Most federal contractors treat past performance as a box-checking exercise. Submit the references, hope the COs say something positive, move on. That approach leaves significant evaluation points on the table — and loses contracts to competitors who understand that the past performance questionnaire is a managed process, not a passive one.

The PPQ is the document your references complete to describe your past contract performance. Evaluators use it alongside your own past performance volume to assign adjectival ratings. Those ratings — Outstanding, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory — carry as much weight as your technical approach on many competitive acquisitions.

Done passively, your reference writes a generic response and you score “Satisfactory.” Done actively, your reference tells exactly the story that maps to the evaluation criteria, and you score “Very Good” or “Outstanding.” The difference between those ratings is often the difference between winning and losing.

PPQ vs. CPARS: Understanding the Difference

CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System) is the government’s internal system for recording past performance after a contract closes. Your references have no control over CPARS entries — the CO writes them, and you can comment but not rewrite them.

The PPQ is different. It is a solicitation-specific questionnaire that the agency sends to your identified references, asking them to rate and describe your performance on a specific contract. Unlike CPARS, the PPQ is driven by the agency’s evaluation criteria for the specific acquisition. The questions, rating scales, and narrative prompts vary by agency and solicitation.

Because PPQs are solicitation-specific, you have more ability to frame the conversation with your references before the questionnaire arrives. That is where most of the strategic opportunity lies. For CPARS management, see our CPARS ratings guide.

What PPQ Evaluators Are Actually Scoring

Federal evaluators score PPQs against the Section M evaluation criteria. The specific factors vary, but most PPQs probe some combination of:

  • Quality of deliverables: Were the work products accurate, complete, and compliant? Were issues resolved promptly?
  • Schedule performance: Was work completed on time? How were delays handled?
  • Cost control: Did the contractor stay within budget? Were cost overruns disclosed early?
  • Management: Was the team responsive? Did leadership stay engaged? Were personnel stable?
  • Customer satisfaction: Would you award this contractor again?
  • Small business utilization: On contracts with subcontracting plans, did the prime meet its small business goals?

Most questionnaires use a 5-point scale or adjectival ratings. A response of “4 out of 5” on quality averages to Satisfactory in most evaluation schemes. A “5 out of 5” with narrative explanation of specific accomplishments maps to Very Good or Outstanding. The narrative is what separates the scores.

Reference Selection: The Most Important PPQ Decision

Many firms select references based on familiarity — whoever they talked to most often. The right selection criterion is relevance to the specific acquisition, not comfort.

Evaluate potential references against three dimensions:

  1. Relevance of the past contract to the new requirement: The closer the work matches in scope, scale, and complexity, the more weight evaluators give the reference. A reference for IT help desk support is more relevant to a new help desk RFP than a reference for a larger but unrelated construction project.
  2. Recency:Most solicitations specify a lookback period (commonly 3–5 years). References outside that window may not be accepted. Within the window, more recent work scores better than older work.
  3. Reference quality:Who was your day-to-day point of contact? A contracting officer’s representative who worked with your team directly will give a more credible and specific response than a CO who only processed paperwork.
Common mistake:Listing a reference from a large contract where your firm was a subcontractor without disclosing that fact. Evaluators flag this when the contract dollar value in your past performance volume doesn’t match what the reference remembers your firm actually doing. Always be explicit about prime vs. sub roles.

Preparing Your References: The Pre-Brief

Contacting your references before the PPQ arrives is not gaming the system — it is standard practice among competitive proposal shops. You are not asking them to lie. You are ensuring they understand the context and can give a specific, useful response instead of a vague one.

An effective reference pre-brief covers:

  • What contract this is for: Give them the solicitation number and agency. References often support multiple contractors and need to know which contract and which firm to focus on.
  • What the new requirement is: Brief them on what the new contract is for. A reference who understands that the new work involves the same type of deliverables they saw from you can make that connection explicitly in their narrative.
  • Specific accomplishments to highlight:Remind them of specific outcomes you delivered — a system that came in under budget, a deliverable delivered ahead of schedule, a staffing surge you managed without degrading quality. They may not remember details without prompting.
  • Timeline:Tell them when to expect the questionnaire and when it needs to be returned. Missed PPQ deadlines are one of the most common ways firms lose past performance evaluation points — not because the reference was unwilling but because no one followed up.

Following Up: The Part Most Firms Skip

Government references are busy. A PPQ that arrives by email on a Monday may sit in an inbox until the proposal deadline has passed. Your job is to make sure that does not happen.

A disciplined PPQ follow-up cadence:

  • Confirm the reference received the questionnaire within 24–48 hours of the agency sending it
  • Check in at the midpoint between receipt and deadline
  • Send a final reminder 48 hours before the deadline
  • Have a backup reference identified in case the primary cannot complete it in time

Some solicitations allow you to submit the PPQ directly with your proposal rather than having the agency contact references separately. In that case, coordinate with your reference to complete the questionnaire and return it to you before your proposal submission deadline.

Building Your Own Past Performance Narrative

The PPQ from your reference is only one component of the past performance volume. Most solicitations also require you to provide a narrative describing each past performance reference — your account of what the work was, what challenges you overcame, and what outcomes you delivered.

Your narrative and your reference’s PPQ response should reinforce each other without being identical. If your narrative describes a 15% cost reduction you achieved through process improvement, your reference’s response should validate that outcome. Inconsistencies between what you claim and what your reference describes are red flags for evaluators.

Evaluation insight:“Very Relevant” is a separate dimension from the adjectival quality rating on most PPQs. A contract that is rated “Outstanding” but “Somewhat Relevant” scores lower than a contract rated “Very Good” and “Very Relevant.” Relevance is determined by the evaluator based on how closely the scope, complexity, and dollar value of the past contract match the new requirement. This is why selecting references for relevance first matters more than selecting for the best relationship.

When You Have Gaps: How to Address Limited Past Performance

New entrants and growing firms frequently face a past performance chicken-and-egg problem: you need past performance to win, but you need to win to build past performance. The solicitation instructions usually provide a path:

  • Subcontract references: Work performed as a subcontractor can be cited as past performance as long as you are transparent about the role and the relevance of your specific scope.
  • State, local, and commercial work: Many solicitations explicitly allow non-federal references when federal experience is limited. A strong commercial reference that demonstrates relevant scope can outperform a marginal federal reference.
  • Key personnel past performance: Some solicitations allow you to cite the past performance of key personnel who performed similar work at a prior employer. This is particularly valuable for firms built around individuals with deep federal experience.
  • Teaming partner past performance:When teaming, the team’s combined past performance can be submitted. A strong prime partner can anchor the past performance volume while your firm’s references demonstrate relevant subcontract experience.

For a deeper look at managing past performance gaps strategically, see our guide on identifying and closing past performance gaps.

Maintaining a Reference Library

The firms that consistently score well on past performance do not scramble for references at proposal time. They maintain an ongoing library of:

  • Current contact information for every COR and CO from past contracts
  • Completion dates and dollar values for each reference contract
  • Key performance outcomes and accomplishments documented at contract close
  • Copies of any CPARS narratives (yours and the government’s)
  • Prior PPQ responses where available (for calibrating what references say)

Keeping this library current while a contract is still active — not after it closes — is when the detail is fresh. A contact who leaves the agency six months after your contract closes is no longer reachable as a government reference. Capture the relationship and the documentation before that happens.