(a) Determinations.
(1)(90) If a contractor's quality deficiencies are of a critical/repetitive nature and the contractor has not taken corrective action, this information may be used as a basis for a nonresponsibility determination. Contractor quality performance deficiencies can include product quality deficiencies, discrepancies due to inadequate packaging, improper or missing documentation, overages, shortages, misdirected or damaged shipments, and/or other similar discrepancies.
(91) If it is determined that award will be made to a contractor that has a questionable quality history but cannot be determined non-responsible, the Acquisition Specialist (preaward) shall-
(A) Document the contract file;
(B) Revise Inspection and Acceptance (I&A) terms to specify that I&A shall take place at source; and
(C) Forward a referral to the Product Specialist in accordance with on-site procedures, requesting a Quality Assurance Letter of Instruction (QALI). The Product Specialist shall submit the QALI to the activity responsible for Government quality assurance.
(92) Adverse performance history shall always be well documented.
(93) Awards proposed to vendors who are designated DCMA Corrective Action Request Level IV, (DCRL Code 12), or offering the product of a Level IV firm, require higher level review and approval in accordance with on-site procedures.
(94) Use working knowledge of the contractor’s performance, and coordinate with Acquisition Specialist (post award) and the Product Specialist, as necessary.
(b) Support documentation.
(90) Determinations of responsibility or nonresponsibility shall be documented and included in the Electronic Contract File (ECF). Refer to on-site procedures for documentation and content requirements. For simplified acquisitions, an annotation on Form 395, Significant Events, in DPACS, or comparable record, is generally sufficient to document the Acquisition Specialist’s actions under 9.105(a)(1) and (2).
(91) Distinguishing responsibility determination from past performance evaluation factor. Acquisition Specialists (preaward) SHALL NOT make a determination of responsibility based on past performance information that applies to evaluation of the contractor’s offer (e.g., an Automated Best Value System (ABVS) score).
(i) Past performance information (e.g., an ABVS score supported by substantiating backup documentation) can be used for evaluation purposes, if a past performance evaluation factor is included in the solicitation. The evaluation process involves a comparative assessment of offers to determine which offer represents the best value - based on price, past performance, and other evaluation factors stated in the solicitation. Acquisition Specialists (preaward) must, however, determine that a prospective contractor is responsible. If a contractor cannot be determined responsible, it is ineligible for award whether or not its offer appears to represent the best value.
(ii) To determine that a contractor is responsible, Acquisition Specialists (preaward) must determine that the contractor meets all the standards in FAR 9.104 (i.e., has adequate financial resources (or ability to obtain them); has ability to satisfy delivery requirements; has a satisfactory performance record; has a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics; has the necessary organization, experience, internal controls, and technical skills; and is otherwise qualified/eligible for award). The DCRL is an essential resource for determining responsibility; because it not only includes past performance data - some or all of which may have gone into the calculation of the ABVS score - but it also captures data that is not included in ABVS (e.g., financial difficulties, suspected product substitution, etc.). Consequently, a contractor may have favorable ABVS scores but could be included on the DCRL for reasons that will preclude a determination of responsibility.
(93) If a preaward survey is not obtained on a proposed award exceeding $100,000, the contracting officer shall include in the contract file a memorandum explaining the basis for the determination of responsibility, addressing each of the applicable standards in FAR 9.104. When the contracting officer makes a determination regarding the prospective contractor's responsibility that is contrary to that recommended in the preaward survey report, the reason for not following the preaward survey report recommendation shall be included in the contract file. In each instance where the preaward survey report recommendation is not followed, the case must be reviewed and concurred in by the chief of the contracting office and at DSCP by the Commodity Business Unit Chiefs. The contracting officer shall provide written notice to the surveying activity that performed the preaward survey of the reason for not following the preaward survey recommendation.
