Click on the links below to go to that
respective site, or just scroll down to find the information you are seeking.
Ames Laboratory This
Appendix B sets forth the process to be used in the evaluation of Ames Laboratory (Ames)
performance as required by Article 6 of the contract. The process described in this
Appendix utilizes, to the extent possible, a set of "objectives,"
"measures," and "expectations" against which Ames Laboratory's
performance will be assessed for each area identified herein.
Brookhaven National Laboratory
This Contract Appendix contains Brookhaven National
Laboratory's FY1999 Critical Outcomes, Objectives and Performance Measures. It sets forth
the performance evaluation system (including processes, criteria, schedules, and measures)
that will be used to evaluate the overall performance of Brookhaven Science Associates
(BSA) in the management and operation of Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) in FY99, as
required by Articles 6, 7, and 12A of the Contract.
Partnering Agreement This agreement, between the U.S. Department of
Energy's Brookhaven Group (BHG) and Brookhaven Science Associates for Brookhaven National
Laboratory, was signed in May 1998. Accompanying the agreement when it was distributed to
BNLers on June 24 was a memo signed by BNL Director John Marburger.
DynMcDermott Petroleum Operations These seventeen attachments (in PDF format) contain DynMcDermott
Petroleum Operations' Technical Support and Management Performance Criteria, Performance
Measures, and FY99 Outputs (Minimum and Target) for each specific area. [NOTE: Disregard
page numbering on the files with an asterisk (*) placed next
Thomas Jefferson National
Accelerator Facility (214kb PDF) This
appendix sets forth the basis upon which an evaluation of the performance of the Thomas
Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (otherwise known as "Jefferson Lab;"
formerly CEBAF) will be conducted. The evaluation procedure utilizes a set of "key
indicators" which will broadly measure the laboratory's performance in seven critical
areas. Associated with most "key indicators" (both peer reviews and performance
metrics) is a set of "secondary indicators" which will measure the laboratory's
performance in a more detailed way and extend the validity of each respective "key
of California/DOE Contracts These pages are the
official UC/DOE Contracts maintained by the University of California's Office of the
President, Laboratory Administration Office.
The University administers three DOE laboratories: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and Los Alamos National Laboratory. Each of these
laboratories' Appendix F, "Objective Standards of Performance," is linked below.
These appendices contain the performance objectives, criteria, and measures (POCMs) which
are the components of the performance-based management system that the University and DOE
will utilize for Laboratory oversight as described in Clause 2.6, Performance-Based
Management. The POCMs will be clear and reasonable objective standards against which the
University's overall compliance with obligations under this contract will be assessed.
Pacific Northwest National
Year 1999 represents the third full year utilizing a results-oriented,
performance-based evaluation for the Contractors operations and management of the
DOE Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (here after referred to as the Laboratory).
However, this is the first year that the Contractors fee is totally
performance-based utilizing the same Critical Outcomes. This document describes the
critical outcomes, objectives, performance indicators, expected levels of performance, and
the basis for the evaluation of the Contractors performance for the period October
1, 1998 through September 30, 1999, as required by Clauses entitled Use of Objective
Standards of Performance, Self Assessment and Performance Evaluation and
Performance Measures Review of the Contract DE-AC06-76RL01830. Furthermore, it
documents the distribution of the total available performance-based fee and the
methodology set for determining the amount of fee earned by the Contractor as stipulated
within the clauses entitled Estimated Cost and Annual Fee, Total
Available Fee and Allowable Costs and Fee. In partnership with the
Contractor and other key customers, the Department of Energy (DOE) Headquarters (HQ) and
Richland Operations Office (RL) has defined four critical outcomes that serve as the core
for the Contractors performance-based evaluation and fee determination. The
Contractor also utilizes these outcomes as a basis for overall management of the
- FY 99
Performance Measures (3.87mb PDF) This Appendix B sets forth the performance
measures and criteria on which an evaluation of the Laboratory's performance will be
principally measured, and the process for their alteration. The performance measures
contained in this Appendix B, along with the results of a self-assessment program, will
form a set of indicators that will track, measure, and assess the Laboratory's performance
in several critical areas.
Other Related Information (Also
see Performance-Based Contracts
in our Links section.)
Administration - Best Practices Guide This U.S. Army site addresses:
(1) clarifying the Contracting Officers Technical Representatives (COTR's)
roles and responsibilities; (2) improving methods of processing contract vouchers and
invoices; and (3) improving procedures for closing contracts.
- Contracting For Best
Value: A Best Practices Guide to Source Selection This U.S. Army Material
Command (AMC) Pamphlet 715-3 guide provides techniques and practices for obtaining best
value products and services through source selection. Consistent with the spirit of
acquisition reform, it introduces new and innovative techniques to simplify the source
selection process and produce better value. Its purpose is to provide you with a practical
reference tool that will help you implement a new way of doing business that promotes
flexibility, streamlining, and simplified procedures. This guide is designed for use by
the entire acquisition workforce to promote a consistent understanding of best value and
the various processes and techniques that can be used to achieve it. It explains best
practices for planning your source selection, teaming, exchanging information with
industry, and conducting efficient and effective source selections.
- Department of Energy:
Lessons Learned Incorporated Into Performance-Based Incentive Contracts [GAO
RCED-98-223, July 29, 1998 (12 pages)]. As part of its efforts to reform its management of
contract operations, the Energy Department (DOE) in 1994 began using performance-based
incentives in contracts for managing and operating its facilities. These incentives are
intended to better link contractors' fees to the satisfactory accomplishment of specific
tasks. However, DOE's Office of Inspector General has identified problems with the
Department's implementation of performance-based contracting at several facilities. In
addition, DOE's October 1997 departmentwide assessment of performance-based incentives in
contracting identified other problems and recommended corrective actions. The assessment
also cited examples of the successful use of performance-based incentives. This report
reviews performance-based incentives at DOE's Hanford, Idaho Falls, Rocky Flats, and
Savannah River sites to determine (1) the extent to which DOE has incorporated lessons
learned in developing its fiscal year 1998 performance-based incentives, (2) whether these
incentives incorporate the baseline measures in DOE's 10-year plan for environmental
cleanup and how the fees are allocated to the incentives; and (3) how DOE evaluates
completed incentive measures and determines their effectiveness.
- Contract Reform Self Assessment
Report September, 1997 (350k PDF file) The primary objective of this self
assessment is to report on on the Department of Energy's progress in implementing the
Contract Reform Initiative launched in February 1994 and to discuss remaining challenges.
Reform Features in Solicitations/Contracts The Contract Reform Initiative has
spawned a number of new and innovative features in recent contract actions, including
competitive solicitations. The following is a compilation of such features. Some of these
may be site-specific; others may provide a model for future actions. It is our intention
to update the list from time to time.
of Contract Reform Initiative Contract Reform is fundamentally changing the
way the Department does business. The culture of the Department is increasingly
characterized by receptivity and responsiveness to new ideas, new partners, and new
contracting approaches and structures. Numerous initiatives are underway to replace
outmoded and burdensome practices.
Laboratories: DOE Needs to Assess the Impact of Using Performance-Based Contracts
(United States General Accounting Office Report to the Committee on Science, House of
Representatives; GAO/RCED-99-141; May, 1999) From the report: "DOE's use of
performance-based contracting for its laboratories is in a state of transition. While all
laboratory contracts we examined had some performance-based features, we found wide
variance in the number of performance measures and the types of fees negotiated."