PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #1 -- Management of Compliance and CommitmentsThe Laboratory shall have in place systems that assure subcontracts are in compliance with its contractual and statutory obligations. (Weight = 30%)
| |||
| CRITERIA | PERFORMANCE MEASURES | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | Self Assessment The Laboratory shall conduct, document, and report to DOE quarterly, the results of a continuous self assessment of its purchasing system consistent with the contract's requirements. The Laboratory shall develop and submit a risk-based annual self assessment plan that assures each element of the purchasing system is assessed at least once each 18 months with high risk elements assessed more frequently. The self assessment plan shall be presented to DOE for approval no later than October 1, 1995. (Weight = 20%)
| 1.1.a | Tracking Plan Accomplishment Measure the percentage of self assessments accomplished against the plan. (Weight = 10%)
|
|
Gradient:
Meets Expectations: | |||
| 1.1.b | Program Effectiveness Measure the percentage of corrective actions completed during the rating period against corrective actions planned to be completed during the rating period. (Weight = 10%)
| ||
|
Assumptions: The definition of item as used in the guidelines will be determined between the Laboratory and its local DOE office.
Findings are considered closed upon completion of all actions required by the Laboratory with the exception of those actions where DOE validation efforts during the appraisal period found the actions to be inadequate.
Gradient: The UC Rating Guidelines for Administrative Systems for corrective action plans will apply with the following exceptions:
Meets Expectations: | |||
| 1.2 | Corrective Action Commitments Findings and recommendations resulting from internal and external audits, assessments (except those under 1.1), reviews, etc., regarding Procurement are tracked and closed in accordance with the mutually agreed upon corrective action plan. (Weight = 10%)
| 1.2.a | Tracking Corrective Action Closures Measure the percentage of corrective actions completed against corrective action plans. (Weight = 10%)
|
|
Assumptions: In the event that there are no deficiencies/findings requiring a corrective action plan that involves areas of high risk/exposure for this rating period, then the 10% weight for 1.2.a will be distributed to 1.1.a and 1.1.b, giving each a new weight of 15%.
Gradient: The UC Rating Guidelines for Administrative Systems for corrective action plans will apply with the following exceptions:
Meets Expectations: | |||
PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #2 -- Socioeconomic Programs and CompetitionThe Laboratory shall make good faith efforts to further the participation of small and disadvantaged businesses in its subcontracts and maximize the effective use of competition. (Weight = 20%)
| |||
| CRITERIA | PERFORMANCE MEASURES | ||
| 2.1 | The Laboratory shall support and promote socioeconomic subcontracting programs. The obligated subcontracted dollars awarded will meet yearly DOE/UC/Laboratory negotiated goals in the following areas:
The Laboratory will propose and provide supporting rationale for socioeconomic goals. The schedule for submitting and negotiating goals will be followed per Appendix D. (Weight = 10%) | 2.1.a | Meeting Socioeconomic Commitments Actual subcontract dollar obligations (not subcontract face value) in the 5 categories are compared against the negotiated goals. Dollars obligated will be plotted as percentages of the specific areas against the purchasing base. (Weight = 10%)
|
| Assumptions: Obligations qualifying in more than 1 category may be counted in more than 1category, e.g., Small Business and Small Business Set-Asides. However, Small Disadvantaged Business Set-Asides may not be counted as Small Business Set-Asides and vice versa.
The purchasing base for purposes of this measure is all obligations incurred during the fiscal year period, excluding: (1) Subcontracts with foreign corporations which will be performed entirely outside of the United States; (2) Utilities (gas, sewer, water, steam, electricity and regulated telecommunications services); (3) Federal Supply Schedule Orders when all terms of the GSA contract apply; (4) GSA Orders when all terms of the GSA contract apply; (5) Agreements with DOE management and operating contractors and University campuses; (6) Federal government and DOE mandatory sources of supply; Federal prison industries, industries of the blind and handicapped; and (7) Credit card purchases.
Gradient: It is recognized that pursuit of Performance Measure 3.2.a (Measuring Administrative Costs) may impact on the establishment of socioeconomic goals and/or on the final achievement of such goals. Consideration will be given to this impact during forecasting of goals and during evaluation of self assessments.
Meets Expectations: | |||
| 2.2 | Promoting Competition The Laboratory shall minimize total acquisition costs through effective competitive techniques and will propose and provide supporting rationale for subcontracting competition goals to the University and DOE annually. The rate of obligated subcontracting competition meets a yearly DOE/UC/Laboratory negotiated goal. Competition goals will be submitted and negotiated in conjunction with the schedule for socioeconomic goals. (Weight = 10%)
| 2.2.a | Meeting Competition Commitments Actual competitively-awarded subcontract dollar obligations are compared against the negotiated goal. Competitively-awarded dollar obligations will be plotted as a percentage of the purchasing base. (Weight = 10%)
|
| Assumptions: The purchasing base for purposes of this measure is all obligations incurred during the fiscal year period, excluding: (1) Subcontracts with foreign corporations which will be performed entirely outside of the United States; (2) Utilities (gas, sewer, water, steam, electricity and regulated telecommunications services); (3) Federal Supply Schedule Orders when all terms of the GSA contract apply; (4) GSA Orders when all terms of the GSA contract apply; (5) Agreements with DOE management and operating contractors and University campuses; (6) Federal government and DOE mandatory sources of supply; federal prison industries, industries of the blind and handicapped; (7) Obligations of $25,000 or less; and (8) Credit card purchases.
Gradient: It is recognized that pursuit of Performance Measure 3.2.a (Measuring Administrative Costs) may impact on the establishment of the competition goal and/or on the final achievement of such a goal. Consideration will be given to this impact during forecasting of goals and during evaluation of self assessments.
Meets Expectations: | |||
PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #3 -- Purchasing System Cost EffectivenessThe Laboratory purchasing system shall appropriately identify and apply the best in purchasing practices and procedures in order to maximize the system's cost effectiveness. (Weight = 40%)
| |||
| CRITERIA | PERFORMANCE MEASURES | ||
| 3.1 | Minimizing Purchasing Lead-Time The Laboratory shall reduce the purchasing lead-time between the point a purchase request arrives in the Purchasing Department and an award is made. The Laboratory shall establish site-specific categories for measuring purchasing lead-times appropriate for the complexity and dollar value of individual requirements. (Weight = 15%) | 3.1.a | Measuring Lead-Times The average acquisition lead-times for the various categories of acquisitions shall be computed quarterly, tracked and trended. The Laboratory will establish site-specific baselines and lead-time reduction goals per category by October 1, 1995. FY95 data shall form the baseline from which reduction is measured. (Weight = 15%)
|
| Gradient: The Laboratory will establish categories, reduction goals and gradients for rating to be agreed upon in partnership with UC and DOE.
| |||
| 3.2 | Minimizing Administrative Costs of Purchasing The Laboratory shall minimize the administrative costs of purchasing. (Weight = 25%)
| 3.2.a | Measuring Administrative Costs The composite of administrative costs of acquisition (Procurement's costs plus those associated with acquisition activity in Receiving and Accounts Payable) will be compared to the total value of purchases annually and be stated as a percentage. This percentage will be compared to a negotiated reduction goal established on or before November 30, 1995 and retroactive to October 1, 1995. FY95 will be used as the baseline year from which improvement will be measured. (Weight = 25%)
|
|
Gradient The Laboratory will establish reduction goals and gradients for rating to be agreed upon in partnership with UC and DOE. Documentation of results must validate that cost reductions are realized (or documentation will demonstrate with certainty that reductions will be realized within the next 6 months with a firm schedule of implementation) for the Procurement, Accounts Payable, and Receiving functions. Consideration will also be given to positive or negative impacts on other organizations, changes in funding profiles, changes in forecast, deletion of requirements, etc. | |||
PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE #4 -- Customer SatisfactionThe Laboratory shall maintain a focus on satisfying customer needs. (Weight = 10%)
| |||
| CRITERIA | PERFORMANCE MEASURES | ||
| 4.1 | Surveying Customers The Laboratory shall survey, at least annually, the needs and satisfaction of its internal and external customers relative to its purchasing systems and methods. At a minimum the following customer groups will be surveyed and weighted as indicated:
The DOE/UC/Laboratory will mutually agree on the acceptability of the surveying process and contents prior to the rating period. (Weight = 10%)
| 4.1.a | Satisfaction Index A satisfaction index shall be created from the results of the individual surveys of customer groups using the weighting in 4.1 and a 100 point scale. If surveys are taken more frequently than annually the most recent survey will be used to establish the index for the rating period. The satisfaction index is to be tracked and trended with an upward trend expected. (Weight = 10%)
|
| Assumptions: Vendors are to include those that submitted successful and unsuccessful bids/offers. Additional consideration may be given for actions implemented by the Laboratory to address customer satisfaction concerns identified by the survey.
Gradient:
Meets Expectations:
| |||
Appendix F Table of Contents