ipl96-14
SUBJECT: Interim Policy Letter (IPL) 96-014, AFMCI 64-107, Contractor 26 Apr 96
Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)
1. Attachment 1 is the final edition of AFMCI 64-107, CPARS,
for implementation at your center. This instruction, based on
the 16 Jun 94 version, incorporates not only changes requested
by the Principal Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Air
Force, Mrs. Darleen Druyun, but also your comments made in response
to HQ AFMC/PK's 5 Feb 96 letter, Review of Proposed Draft AFMCI
64-107, CPARS. Attachment 3, Comment Resolution Summary, addresses
the actions taken in response to your comments.
2. This final edition accomplishes a number of tasks. First,
it satisfies Lightning Bolt #6 by implementing a revised form
(Attachment 2) for the collection of past performance information
on system contracts over $5M. Second, the requirement for the
collection of contract performance information on service contracts
has been deleted; the requirement for past performance information
on service contracts and all other contract categories will be
levied at the Air Force level. Third, the retention period for
CPARs is now three years from contract completion. CPAR focal
points at centers with master libraries will retain CPARs for
three years after the completion date shown on the final CPAR.
Fourth, contractor officials will be offered not only access
to their CPARs but also a copy of their completed reports.
3. My staff and I are available to assist you as necessary.
My action officer for this effort is Ed Hiehle, HQ AFMC/PKPB,
DSN 787-4788, FAX-DSN 986-2436, or hiehle@wpgate1.wpafb.af.mil.
-signed-
LINDA G. WILLIAMS, SES
Deputy Director of Contracting
Attachments:
1. AFMCI 64-107, CPARS
2. AFMC Form 38A
3. Comment Resolution Summary
cc: SAF/AQCO
PKA Mr. Ross
PKD Mr. Kennedy
PKL Mr. Hill
PKO Mr. Furry
PKP Col Avon
PKT Lt Col Borchardt
PKS Mr. Bird
PKX Col Mastin
AFMC CO/PK Col Zura
AFMC CO/PK Lt Col Beckman
| AEDC/PK
100 Kindel Dr, Ste A335 Arnold AFB TN 37389-1335 | OO-ALC/PK/PKL
6038 Aspen Ave Hill AFB UT 84056 |
| AFDTC/PK
205 WD Ave, Ste 433 Eglin AFB FL 32542-6864 | PL/PK
3651 Lowry Ave SE, Rm 222 Kirtland AFB NM 87117-5777 |
| AFFTC/PK
5 S. Wolfe Ave Edwards AFB CA 93524-1185 | RL/PK
26 Electronics Pkwy BLDG 106 Griffiss AFB NY 13441-4514 |
| AFOSR/PK
110 Duncan Ave, Ste 100 Bolling AFB DC 20332-0001 | SA-ALC/PK
143 Billy Mitchell Rd Kelly AFB TX 78241-6014 |
| AGMC/PK
813 Irving-Wick Dr/W Newark AFB OH 43057-0027 | SM-ALC/PK
3237 Peacekeeper Way, Ste 17 McClellan AFB CA 95652-1060 |
| ASC/PK
1865 Fourth Street, Suite 6 Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7120 | SMC/PK
155 Discoverer Blvd, Ste 1516 Bldg 110 Los Angeles AFB CA 90245-4692 |
| ASC/OL-PK
205 West D Ave, Ste 433 Eglin AFB FL 32542-5000 | SSG/PK
375 Libby St., gunter annex Maxwell AFB AL 36114-3297 |
| ESC/PK
Bldg 1606, Rm 220 Hanscom AFB MA 01731-5000 | WL/PK
2530 C Street Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7607 |
| HSC/PK
8005 9th St Brooks AFB TX 78235-5353 | WR-ALC/PK
215 Byron St Robins AFB GA 31098-1611 |
| OC-ALC/PK
3001 Staff Dr, Ste 1AG76A Tinker AFB OK 73145-3015 | Det 2, SMC/PK
1080 Lockheed Way, Box 043 Sunnyvale CA 94089-1235 |
cc:
ASC/OL-PK
38 LS/LGC
CSPO/PGZ
Det 2, SMC/PK
HSC/PKR
MSG/PK
PL/PK
RL/PK
WL/PK
This instruction implements AFPD 64-1, The Contracting
System. It sets policy, assigns responsibilities, and provides
procedures for systematically assessing contractor performance
on current systems acquisitions greater than $5M. General information
applicable to these contract efforts is referred to as the Contractor
Performance Assessment Report (CPAR or CPARs) or the CPAR System
(CPARS). Specific information regarding systems assessments
greater than $5M is annotated as "CPAR-Systems".
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
This revision implements an enhanced CPARS form,
deletes all references to Service-CPARS, changes the retention
period to three years after the completion date of the final CPARs,
and makes several administrative changes.
Section A--Air Force Materiel Command Policy
1. Purpose:
1.1 The sole purpose of the CPARS is to ensure a
command-wide data base of contractor performance information is
current and available for use in responsibility determinations
and in formal and informal source selections. Performance assessments
will be used as an aid in awarding contracts to contractors that
consistently produce quality, on-time products and conform to
contractual requirements. The CPAR can be used to effectively
communicate contractor past performance experiences to source
selection officials. The CPAR will not be used for any purpose
other than as stated in this paragraph; however, summary data
may be used as outlined in paragraph 1.6.
1.2 The CPARS assesses a contractor's performance,
both positive and negative, on a given contract during a specific
period of time. Each assessment must be based on objective facts
and be supportable by program and contract management data, such
as cost performance reports, customer complaints, quality reviews,
technical interchange meetings, financial solvency assessments,
production management reviews, contractor operations reviews,
functional performance evaluations, and earned contract incentives.
Subjective assessments concerning the cause or implications of
the contractor's performance should be provided; however, speculation
or conjecture should not be included.
1.3 The value of a CPAR to a future source selection team is inextricably linked to the care the program manager takes in preparing a quality narrative to accompany the ratings. It is of the utmost importance that the program manager make a dedicated effort to thoroughly describe the circumstances surrounding a rating.
1.4. The CPAR process is designed with a series
of checks and balances to facilitate the objective and consistent
evaluation of contractor performance. Both government and contractor
program management perspectives are captured on the form. The
assessment is reviewed by a level of management above the program
manager (see paragraph 4.4) to ensure consistency with other
evaluations throughout the activity as well as other program assessments.
CPARs are not subject to the "Disputes" clause, nor
are they subject to appeal beyond the procedures described in
this instruction.
1.5. The nature of the effort to be acquired will
determine whether a CPAR-Systems is required. (See paragraph
2.1). If a given contract contains a mixture of types of efforts,
the acquisition activity will determine if the CPAR-Systems is
appropriate based upon the preponderance of the contract dollar
value.
1.6. While the CPAR will not be used for any other
purpose than stated in paragraph 1.1., summary data from the
CPARS data base or from the reports themselves may be used to
measure the status of industry performance, and support continuous
process improvement, provided that the data used does not reveal
individual contract or contractor performance in any form, and
subject to the limitations of paragraph 3.4.
2. Applicability and Scope:
2.1 CPAR-Systems.
2.1.1. The Contractor Performance Assessment Report
(CPAR)-Systems, AFMC Form 38A, must be completed on every contractual
effort for systems. For the purposes of this instruction a "systems"
contract is defined as a contractual effort for concept demonstration
and validation, Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD),
production and deployment, modifications, and programmed depot
maintenance with a total estimated value, including options, greater
than $5M. (A CPAR-Systems may be completed on a research and
development project at the Laboratory Commander's discretion,
if the project is valued over $5M and is funded with 6.4 funds.
When this occurs, the program office will notify the contractor
prior to contract award.)
2.1.2. Laboratory (science and technology) efforts
funded by 6.1 (Basic Research), 6.2 (Exploratory Development),
6.3 (Advanced Technology Development), or 7.8 (Manufacturing Technology)
funds, replenishment spare parts contracts, base operating support
contracts, and service contracts for operation and maintenance
efforts are not included in the scope of this instruction.
2.1.3. When a single contract instrument requires
segregation of costs for combining EMD and production efforts
or containing multiple production lots, an individual CPAR may
be completed for each segment of work. In the case of a time and
material contract and a basic ordering agreement, a CPAR will
be accomplished on the individual order that meets the threshold
described above. In the case of an indefinite delivery contract
as defined in FAR Subpart 16.5, a CPAR will be accomplished on
the individual order that meets the threshold described above.
When the type of effort and the contractor's performance on each
order are so similar as to reflect identical results, the program
manager in consultation with the CPAR focal point may elect to
prepare a single CPAR for a group of orders, each of which meets
the threshold. Block 13 should state that CPARs are not being
prepared on individual orders.
2.1.4. For those contracts at product centers where
a provisioning line is established, an assessment should include
an assessment of that effort in the "Other Areas" (AFMC
Form 38A, block 14.j).
2.2. CPARs will be prepared on any contract meeting
the above requirements when the overall program/effort is managed
by AFMC.
2.3. CPARs will be prepared on contracts for joint
ventures that meet the thresholds above. Joint con-tractors will
be rated on the same report and duplicate copies will be maintained
in each contractor's file in the CPAR library.
2.4. CPARs on classified contracts will be processed in accordance with program security requirements. Copies of classified CPARs will be provided to
HQ AFMC/DRJ.
2.5. CPARs will be accomplished on the applicable
1st tier subcontractor on contracts awarded to the Small Business
Administration under the 8(a) program.
Section B--Responsibilities Assigned
3. HQ AFMC Responsibilities:
3.1. The Director of Contracting (HQ AFMC/PK), in
coordination with the Director of Requirements (HQ AFMC/DR) is
responsible for managing the CPARS and maintaining the currency
of this instruction.
3.2. HQ AFMC/PK will establish a headquarters CPAR
focal point that is responsible for maintaining one of the five
master CPAR libraries, a data base, and indicators. The HQ CPAR
focal point will provide training and/or field assistance for
activity focal points that will maintain a current CPAR data base
listing and will periodically provide a copy to each field activity.
The HQ CPAR focal point is responsible for responding to requests
for CPAR data to support source selections in other government
agencies and will process all requests for CPAR data under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in accordance with paragraph
8.2.2.2.
3.3. HQ AFMC/PKP is responsible for determining
what data will be collected from the individual reports for inclusion
in the CPARS data base, and controlling access to and use of
the data base. Access to the data base will be permitted only
when the purpose is consistent with paragraph 1.6.
3.4. HQ AFMC/PKP will analyze the data base and
publish the results of that analysis for use by government and
industry. The analysis will include mean performance by element
charts, color rating trend charts, and reasons analysis by element
charts. The form of this package may vary over time, but will
always be consistent with paragraph 1.6. Further analyses of
data from the CPARS data base may be accomplished by the center
CPAR focal point for internal government use, but is expressly
not authorized for release outside the government.
4. Field Activity Responsibilities.
The commander or vice commander of each field activity will:
4.1. Implement this instruction by assuring training
requirements are satisfied for focal points in the program offices
and reviewing officials, and by establishing processes to monitor
the integrity (i.e., quality) and timely completion of reports.
4.2. Establish a CPAR Focal Point. The activity
focal point is responsible for the collection, distribution, and
control of CPARs. This CPAR focal point (Atch 3) will assist
the program manager (PM) in implementing this instruction by providing
training and other administrative assistance to ensure that reports
are timely and in compliance with this instruction.
4.2.1. The following activity focal points will
maintain a master CPAR library (Atch 2) for use in source selections:
Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC), Air Force Development Test
Center (AFDTC), Electronic Systems Center (ESC), and Space and
Missile Systems Center (SMC). The focal points of activities
that do not maintain a CPAR library will support local source
selections by requesting "relevant" CPAR data from HQ
AFMC/PKP or a geographically more convenient master library.
4.3. Ensure timely completion of reports by PMs.
The PM is responsible for assessing contractor performance in
accordance with this instruction. In the context of this instruction,
the PM is the single manager, systems support manager or development
systems manager that has overall responsibility for acquisition
of a system.
4.4. Ensure timely review of CPARs by reviewing
officials. The reviewing official provides the check-and-balance
needed to ensure report integrity, especially when there are significant
disconnects between the PM and the contractor. (See paragraph
6.8).
Section C--CPAR Procedures
5. Frequency of Reporting:
5.1. Initial Reports. An initial CPAR is required
for new contracts meeting the criteria of paragraph 2. The initial
CPAR must reflect evaluation of at least the first 180 days of
performance under the contract, and may include up to the first
365 days of performance.
5.2. Intermediate Reports. Intermediate CPARs are
required every 12 months throughout the entire period of performance
of the contract. An intermediate CPAR is limited to contractor
performance occurring after the preceding CPAR. To improve efficiency
in preparing the CPAR, it is recommended that the CPAR be completed
together with other reviews (e.g., award fee determinations, major
program events, or program milestones). Activities may, through
local processes, establish a specific submittal date for all intermediate
CPARs, provided they are completed for every 12 month evaluation
period.
5.3. Out-of-Cycle Reports:
5.3.1. An out-of-cycle report may be required when
there is a significant change in performance that alters the assessment
in one or more evaluation area. When a significant change in
performance has occurred, the contractor may request an updated
report or the PM may unilaterally change the assessment and process
a revised report. The determination as to whether or not to update
a CPAR will be made solely by the PM. An updated report will
only address the changed elements.
5.3.2. Prior to a PM leaving the program office
(or prior to a contract being transferred between Centers), the
PM will complete an AFMC Form 38A if at least four months have
elapsed since the last CPAR was completed. This updated form
need not be processed through the contractor and CPAR reviewing
official; rather, it should be passed to the succeeding PM for
background information for completing the next CPAR.
5.3.3. Generally, no more than two CPARs per year should be completed on a contract. Out-of-cycle reports do not alter the annual reporting requirement; for example, if the normal CPAR period of performance ends on 1 November and an out-of-cycle report is accomplished which covers a performance period that ends 6 months earlier (1 May), a second CPAR report is still required to cover the period of performance from 1 May-1 November of that same year and each
1 November throughout the life of the contract.
5.4. Final Report: A final CPAR will be completed
upon contract termination, transfer of program man-agement responsibility
outside of AFMC, or the delivery of the final major end item on
contract or completion of the period of performance. The final
CPAR does not include cumulative information, but is limited to
the period of contractor performance occurring after the preceding
CPAR.
6. Preparing and Processing Reports:
6.1. The PM responsible for the overall program
is also responsible for preparing, reviewing, signing, and processing
the CPAR. (See attachment 1 for instructions on preparing reports).
The command goal for processing a CPAR is 120 days. CPARs should
be completed and signed by the reviewing official not later than
120 days after the end of the evaluation period.
6.2. Completion of CPAR:
6.2.1. CPAR-Systems. The PM responsible for the
contract being reviewed prepares the documentation and assessment
in coordination with the project team. This assessment should
be based on multi-functional input from specialists familiar with
the contractor's performance (Attachment 1, paragraph A1.15.1).
The PM should request input from the applicable ALC as part of
the multi-functional input referenced above. The system program
director should ensure user input is provided via the program
office integrated product team.
6.2.2. Manpower support contractors may provide
factual input as project team members, however, under no circumstances
should they be allowed to write CPARs or have access to completed
CPARs. To prevent possible conflict of interest issues, use of
manpower support contractors should be very rare or limited in
scope.
6.3. PM narrative remarks are limited to block 16
plus two additional 8-1/2 by 11 inch typewritten pages. In rare
circumstances, such as an assessment containing several blue or
red ratings, a third typewritten page may be added. Under no
circumstances will more than three additional pages be permitted.
Also, the contractor is allowed the same amount of additional
space for comments. All additional pages are considered part
of the CPAR itself. (See paragraph 6.5.2.5.).
6.4. Contractor organizations will be given an opportunity
to review and comment on the assessment. Since communication
and feedback regarding contractor performance are always encouraged,
the PM may consider allowing a pre-assessment briefing by the
contractor to discuss the contractor's performance during the
evaluation period. These pre-assessment discussions must be structured
around firm contract requirements and events which are deemed
to be critical during the upcoming reporting period. PMs are
strongly encouraged to conduct face-to-face meetings with the
contractor during the assessment process. Participation by representatives
from the Contracting Office is strongly encouraged for all meetings.
6.5. The CPAR review and approval process is as
follows:
6.5.1. The PM will sign and retain a copy of the
CPAR and transmit the original to his or her counterpart within
the contractor's organization. Local processes may require review
by the activity CPAR focal point and/or reviewing official prior
to sending the CPAR to the contractor. The preferred method of
transmitting a report is by hand delivery (with receipt), in conjunction
with face-to-face discussions. Certified mail or other methods
of ensuring receipt are also acceptable. Meetings with contractor
management to discuss CPAR ratings are strongly recommended and
may be pre-arranged by the Government or at the request of the
contractor. (See paragraph 6.5.2.6.) Regardless of the method
of transmittal, a transmittal letter must accompany the CPAR.
6.5.2. The transmittal letter, which may be signed
by the PM, will provide the following instructions to the contractor.
(Local processes will describe the level of review and transmittal):
6.5.2.1. The CPAR is "source selection information"
and must be protected as such. After review, transmit the CPAR
back to the originating office marked and handled as "source
selection information". Request return of the CPAR by certified
mail or some other controlled method.
6.5.2.2. Strictly control access to the CPAR while
in the contractor's organization.
6.5.2.3. Ensure the CPAR is never released to persons
or entities outside the contractor's control.
6.5.2.4. Prohibit the use of or reference to CPAR
data for advertising, promotional material, preaward surveys,
proposal submittals, production readiness reviews, or other similar
purposes.
6.5.2.5. Advise the contractor that comments are
optional but are due to the originating office within 30 calendar
days after receipt. The contractor may provide comments in response
to the assessment, or sign and return the assessment without comment.
If the contractor elects not to provide comments, he or she should
acknowledge receipt of the CPAR by signing/dating block 19 of
the form and return the CPAR to the originating office. Comments
should be focused on the objective portion of the PMs narrative
and provide views on causes and implications of the assessed performance.
Contractor comments are subject to the same limitations in paragraph
6.3. This page limit will be strictly enforced and extra pages
will not be reviewed or included with the CPAR. Label all additional
pages with the contractor's name, contract number, period covered
by report, and page number.
6.5.2.6. Advise that if the contractor desires a
meeting to discuss the CPAR, it must be requested, in writing,
no later than 7 days from the receipt of the CPAR. This meeting
will be held during the contractor's 30 day review period.
6.5.2.7. Advise that a copy of the completed CPAR
(that is, a CPAR flowing through all of the process steps including
signature by the reviewing official) may be requested at the time
the CPAR is returned to the PM by noting the name, title, and
complete address of the chief executive officer (CEO), the chief
operating officer (COO), or president of the corporate entity
responsible for the operating unit for which the CPAR was executed.
(See paragraph 6.9). No other distribution will be made by the
Government to any other contractor representative or contractor
entity.
6.5.3. If the contractor does not return the CPAR
within the allotted 30 days, block 18 of a retained copy will
be annotated, "The report was delivered/received by the contractor
on [date]. The contractor neither signed nor offered comment
in response to this assessment." The program office will
continue processing the CPAR.
6.5.4. After receiving and reviewing the contractor's
comments on the CPAR, the PM may revise the assessment, including
the narrative. Revised assess-ments must be recorded on a new
CPAR for the same period covering the original report. The original
CPAR form will be attached to the new CPAR form. The PM will
notify the contractor of any revisions made to a report as a result
of the contractor's comments. Such a revised report will not
be sent to the contractor for further comment or re-signature.
If the contractor has requested a copy of the completed CPAR
(see paragraph 6.5.2.7.), a copy will be provided after the Reviewing
Official signs the form. Further, contractors have the option
to review their final CPARs after they enter the CPAR library.
A copy may be obtained according to paragraph 6.9.
6.5.4.1. Revised CPARs should be noted "Revision
to CPAR for period (insert period covered by report)," followed
by the program title and phase of acquisition. Indicate revised
or affected ratings in block 14 or 15 and explain the changes
in block 16. The PM will then sign block 17 of the revised CPAR
and annotate block 20 of the original CPAR with "See revised
CPAR". The reviewing official will sign block 21 of the
revised CPAR in accordance with paragraph 6.6, below. The revised
CPAR should be stapled on top of the original report.
6.6. After receiving contractor comments or 30 days
from the date of contractor receipt of the CPAR, whichever occurs
first, the CPAR will be sent to the reviewing official for review
and signature according to local processes.
6.6.1. If the PM does not choose to alter the assessment
as a result of contractor comments received, the reviewing official
will be provided an explanation of that decision (e.g., Staff
Summary Sheet).
6.7. To facilitate future CPAR preparation, the
program office may retain CPAR copies and working papers associated
with CPAR evaluations. However, all retained CPAR copies and
working papers must be marked "For Official Use Only/Source
Selection Information - See FAR 3.104" and handled accordingly.
6.8. The activity reviewing official must be at
least one level above the PM and be a general officer, a member
of the senior executive service or the activity commander or vice
commander. This individual will be designated by local processes.
However, for major programs, the program executive officer (PEO)
or the designated acquisition commander (DAC) will be given the
option of acting as the reviewing official. The reviewing official's
comments in the CPAR will acknowledge consideration and reconciliation,
if possible, of any significant discrepancies between the PM assessment
and the contractor's comments. When the reviewing official signs
the CPAR, it will be considered complete.
6.9. If the contractor has requested a copy of the
completed CPAR by providing the name, title and address of the
corporation's CEO, COO, or president, then the reviewing official
should assure that a copy of the completed CPAR is sent to the
contractor with a transmittal letter advising again of the precautions
and controls outlined in paragraph 6.5.2.1. through 6.5.2.4.
Note that the completed CPAR is source selection information in
accordance with FAR 3.104-4(k)(1) in that it is prepared for use
by the Government to potentially support a future procurement
and that unauthorized disclosure could compromise future procurements.
This requires the CEO, COO, or president to protect the information
from disclosure to any unauthorized persons in that it is prepared
for use by the government to support future procurements utilizing
source selection procedures.
6.10. The CPAR, signed by the reviewing official,
will be entered into all master CPAR libraries maintained by HQ
AFMC/PKP, ASC, AFDTC, ESC, and SMC. The CPAR focal point at activities
maintaining a master library will enter reports in accordance
with local processes and will distribute copies to the other master
libraries. The focal points at other activities will submit
their CPARs to HQ AFMC/PKP and copies to the other master libraries.
Classified CPARs for Special Access Programs will be distributed
only to HQ AFMC/DRJ who will maintain a separate master library.
The reporting requirements in this paragraph are exempt from
licensing in accordance with paragraph 2.11.5, AFI 37-124, The
Information Collections and Reports Management Program; Controlling
Internal, Public, and Interagency Air Force Information Collections.
6.11. All records created under this instruction
will be retained and disposed of according to AFR 12-50, Vol I,
Disposition of Air Force Documentation-Policies, Procedures, and
Responsibilities. CPAR data will be mailed in accordance with
the requirements for trans-mitting "source selection information"
(see AFFARS Appendix AA, as well as, FAR 3.104).
7. CPAR Focal Points:
7.1. Each CPAR focal point with a master library
will keep CPARs and all attachments in separate files for each
contractor. CPARs for a given contract will be retained for 3
years beyond the end of the period covered by [the] report on
the final CPAR.
7.2. Distribution of CPARs within AFMC will only
be made from one activity CPAR focal point to another. For a
particular source selection, the performance risk analysis group
(PRAG) or source selection authority must contact their local
CPAR focal point to obtain CPAR data. The CPAR focal point of
activities that do not have a master library will request relevant
CPARs from a geographically convenient master library.
7.3. HQ AFMC/PKP is the command focal point for
processing CPAR requests from government activities outside the
command. All such requests received by field activities are to
be referred to HQ AFMC/PKP, 4375 Chidlaw Road, Suite 6, Wright-Patterson
AFB, OH 45433-5006.
7.4. CPAR focal points at each activity will be
responsible for tracking and suspensing CPARs as they become due.
The focal points will notify the program office at least 90 days
prior to the CPAR due date, in accordance with local processes.
Notice will be pro-vided; however, this does not relieve the
PM of the responsibility for processing reports in a timely manner.
Focal points will not be responsible for the contents of the
CPAR.
7.5. The CPAR focal point at each activity is responsible
for monitoring the status of late reports. Local processes should
be established to notify the activity Commander, the PEO, and
the DAC of reports more than 30 days overdue and to notify HQ
AFMC/PKP of all CPARs that are 60 days or more overdue.
7.6. A list of all AFMC CPAR focal points is in
attachment 3.
8. CPAR Markings and Protection:
8.1. The PM is responsible for ensuring that CPARs
are appropriately marked and handled. All CPAR forms, attachments
and working papers must be marked "FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY/SOURCE
SELECTION INFORMATION - SEE FAR 3.104" according to AFI 37-131,
Air Force Freedom of Information Act Program, FAR 3.104, and AFFARS
Appendix AA and BB. CPARs have the unique characteristic of always
being predecisional in nature. They will always be source selection
information because they will be in constant use to support ongoing
and future source selections. This predecisional nature of CPARs
is a basis for requiring that all CPAR data be protected from
disclosure to unauthorized personnel.
8.2. CPARs may also contain information that is
proprietary to the contractor. Information contained on the CPAR
such as trade secrets, and confidential commercial or financial
data, obtained from the contractor in confidence, must also be
protected from unauthorized disclosure. Additionally, CPARs may
contain valuable government-generated commercial information that
will be used in the award of government contracts. Such commercially
valuable information must be protected from unauthorized disclosure.
Based on the confidential nature of the CPARs, the following
guidance applies to protection both internal and external to the
government:
8.2.1. Internal Government Protection:
8.2.1.1. CPARs must be treated as source selection
information at all times. The flow of CPARs throughout AFMC in
support of source selections will be controlled by the CPAR focal
points and transmitted only from one CPAR focal point to another.
Information contained in the CPAR must be protected in the same
manner as information contained in completed source selection
files. (See AFFARS Appendices AA and BB).
8.2.1.2. CPAR data will not be used to support pre-award
surveys, debarment proceedings or other internal government reviews.
8.2.2. External Government Protection:
8.2.2.1. Due to the sensitive and confidential nature
of CPARs, disclosure of CPAR data to contractors other than the
contractor which is the subject of the report or other entities
outside the government is not authorized. A contractor may be
provided a copy of its CPAR after reviewing official signature
as discussed in paragraph 6.9. A contractor may also be granted
access to its CPARs as maintained in the master CPAR libraries.
In this situation, access to review completed CPARs will be
granted by the CPAR focal point. Individuals requesting access
must have a letter granting disclosure to them, signed by the
individual in charge of the operating unit for which the CPAR
was executed (i.e., the division or subsidiary identified in block
1 of the CPAR). The CEO is the only other individual who may
grant disclosure to corporate personnel to view CPARs. One situation
where this may be applicable is when the CEO tasks an individual
to review CPARs prepared for several divisions of a corporation.
The CPAR access letter, signed by either the CEO or the individual
in charge of the operating unit, must be presented to the CPAR
focal point. Copies of CPARs are not allowed to be made from
the master library or retained by the contractor's representative.
This access is needed to ensure the accuracy of changes made
to the CPAR after the contractor's initial review. Note: During
the source selection process, any past performance data resulting
from CPARs that is contradictory, unclear or could lead to a moderate
or high risk assessment will result in the need for a clarification
request. (See AFMCFARS AA and BB).
8.2.2.2. On those rare occasions when a FOIA request is received for CPAR records, the unit FOIA office must refer the request to 88 CG/IMADF, 2275 D Street, Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7220 for subsequent consideration by HQ AFMC/PKP and
HQ AFMC/JAQ.
9. Forms Prescribed.
AFMC Form 38A.
RICHARD H. ROELLIG, Brigadier General, USAF
Director of Contracting
3 Attachments
1. Instructions for Completing AFMC Form 38A (CPAR-Systems)
2. Master CPAR Libraries
3. CPAR Focal Points
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING CPAR-Systems
A1.1. All information on the form will be typewritten;
no handwritten CPARs will be accepted by the CPAR focal points
for inclusion into CPAR libraries. Reduced or condensed print
is not acceptable. All authorized additional pages must be annotated
at the top with the contractor's name, contract number, period
of covered by report, and page number.
A1.2. Block 1 - Name/Address of Contractor. State
the name and address of the division or subsidiary of the contractor
performing the contract. Identify the parent corporation (no
address required). Identify the contractor's commercial and government
entity (CAGE) code.
A1.3. Block 2 - Type Report. Indicate whether,
in accordance with section C, paragraph 5., the CPAR is an initial,
intermediate, or final report. If this is an out-of-cycle report,
check "intermediate".
A1.4. Block 3 - Period Covered by Report. State
the period of performance covered by the report (dates must be
in MM/DD/YY format). In no instance should a period of evaluation
include previously reported effort (i.e., CPARs are not cumulative
or overlapping). CPAR assessments for "intermediate"
reports should only cover a 12 month period of performance; therefore,
the report should not reflect a period of performance greater
than 12 months. Exceptions to this rule for special circumstances,
such as a period of performance that ends one month before contract
completion, must be approved by the CPAR focal point. The CPAR
focal point has the authority to approve extensions when special
circumstances arise.
A1.5. Block 4 - Contract Number. Self-explanatory.
A1.6. Block 5 - Contracting Office. Self-explanatory.
A1.7. Block 6 - Location of Contract Performance.
Self-explanatory.
A1.8. Block 7 - Contract Period of Performance.
State current contract period of performance including any authorized
extensions, such as options that have been exercised (dates must
be in MM/DD/YY format).
A1.9. Block 8 - Contract Percent Complete/Delivery
Order Status. State the current percent of the contract that
is complete. If cost performance reports (CPR) or cost/schedule
status reports (C/SSR) data is available, calculate percent complete
by dividing cumulative budgeted cost of work performed (BCWP)
by contract budget base (CBB) (less management reserve) and multiplying
by 100. CBB is the sum or negotiated cost plus estimated cost
of authorized undefinitized work. If not indicated elsewhere,
include the cutoff date for the CPR or C/SSR used. If CPR or
C/SSR data is not available, estimate percent complete by dividing
the number of months elapsed by total number of months in contract
period of performance and multiplying by 100. For indefinite delivery
(ID) contracts, divide the dollars obligated through the end of
the reporting period by the dollar value listed in block 9 and
multiply by 100.
A1.10. Block 9 - Current Contract Dollar Value (as of report date). State the current face value of contract. For incentive contracts, state the target price or total estimated amount.
A1.11. Block 10 - Basis of Award. Identify the
basis of award by placing an "X" in the appropriate
box. For "other", explain in Block 13 the nature of
the effort (e.g. set-aside)
A1.12. Block 11 - Contract Type. Identify the contract
type. For mixed contract types, check the predominate contract
type and identify the other contract type in the "mixed"
block.
A1.13. Block 12 - Program Title and Phase of Acquisition.
Provide a short descriptive narrative of the program. Spell
out all abbreviations. Identify overall program phase and production
lot (for example, concept development, engineering and manufacturing
development, low-rate initial production, or full-rate production
(Lot 1)). Identify milestone phases, if applicable.
A1.14. Block 13 - Contract Effort Description.
Provide a complete description of the contract effort that identifies
key technologies, components, subsystems, and requirements. This
section is of critical importance to future performance risk analysis
groups (PRAG) and source selection authorities. The description
should be detailed enough to assist a future PRAG in determining
the relevancy of this program to their source selection. Also,
keep in mind that users of this information may not understand
program jargon. It is important to address the complexity of
the contract effort and the overall technical risk associated
with accomplishing the effort. For intermediate CPARs, a brief
description of key milestone events that occurred in the review
period may be beneficial (e.g., critical design review (CDR),
functional configuration audit (FCA)), as well as, major contract
modifications during the period. For task/delivery order contracts,
state the number of tasks issued during the period, tasks completed
during the period, and tasks which remain active. For contracts
which include multiple functional disciplines or activities, categories
should be designated to: (1) reflect the full scope of the contract,
(2) allow grouping similar work efforts within the categories
to avoid unnecessary segregation of essentially similar specialties
or activities, and (3) avoid combining essentially dissimilar
work efforts within the categories. Each category or area should
be separately numbered, titled and described within block 13 to
facilitate cross-referencing with the evaluation of the contractor's
performance within each category in blocks 14 and 15. If necessary,
the description within this block may be extended to one additional
typewritten page.
A1.15. Block 14 - Evaluation Areas. Evaluate each
area based on the following criteria:
A1.15.1. Each area assessment must be based on objective
data that will be provided in block 16. Facts to support specific
areas of evaluation must be requested from the contracting officer
and other government specialists familiar with the contractor's
performance on the contract under review. Such specialists may,
for example, be from engineering, manufacturing, quality, logistics
(including provisioning), contract administration services, maintenance,
security, data, etc.
A1.15.2. The amount of risk inherent in the effort
should be recognized as a significant factor and taken into account
when assessing the contractor's performance. For example, if
a contractor meets an extremely tight schedule, a blue (exceptional)
may be appropriate, or meeting a tight schedule with few delinquencies,
a green (satisfactory) with an upward arrow assessment may be
given in recognition of the inherent schedule risk. When a contractor
identifies significant technical risk and takes action to abate
those risks, the effectiveness of these actions should be included
in the narrative supporting the block 14 ratings.
A1.15.3. The CPAR is designed to assess prime contractor
performance. However, in those evaluation areas where subcontractor
actions have significantly influenced the prime contractor's performance
in a negative or positive way, record the subcontractor actions
in block 16.
A1.15.4. Many of the evaluation areas in block 14
represent groupings of diverse elements. The program manager
should consider each element and use the area rating to highlight
significant issues. In addition, the evaluator should clearly
focus on the contractor's "results" in determining the
overall area rating.
A1.15.5. Evaluate all areas which pertain to the
contract under evaluation, unless they are not applicable--"N/A".
A1.15.6. When performance has changed from one period
to another such that a change in color results, the narrative
in block 16 must address each change.
A1.15.7. Scoring will be in accordance with the
definitions described below in Figure A1.1, "Evaluation Colors."
Blue (Exceptional). Indicates performance clearly
exceeds contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains
few minor problems for which corrective actions appear highly
effective.
Green (Satisfactory). Indicates performance clearly
meets contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains
some minor problems for which the corrective actions appear satisfactory.
Yellow (Marginal). Indicates performance meets contractual
requirements. The area of evaluation contains a serious problem
for which corrective actions have not yet been identified, appear
only marginally effective, or have not been fully implemented.
Red (Unsatisfactory). Indicates the contractor is
in danger of not being able to satisfy contractual requirements
and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The area of evaluation
contains serious problems for which the corrective actions appear
ineffective.
NOTE 1: Upward or downward arrows may be used to indicate an improving or worsening trend insufficient to change the assessment status.
NOTE 2: N/A means not applicable.
Figure A1.1. Evaluation Colors.
A1.16. Block 14a - Management Responsiveness. Evaluate
the adequacy of the contractor's responsiveness to the program
needs during the period covered by the report. Address issues
such as: the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification,
corrective action plans, and proposal submittals (especially responses
to change orders or other undefinitized contractual actions).
A1.17. Block 14b - Schedule Control. Evaluate the
contractor's adherence to the contract or task order schedule
by evaluating the contractor's efforts during the evaluation period
that contribute to or effect that variance. Note that cumulative
schedule variance is reflected in block 15. The associated narrative
explanation in block 16 should address significance of scheduled
events, discuss causes, and evaluate effectiveness of contractor
corrective actions. Identify in block 16 the major milestones,
deliverable items, or significant data items applicable to the
evaluation period which contribute to the schedule assessment.
For ID or task order contracts, quantify in block 16, to the
extent possible, the percentage of tasks being completed on time,
ahead of schedule or behind schedule.
A1.18. Block 14c - Cost Control. Evaluate current
cost performance if the contract is greater than 10 percent complete
(see block 8 to calculate percent complete). To the best extent
possible, cost control should be evaluated regardless of contract
type. Cumulative percent variance and government estimate at
completion are reflected in block 15. Block 14c is the evaluation
of the contractor's cost management efforts "during the evaluation
period" that contribute to or effect those figures. The
associated narrative in block 16 should explain the causes and
contractor-proposed solutions. If CPR or C/SSR data are not available,
evaluate contractor cost management. Is the contractor experiencing
cost growth or underrun? Provide a short narrative explanation
in block 16 of causes and the contractor's proposed solutions.
If cost performance cannot be determined, mark this block N/A.
For contracts where task or contract sizing is based upon contractor
provided person-hour estimates, the relationship of these estimates
to ultimate task cost should be assessed. In addition, the extent
to which the contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility,
through the efficient use of resources in each work effort, should
be evaluated.
A1.19. Block 14d - Technical Performance of Product.
Evaluate the extent to which the contractor is meeting overall
product or system performance in terms of the contract requirements,
including but not limited to the statement of work, specifications,
contract data requirement lists, and significant special contract
clauses. Does the product perform as required?
A1.20. Block 14e - Product Assurance. The primary
areas of consideration focus on satisfying the requirements of
the functional "ilities": producibility, reliability,
maintainability, inspectability, testability, etc. The program
manager must be flexible in how contractor success is measured.
Examples of possible measures: data from design test/operational
testing successes, field reliability and maintainability reports,
user complaints and acceptance rates, improved subcontractor and
vendor quality, and scrap and rework rates. These quantitative
indicators may be useful later, for example, in source selection
evaluations, in demonstrating continuous improvement, quality
and reliability leadership that reflects progress in total quality
management.
A1.20.1. Block 14e(1) - Quality System. Evaluate
the overall quality of the deliverables (including reports) in
terms of compliance with the requirements of the contract.
A1.20.2. Block 14e(2) - Manufacturing Management.
Identify the contractor's performance to control the overall
manufacturing process to include material control, shop floor
planning and control, statusing and control, factory floor optimization,
factory design, and factory performance.
A1.21. Block 14f - Program/Data Management. Evaluate
the extent to which the contractor: discharges its responsibility
for integration and coordination for all activity needed to execute
the contract as documented in the Integrated Master Plan/Schedule;
identifies and applies resources required to maintain schedule;
assigns responsibility for tasks/actions required by contract;
communicates appropriate information to affected program elements
in a timely manner. Assess the adequacy of the contractor's
mechanism for tracking contract compliance, recording changes
to planning documentation and management of cost and schedule
control system. Evaluate the contractor's risk management practices,
especially the ability to identify risks and formulate and implement
risk mitigation plans. Finally, evaluate the contractor's performance
relative to management of data collection, recording, and distribution
as required by the contract.
A1.22. Block 14g - Procurement/Subcontract Management.
Identify the percentage of subcontracting effort and evaluate
the prime contractor's effort devoted to managing subcontracts.
Consider efforts taken to ensure early identification of subcontract
problems and the timely application of corporate resources to
preclude subcontract problems from impacting overall prime contractor
performance. Identify contractor's ability to provide timely
subcontract awards based on best value. Consider contacting the
contract administration office for information as to the contractor's
performance against the Subcontract Plan.
A1.23. Block 14h - Logistic Support/Sustainment.
Evaluate the adequacy of the contractor's performance in accomplishing
integrated logistics support (ILS) program tasks (the nine ILS
element groupings of maintenance planning, manpower and personnel,
supply support, support equipment, technical data, training and
support, computer resources support, facilities (packaging, handling,
storage, and transportation), and design interface), and the contractor's
performance of logistics support analysis activities. When the
contract requires technical/engineering data deliverables, the
Cataloging and Standardization Center (CASC) comments should be
solicited.
A1.24. Block 14i - Engineering. (Note: Engineering
is comprised of many elements including systems engineering and
software engineering. If system and/or software engineering performance
is critical to successfully satisfying the requirement, they should
be separately evaluated in block 14i(1) and 14i(2).) Use block
14.i. to evaluate the contractor's overall engineering performance
on activities planned for the period covered by report. The evaluation
should cover these disciplines: design, manufacturing integration
and support, configuration control, documentation, test and evaluation.
The evaluation for this block should focus on efforts exclusive
of blocks 14i(1) and (2).
A1.24.1. Block 14i(1) - Systems Engineering. Evaluate
the contractor's effort to define the system performance parameters
and system configuration to satisfy: the requirements, the planning
and control of technical program tasks, the quality and adequacy
of the engineering support provided throughout all phases of contract
execution, the integration of the engineering specialties, management
of interfaces, and the management of a totally integrated effort
of all engineering concerns to meet cost, technical performance,
and schedule objectives. System engineering activities ensure
that integration of these engineering concerns is addressed up-front
and early in the design/development process. These activities
include: producibility engineering, logistics support analysis,
survivability, human factors and the "ilities"--reliability,
quality, maintainability, availability, inspectability, etc. Although
some of these activities will be specifically addressed in other
categories above (such as product assurance, and test and evaluation),
the focus of the evaluation of systems engineering is on the integration
of these specific areas. The scoring of systems engineering needs
to remain flexible to allow the evaluator to account for program
unique technical concerns and to allow for the changing systems
engineering environment as a program moves through the program
phases (i.e., Dem/Val, EMD, Production).
A1.24.2. Block 14i(2) - Software Engineering. Evaluate
the extent to which the contractor's performance is meeting the
software development, modification, or maintenance contract requirements
or a government-approved software development plan. Consider
the amount and quality of software development resources devoted
to support the contract effort. The Software Development Capability
Evaluation (SDCE) may be used as a source of information to support
this evaluation.
A1.25. Block 14j - Unique Technical Performance/Other
Areas. Specify additional evaluation areas that are unique to
the contract, or that cannot be captured elsewhere on the form.
More than one type of entry may be included, but should be separately
labeled. If extra space is needed, use block 16.
A1.25.1. If the contract contains an award fee provision,
enter "award fee" in the "Other" block (14j).
Use the columns, beginning with the "Past Color" column,
to record the award fee percentages earned. Subsequent columns
should be used if there was more than one award fee earned during
the period covered by the CPAR (as reflected in block 3). For
example, if two award fees were earned during the period covered
by report and the contractor earned 80% on both, the block 14j
entry under "Past Color" would read: "1--80%"
and under "Red" the entry would read: "2--80%."
In addition, the program manager may translate the award fee
earned to color ratings, which could prove more useful for using
past performance to assess future performance risk in upcoming
source selections. In this instance, the block 14j entry could
read: "1--Green" or "1--80%--Green." If
award fee information is included in the CPAR, use block 16 to
provide a description for each award fee listed in block 14j.
Include the scope of the award fee by describing the extent to
which it covers the total range of contract performance activities,
or is restricted to certain elements of the contract. Also include
the dollars awarded at each award point in the block 16 narrative
in the same format as that described for block 14j.
A1.25.2. If any other type of contract incentive
is included in the contract (excluding contract shareline incentives
on fixed price or cost-type contracts), it should be reported
in a manner similar to the steps described above for award fee.
Enter "Incentive" in block 14j.
A1.25.3. Use block 14j in those instances where
the program manager believes strongly, either positively or negatively,
regarding an aspect of the contractor's performance, but cannot
fit that aspect into any of the other blocks on the form. As
an example, this block may be used to address security issues
such as; compliance with the National Industrial Security Program
Operation Manual (NISPOM, formerly the DoD Industrial Security
Manual), program protection planning, or system security engineering
management requirements. An assessment of provisioning lines
may also be addressed here.
A1.26. Block 15 - Variances (Contract to Date).
If CPR or C/SSR data are available, identify: the current percent
cost variance to date, the government's estimated completion cost
variance (percent), and the cumulative schedule variance (percent).
Indicate the cutoff date for the CPR or C/SSR used.
A1.26.1. Compute current cost variance percentage
by dividing cumulative cost variance to date (column 11 of the
CPR, column 6 of the C/SSR) by BCWP and multiplying by 100.
A1.26.2. Compute completion cost variance percentage
by dividing CBB less the government's estimate at completion (EAC)
by CBB and multiplying by 100. The calculation is [(CBB - EAC)/CBB]
X 100. The CBB must be the current budget base against which
the contractor is performing (including formally established over
target baselines (OTB)). If an OTB has been established since
the last CPAR, a brief description in block 16 of the nature and
magnitude of the baseline adjustment must be provided. Subsequent
CPARs must evaluate cost performance in terms of the revised baseline
and reference the CPAR which described the baseline adjustment.
For example, "The contract baseline was formally adjusted
on (date); see CPAR for (period covered by report) for an explanation."
A1.26.3. Compute cumulative schedule variance percentage
by dividing BCWP less budgeted cost of work scheduled (BCWS) by
BCWS and multiplying by 100. The calculation is [(BCWP - BCWS)/BCWS]
X 100. If the schedule variance exceeds 15 percent (positive
or negative), briefly discuss in block 16 the significance of
this variance for the contract effort.
A1.27. Block 16 - Program Director/Manager Narrative.
A short, factual narrative statement is required for all assessments
regardless of color rating (e.g., even "green" ratings
require narrative support). Cross-reference the comments in block
16 to their corresponding evaluation area in block 14 or 15.
Each narrative statement in support of the area assessment must
contain objective data. An exceptional cost performance assessment
could, for example, cite the current underrun dollar value and
estimate at completion. A marginal engineering design/support
assessment could, for example, be supported by information concerning
personnel changes. Key engineers familiar with the effort may
have been replaced by less experienced engineers. Sources of
data include operational test and evaluation results; technical
interchange meetings; production readiness reviews; earned contract
incentives; or award fee evaluations.
A1.27.1. The final entry in this block will be a
statement by the evaluator in the following form: "Given
what I know today about the contractor's ability to execute what
he promised in his proposal, I (definitely would not, probably
would not, might or might not, probably would or definitely would)
award to him today given that I had a choice". Block 16
comments may be extended to two additional typewritten page (also,
see section C, paragraph 6.3.). All additional pages added to
the report to continue block 16, 18, or 21 will contain the following
at the top of each page: "SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION -
SEE FAR 3.104". Further, each additional page will be annoted
on the top with the contractor's name, contract number, period
of performance, and page number.
A1.28. Block 17 - Program Director/Manager Signature.
The program director/manager "signs and dates" the
form prior to forwarding it to the contractor for review. (See
section C, paragraph 6.5. for guidance on sending the CPAR to
the contractor for review and comment.)
A1.29. Block 18 - Contractor Comments. Optional.
A1.30. Block 19 - Contractor Representative Signature.
Self-explanatory.
A1.31. Block 20 - Reviewing Official Comments.
The reviewing official must acknowledge consideration of any significant
discrepancies between the PM assessment and the contractor's comments.
A1.32. Block 21 - Reviewing Official Signature.
Self-explanatory. (See section C, paragraph 6.8. for guidance
as to who may act as the reviewing official.)
MASTER CPAR LIBRARIES
HQ AFMC:
Unclassified Reports:
HQ AFMC/PKP
4375 Chidlaw Road, Suite 6
Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-5006
DSN 787-2717, Commercial (513) 257-2717
Classified Reports:
HQ AFMC/DRJ
Attn: Contracts Policy
4170 Hebble Creek Road, Suite 1
Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-5644
DSN 787-5538, Commercial (513) 257-5538
AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS CENTER
ASC/CYX
2335 Seventh Street, Suite 2
Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7805
DSN 785-5912, Ext. 202; Commercial (513) 255-5912,
Ext.202
AIR FORCE DEVELOPMENT TEST CENTER
AFDTC/PKCA
205 West "D" Ave, Suite 433
Eglin AFB FL 32542-6864
DSN 872-3192, Commercial (904) 882-3192,
ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS CENTER
ESC/PKA
3 Kirtland Street
Hanscom AFB MA 01731-2309
DSN 478-5852, Commercial (617) 377-5852
SPACE AND MISSILE SYSTEMS CENTER
SMC/SDS
155 Discoverer Boulevard, Suite 2506
Los Angeles AFB CA 90245-4692
DSN 833-3210, Commercial (310) 363-3210
CPAR FOCAL POINTS
HQ AFMC:
Unclassified Reports:
HQ AFMC/PKP
4375 Chidlaw Road, Suite 6
Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-5006
DSN 787-2717, Commercial (513) 257-2717
Classified Reports:
HQ AFMC/DRJ
Attn: Contracts Policy
4170 Hebble Creek Road, Suite 1
Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-5644
DSN 787-5538, Commercial (513) 257-5538
PRODUCT CENTERS:
AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS CENTER
ASC/CYX
2335 Seventh Street, Suite 2
Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7805
DSN 785-5912, Ext. 202; Commercial (513) 255-5912,
Ext. 202
ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS CENTER
ESC/PKA
3 Kirtland Street
Hanscom AFB MA 01731-2309
DSN 478-5852, Commercial (617) 377-5852
HUMAN SYSTEMS CENTER
HSC/YAK
8107 13th Street
Brooks AFB TX 78235-5218
DSN 240-6336, Commercial (210) 536-6336
SPACE AND MISSILE SYSTEMS CENTER
SMC/SDS
155 Discoverer Boulevard, Suite 2506
Los Angeles AFB CA 90245-4692
DSN 833-3210, Commercial (310) 363-3210
LOGISTICS CENTERS:
OKLAHOMA CITY AIR LOGISTICS CENTER
OC-ALC/PKC
3001 Staff Drive, Suite 2AJ80A
Tinker AFB OK 73145-3015
DSN 339-5804, Commercial (405) 739-5804
OGDEN AIR LOGISTICS CENTER
OO-ALC/PKXD
6038 Aspen Avenue
Hill AFB UT 84056-5805
DSN 458-5486, Commercial (801) 777-5486
SAN ANTONIO AIR LOGISTICS CENTER
SA-ALC/PKC
485 Quentin Roosevelt Road, Suite 12
Kelly AFB TX 78241-6420
DSN 945-7761, Commercial (210) 925-7761
SACRAMENTO AIR LOGISTICS CENTER
SM-ALC/PKLT
3237 Peacekeeper Way, Suite 17
McClellan AFB CA 95652-1060
DSN 633-3726, Commercial (916) 643-3726
WARNER ROBINS AIR LOGISTICS CENTER
WR-ALC/PKP-RFPSO
235 Byron Street
Robins AFB GA 31098-1611
DSN 468-2575, Commercial (912) 926-2575
TEST CENTERS:
AIR FORCE DEVELOPMENT TEST CENTER
AFDTC/PKCA
205 West "D" Avenue, Suite 433
Eglin AFB FL 32542-6864
DSN 872-3192, Commercial (904) 882-3192
AIR FORCE FLIGHT TEST CENTER
AFFTC/PKB
5 South Wolfe Avenue
Edwards AFB CA 93524-1185
DSN 527-3900, Ext. 2205, Commercial (805) 277-3900,
Ext. 2205
ARNOLD ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT CENTER
AEDC/PKM
100 Kindel Drive, Suite A335
Arnold AFB TN 37389-1335
DSN 340-5408, Commercial (615) 454-5408
LABORATORIES:
PHILLIPS LABORATORY
PL/PKM
3651 Lowry Avenue SE, Room 222
Kirtland AFB NM 87117-5777
DSN 246-4695, Commercial (505) 846-4695
ROME LABORATORY
RL/PKPX
26 Electronics Parkway
Griffiss AFB NY 13441-4514
DSN 587-3530, Commercial (315) 330-3530
WRIGHT LABORATORY
See ASC Focal Point
AFMCI 64-107
Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System
(CPARS)
COMMENT RESOLUTION
AFDTCAccept as is. | |
ASC Strongly disagree with deletion of
requirement for Service-CPARs.
Believe AFMC is not complying by the recommendations of the NGS-IPT in matters such as providing CPARs to contractors.
Para 2.1 - Retain requirement for programmed depot maintenance evaluations.
Para 2.1 - Continue to allow evaluations of S&T contracts at the option of the Laboratory Commanders.
Para 5.1 - Retain "Initial Report" designation.
Para 6.1 - Retain 90 day Command cycle time goal.
Para 6.2.2 - Redundant paragraph. Para 6.3 - Retain paragraph addressing support contractors. ASC, cont.
Para 6.3 - Disagree with changing overflow page limits from 1 to 2. Should also require overflow pages to be marked.
Para 6.5.1, line 11 - Clarify sentence.
Para 6.5.2.5, line 20 - Limitations should be on the contractor comments.
Paras 6.5.2.7 and 6.9 - Obtain legal coordination on procedures to provide completed CPARs to contractors.
Para 6.6.4.1 - Add instructions that revised reports should be kept with the original.
Par 6.5.2. - Signer of transmittal letter should be at least one-level above the rater.
Para 6.5.2.7 - Copies of CPARs should be released by the same person making distribution to the libraries. Also why not release reports to contractor representatives.
Para 6.7 & 6.8 - Object to allowing copies to be maintained in the program office. Para 8.2.2.1 - Retain note that states the contractor will be notified of relevant past performance data that requires clarification.
Delete line 27 concerning contractor's limited access.
A.1.15.6 - Clarify that a narrative is required for each evaluation area changed from the previous period.
A1.25.3 - Change DoD to National in NISPOM.
AFMC Form 38A - Take some space from Block 12 and give it to Block 13. ESC
Summary Of Changes - Replace "...deletes all requirement for Service-CPARS..." with "deletes all references to Service CPARs.
Para 1.1, line 2 - Rewrite to read "formal and informal source selections".
Para 1.1, line 5 - Add "on-time" after quality products..
Para 1.5 - Make reference to para 2.1.
Para 2.1 - Add para 2.1.1.
Para 2.1.2 - Mention at beginning of document that select categories of contracts are not included.
Para 2.4 - Isn't this a violation by providing one contractor's performance information to another?
Para 3.4, line 9 - Delete reference to "automated data base".
Para 3.4, line 8 - The centers should also be allowed to analyze the data base.
Para 4.4 - Cross-reference with para 6.8.
Para 6.1 Program Director along with Program Manager.
Para 6.2.2 - Should CPARs be written for the entire contract or on individual orders.
Para 6.3 - Cross-reference to para 6.5.2.5. Para 6.5.2.6 - Consider adding "...which will not be extended..." ESC, cont.
Para 6.5.4. - Insert sentence to cover the new procedure of sending copies to the contractor.
Para 6.7 - Allow the CPAR focal points to send CPARs back to the contractors.
Para 8.2.2.1 - Providing copies to contractors should be limited to only future CPARs.
Para 8.2.2.1 - Delete last sentence.
Para 10 - Renumber.
Para A1.27.1 - Mark additional pages with contractor name, period of performance, etc. Para A1.28 - Slight inconsistencies exist between this paragraph and the corresponding title on the form. | Mrs. Druyun specifically deleted the Service form. Service contracts will be covered by the requirement for a general form levied in the AFFARS.
While the new form is the recommendation of the NGS-IPT, the procedures are not. The procedures can be different from Service to Service.
Agree.
Mrs. Druyun is seeking a waiver for S&T contracts. Evaluations on an optional basis is fine.
OK.
Goal was established by General Viccellio.
Deleted.
Agree.
Limit was expanded to allow more room to better communicate the details of a rating. Will require pages to be marked.
Agree.
The Government and contractor have the same page limitations.
HQ AFMC/JAQ coordination has been received.
Agree.
Left to center discretion if other than the rater is to sign.
Agree. Distribution is being limited to focus control on one person within the contractor's organization.
The program manager must know the same information as the contractor.
Agree to both.
Agree.
Agree.
Agree.
Agree.
Agree
Agree.
Agree.
Agree.
Opening paragraph states instruction is limited to "system" contracts.
Joint efforts refers to those situations where the contractors are of equal status and have joined together to form another entity.
Agree.
As long as the contractors' names and contract numbers are not divulge there is no problem.
Agree.
Agree.
Yes, if requirements of para 2.1.3. are meet.
This paragraph is being deleted to avoid confusion.
Paragraph will stand.
Agree.
Local processes may govern who is responsible for sending the copies
Procedures for providing copies of past CPARs have not been developed as yet.
Agree.
Agree.
Already covered in para A1.1.
Agree. |
HSC
Para 2.1 - Reword "total face value plus unexercised options and potential orders which could be exercised/placed against the contract."
Para 6.2.2 - Redundant.
Para 6.3 - Retain this paragraph if support contractors are to be limited.
General - There is no discussion of distribution of CPARs to Master Libraries. | Agree.
Agree.
Agree. Para 6.10 states that distribution should be made to all master libraries. |
SMC Para 6.5.2 - Is the rater the same as the PM in this paragraph? SMC, cont.
Para 6.5.2.7 Who will address copying costs?
Para 6.9 - Will contractors be allowed copies of past CPARs?
Para 7.4 - Change the 90 notification date to 120 to match para 6.1
Para 8.2.2.1 - Who will designate a limitation on the number of contractor reps allowed access to CPARs?
Para A1.27.1 - Two additional pages may be used per para 6.3.
CPAR Focal Points - Update SMC's address. | "Rater" replaced by "PM".
The AFMCI will not.
This issue has not been resolved.
The ninety days referenced here is a guideline for making sure the PM is well aware of the upcoming requirement to prepare a CPAR. The 120 days noted in para 6.1 is a goal for completing the three major steps in the CPARs process. They are different.
The AFMCI has not recognized this to be a problem.
Agree.
Done. |
OC-ALC
Para 2.1 - Reinstate progammed depot maintenance.
Para 4.1 - How does Lightning Bolt #4 affect local procedures?
Para 5.3.2 - When contracts are transferred to another center the PM should prepare a new CPAR if the last one is at least four months old.
Para 6.5.2 - Allow that the "rater may sign the transmittal letter".
Para 6.5.2.7 - Should internal staff summary sheets be released to the contractors? OC-ALC, cont.
Para 7.5 - Recommend the DAC or PEO also be notified of late reports.
Para 8.2.1.1 - Also reference AFFARS Appendix BB. A1.18, Block 14.c. - Add "To the best extent possible, cost control should be evaluated regardless of contract type".
| Agree.
Processes will be allowed in local process guides, but not policy.
Language changed to accommodate transfers.
Local processes will determine the signer.
No, only the CPARs.
Agree.
Agree.
Agree. |
OO-ALC All OO-ALC comments were administrative. | Agree. |
SA-ALC
Make proper cross-references in paras 1.1, 3.3, and 3.4.
Para 2.1.3 - Add period after "entire contract".
Para 6.2.2 - Redundant.
Para 6.5.4.1 - Cross-reference should be to par 6.6.
Para 7.4 Should the ninety day notification be the same as the Command goal of 120 days.
Para 7.5 Revise to read, "Local procedures should be established to notify the activity commander of overdue reports.
A.1.1 - Delete reference to the font size to be used.
A1.4 and 8 - Change format to DD MMM YY. A1.27 - Change to allow two typewritten pages. SA-ALC, cont. Attachment 3 - Update SA-ALC address. | Agree.
Agree.
Agree.
Agree.
No, they are different periods of time.
OK.
Agree.
In order to facilitate future computerization the MM/DD/YY format is being used.
Agree. OK. |
SM-ALC Approve draft. | |
WR-ALC
Para 1.2 - Reiterate info in para 5.1..
Para 1.5 - Delete this; it is repetitive of 2.1.
Para 2.1 - Should the reference to programmed depot maintenance be deleted?
Para 2.1.1 and 2.2.1 - CPARs may not be required on multi-year contract that haven't reached the $5M threshold.
Para 2.2.2 and 6.3 - Use the term Manpower Support Contracts.
Par 2.6 - The 8(a) program is suspended. Why include this paragraph?
Para Section 4 - How are transfers to be handled.
Para 5.4 - This paragraph is open-ended. Please clarify.
Par 6.1 and 6.7 - Has the goal increased? Para 6.2 - Recommend adding the other forms to the instruction. WR-ALC, cont.
Para 6.2.1 - Discussion of provisioning items was deleted. Should it have been?
Para 6.2.2.1 - This paragraph asks for the service tasks to be identified. How is this accomplished?
Para 6.2.2 - Delete the redundant information on indefinite delivery contracts in para 2.1.3.
Para 6.4 - Why is there a page limit?
Para 6.5.2.1 - Should the CPAR be protected as "source selection information"?
Para 6.5.2.7 - Cross-reference to para 6.9.
Para 6.9 - Recommend making the PM responsible for preparing the staff summary sheet, transmittal letter, and making copies of the report. Para 7.1 - Please clarify the retention period.
If a contract runs for five years (and there is an initial, three interims, and a final report) the CPARs will be maintained for three years beyond the ending date of the period covered by the final report.
Para 7.2 - Add "source selection authority" to the second sentence.
Para 7.4 - Revise to read, " However, this does not relieve the PM/CR..." Also should the notification time be extended to 120 days.
Para 7.5 - Delete requirement to notify AFMC/PKM of CPARs overdue by 60 days. WR-ALC, cont.
Para 8.2.2.1 - Is this redundant?
A1.1 - Isn't specifying print size overkill?
A1.4 - This paragraph restricts extending the period of performance beyond one month. Can this be extended?
A.1.9 - Calculate percent of contract completion by dividing the quantity of units ordered by the quantity of units delivered.
A1.14 - Include reference to the SSA in this paragraph.
A.1.16 and A.1.24 - Emphasize that evaluations are limited to the contractor's efforts during the evaluation period.
A1.22 - Recommend contacting the ACO for information about the offerors success in meeting the Subcontract Plan.
A1.27.1 - Recommend altering Mrs. Druyun's question. Attachment 3 - Please update WR-ALC's address. | Para 1.2 is introductory and 5.1 is sufficient.
As an introduction it can stand.
No. It will be added.
Multi-year contracts are generally exercised at very high dollar levels that would exceed $5M.
Service contracts are not covered by this instruction.
The paragraph has been reworded, but I know of no suspension of the program!
Para 5.3.2 will make reference to transfers.
Paragraph allows for the final CPARs whenever the program manger believes it is appropriate. If hardware deliveries have been made, but substantial quantities of data remain to be delivered, then don't submit the final CPAR after the hardware deliveries, but after the data.
Yes, but only one subdivision has been defined--the contractor comment period remains at 30 days.
This version of the instruction only addresses major system contracts.
No. It was reinstated at para 2.1.4.
This paragraph has been deleted, as it relates to service contracts.
Chosen to keep the para at 2.1.3. and deleted 6.2.2.
Page limits are needed now to keep the files manageable, and will be needed in the future to accommodate automation of the CPARs process.
Yes.
OK.
We will allow each center to decide what office accomplishes these tasks.
Yes.
OK.
Agree. We believe 90 days is sufficient, but if earlier notification is needed--give it.
Will consider this, but not at this time. We would like to reach the Command goal first.
Will retain.
Agree.
Para graph has been reworded to make it clear the CPAR focal point may grant extensions based upon special circumstances.
Percent complete is rough measure at best. Any number of techniques could be used. Use these if possible.
OK.
Agree.
Agree.
We'll let the quote stand.
OK. |
AFOSR No comments. | |
RL No comments. | |
WL Para 2.1.2 - Also exempt Manufacturing Technology, 7.8. | OK.
|
| Others - administrative comments received from AFMC/PKP and PKA. |
An official website of the United States Government
