contracts registered more than 1
year late
68% had past performance assessments reports
that were overdue
82 % of past performance reports were deficient
Contracting Offices lacked PPI to make informed
decisions in source selection
HISTORY
2009 GAO Report of Federal Agencies Use of Past
Performance
Reviews completed 2006, 2007 and found little
progress made in collection and use of PPI
Better performance data needed to support agency
decisions
Past Performance assessments occurred less than 1/3
of contracts
Agencies considered past performance information in
evaluating contractors for each of the 62 solicitations
reviewed
HISTORY
OFPP Memo July 2009 - Improving the Use of
Contractor Performance Information
establish internal procedures for collecting and
reporting past performance information to PPIRS
identify agency officials responsible for preparing
interim and final performance evaluations; and
consider the achievement of small business goals
in performance evaluations when the contract
includes a Small Business Subcontracting Plan.
Beginning February 1, 2010, OFPP will conduct
regular compliance assessments and quality reviews
WHY DO WE COLLECT &
REPORT PPI?
One of the Guiding Principles of the FAR: “(Use)
contractors who have a successful track record of past
performance...”
Continuing OMB and GAO interest in past performance
data collection and reporting
We want to motivate improved performance
Promotes robust competitive environment
Promotes transparency and collaboration
REGULATORY
REQUIREMENTS
 FAR 8.405-1 and -2 – Evaluation of past performance when ordering under
Federal Supply Schedules
 FAR 9.105-1 – The contracting officer shall consider relevant past performance
information when making a determination of responsibility
 Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)
 Excluded Parties List System (EPLS)
 Records and experience data
 Questionnaire replies
 Preaward survey reports
 Other sources: Government agencies; business and trade associations
REGULATORY
REQUIREMENTS
 FAR 12.206 – Use of past performance for commercial items
 FAR 13.106-1 and -2 – Contracting officer may use past
performance as a basis for award under simplified acquisition
procedures
 FAR 15.304 and 15.305 – Past performance shall be evaluated
in all source selections for negotiated competitive acquisitions
expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold
 FAR 16.505 – Past performance should be considered when
placing orders under multiple award contracts
REGULATORY
REQUIREMENTS
 FAR Subpart 42.15 – Contractor Performance Information
 Policies and responsibilities for recording and maintaining
contractor performance information
 Addresses contractor’s record in conforming to contract
requirements, controlling costs, adhering to schedules,
exhibiting reasonable and cooperative behavior, committing
to customer satisfaction, and demonstrating integrity and
ethical behavior.
 FAR 42.1502 – Evaluate contractor performance for each award
over the simplified acquisition threshold
RESPONSIBLE PARTIES
 The contracting officer and the program office
representative (usually COTR) are jointly responsible
for assessing contractor performance
 The individual responsible for preparing each
assessment must consider inputs from the program
manager, end user, Contracting Officer, and other
parties affected by the item or service
 Contractor is motivated to provide best efforts
because of power of past performance in source
selection, ensures timely and accurate assessment
COMMON PROBLEMS
 Eligible contracts are not registered
 Performance reports are not entered in a timely manner
 Failure to conduct required interim assessments
 Narratives lack sufficient detail to demonstrate that ratings
are credible and justified
 Narratives provide misleading comments – do not support
ratings
Incomplete and missing performance reports
negatively impact the source selection process!
Contractor Concerns
 Right of contractor to request review by one level
above if contractor does not agree with assessment
 Two recent U.S. Court of Federal Claims cases*
 Jurisdiction to hear contractor claims challenging improper
past performance assessments
 Ensure accurate evaluations are recorded timely in the
database
*National
Defense Magazine, March 2009
SYSTEMS IN USE
 Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System
(CPARS) (https://www.cpars.csd.disa.mil). Not to be used for
Classified and Special Access Programs.
 Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)
http://www.ppirs.gov. The “central warehouse” for receipt of
performance assessment reports from Federal performance
evaluation collection systems. CPARS “feeds” PPIRS. COs shall
not use past performance information that is more than three
years old (six for construction and architect-engineer contracts).
 Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support System
(ACASS)
 Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS)
SYSTEMS IN USE
 Contractor Performance System (CPS)
https://cps.nih.gov
 Multiple Agency, Shared File Subscription System: Designed, developed,
and implemented by the NIH Center for Information Technology (CIT)
 NASA Past Performance Data Base (PPDB) -NASA
has also developed a past performance database to
track contractor's performance on NASA contracts
CPARS REPORTING
FREQUENCY

Initial Report
 Required if Period of Performance > 365 Days
 Not Required if Period of Performance ≤ 365 Days – Write
Final CPAR Only
 Covers No More Than 12 Months of Actual Performance
 Assessment Period May Begin After Contract Award Date
 Protests
 Delayed Starts
 Note the date in the Effective Date field in CPARS
CPARS REPORTING
FREQUENCY

Intermediate Reports
 Required every 12 months
 Complete with Other Reviews When They Coincide
 Option Exercise
 Award Fee Determinations
 Program Milestones
 Not Cumulative: Assess Only Performance Occurring After
Last Assessment Period
 Required Upon Transfer of Program Management
Responsibility Outside Original Buying Activity
CPARS REPORTING
FREQUENCY

Out-of-Cycle Report (Optional)
 Written if Significant Change in Performance
 Contractor May Request in Writing
 Written at Government’s Discretion
 Address Only Those Areas That Have Changes
 No More Than Once Out-of-Cycle Report Completed Per
Cycle Year
CPARS REPORTING
FREQUENCY

Final Report
 Required at Contract Completion
 Delivery of Final End Item
 End of Period of Performance
 Required Upon Contract Termination
 Not Cumulative: Assess Only Performance Occurring After
Last Assessment Period
CPARS REPORTING
FREQUENCY

Addendum Report (Optional)
 Evaluate Contract Close-Out
 Timeliness of Providing Documents
 Evaluate Warranty Performance
 Evaluate Performance with Respect to Other Administrative
Requirements
 Written at Government’s Discretion
REPORTING
TASK/DELIVERY ORDERS
 Must Complete Individual CPAR for Each
Task/Delivery Order That Meets or Exceeds the
Reporting Threshold
 The Basic Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ)
contract, Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA), or Blanket
Purchasing Agreement (BPA) Does Not Need to be in
CPARS to Enter an Order
REPORTING FSS ORDERS
 Orders under Federal Supply Schedule (FSS)
contracts That Meet or Exceed the Reporting
Threshold Are Reported Individually
 The base contract does not need to be in CPARS to enter an
order
 When registering a FSS contract in CPARS, the FSS
contract number should be entered in the contract number
field and the order number is placed in the order number
field. An order number is required when registering FSS
contracts.
 GSA Prepares the Assessment for the Base Contract
REPORTING UCAs
 Prior to Definitization
 Address Performance Beginning with Date the UCA Was Issued
 Address Contractor’s Ability to Remain Within UCA Cost Limitations
 Following Definitization
 Address Contractor’s Efforts in Promoting Contract Definitization
 If Definitized as Cost-Type or Time-and-Materials (T&M)/Labor
Hour Contract, Continue to Address Cost Control
 If Definitized as Firm-Fixed-Price Contract, Only Address Cost
Control Efforts Prior to Definitization
BEST PRACTICES
 Discuss performance expectations in the initial post award meeting/provide CPARS Guides to
Contractors and Evaluators
 Conduct discussions early in the performance of work
so contractors have an opportunity to improve
performance
 Maintain open communications with the contractor
about the Government's requirements and how the
contractor can best meet them
BEST PRACTICES
 Keep a timely performance record of quality, cost,
schedule, and business relations
 If available, use award fee board, earned value
management system, Quality Assurance Surveillance
Plan, or other similar contract administration
records...then include contractor discussion and
comments on the evaluation...Don’t reinvent the
wheel!
BEST PRACTICES
 For orders against MACs:
– Use past performance as an initial screen to
determine which awardees will receive further
consideration for a task or delivery order
– Conduct interim evaluations and customer
satisfaction surveys
– Hold meetings with contractors experiencing
performance and quality problem
– Consider “out of cycle” reporting
BEST PRACTICES
 Give the contractor a draft report of evaluation prior
to publishing
 COTRS - Maintain a performance record, on the
prime contractor’s performance report, of the major
subcontractors and any team or joint venture partners
on the contract
 If evaluation subfactors are used, tailor them to
match the requirement and capture the key
performance criteria in the statement of work
BEST PRACTICES
 COTRS
 Focus on useful training outside of the required 40 hours
 Develop a COTR program
 Appoint PM as the Source Selection Official
 Add PPI Registration and Assessment metrics to
Performance Plans to measure timeliness and
accuracy
QUESTIONS
References
 IG report, "Contractor Past Performance Information" (No. D-2008-057), is
available at: http://www.dodig.osd.mil/Audit/reports/fy08/08-057.pdf.
 Federal Contractors: Better Performance Information Needed to Support Agency
Contract Award Decisions GAO-09-374 April 23, 2009
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-374
 OFPP Memorandum for the Chief Acquisition Officers Senior Procurement
Executives July 29, 2009
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/procurement/improving_use_of_contract
or_perf_info.pdf