Recent and Relevant Experience: Click here to enter RREP task #

For this CPR, were you the Prime or the Subcontractor? Prime

If you were the Prime, please provide the total awarded value. 1,200,000.00

If you were the Subcontractor, please provide the total value of your portion of the total effort. N/A CPR Contract Name: Census Bureau Emergency Medical Mobile Application SBIR Phase III CPR Contract Number: 133LC21P00000119

CPR Contract Scope: To introduce Artificial Intelligence (AI), Blockchain/DLT, Robotic Process Automation (RPA), Data Analytics, and Digital Transformation services to support Census with modernizing legacy IT systems and processes and transforming the agency by automating critical business practices.

CPR Contract Type: FFP

CPR Point of Contact Name: Marcus A. Barber CPR Point of Contact Telephone:

CPR Point of Contact E-Mail Address:

Rating Definitions (FAR 42.1503 Table 42.1)

Rating

Definition

Note

(a) Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Customer’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective.

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(b) Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Customer’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the government.

There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(c) Satisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without significant impact to the contract/order. There must have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning rating is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order

(d) Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

Technical

Exceptional

Cost Control

Exceptional

Schedule

Very good

Management

Exceptional

OVERALL RATING

Exceptional