JSC CPARS Overview for Contractors Adrian Clayton Leigh Allen Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System

Regulatory Requirements FAR 42.1502 & 42.1503: Agencies Shall Prepare an Evaluation of Contractor Performance and Submit to PPIRS FAR 15.304: Past Performance Shall be Evaluated in All Source Selections for Negotiated Competitive Acquisitions Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) CPARS shall be used to document evaluations. (1842.1503) PPIRS Shall be Used as a Source of Past Performance Information in Source Selections NASA FAR Supplement

Past Performance Process Overview Govt Source Selection Officials Govt Program Manager /Contracting Officer CPARS PPIRS Contractor Senior Management Contractor Representative

CPARS Primary Objectives Support Best Value Source Selection Decisions – Awards for Proven Performers (FAR 15) Provide Up-To-Date Documentation of Contractor’s Ability to Meet Requirements (FAR 42) Motivate Improved Performance Facilitate Government - Contractor Communication Determine Prospective Contractor Responsibility (FAR 9)

YES! 92% 98% Government Contractor CPARS & Communication Is CPARS an Effective Tool for Improving Government-Contractor Communication? YES! Government Contractor 92% 98%

Important! Evaluate Prime Contractor Performance ONLY Do Not Evaluate Subcontractor Performance Privity of Contract Between Prime-Sub Acknowledge Subcontractor Effort Critical Aspect or 25% or More of Effort Include Sub’s Name and DUNS Address in Narrative Subcontract Management Business Relations

CPARS Workflow Contract Registration Enter Proposed Ratings Validate Proposed Ratings Review Contractor Comments Reviewing Official Comments Contractor Comments Focal Points COTR Buyer/CO CO Proc Team Lead 7

Ratings & Narratives Rating Contract Requirements Problems Corrective Actions Exceptional Exceeds Many – with Govt Benefit Few Minor Problems Minor Problems; Highly Effective Very Good Exceeds Some Some Minor Problems Minor Problems; Effective Satisfactory Meets All Minor Problems and Major Major Problems w/Corrective Action Marginal Does Not Meet Some -Govt Impact Serious; Recovery Possible Marginally Effective; Not Fully Implemented Unsatisfactory Does Not Meet Most Serious; Recovery Not likely Multiple Significant Problems; Ineffective ?’s Definitions are in the CPARS Policy Guide at www.cpars.gov

Award Fee Contracts Current JSC Policy: Evaluation factors shall be rated in accordance with a five scale rating system. Rating definitions shall reflect those contained in the CPARS Policy Guide When contract provides for award fee, the award fee contract performance adjectival rating shall be entered into CPARS. FAR 42.1503 (Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 158) FAR Case 2009-042

Contractor Process System Requirements 7 Days to Request Meeting to Discuss CPAR 30 Days to Respond System Generated Weekly Email Notifications Review Admin Info (Blocks 1-17) , Ratings and Narratives Provide Clear and Concise Responses (Block 22) 24,000 Character Limit (approximately 4.5 pages) Provide Concurrence / Non-Concurrence, Name & Title (Block 23) Send to Assessing Official

Contractor Guidance Protect the CPAR Handle as “Proprietary Information” Prohibited Use of CPARS/PPIRS Information Advertising Promotional Material Pre-Award Surveys Production Readiness Reviews Contractors are Advised to Acknowledge Receipt Comment Respond Within 30 Days

Contractor Guidance Workflow Note If the Contractor fails to respond to the CPAR within 30 days, the Contracting Officer has the option to pull back the CPAR and continue the process by sending it to the Reviewing Official.

Thank You!!! JSC CPARS Focal Point http://www.cpars.gov/ Leigh Allen (d.l.allen@nasa.gov) http://www.cpars.gov/ http://procurement.jsc.nasa.gov/ Do you have any questions?