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

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

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

4. 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)

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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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 (Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 158)
FAR Case

10. Contractor Process System Requirements
7 Days to Request Meeting to Discuss CPAR
30 Days to Respond
System Generated Weekly 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

11. 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

12. 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.

13. Thank You!!! JSC CPARS Focal Point http://www.cpars.gov/
Leigh Allen
Do you have any questions?