SUBJECT: Interim Policy Letter (IPL) 96-014, AFMCI 64-107, Contractor 26 Apr 96

Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)

1. Attachment 1 is the final edition of AFMCI 64-107, CPARS, for implementation at your center. This instruction, based on the 16 Jun 94 version, incorporates not only changes requested by the Principal Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, Mrs. Darleen Druyun, but also your comments made in response to HQ AFMC/PK's 5 Feb 96 letter, Review of Proposed Draft AFMCI 64-107, CPARS. Attachment 3, Comment Resolution Summary, addresses the actions taken in response to your comments.

2. This final edition accomplishes a number of tasks. First, it satisfies Lightning Bolt #6 by implementing a revised form (Attachment 2) for the collection of past performance information on system contracts over $5M. Second, the requirement for the collection of contract performance information on service contracts has been deleted; the requirement for past performance information on service contracts and all other contract categories will be levied at the Air Force level. Third, the retention period for CPARs is now three years from contract completion. CPAR focal points at centers with master libraries will retain CPARs for three years after the completion date shown on the final CPAR. Fourth, contractor officials will be offered not only access to their CPARs but also a copy of their completed reports.

3. My staff and I are available to assist you as necessary. My action officer for this effort is Ed Hiehle, HQ AFMC/PKPB, DSN 787-4788, FAX-DSN 986-2436, or



Deputy Director of Contracting


1. AFMCI 64-107, CPARS

2. AFMC Form 38A

3. Comment Resolution Summary



PKA Mr. Ross

PKD Mr. Kennedy

PKL Mr. Hill

PKO Mr. Furry

PKP Col Avon

PKT Lt Col Borchardt

PKS Mr. Bird

PKX Col Mastin


AFMC CO/PK Lt Col Beckman

100 Kindel Dr, Ste A335

Arnold AFB TN 37389-1335


6038 Aspen Ave

Hill AFB UT 84056


205 WD Ave, Ste 433

Eglin AFB FL 32542-6864


3651 Lowry Ave SE, Rm 222

Kirtland AFB NM 87117-5777


5 S. Wolfe Ave

Edwards AFB CA 93524-1185


26 Electronics Pkwy BLDG 106

Griffiss AFB NY 13441-4514


110 Duncan Ave, Ste 100

Bolling AFB DC 20332-0001


143 Billy Mitchell Rd

Kelly AFB TX 78241-6014


813 Irving-Wick Dr/W

Newark AFB OH 43057-0027


3237 Peacekeeper Way, Ste 17

McClellan AFB CA 95652-1060


1865 Fourth Street, Suite 6

Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7120


155 Discoverer Blvd, Ste 1516 Bldg 110

Los Angeles AFB CA 90245-4692


205 West D Ave, Ste 433

Eglin AFB FL 32542-5000


375 Libby St., gunter annex

Maxwell AFB AL 36114-3297


Bldg 1606, Rm 220

Hanscom AFB MA 01731-5000


2530 C Street

Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7607


8005 9th St

Brooks AFB TX 78235-5353


215 Byron St

Robins AFB GA 31098-1611


3001 Staff Dr, Ste 1AG76A

Tinker AFB OK 73145-3015

Det 2, SMC/PK

1080 Lockheed Way, Box 043

Sunnyvale CA 94089-1235





Det 2, SMC/PK






This instruction implements AFPD 64-1, The Contracting System. It sets policy, assigns responsibilities, and provides procedures for systematically assessing contractor performance on current systems acquisitions greater than $5M. General information applicable to these contract efforts is referred to as the Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR or CPARs) or the CPAR System (CPARS). Specific information regarding systems assessments greater than $5M is annotated as "CPAR-Systems".


This revision implements an enhanced CPARS form, deletes all references to Service-CPARS, changes the retention period to three years after the completion date of the final CPARs, and makes several administrative changes.

Section A--Air Force Materiel Command Policy

1. Purpose:

1.1 The sole purpose of the CPARS is to ensure a command-wide data base of contractor performance information is current and available for use in responsibility determinations and in formal and informal source selections. Performance assessments will be used as an aid in awarding contracts to contractors that consistently produce quality, on-time products and conform to contractual requirements. The CPAR can be used to effectively communicate contractor past performance experiences to source selection officials. The CPAR will not be used for any purpose other than as stated in this paragraph; however, summary data may be used as outlined in paragraph 1.6.

1.2 The CPARS assesses a contractor's performance, both positive and negative, on a given contract during a specific period of time. Each assessment must be based on objective facts and be supportable by program and contract management data, such as cost performance reports, customer complaints, quality reviews, technical interchange meetings, financial solvency assessments, production management reviews, contractor operations reviews, functional performance evaluations, and earned contract incentives. Subjective assessments concerning the cause or implications of the contractor's performance should be provided; however, speculation or conjecture should not be included.

1.3 The value of a CPAR to a future source selection team is inextricably linked to the care the program manager takes in preparing a quality narrative to accompany the ratings. It is of the utmost importance that the program manager make a dedicated effort to thoroughly describe the circumstances surrounding a rating.

1.4. The CPAR process is designed with a series of checks and balances to facilitate the objective and consistent evaluation of contractor performance. Both government and contractor program management perspectives are captured on the form. The assessment is reviewed by a level of management above the program manager (see paragraph 4.4) to ensure consistency with other evaluations throughout the activity as well as other program assessments. CPARs are not subject to the "Disputes" clause, nor are they subject to appeal beyond the procedures described in this instruction.

1.5. The nature of the effort to be acquired will determine whether a CPAR-Systems is required. (See paragraph 2.1). If a given contract contains a mixture of types of efforts, the acquisition activity will determine if the CPAR-Systems is appropriate based upon the preponderance of the contract dollar value.

1.6. While the CPAR will not be used for any other purpose than stated in paragraph 1.1., summary data from the CPARS data base or from the reports themselves may be used to measure the status of industry performance, and support continuous process improvement, provided that the data used does not reveal individual contract or contractor performance in any form, and subject to the limitations of paragraph 3.4.

2. Applicability and Scope:

2.1 CPAR-Systems.

2.1.1. The Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR)-Systems, AFMC Form 38A, must be completed on every contractual effort for systems. For the purposes of this instruction a "systems" contract is defined as a contractual effort for concept demonstration and validation, Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD), production and deployment, modifications, and programmed depot maintenance with a total estimated value, including options, greater than $5M. (A CPAR-Systems may be completed on a research and development project at the Laboratory Commander's discretion, if the project is valued over $5M and is funded with 6.4 funds. When this occurs, the program office will notify the contractor prior to contract award.)

2.1.2. Laboratory (science and technology) efforts funded by 6.1 (Basic Research), 6.2 (Exploratory Development), 6.3 (Advanced Technology Development), or 7.8 (Manufacturing Technology) funds, replenishment spare parts contracts, base operating support contracts, and service contracts for operation and maintenance efforts are not included in the scope of this instruction.

2.1.3. When a single contract instrument requires segregation of costs for combining EMD and production efforts or containing multiple production lots, an individual CPAR may be completed for each segment of work. In the case of a time and material contract and a basic ordering agreement, a CPAR will be accomplished on the individual order that meets the threshold described above. In the case of an indefinite delivery contract as defined in FAR Subpart 16.5, a CPAR will be accomplished on the individual order that meets the threshold described above. When the type of effort and the contractor's performance on each order are so similar as to reflect identical results, the program manager in consultation with the CPAR focal point may elect to prepare a single CPAR for a group of orders, each of which meets the threshold. Block 13 should state that CPARs are not being prepared on individual orders.

2.1.4. For those contracts at product centers where a provisioning line is established, an assessment should include an assessment of that effort in the "Other Areas" (AFMC Form 38A, block 14.j).

2.2. CPARs will be prepared on any contract meeting the above requirements when the overall program/effort is managed by AFMC.

2.3. CPARs will be prepared on contracts for joint ventures that meet the thresholds above. Joint con-tractors will be rated on the same report and duplicate copies will be maintained in each contractor's file in the CPAR library.

2.4. CPARs on classified contracts will be processed in accordance with program security requirements. Copies of classified CPARs will be provided to


2.5. CPARs will be accomplished on the applicable 1st tier subcontractor on contracts awarded to the Small Business Administration under the 8(a) program.

Section B--Responsibilities Assigned

3. HQ AFMC Responsibilities:

3.1. The Director of Contracting (HQ AFMC/PK), in coordination with the Director of Requirements (HQ AFMC/DR) is responsible for managing the CPARS and maintaining the currency of this instruction.

3.2. HQ AFMC/PK will establish a headquarters CPAR focal point that is responsible for maintaining one of the five master CPAR libraries, a data base, and indicators. The HQ CPAR focal point will provide training and/or field assistance for activity focal points that will maintain a current CPAR data base listing and will periodically provide a copy to each field activity. The HQ CPAR focal point is responsible for responding to requests for CPAR data to support source selections in other government agencies and will process all requests for CPAR data under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in accordance with paragraph

3.3. HQ AFMC/PKP is responsible for determining what data will be collected from the individual reports for inclusion in the CPARS data base, and controlling access to and use of the data base. Access to the data base will be permitted only when the purpose is consistent with paragraph 1.6.

3.4. HQ AFMC/PKP will analyze the data base and publish the results of that analysis for use by government and industry. The analysis will include mean performance by element charts, color rating trend charts, and reasons analysis by element charts. The form of this package may vary over time, but will always be consistent with paragraph 1.6. Further analyses of data from the CPARS data base may be accomplished by the center CPAR focal point for internal government use, but is expressly not authorized for release outside the government.

4. Field Activity Responsibilities. The commander or vice commander of each field activity will:

4.1. Implement this instruction by assuring training requirements are satisfied for focal points in the program offices and reviewing officials, and by establishing processes to monitor the integrity (i.e., quality) and timely completion of reports.

4.2. Establish a CPAR Focal Point. The activity focal point is responsible for the collection, distribution, and control of CPARs. This CPAR focal point (Atch 3) will assist the program manager (PM) in implementing this instruction by providing training and other administrative assistance to ensure that reports are timely and in compliance with this instruction.

4.2.1. The following activity focal points will maintain a master CPAR library (Atch 2) for use in source selections: Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC), Air Force Development Test Center (AFDTC), Electronic Systems Center (ESC), and Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC). The focal points of activities that do not maintain a CPAR library will support local source selections by requesting "relevant" CPAR data from HQ AFMC/PKP or a geographically more convenient master library.

4.3. Ensure timely completion of reports by PMs. The PM is responsible for assessing contractor performance in accordance with this instruction. In the context of this instruction, the PM is the single manager, systems support manager or development systems manager that has overall responsibility for acquisition of a system.

4.4. Ensure timely review of CPARs by reviewing officials. The reviewing official provides the check-and-balance needed to ensure report integrity, especially when there are significant disconnects between the PM and the contractor. (See paragraph 6.8).

Section C--CPAR Procedures

5. Frequency of Reporting:

5.1. Initial Reports. An initial CPAR is required for new contracts meeting the criteria of paragraph 2. The initial CPAR must reflect evaluation of at least the first 180 days of performance under the contract, and may include up to the first 365 days of performance.

5.2. Intermediate Reports. Intermediate CPARs are required every 12 months throughout the entire period of performance of the contract. An intermediate CPAR is limited to contractor performance occurring after the preceding CPAR. To improve efficiency in preparing the CPAR, it is recommended that the CPAR be completed together with other reviews (e.g., award fee determinations, major program events, or program milestones). Activities may, through local processes, establish a specific submittal date for all intermediate CPARs, provided they are completed for every 12 month evaluation period.

5.3. Out-of-Cycle Reports:

5.3.1. An out-of-cycle report may be required when there is a significant change in performance that alters the assessment in one or more evaluation area. When a significant change in performance has occurred, the contractor may request an updated report or the PM may unilaterally change the assessment and process a revised report. The determination as to whether or not to update a CPAR will be made solely by the PM. An updated report will only address the changed elements.

5.3.2. Prior to a PM leaving the program office (or prior to a contract being transferred between Centers), the PM will complete an AFMC Form 38A if at least four months have elapsed since the last CPAR was completed. This updated form need not be processed through the contractor and CPAR reviewing official; rather, it should be passed to the succeeding PM for background information for completing the next CPAR.

5.3.3. Generally, no more than two CPARs per year should be completed on a contract. Out-of-cycle reports do not alter the annual reporting requirement; for example, if the normal CPAR period of performance ends on 1 November and an out-of-cycle report is accomplished which covers a performance period that ends 6 months earlier (1 May), a second CPAR report is still required to cover the period of performance from 1 May-1 November of that same year and each

1 November throughout the life of the contract.

5.4. Final Report: A final CPAR will be completed upon contract termination, transfer of program man-agement responsibility outside of AFMC, or the delivery of the final major end item on contract or completion of the period of performance. The final CPAR does not include cumulative information, but is limited to the period of contractor performance occurring after the preceding CPAR.

6. Preparing and Processing Reports:

6.1. The PM responsible for the overall program is also responsible for preparing, reviewing, signing, and processing the CPAR. (See attachment 1 for instructions on preparing reports). The command goal for processing a CPAR is 120 days. CPARs should be completed and signed by the reviewing official not later than 120 days after the end of the evaluation period.

6.2. Completion of CPAR:

6.2.1. CPAR-Systems. The PM responsible for the contract being reviewed prepares the documentation and assessment in coordination with the project team. This assessment should be based on multi-functional input from specialists familiar with the contractor's performance (Attachment 1, paragraph A1.15.1). The PM should request input from the applicable ALC as part of the multi-functional input referenced above. The system program director should ensure user input is provided via the program office integrated product team.

6.2.2. Manpower support contractors may provide factual input as project team members, however, under no circumstances should they be allowed to write CPARs or have access to completed CPARs. To prevent possible conflict of interest issues, use of manpower support contractors should be very rare or limited in scope.

6.3. PM narrative remarks are limited to block 16 plus two additional 8-1/2 by 11 inch typewritten pages. In rare circumstances, such as an assessment containing several blue or red ratings, a third typewritten page may be added. Under no circumstances will more than three additional pages be permitted. Also, the contractor is allowed the same amount of additional space for comments. All additional pages are considered part of the CPAR itself. (See paragraph

6.4. Contractor organizations will be given an opportunity to review and comment on the assessment. Since communication and feedback regarding contractor performance are always encouraged, the PM may consider allowing a pre-assessment briefing by the contractor to discuss the contractor's performance during the evaluation period. These pre-assessment discussions must be structured around firm contract requirements and events which are deemed to be critical during the upcoming reporting period. PMs are strongly encouraged to conduct face-to-face meetings with the contractor during the assessment process. Participation by representatives from the Contracting Office is strongly encouraged for all meetings.

6.5. The CPAR review and approval process is as follows:

6.5.1. The PM will sign and retain a copy of the CPAR and transmit the original to his or her counterpart within the contractor's organization. Local processes may require review by the activity CPAR focal point and/or reviewing official prior to sending the CPAR to the contractor. The preferred method of transmitting a report is by hand delivery (with receipt), in conjunction with face-to-face discussions. Certified mail or other methods of ensuring receipt are also acceptable. Meetings with contractor management to discuss CPAR ratings are strongly recommended and may be pre-arranged by the Government or at the request of the contractor. (See paragraph Regardless of the method of transmittal, a transmittal letter must accompany the CPAR.

6.5.2. The transmittal letter, which may be signed by the PM, will provide the following instructions to the contractor. (Local processes will describe the level of review and transmittal): The CPAR is "source selection information" and must be protected as such. After review, transmit the CPAR back to the originating office marked and handled as "source selection information". Request return of the CPAR by certified mail or some other controlled method. Strictly control access to the CPAR while in the contractor's organization. Ensure the CPAR is never released to persons or entities outside the contractor's control. Prohibit the use of or reference to CPAR data for advertising, promotional material, preaward surveys, proposal submittals, production readiness reviews, or other similar purposes. Advise the contractor that comments are optional but are due to the originating office within 30 calendar days after receipt. The contractor may provide comments in response to the assessment, or sign and return the assessment without comment. If the contractor elects not to provide comments, he or she should acknowledge receipt of the CPAR by signing/dating block 19 of the form and return the CPAR to the originating office. Comments should be focused on the objective portion of the PMs narrative and provide views on causes and implications of the assessed performance. Contractor comments are subject to the same limitations in paragraph 6.3. This page limit will be strictly enforced and extra pages will not be reviewed or included with the CPAR. Label all additional pages with the contractor's name, contract number, period covered by report, and page number. Advise that if the contractor desires a meeting to discuss the CPAR, it must be requested, in writing, no later than 7 days from the receipt of the CPAR. This meeting will be held during the contractor's 30 day review period. Advise that a copy of the completed CPAR (that is, a CPAR flowing through all of the process steps including signature by the reviewing official) may be requested at the time the CPAR is returned to the PM by noting the name, title, and complete address of the chief executive officer (CEO), the chief operating officer (COO), or president of the corporate entity responsible for the operating unit for which the CPAR was executed. (See paragraph 6.9). No other distribution will be made by the Government to any other contractor representative or contractor entity.

6.5.3. If the contractor does not return the CPAR within the allotted 30 days, block 18 of a retained copy will be annotated, "The report was delivered/received by the contractor on [date]. The contractor neither signed nor offered comment in response to this assessment." The program office will continue processing the CPAR.

6.5.4. After receiving and reviewing the contractor's comments on the CPAR, the PM may revise the assessment, including the narrative. Revised assess-ments must be recorded on a new CPAR for the same period covering the original report. The original CPAR form will be attached to the new CPAR form. The PM will notify the contractor of any revisions made to a report as a result of the contractor's comments. Such a revised report will not be sent to the contractor for further comment or re-signature. If the contractor has requested a copy of the completed CPAR (see paragraph, a copy will be provided after the Reviewing Official signs the form. Further, contractors have the option to review their final CPARs after they enter the CPAR library. A copy may be obtained according to paragraph 6.9. Revised CPARs should be noted "Revision to CPAR for period (insert period covered by report)," followed by the program title and phase of acquisition. Indicate revised or affected ratings in block 14 or 15 and explain the changes in block 16. The PM will then sign block 17 of the revised CPAR and annotate block 20 of the original CPAR with "See revised CPAR". The reviewing official will sign block 21 of the revised CPAR in accordance with paragraph 6.6, below. The revised CPAR should be stapled on top of the original report.

6.6. After receiving contractor comments or 30 days from the date of contractor receipt of the CPAR, whichever occurs first, the CPAR will be sent to the reviewing official for review and signature according to local processes.

6.6.1. If the PM does not choose to alter the assessment as a result of contractor comments received, the reviewing official will be provided an explanation of that decision (e.g., Staff Summary Sheet).

6.7. To facilitate future CPAR preparation, the program office may retain CPAR copies and working papers associated with CPAR evaluations. However, all retained CPAR copies and working papers must be marked "For Official Use Only/Source Selection Information - See FAR 3.104" and handled accordingly.

6.8. The activity reviewing official must be at least one level above the PM and be a general officer, a member of the senior executive service or the activity commander or vice commander. This individual will be designated by local processes. However, for major programs, the program executive officer (PEO) or the designated acquisition commander (DAC) will be given the option of acting as the reviewing official. The reviewing official's comments in the CPAR will acknowledge consideration and reconciliation, if possible, of any significant discrepancies between the PM assessment and the contractor's comments. When the reviewing official signs the CPAR, it will be considered complete.

6.9. If the contractor has requested a copy of the completed CPAR by providing the name, title and address of the corporation's CEO, COO, or president, then the reviewing official should assure that a copy of the completed CPAR is sent to the contractor with a transmittal letter advising again of the precautions and controls outlined in paragraph through Note that the completed CPAR is source selection information in accordance with FAR 3.104-4(k)(1) in that it is prepared for use by the Government to potentially support a future procurement and that unauthorized disclosure could compromise future procurements. This requires the CEO, COO, or president to protect the information from disclosure to any unauthorized persons in that it is prepared for use by the government to support future procurements utilizing source selection procedures.

6.10. The CPAR, signed by the reviewing official, will be entered into all master CPAR libraries maintained by HQ AFMC/PKP, ASC, AFDTC, ESC, and SMC. The CPAR focal point at activities maintaining a master library will enter reports in accordance with local processes and will distribute copies to the other master libraries. The focal points at other activities will submit their CPARs to HQ AFMC/PKP and copies to the other master libraries. Classified CPARs for Special Access Programs will be distributed only to HQ AFMC/DRJ who will maintain a separate master library. The reporting requirements in this paragraph are exempt from licensing in accordance with paragraph 2.11.5, AFI 37-124, The Information Collections and Reports Management Program; Controlling Internal, Public, and Interagency Air Force Information Collections.

6.11. All records created under this instruction will be retained and disposed of according to AFR 12-50, Vol I, Disposition of Air Force Documentation-Policies, Procedures, and Responsibilities. CPAR data will be mailed in accordance with the requirements for trans-mitting "source selection information" (see AFFARS Appendix AA, as well as, FAR 3.104).

7. CPAR Focal Points:

7.1. Each CPAR focal point with a master library will keep CPARs and all attachments in separate files for each contractor. CPARs for a given contract will be retained for 3 years beyond the end of the period covered by [the] report on the final CPAR.

7.2. Distribution of CPARs within AFMC will only be made from one activity CPAR focal point to another. For a particular source selection, the performance risk analysis group (PRAG) or source selection authority must contact their local CPAR focal point to obtain CPAR data. The CPAR focal point of activities that do not have a master library will request relevant CPARs from a geographically convenient master library.

7.3. HQ AFMC/PKP is the command focal point for processing CPAR requests from government activities outside the command. All such requests received by field activities are to be referred to HQ AFMC/PKP, 4375 Chidlaw Road, Suite 6, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-5006.

7.4. CPAR focal points at each activity will be responsible for tracking and suspensing CPARs as they become due. The focal points will notify the program office at least 90 days prior to the CPAR due date, in accordance with local processes. Notice will be pro-vided; however, this does not relieve the PM of the responsibility for processing reports in a timely manner. Focal points will not be responsible for the contents of the CPAR.

7.5. The CPAR focal point at each activity is responsible for monitoring the status of late reports. Local processes should be established to notify the activity Commander, the PEO, and the DAC of reports more than 30 days overdue and to notify HQ AFMC/PKP of all CPARs that are 60 days or more overdue.

7.6. A list of all AFMC CPAR focal points is in attachment 3.

8. CPAR Markings and Protection:

8.1. The PM is responsible for ensuring that CPARs are appropriately marked and handled. All CPAR forms, attachments and working papers must be marked "FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY/SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - SEE FAR 3.104" according to AFI 37-131, Air Force Freedom of Information Act Program, FAR 3.104, and AFFARS Appendix AA and BB. CPARs have the unique characteristic of always being predecisional in nature. They will always be source selection information because they will be in constant use to support ongoing and future source selections. This predecisional nature of CPARs is a basis for requiring that all CPAR data be protected from disclosure to unauthorized personnel.

8.2. CPARs may also contain information that is proprietary to the contractor. Information contained on the CPAR such as trade secrets, and confidential commercial or financial data, obtained from the contractor in confidence, must also be protected from unauthorized disclosure. Additionally, CPARs may contain valuable government-generated commercial information that will be used in the award of government contracts. Such commercially valuable information must be protected from unauthorized disclosure. Based on the confidential nature of the CPARs, the following guidance applies to protection both internal and external to the government:

8.2.1. Internal Government Protection: CPARs must be treated as source selection information at all times. The flow of CPARs throughout AFMC in support of source selections will be controlled by the CPAR focal points and transmitted only from one CPAR focal point to another. Information contained in the CPAR must be protected in the same manner as information contained in completed source selection files. (See AFFARS Appendices AA and BB). CPAR data will not be used to support pre-award surveys, debarment proceedings or other internal government reviews.

8.2.2. External Government Protection: Due to the sensitive and confidential nature of CPARs, disclosure of CPAR data to contractors other than the contractor which is the subject of the report or other entities outside the government is not authorized. A contractor may be provided a copy of its CPAR after reviewing official signature as discussed in paragraph 6.9. A contractor may also be granted access to its CPARs as maintained in the master CPAR libraries. In this situation, access to review completed CPARs will be granted by the CPAR focal point. Individuals requesting access must have a letter granting disclosure to them, signed by the individual in charge of the operating unit for which the CPAR was executed (i.e., the division or subsidiary identified in block 1 of the CPAR). The CEO is the only other individual who may grant disclosure to corporate personnel to view CPARs. One situation where this may be applicable is when the CEO tasks an individual to review CPARs prepared for several divisions of a corporation. The CPAR access letter, signed by either the CEO or the individual in charge of the operating unit, must be presented to the CPAR focal point. Copies of CPARs are not allowed to be made from the master library or retained by the contractor's representative. This access is needed to ensure the accuracy of changes made to the CPAR after the contractor's initial review. Note: During the source selection process, any past performance data resulting from CPARs that is contradictory, unclear or could lead to a moderate or high risk assessment will result in the need for a clarification request. (See AFMCFARS AA and BB). On those rare occasions when a FOIA request is received for CPAR records, the unit FOIA office must refer the request to 88 CG/IMADF, 2275 D Street, Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7220 for subsequent consideration by HQ AFMC/PKP and


9. Forms Prescribed. AFMC Form 38A.

RICHARD H. ROELLIG, Brigadier General, USAF

Director of Contracting

3 Attachments

1. Instructions for Completing AFMC Form 38A (CPAR-Systems)

2. Master CPAR Libraries

3. CPAR Focal Points


A1.1. All information on the form will be typewritten; no handwritten CPARs will be accepted by the CPAR focal points for inclusion into CPAR libraries. Reduced or condensed print is not acceptable. All authorized additional pages must be annotated at the top with the contractor's name, contract number, period of covered by report, and page number.

A1.2. Block 1 - Name/Address of Contractor. State the name and address of the division or subsidiary of the contractor performing the contract. Identify the parent corporation (no address required). Identify the contractor's commercial and government entity (CAGE) code.

A1.3. Block 2 - Type Report. Indicate whether, in accordance with section C, paragraph 5., the CPAR is an initial, intermediate, or final report. If this is an out-of-cycle report, check "intermediate".

A1.4. Block 3 - Period Covered by Report. State the period of performance covered by the report (dates must be in MM/DD/YY format). In no instance should a period of evaluation include previously reported effort (i.e., CPARs are not cumulative or overlapping). CPAR assessments for "intermediate" reports should only cover a 12 month period of performance; therefore, the report should not reflect a period of performance greater than 12 months. Exceptions to this rule for special circumstances, such as a period of performance that ends one month before contract completion, must be approved by the CPAR focal point. The CPAR focal point has the authority to approve extensions when special circumstances arise.

A1.5. Block 4 - Contract Number. Self-explanatory.

A1.6. Block 5 - Contracting Office. Self-explanatory.

A1.7. Block 6 - Location of Contract Performance. Self-explanatory.

A1.8. Block 7 - Contract Period of Performance. State current contract period of performance including any authorized extensions, such as options that have been exercised (dates must be in MM/DD/YY format).

A1.9. Block 8 - Contract Percent Complete/Delivery Order Status. State the current percent of the contract that is complete. If cost performance reports (CPR) or cost/schedule status reports (C/SSR) data is available, calculate percent complete by dividing cumulative budgeted cost of work performed (BCWP) by contract budget base (CBB) (less management reserve) and multiplying by 100. CBB is the sum or negotiated cost plus estimated cost of authorized undefinitized work. If not indicated elsewhere, include the cutoff date for the CPR or C/SSR used. If CPR or C/SSR data is not available, estimate percent complete by dividing the number of months elapsed by total number of months in contract period of performance and multiplying by 100. For indefinite delivery (ID) contracts, divide the dollars obligated through the end of the reporting period by the dollar value listed in block 9 and multiply by 100.

A1.10. Block 9 - Current Contract Dollar Value (as of report date). State the current face value of contract. For incentive contracts, state the target price or total estimated amount.

A1.11. Block 10 - Basis of Award. Identify the basis of award by placing an "X" in the appropriate box. For "other", explain in Block 13 the nature of the effort (e.g. set-aside)

A1.12. Block 11 - Contract Type. Identify the contract type. For mixed contract types, check the predominate contract type and identify the other contract type in the "mixed" block.

A1.13. Block 12 - Program Title and Phase of Acquisition. Provide a short descriptive narrative of the program. Spell out all abbreviations. Identify overall program phase and production lot (for example, concept development, engineering and manufacturing development, low-rate initial production, or full-rate production (Lot 1)). Identify milestone phases, if applicable.

A1.14. Block 13 - Contract Effort Description. Provide a complete description of the contract effort that identifies key technologies, components, subsystems, and requirements. This section is of critical importance to future performance risk analysis groups (PRAG) and source selection authorities. The description should be detailed enough to assist a future PRAG in determining the relevancy of this program to their source selection. Also, keep in mind that users of this information may not understand program jargon. It is important to address the complexity of the contract effort and the overall technical risk associated with accomplishing the effort. For intermediate CPARs, a brief description of key milestone events that occurred in the review period may be beneficial (e.g., critical design review (CDR), functional configuration audit (FCA)), as well as, major contract modifications during the period. For task/delivery order contracts, state the number of tasks issued during the period, tasks completed during the period, and tasks which remain active. For contracts which include multiple functional disciplines or activities, categories should be designated to: (1) reflect the full scope of the contract, (2) allow grouping similar work efforts within the categories to avoid unnecessary segregation of essentially similar specialties or activities, and (3) avoid combining essentially dissimilar work efforts within the categories. Each category or area should be separately numbered, titled and described within block 13 to facilitate cross-referencing with the evaluation of the contractor's performance within each category in blocks 14 and 15. If necessary, the description within this block may be extended to one additional typewritten page.

A1.15. Block 14 - Evaluation Areas. Evaluate each area based on the following criteria:

A1.15.1. Each area assessment must be based on objective data that will be provided in block 16. Facts to support specific areas of evaluation must be requested from the contracting officer and other government specialists familiar with the contractor's performance on the contract under review. Such specialists may, for example, be from engineering, manufacturing, quality, logistics (including provisioning), contract administration services, maintenance, security, data, etc.

A1.15.2. The amount of risk inherent in the effort should be recognized as a significant factor and taken into account when assessing the contractor's performance. For example, if a contractor meets an extremely tight schedule, a blue (exceptional) may be appropriate, or meeting a tight schedule with few delinquencies, a green (satisfactory) with an upward arrow assessment may be given in recognition of the inherent schedule risk. When a contractor identifies significant technical risk and takes action to abate those risks, the effectiveness of these actions should be included in the narrative supporting the block 14 ratings.

A1.15.3. The CPAR is designed to assess prime contractor performance. However, in those evaluation areas where subcontractor actions have significantly influenced the prime contractor's performance in a negative or positive way, record the subcontractor actions in block 16.

A1.15.4. Many of the evaluation areas in block 14 represent groupings of diverse elements. The program manager should consider each element and use the area rating to highlight significant issues. In addition, the evaluator should clearly focus on the contractor's "results" in determining the overall area rating.

A1.15.5. Evaluate all areas which pertain to the contract under evaluation, unless they are not applicable--"N/A".

A1.15.6. When performance has changed from one period to another such that a change in color results, the narrative in block 16 must address each change.

A1.15.7. Scoring will be in accordance with the definitions described below in Figure A1.1, "Evaluation Colors."

Blue (Exceptional). Indicates performance clearly exceeds contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains few minor problems for which corrective actions appear highly effective.

Green (Satisfactory). Indicates performance clearly meets contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains some minor problems for which the corrective actions appear satisfactory.

Yellow (Marginal). Indicates performance meets contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains a serious problem for which corrective actions have not yet been identified, appear only marginally effective, or have not been fully implemented.

Red (Unsatisfactory). Indicates the contractor is in danger of not being able to satisfy contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The area of evaluation contains serious problems for which the corrective actions appear ineffective.

NOTE 1: Upward or downward arrows may be used to indicate an improving or worsening trend insufficient to change the assessment status.

NOTE 2: N/A means not applicable.

Figure A1.1. Evaluation Colors.

A1.16. Block 14a - Management Responsiveness. Evaluate the adequacy of the contractor's responsiveness to the program needs during the period covered by the report. Address issues such as: the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, and proposal submittals (especially responses to change orders or other undefinitized contractual actions).

A1.17. Block 14b - Schedule Control. Evaluate the contractor's adherence to the contract or task order schedule by evaluating the contractor's efforts during the evaluation period that contribute to or effect that variance. Note that cumulative schedule variance is reflected in block 15. The associated narrative explanation in block 16 should address significance of scheduled events, discuss causes, and evaluate effectiveness of contractor corrective actions. Identify in block 16 the major milestones, deliverable items, or significant data items applicable to the evaluation period which contribute to the schedule assessment. For ID or task order contracts, quantify in block 16, to the extent possible, the percentage of tasks being completed on time, ahead of schedule or behind schedule.

A1.18. Block 14c - Cost Control. Evaluate current cost performance if the contract is greater than 10 percent complete (see block 8 to calculate percent complete). To the best extent possible, cost control should be evaluated regardless of contract type. Cumulative percent variance and government estimate at completion are reflected in block 15. Block 14c is the evaluation of the contractor's cost management efforts "during the evaluation period" that contribute to or effect those figures. The associated narrative in block 16 should explain the causes and contractor-proposed solutions. If CPR or C/SSR data are not available, evaluate contractor cost management. Is the contractor experiencing cost growth or underrun? Provide a short narrative explanation in block 16 of causes and the contractor's proposed solutions. If cost performance cannot be determined, mark this block N/A. For contracts where task or contract sizing is based upon contractor provided person-hour estimates, the relationship of these estimates to ultimate task cost should be assessed. In addition, the extent to which the contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility, through the efficient use of resources in each work effort, should be evaluated.

A1.19. Block 14d - Technical Performance of Product. Evaluate the extent to which the contractor is meeting overall product or system performance in terms of the contract requirements, including but not limited to the statement of work, specifications, contract data requirement lists, and significant special contract clauses. Does the product perform as required?

A1.20. Block 14e - Product Assurance. The primary areas of consideration focus on satisfying the requirements of the functional "ilities": producibility, reliability, maintainability, inspectability, testability, etc. The program manager must be flexible in how contractor success is measured. Examples of possible measures: data from design test/operational testing successes, field reliability and maintainability reports, user complaints and acceptance rates, improved subcontractor and vendor quality, and scrap and rework rates. These quantitative indicators may be useful later, for example, in source selection evaluations, in demonstrating continuous improvement, quality and reliability leadership that reflects progress in total quality management.

A1.20.1. Block 14e(1) - Quality System. Evaluate the overall quality of the deliverables (including reports) in terms of compliance with the requirements of the contract.

A1.20.2. Block 14e(2) - Manufacturing Management. Identify the contractor's performance to control the overall manufacturing process to include material control, shop floor planning and control, statusing and control, factory floor optimization, factory design, and factory performance.

A1.21. Block 14f - Program/Data Management. Evaluate the extent to which the contractor: discharges its responsibility for integration and coordination for all activity needed to execute the contract as documented in the Integrated Master Plan/Schedule; identifies and applies resources required to maintain schedule; assigns responsibility for tasks/actions required by contract; communicates appropriate information to affected program elements in a timely manner. Assess the adequacy of the contractor's mechanism for tracking contract compliance, recording changes to planning documentation and management of cost and schedule control system. Evaluate the contractor's risk management practices, especially the ability to identify risks and formulate and implement risk mitigation plans. Finally, evaluate the contractor's performance relative to management of data collection, recording, and distribution as required by the contract.

A1.22. Block 14g - Procurement/Subcontract Management. Identify the percentage of subcontracting effort and evaluate the prime contractor's effort devoted to managing subcontracts. Consider efforts taken to ensure early identification of subcontract problems and the timely application of corporate resources to preclude subcontract problems from impacting overall prime contractor performance. Identify contractor's ability to provide timely subcontract awards based on best value. Consider contacting the contract administration office for information as to the contractor's performance against the Subcontract Plan.

A1.23. Block 14h - Logistic Support/Sustainment. Evaluate the adequacy of the contractor's performance in accomplishing integrated logistics support (ILS) program tasks (the nine ILS element groupings of maintenance planning, manpower and personnel, supply support, support equipment, technical data, training and support, computer resources support, facilities (packaging, handling, storage, and transportation), and design interface), and the contractor's performance of logistics support analysis activities. When the contract requires technical/engineering data deliverables, the Cataloging and Standardization Center (CASC) comments should be solicited.

A1.24. Block 14i - Engineering. (Note: Engineering is comprised of many elements including systems engineering and software engineering. If system and/or software engineering performance is critical to successfully satisfying the requirement, they should be separately evaluated in block 14i(1) and 14i(2).) Use block 14.i. to evaluate the contractor's overall engineering performance on activities planned for the period covered by report. The evaluation should cover these disciplines: design, manufacturing integration and support, configuration control, documentation, test and evaluation. The evaluation for this block should focus on efforts exclusive of blocks 14i(1) and (2).

A1.24.1. Block 14i(1) - Systems Engineering. Evaluate the contractor's effort to define the system performance parameters and system configuration to satisfy: the requirements, the planning and control of technical program tasks, the quality and adequacy of the engineering support provided throughout all phases of contract execution, the integration of the engineering specialties, management of interfaces, and the management of a totally integrated effort of all engineering concerns to meet cost, technical performance, and schedule objectives. System engineering activities ensure that integration of these engineering concerns is addressed up-front and early in the design/development process. These activities include: producibility engineering, logistics support analysis, survivability, human factors and the "ilities"--reliability, quality, maintainability, availability, inspectability, etc. Although some of these activities will be specifically addressed in other categories above (such as product assurance, and test and evaluation), the focus of the evaluation of systems engineering is on the integration of these specific areas. The scoring of systems engineering needs to remain flexible to allow the evaluator to account for program unique technical concerns and to allow for the changing systems engineering environment as a program moves through the program phases (i.e., Dem/Val, EMD, Production).

A1.24.2. Block 14i(2) - Software Engineering. Evaluate the extent to which the contractor's performance is meeting the software development, modification, or maintenance contract requirements or a government-approved software development plan. Consider the amount and quality of software development resources devoted to support the contract effort. The Software Development Capability Evaluation (SDCE) may be used as a source of information to support this evaluation.

A1.25. Block 14j - Unique Technical Performance/Other Areas. Specify additional evaluation areas that are unique to the contract, or that cannot be captured elsewhere on the form. More than one type of entry may be included, but should be separately labeled. If extra space is needed, use block 16.

A1.25.1. If the contract contains an award fee provision, enter "award fee" in the "Other" block (14j). Use the columns, beginning with the "Past Color" column, to record the award fee percentages earned. Subsequent columns should be used if there was more than one award fee earned during the period covered by the CPAR (as reflected in block 3). For example, if two award fees were earned during the period covered by report and the contractor earned 80% on both, the block 14j entry under "Past Color" would read: "1--80%" and under "Red" the entry would read: "2--80%." In addition, the program manager may translate the award fee earned to color ratings, which could prove more useful for using past performance to assess future performance risk in upcoming source selections. In this instance, the block 14j entry could read: "1--Green" or "1--80%--Green." If award fee information is included in the CPAR, use block 16 to provide a description for each award fee listed in block 14j. Include the scope of the award fee by describing the extent to which it covers the total range of contract performance activities, or is restricted to certain elements of the contract. Also include the dollars awarded at each award point in the block 16 narrative in the same format as that described for block 14j.

A1.25.2. If any other type of contract incentive is included in the contract (excluding contract shareline incentives on fixed price or cost-type contracts), it should be reported in a manner similar to the steps described above for award fee. Enter "Incentive" in block 14j.

A1.25.3. Use block 14j in those instances where the program manager believes strongly, either positively or negatively, regarding an aspect of the contractor's performance, but cannot fit that aspect into any of the other blocks on the form. As an example, this block may be used to address security issues such as; compliance with the National Industrial Security Program Operation Manual (NISPOM, formerly the DoD Industrial Security Manual), program protection planning, or system security engineering management requirements. An assessment of provisioning lines may also be addressed here.

A1.26. Block 15 - Variances (Contract to Date). If CPR or C/SSR data are available, identify: the current percent cost variance to date, the government's estimated completion cost variance (percent), and the cumulative schedule variance (percent). Indicate the cutoff date for the CPR or C/SSR used.

A1.26.1. Compute current cost variance percentage by dividing cumulative cost variance to date (column 11 of the CPR, column 6 of the C/SSR) by BCWP and multiplying by 100.

A1.26.2. Compute completion cost variance percentage by dividing CBB less the government's estimate at completion (EAC) by CBB and multiplying by 100. The calculation is [(CBB - EAC)/CBB] X 100. The CBB must be the current budget base against which the contractor is performing (including formally established over target baselines (OTB)). If an OTB has been established since the last CPAR, a brief description in block 16 of the nature and magnitude of the baseline adjustment must be provided. Subsequent CPARs must evaluate cost performance in terms of the revised baseline and reference the CPAR which described the baseline adjustment. For example, "The contract baseline was formally adjusted on (date); see CPAR for (period covered by report) for an explanation."

A1.26.3. Compute cumulative schedule variance percentage by dividing BCWP less budgeted cost of work scheduled (BCWS) by BCWS and multiplying by 100. The calculation is [(BCWP - BCWS)/BCWS] X 100. If the schedule variance exceeds 15 percent (positive or negative), briefly discuss in block 16 the significance of this variance for the contract effort.

A1.27. Block 16 - Program Director/Manager Narrative. A short, factual narrative statement is required for all assessments regardless of color rating (e.g., even "green" ratings require narrative support). Cross-reference the comments in block 16 to their corresponding evaluation area in block 14 or 15. Each narrative statement in support of the area assessment must contain objective data. An exceptional cost performance assessment could, for example, cite the current underrun dollar value and estimate at completion. A marginal engineering design/support assessment could, for example, be supported by information concerning personnel changes. Key engineers familiar with the effort may have been replaced by less experienced engineers. Sources of data include operational test and evaluation results; technical interchange meetings; production readiness reviews; earned contract incentives; or award fee evaluations.

A1.27.1. The final entry in this block will be a statement by the evaluator in the following form: "Given what I know today about the contractor's ability to execute what he promised in his proposal, I (definitely would not, probably would not, might or might not, probably would or definitely would) award to him today given that I had a choice". Block 16 comments may be extended to two additional typewritten page (also, see section C, paragraph 6.3.). All additional pages added to the report to continue block 16, 18, or 21 will contain the following at the top of each page: "SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - SEE FAR 3.104". Further, each additional page will be annoted on the top with the contractor's name, contract number, period of performance, and page number.

A1.28. Block 17 - Program Director/Manager Signature. The program director/manager "signs and dates" the form prior to forwarding it to the contractor for review. (See section C, paragraph 6.5. for guidance on sending the CPAR to the contractor for review and comment.)

A1.29. Block 18 - Contractor Comments. Optional.

A1.30. Block 19 - Contractor Representative Signature. Self-explanatory.

A1.31. Block 20 - Reviewing Official Comments. The reviewing official must acknowledge consideration of any significant discrepancies between the PM assessment and the contractor's comments.

A1.32. Block 21 - Reviewing Official Signature. Self-explanatory. (See section C, paragraph 6.8. for guidance as to who may act as the reviewing official.)



Unclassified Reports:


4375 Chidlaw Road, Suite 6

Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-5006

DSN 787-2717, Commercial (513) 257-2717

Classified Reports:


Attn: Contracts Policy

4170 Hebble Creek Road, Suite 1

Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-5644

DSN 787-5538, Commercial (513) 257-5538



2335 Seventh Street, Suite 2

Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7805

DSN 785-5912, Ext. 202; Commercial (513) 255-5912, Ext.202



205 West "D" Ave, Suite 433

Eglin AFB FL 32542-6864

DSN 872-3192, Commercial (904) 882-3192,



3 Kirtland Street

Hanscom AFB MA 01731-2309

DSN 478-5852, Commercial (617) 377-5852



155 Discoverer Boulevard, Suite 2506

Los Angeles AFB CA 90245-4692

DSN 833-3210, Commercial (310) 363-3210



Unclassified Reports:


4375 Chidlaw Road, Suite 6

Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-5006

DSN 787-2717, Commercial (513) 257-2717

Classified Reports:


Attn: Contracts Policy

4170 Hebble Creek Road, Suite 1

Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-5644

DSN 787-5538, Commercial (513) 257-5538




2335 Seventh Street, Suite 2

Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7805

DSN 785-5912, Ext. 202; Commercial (513) 255-5912, Ext. 202



3 Kirtland Street

Hanscom AFB MA 01731-2309

DSN 478-5852, Commercial (617) 377-5852



8107 13th Street

Brooks AFB TX 78235-5218

DSN 240-6336, Commercial (210) 536-6336



155 Discoverer Boulevard, Suite 2506

Los Angeles AFB CA 90245-4692

DSN 833-3210, Commercial (310) 363-3210




3001 Staff Drive, Suite 2AJ80A

Tinker AFB OK 73145-3015

DSN 339-5804, Commercial (405) 739-5804



6038 Aspen Avenue

Hill AFB UT 84056-5805

DSN 458-5486, Commercial (801) 777-5486



485 Quentin Roosevelt Road, Suite 12

Kelly AFB TX 78241-6420

DSN 945-7761, Commercial (210) 925-7761



3237 Peacekeeper Way, Suite 17

McClellan AFB CA 95652-1060

DSN 633-3726, Commercial (916) 643-3726



235 Byron Street

Robins AFB GA 31098-1611

DSN 468-2575, Commercial (912) 926-2575




205 West "D" Avenue, Suite 433

Eglin AFB FL 32542-6864

DSN 872-3192, Commercial (904) 882-3192



5 South Wolfe Avenue

Edwards AFB CA 93524-1185

DSN 527-3900, Ext. 2205, Commercial (805) 277-3900, Ext. 2205



100 Kindel Drive, Suite A335

Arnold AFB TN 37389-1335

DSN 340-5408, Commercial (615) 454-5408




3651 Lowry Avenue SE, Room 222

Kirtland AFB NM 87117-5777

DSN 246-4695, Commercial (505) 846-4695



26 Electronics Parkway

Griffiss AFB NY 13441-4514

DSN 587-3530, Commercial (315) 330-3530


See ASC Focal Point

AFMCI 64-107

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System




Accept as is.


Strongly disagree with deletion of

requirement for Service-CPARs.

Believe AFMC is not complying by the recommendations of the NGS-IPT in matters such as providing CPARs to contractors.

Para 2.1 - Retain requirement for programmed depot maintenance evaluations.

Para 2.1 - Continue to allow evaluations of S&T contracts at the option of the Laboratory Commanders.

Para 5.1 - Retain "Initial Report" designation.

Para 6.1 - Retain 90 day Command cycle time goal.

Para 6.2.2 - Redundant paragraph.

Para 6.3 - Retain paragraph addressing support contractors.

ASC, cont.

Para 6.3 - Disagree with changing overflow page limits from 1 to 2. Should also require overflow pages to be marked.

Para 6.5.1, line 11 - Clarify sentence.

Para, line 20 - Limitations should be on the contractor comments.

Paras and 6.9 - Obtain legal coordination on procedures to provide completed CPARs to contractors.

Para - Add instructions that revised reports should be kept with the original.

Par 6.5.2. - Signer of transmittal letter should be at least one-level above the rater.

Para - Copies of CPARs should be released by the same person making distribution to the libraries. Also why not release reports to contractor representatives.

Para 6.7 & 6.8 - Object to allowing copies to be maintained in the program office.

Para - Retain note that states the contractor will be notified of relevant past performance data that requires clarification.

Delete line 27 concerning contractor's limited access.

A.1.15.6 - Clarify that a narrative is required for each evaluation area changed from the previous period.

A1.25.3 - Change DoD to National in NISPOM.

AFMC Form 38A - Take some space from Block 12 and give it to Block 13.


Summary Of Changes - Replace "...deletes all requirement for Service-CPARS..." with "deletes all references to Service CPARs.

Para 1.1, line 2 - Rewrite to read "formal and informal source selections".

Para 1.1, line 5 - Add "on-time" after quality products..

Para 1.5 - Make reference to para 2.1.

Para 2.1 - Add para 2.1.1.

Para 2.1.2 - Mention at beginning of document that select categories of contracts are not included.

Para 2.4 - Isn't this a violation by providing one contractor's performance information to another?

Para 3.4, line 9 - Delete reference to "automated data base".

Para 3.4, line 8 - The centers should also be allowed to analyze the data base.

Para 4.4 - Cross-reference with para 6.8.

Para 6.1 Program Director along with Program Manager.

Para 6.2.2 - Should CPARs be written for the entire contract or on individual orders.

Para 6.3 - Cross-reference to para

Para - Consider adding "...which will not be extended..."

ESC, cont.

Para 6.5.4. - Insert sentence to cover the new procedure of sending copies to the contractor.

Para 6.7 - Allow the CPAR focal points to send CPARs back to the contractors.

Para - Providing copies to contractors should be limited to only future CPARs.

Para - Delete last sentence.

Para 10 - Renumber.

Para A1.27.1 - Mark additional pages with contractor name, period of performance, etc.

Para A1.28 - Slight inconsistencies exist between this paragraph and the corresponding title on the form.

Mrs. Druyun specifically deleted the Service form. Service contracts will be covered by the requirement for a general form levied in the AFFARS.

While the new form is the recommendation of the NGS-IPT, the procedures are not. The procedures can be different from Service to Service.


Mrs. Druyun is seeking a waiver for S&T contracts. Evaluations on an optional basis is fine.


Goal was established by General Viccellio.



Limit was expanded to allow more room to better communicate the details of a rating. Will require pages to be marked.


The Government and contractor have the same page limitations.

HQ AFMC/JAQ coordination has been received.


Left to center discretion if other than the rater is to sign.

Agree. Distribution is being limited to focus control on one person within the contractor's organization.

The program manager must know the same information as the contractor.

Agree to both.









Opening paragraph states instruction is limited to "system" contracts.

Joint efforts refers to those situations where the contractors are of equal status and have joined together to form another entity.


As long as the contractors' names and contract numbers are not divulge there is no problem.



Yes, if requirements of para 2.1.3. are meet.

This paragraph is being deleted to avoid confusion.

Paragraph will stand.


Local processes may govern who is responsible for sending the copies

Procedures for providing copies of past CPARs have not been developed as yet.



Already covered in para A1.1.



Para 2.1 - Reword "total face value plus unexercised options and potential orders which could be exercised/placed against the contract."

Para 6.2.2 - Redundant.

Para 6.3 - Retain this paragraph if support contractors are to be limited.

General - There is no discussion of distribution of CPARs to Master Libraries.




Para 6.10 states that distribution should be made to all master libraries.


Para 6.5.2 - Is the rater the same as the PM in this paragraph?

SMC, cont.

Para Who will address copying costs?

Para 6.9 - Will contractors be allowed copies of past CPARs?

Para 7.4 - Change the 90 notification date to 120 to match para 6.1

Para - Who will designate a limitation on the number of contractor reps allowed access to CPARs?

Para A1.27.1 - Two additional pages may be used per para 6.3.

CPAR Focal Points - Update SMC's address.

"Rater" replaced by "PM".

The AFMCI will not.

This issue has not been resolved.

The ninety days referenced here is a guideline for making sure the PM is well aware of the upcoming requirement to prepare a CPAR. The 120 days noted in para 6.1 is a goal for completing the three major steps in the CPARs process. They are different.

The AFMCI has not recognized this to be a problem.




Para 2.1 - Reinstate progammed depot maintenance.

Para 4.1 - How does Lightning Bolt #4 affect local procedures?

Para 5.3.2 - When contracts are transferred to another center the PM should prepare a new CPAR if the last one is at least four months old.

Para 6.5.2 - Allow that the "rater may sign the transmittal letter".

Para - Should internal staff summary sheets be released to the contractors?

OC-ALC, cont.

Para 7.5 - Recommend the DAC or PEO also be notified of late reports.

Para - Also reference AFFARS Appendix BB.

A1.18, Block 14.c. - Add "To the best extent possible, cost control should be evaluated regardless of contract type".


Processes will be allowed in local process guides, but not policy.

Language changed to accommodate transfers.

Local processes will determine the signer.

No, only the CPARs.





All OO-ALC comments were administrative.



Make proper cross-references in paras 1.1, 3.3, and 3.4.

Para 2.1.3 - Add period after "entire contract".

Para 6.2.2 - Redundant.

Para - Cross-reference should be to par 6.6.

Para 7.4 Should the ninety day notification be the same as the Command goal of 120 days.

Para 7.5 Revise to read, "Local procedures should be established to notify the activity commander of overdue reports.

A.1.1 - Delete reference to the font size to be used.

A1.4 and 8 - Change format to DD MMM YY.

A1.27 - Change to allow two typewritten pages.

SA-ALC, cont.

Attachment 3 - Update SA-ALC address.





No, they are different periods of time.



In order to facilitate future computerization the MM/DD/YY format is being used.




Approve draft.


Para 1.2 - Reiterate info in para 5.1..

Para 1.5 - Delete this; it is repetitive of 2.1.

Para 2.1 - Should the reference to programmed depot maintenance be deleted?

Para 2.1.1 and 2.2.1 - CPARs may not be required on multi-year contract that haven't reached the $5M threshold.

Para 2.2.2 and 6.3 - Use the term Manpower Support Contracts.

Par 2.6 - The 8(a) program is suspended. Why include this paragraph?

Para Section 4 - How are transfers to be handled.

Para 5.4 - This paragraph is open-ended. Please clarify.

Par 6.1 and 6.7 - Has the goal increased?

Para 6.2 - Recommend adding the other forms to the instruction.

WR-ALC, cont.

Para 6.2.1 - Discussion of provisioning items was deleted. Should it have been?

Para - This paragraph asks for the service tasks to be identified. How is this accomplished?

Para 6.2.2 - Delete the redundant information on indefinite delivery contracts in para 2.1.3.

Para 6.4 - Why is there a page limit?

Para - Should the CPAR be protected as "source selection information"?

Para - Cross-reference to para 6.9.

Para 6.9 - Recommend making the PM responsible for preparing the staff summary sheet, transmittal letter, and making copies of the report.

Para 7.1 - Please clarify the retention period.

If a contract runs for five years (and there is an initial, three interims, and a final report) the CPARs will be maintained for three years beyond the ending date of the period covered by the final report.

Para 7.2 - Add "source selection authority" to the second sentence.

Para 7.4 - Revise to read, " However, this does not relieve the PM/CR..." Also should the notification time be extended to 120 days.

Para 7.5 - Delete requirement to notify AFMC/PKM of CPARs overdue by 60 days.

WR-ALC, cont.

Para - Is this redundant?

A1.1 - Isn't specifying print size overkill?

A1.4 - This paragraph restricts extending the period of performance beyond one month. Can this be extended?

A.1.9 - Calculate percent of contract completion by dividing the quantity of units ordered by the quantity of units delivered.

A1.14 - Include reference to the SSA in this paragraph.

A.1.16 and A.1.24 - Emphasize that evaluations are limited to the contractor's efforts during the evaluation period.

A1.22 - Recommend contacting the ACO for information about the offerors success in meeting the Subcontract Plan.

A1.27.1 - Recommend altering Mrs. Druyun's question.

Attachment 3 - Please update WR-ALC's address.

Para 1.2 is introductory and 5.1 is sufficient.

As an introduction it can stand.

No. It will be added.

Multi-year contracts are generally exercised at very high dollar levels that would exceed $5M.

Service contracts are not covered by this instruction.

The paragraph has been reworded, but I know of no suspension of the program!

Para 5.3.2 will make reference to transfers.

Paragraph allows for the final CPARs whenever the program manger believes it is appropriate. If hardware deliveries have been made, but substantial quantities of data remain to be delivered, then don't submit the final CPAR after the hardware deliveries, but after the data.

Yes, but only one subdivision has been defined--the contractor comment period remains at 30 days.

This version of the instruction only addresses major system contracts.

No. It was reinstated at para 2.1.4.

This paragraph has been deleted, as it relates to service contracts.

Chosen to keep the para at 2.1.3. and deleted 6.2.2.

Page limits are needed now to keep the files manageable, and will be needed in the future to accommodate automation of the CPARs process.



We will allow each center to decide what office accomplishes these tasks.



Agree. We believe 90 days is sufficient, but if earlier notification is needed--give it.

Will consider this, but not at this time. We would like to reach the Command goal first.

Will retain.


Para graph has been reworded to make it clear the CPAR focal point may grant extensions based upon special circumstances.

Percent complete is rough measure at best. Any number of techniques could be used. Use these if possible.




We'll let the quote stand.



No comments.


No comments.


Para 2.1.2 - Also exempt Manufacturing Technology, 7.8.


Others - administrative comments received from AFMC/PKP and PKA.