1240LN22Q0024Attach5QASP.pdf

US Department of Agriculture (USDA)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

Contents Project Name Solicitation / Contract Number Section 1: Introduction

1.1 Purpose

1.2 QASP Relation to the Contract

1.2.1 QASP Revisions

1.2.2 Surveillance of Performance Progression

1.3 QASP Relation to the Quality Control Plan (QCP)

Section 2: Performance Description

2.1 Performance Standards and Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs)

2.1.1 Allowable Deviation

2.1.2 Substantially Complete

2.2 Non-Performance

2.2.1 Documentation

2.2.2 Remedial Actions

Section 3: Contractor and Government Responsibilities

3.1 Contractor Responsibility

3.2 Government Responsibility

3.2.1 Contracting Officer (CO)

3.2.2 Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

3.2.3 Customers

Section 4: Surveillance Methods to Perform Quality Assurance

4.1 Surveillance Methods

4.1.1 PAYMENTS, REDUCTIONS & RE-INSPECTION COSTS

Reductions Payments at 81 to 89% AQL Payments below 80% AQL

4.2 Analysis and Results

Project Name

Box Creek Mechanical Thinning Contract

Solicitation / Contract Number Insert Solicitation / Contract Number

Section 1: Introduction This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled Box Creek Mechanical Thinning Contract. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines that the USDA, Pike and San Isabel National Forests, Leadville Ranger District will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to measure performance and to identify the reports required and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards identified in the PWS. This QASP is designed to define roles and responsibilities, identify the performance objectives, define the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describe quality assurance reporting, and describe the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 QASP Relation to the Contract

1.2.1 QASP Revisions

The Contracting Officer Representative (COR) may make revisions or changes to the QASP procedures and surveillance methods or increase or decrease the degree of surveillance methods at any time during the contract performance period. Changes to the Metric must be incorporated into the PWS, Performance Requirement Summary (PRS) and QASP by a bilateral modification to contract that is issued by the Contracting Officer (CO). A copy of the QASP is provided to the contractor to enable the contractor to enhance its Quality Control (QC) program to perform in accordance with its Quality Control Plan (QCP).

1.2.2 Surveillance of Performance Progression

As the performance period progresses, the levels of surveillance may be altered for service areas where performance is either consistently excellent or unsatisfactory. If consistently good performance, then the amount of surveillance may be reduced. If observations reveal consistent deficiencies, increased surveillance may be implemented.

1.3 QASP Relation to the Quality Control Plan (QCP)

The QCP is a required element of the contract and the Contractor shall adhere to its established quality control processes and procedures in managing and performing work as described in the contract. While the QCP represents the way in which the Contractor will ensure its quality and timeliness of services, as defined in the PWS, the QASP represents the way in which the Government personnel specified in Section 3: Contractor and Government Responsibilities, Paragraph 3.2, Government Responsibilities will evaluate the contractor’s performance. The contractor’s QC program and the residual organization’s QASP should be complementary programs that ensure successful contractor performance.

Section 2: Performance Description Performance of the contractor will be monitored through the surveillance methods described in Section 4: Surveillance Methods to Perform Quality Assurance to assess the Contractor’s performance against PWS requirements.

2.1 Performance Standards and Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) For selected activities in the PWS, the PRS provides a performance standard and an AQL. A performance standard is the expected level of contractor performance. An AQL defines the level of performance that is satisfactory. Depending on the service evaluated and the evaluation method selected, performance standards and AQLs may be stated as a number of occurrences or as a percentage. Performance standards and AQLs for random sampling and 100 percent inspection are generally stated as percentages. For periodic inspections, performance standards may be stated as either percentages or as absolute numbers.

The contract requires the Contractor to perform all work as specified. Any inaccuracies or omissions in services or products are referred to as “defects” on the part of the Contractor. The Contractor shall be responsible for all identified defects and may be required to perform the work at no cost to the government. The AQLs take into account that in some instances an allowable level of deficiencies (deviations) is possible while overall performance continues to meet the government’s desired level of service.

2.1.1 Allowable Deviation

The AQLs define the level or number of performance deficiencies the Contractor is permitted to reach under this contract. AQLs take into account the difference between an occasional defect and a gross number of defects. AQLs can be expressed as a percentage of or as an absolute number (e.g., three per month). There may be instances where 100 percent compliance is required, and no deviation is acceptable (e.g., where safety is involved).

2.1.2 Substantially Complete

In some cases, service outputs are evaluated using subjective values (e.g., excellent, satisfactory, unsatisfactory). The criteria for acceptable performance and for defects must be defined for these service outputs. The concept of “substantially complete” should be the basis for inspections based on subjective scales. Work is considered “substantially complete” where there has been no significant departure from the terms of the contract and no omission of essential work. In addition, the Contractor has performed the work required to the best of its ability and the only variance consists of minor omissions or deficiencies.

2.2 Non-Performance

Non-performance occurs when the contractor’s performance does not meet the AQL for a given requirement.

Requirements may contain multiple performance elements, and therefore, deficiencies may occur in one or more aspects of performance (e.g., timeliness, accuracy, completeness, etc.) or subject areas of effort.

When surveillance indicates that the contractor's service output is not in compliance with the contract requirements, the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) must determine whether the Contractor or the Government caused the deficiency. If the cause of the defect rests with the Government, corrective action must be taken through Government channels. If the cause of the defect is due to action or inaction by the contractor, the contractor is responsible for correction of the problem at no additional expense to the Government.

2.2.1 Documentation

Documentation of work non-performed or unacceptable work is essential for tracking Contractor performance. The COR will document deficient work by compiling facts describing the inspection methods and results and to substantiate nonconformance with the contract. A sample documentation reporting form is provided in Appendix B: Example Discrepancy Report. The documentation, with any recommendations, will be forwarded to the CO. In the case of the Contractor, the COR will decide whether to elevate the problem to the CO for corrective action.

B: Example Discrepancy Report

2.2.2 Remedial Actions

The Federal Acquisition Regulation allows for penalties in the event that the Contractor fails to perform the required services. Penalties are defined as those actions taken under the direction of the CO against the contractor within the general provisions of the contract for nonconformance to the PWS and PRS.

Section 3: Contractor and Government Responsibilities

3.1 Contractor Responsibility

The Contractor is responsible for delivering products or services in accordance with the contract. Implementing its QCP, which describes the Contractor’s methods for ensuring all products and services under the contract meet established performance standards and AQLs. Maintaining, and providing for audit, quality control records and reports and all records associated with the investigation and complaint resolutions. Appointing a single quality control point-of-contact to act as a central recipient of communication from the COR or CO.

3.2 Government Responsibility

3.2.1 Contracting Officer (CO)

The CO is responsible for administering and monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by COR and the contractor’s performance. The CO may delegate various day-to-day contract administration duties to a Administering ACO (ACO) and/or the COR for performance management and administrative actions such as invoice approval and issuance of Contract Discrepancy Reports may be, and normally are, delegated by the CO to the COR. The CO shall approve any revisions to the QASP processes or standards.

3.2.2 Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

The COR, is designated in writing, by the CO. The COR will ensure that the QA function is properly executed, plays a key role in contract administration and performs the contract surveillance and monitoring. Some key contract administration duties include, but are not limited to, performs surveillance as required by this QASP; make recommendations to the CO for issuance of Contract Discrepancy Reports or letters of commendation and acceptance or rejection of completed work and for administrative actions based on unsatisfactory or non-performed work, and revisions or changes to the QASP;

and assists the CO in identifying necessary contract modifications and preparing reports of Contractor performance and cost.

The COR may use the form(s) included in the Appendices to perform the inspection or other forms as approved by the CO. The Contractor overall guidance is also provided by FAR clause, see following table:

FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (48 CFR CHAPTER 1) CLAUSES

Clause Number

Title

Date

PERTAINING TO ALL ITEMS

PERTAINING TO SERVICE ITEMS

52.246-4

Inspection of Services—Fixed Price

(Aug 1996)

52.246-20

Warranty of Services

(May 2001)

3.2.3 Customers

Customers or organizations/offices that the Contractor provided support may be requested to assist the COR in conducting QA to provide information relating to the Contractor’s performance through Customer Feedback.

Information gained from the Customer Feedback may be used in conjunction with other methods of observation to rate the performance of the Contractor.

Section 4: Surveillance Methods to Perform Quality Assurance

4.1 Surveillance Methods

The surveillance methods used in the QA process are the Government’s tools to monitor the Contractor’s products and services. The best means of determining whether the Contractor has met all contract requirements is to inspect the Contractor’s service products and analyze the results. Further, documented inspection results are an effective tool in contract administration that can confirm the successful achievement of all performance requirements or highlight areas where defects exist, and improvements are necessary.

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS

WORK DESCRIPTION PERFORMANCE

STANDARD

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY

LEVEL (AQL)

MONITORING METHOD

Felling Cut all trees identified in the treatment descriptions;

PWS 3.0.

90%, unless otherwise permitted by contract specifications

· Review Contractor’s written record of Plot Inspections

· Visual inspection—walk through Units

· Periodic verification of compliance with the use of plot inspections

Decking

Deck all required material at proper height and at

Forest Service (FS) approved locations; PWS

3.0.

90%, unless otherwise permitted by contract specifications

· Regular onsite review of specification compliance

· Visual inspection—walk through Units

· Written documentation of visual inspection

Slash Treatment

Treatment of all slash to contract specifications;

PWS 3.0.

90%, unless otherwise permitted by contract specifications

· Review Contractor’s written record of plot inspections

· Visual inspection—walk through Units

· Periodic verification of compliance with the use of plot inspections

Processing of Material Included Timber is processed to contract specifications; PWS 3.0.

90%, unless otherwise permitted by contract specifications

· Regular onsite review of specification compliance

· Visual inspection—walk through Units

· Written documentation of visual inspection

Forwarding and Yarding

Forwarding and yarding of all designated trees/material to designated location; PWS

3.0.

90%, unless otherwise agreed in writing

· Regular onsite review of specification compliance

· Visual inspection—walk through Units

· Written documentation of visual inspection

Prevention of Damage to Physical Improvements, and Resources to Protect

Any damage to physical improvements is repaired to meet Government Standards.

100% Unless otherwise permitted by contract requirements

· Visual inspection

· Written documentation of visual inspection.

4.1.1 PAYMENTS, REDUCTIONS & RE-INSPECTION COSTS

Method of Payment Payment will be made for completed task(s) meeting or exceeding the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL). Upon acceptance, payment will be determined on the service less any deductions for any nonconforming or unacceptable performance as noted below.

Reductions

Payments at 90% AQL or above The Government expects to receive good services. The minimum 90% AQL is required to achieve a satisfactory performance rating. Full payment will be made for final work meeting at least 90% AQL and above.

Payments at 81 to 89% AQL If the unit cannot/will not be reworked to achieve the minimum required 90% AQL, payment of 90% of the unit price will be made for AQL falling between 80 to 89% AQL.

Payments below 80% AQL If the unit cannot/will not be reworked to achieve the minimum required 90% AQL, payment of 90% of the unit price times the actual AQL received will be made for AQL falling below 80% AQL.

Example - 75% AQL is achieved. Unit price is $10,000.00

10,000 x 90% = 9,000 x 75% = $6,750.00 price to be paid for unit.

Re-Inspection Costs

If the original government inspection results are not acceptable to the Contractor, a re-inspection may be requested, in writing, up to seven (7) days after receiving notification of unacceptable work. If the original inspection results in failure due to an unacceptable Form Score or Total Score, but re-inspection results in fully passing score, then the Government assumes the cost of re-inspection. If the re-inspection confirms the results of the original inspection, the Contractor shall reimburse the Government for actual costs incurred for performing re-inspection.

If rework of task(s) is required, the Contractor will be assessed the costs incurred by the Government in performing such activities. The table below lists charge rates for Government re-inspection of work.

Activity Charge rate

Government wages (per employee performing re-inspection) $50.00/hour

*Government mileage $0.58/mile

*Mileage reimbursement rate in effect January 1, 2019 is $0.58 per mile. Mileage rates change periodically and the most current mileage rates for assessed damages at the time will be used. Most current mileage rates can be found at the General Services Administration website https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/transportation- airfare-rates-pov-rates/privately-owned-vehicle-pov-mileage-reimbursement-rates

4.2 Analysis and Results

When the inspections and customer feedback validations have been completed, the COR will perform an analysis of the Contractor’s performance. The purpose of the analysis is to ensure Government is receiving high-quality products and services from the Contractor. The COR will review the results, rate the Contractor’s compliance with the performance standards and AQLs, and characterize the Contractor’s overall performance. Analysis of all types of contract monitoring will result in one of the following outcomes:

Outstanding performance is the result of the Contractor substantially exceeding the performance standards with significant achievements and no significant deficiencies. The Government may reduce its level of surveillance when the COR determines that the Contractor provides sustained performance that significantly exceeds the requirements with no significant deficiencies.

http://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/transportation-http://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/transportation-

Disincentives for failure to meet the above standards may be as follows:

(a) Rework will be completed at Contractor’s expense.

(b) If rework is not physically possible, payment deductions will be made for work falling below AQL (Payment

Reductions.

(c) Damage to the residual stand or infrastructure will be assessed against the Contractor.

(d) Government re-inspection charges.

(e) Poor performance rating will be given.