Blog Tags - Vendor rating system

For new vendors receiving an award that crosses the threshold into "substantial funding" as that term is defined by your system, you can document pre-award vendor rating in a range of ways, from a memo stating that ratings will occur during the next "ratings refresh" period or at the end of of order performance (whichever comes first) to collections of past performance data including but not limited to vendor requests (formatted like those requests are sent during prime contract proposal processes, via RFQ or separate send, addressing technical capacities), OCI certifications and D&B re

There are two basic uses for a Vendor Rating - Qualification and Differentiation.

Qualification - your vendor rating system should include a basement qualifying score under which vendors are excluded from procurement activities. Easy way to do it - scores based on 10 (averaged scores) or 100 (cumulative), with a cut off at 5/50.

Differentiation - Vendor Ratings are great tie breakers in Best Value procurements. Past performance is a valid evaluative criteria - vendor ratings should be taken into account when determining awardees resulting from competition.

The basic goal is the use of a cross-disciplinary team approach to review aspects of vendor performance that could potentially impact the effectiveness of their support under a government contract. Traditional manufacturer-implemented vendor rating systems usually focus on pure performance - turnaround on order fulfillment, workability of individual parts, down time for repair, etc.

First - to my knowledge, there is nothing in FAR Part 52 that directly requires prime contractors to maintain a vendor rating system (which is not the same as EVMS). The requirement to track contractor performance information comes through FAR Part 9 and 42.