J.02 QASP.pdf

International Boundary and Water Commission, United States Section

Environmental Services Indefinite Deliveries Indefinite Quantities

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

October 23, 2019

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled Indefinite Deliveries Indefinite Quantities Environmental Services. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the International Boundary and Water Commission, United States Section (USIBWC) will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor (which includes management of subcontractors)..

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and to ensure that the government pays only for the level of services received.

1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the integrated project team (IPT), identifies the performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describes quality assurance documentation requirements, and describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by the USIBWC to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints.

The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. Key personnel will not be substituted as stated in the IDIQ PWS, without prior written approval. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

1.3.2 The government representative(s) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. This will also entail inspections for labor based on the Davis – Bacon Act (Pub.L 71-798, et al). The government will make determination regarding incentives (Appendix 1) based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

The contracting officer (CO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the USIBWC’s contracting officer's representative (COR) or program manager (PM) and the contractor. The CO will designate at least one COR as the government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as technical inspectors depends on the complexity of the services measured, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the CO.

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

The COR is designated in writing by the CO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR is responsible for technical administration of the project and ensures proper government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the CO for action. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms (Appendix 2) used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s work performance. Government surveillance may occur pursuant to FAR 52.246-4, Inspection of Services – Fixed-Price for any service relating to the contract.

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included in the PWS and in Appendix 1, “Performance Requirements Summary.”

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. Potential methods of surveillance include:

• Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the COR or designated inspector.

• Feedback from Area Operations Managers (AOM) to the COR when work is performed at field offices.

• 100% Inspection – Each month, the COR shall review the generated documentation and enter summary results into the Surveillance Activity Checklist.

• Periodic Inspection – COR may perform a periodic inspection on a monthly basis.

• Contractor Self-Reporting – Contractor shall provide periodic reports indicating tasks accomplished, percent completion of tasks, any issues and resolutions to correct, and any other pertinent information that will show performance efforts.

• Certification – Contractor shall provide appropriate licenses or certifications as proof of qualification to perform specified tasks as noted in the specific task order.

4.2 Acceptable Quality Levels

The acceptable quality levels (AQLs) included in Appendix 1, Performance Requirements Summary Table, for contractor performance are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls. For a critical activity such as those involving federal and state acts, laws, or mandates, the desired performance level is established at 100 percent. Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance established in the task order.

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes.

Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and is assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Appendix 1.

5.2 Monitoring Forms

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR will be reported using the monitoring forms in Appendices 2 and 3. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results are being achieved.

5.2.1 The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.1.1 Government shall use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards have been met. If the contractor has not met the minimum requirements, it may be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels. Performance for a task order will be used in evaluating proposals for award of future task orders.

6.1.2. Late deliverables. The COR will notify the CO when task order deliverables/submittals are late and/or not delivered. The contractor must communicate with the COR prior to submitting a later deliverable to be considered excused from the negative incentives in Appendix 1. The CO has the final determination on negative incentives applied.

6.2 Reporting

6.2.1 At the end of each month, the COR will prepare a written report for the CO summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. This written report, which includes the contractor’s submitted monthly report and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Appendix 2), will become part of the QA documentation. It will enable the Government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives.

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

6.3.1 The COR may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the CO and other government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The CO will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, including appropriate self-assessments by the contractor; however, if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the COR as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

• Monthly performance assessment data and trends

• Issues and concerns of both parties

• Projected outlook for upcoming months and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis

• Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

• Issues arising from the performance monitoring processes

6.3.2 The COR must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

6.3.3 The COR and contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long-term courses of action.

Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be clearly documented.

Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be incorporated as a contract modification as deemed necessary by the CO.

7 FAILURE TO PERFORM

The contractor may receive termination based on failure to perform. The following criteria apply for determining appropriate action:

1. Notifications. Consistent with FAR Part 49, the CO shall notify the contractor of failure to meet standards through QA monitoring forms, direct notification by CO, or show cause notices and shall inform the contractor or designated alternate of such notices.

2. Termination. If the CO determines that the contractor has failed to perform to the extent that a termination for default is justified, the CO shall issue a notice of termination, consistent with FAR Part 49.

3. Exclusion. If the contractor fails to perform of receives marginal or unsatisfactory evaluations (see Appendix 2), contractor may be excluded from future task orders.

APPENDIX 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Description Performance

Standards Acceptable

Quality Levels

(AQL)

Methods of

Surveillance Negative Incentives

Positive Incentive

Written Progress Reports (PWS 5.4.6)

Reports are submitted on-time and accurately depict current status

99%

Self reporting 0.5% of Task Order price for every day that the deliverable is not received.

Past Performance Ratings; exercising Option Years

Draft Technical Reports (PWS 5.4.7.a)

Draft report submitted on-time and in accordance with the Task Order

90% Review by

COR

0.5% of Task Order for every day that the deliverable is not received.

Past Performance Ratings; exercising Option Years

Final Technical Reports (PWS 5.4.7.b)

Final Report submitted on-time with all comments addressed

100% Review by

COR

1.0% of Task Order for every day that the deliverable is not received.

Past Performance Ratings; exercising Option Years

Administer quality control program including subcontractor management in accordance with QCP

(PWS 1.4)

Contractor is in compliance with QCP 97% of the time

95%

File reviews, periodic inspections, and random, observations, customer complaints

Contractual Remedies to include Past Performance Ratings and not exercising Option Years

Past Performance Ratings; exercising Option Years

Compliance with all applicable regulations as listed in task order

(PWS 1.2)

Contractor is in compliance with federal, state, and

100%

File reviews, periodic inspections, and random, observations, Contractual Remedies to include Past Performance Ratings and not exercising Option Years

Past Performance Ratings; exercising Option Years local regulations 100% of the time customer complaints

Program and project management

(PWS 6.1)

Provide effective program and project management to fulfill task order requirements

95%

File reviews, periodic inspections, and random, observations, customer complaints

Contractual Remedies to include Past Performance Ratings and not exercising Option Years

Past Performance Ratings; exercising Option Years

Task order specific Task order specific metrics

Past Performance Ratings; task order specific positive incentives, as applicable

APPENDIX 2

QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

TASK ORDER NUMBER:

DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

Contractor Self Reporting

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: ______ %

PERCENTAGE OF COMPLETION OF TASK ORDER: ______ %

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Contractors Performance Rating (Check): ___________________________________

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: _________________

Instructions for completing Quality Assurance Monitoring Form

Task Order: Enter Acquisitions assigned Task Order Number or Contract Number if no task order.

Description of Services: Enter title of the Task Order or a short description of task order.

Survey Period: Enter dates of surveillance being reported on the form.

Surveillance method: Check appropriate method. More than 1 method can be used during surveillance period. Check all that apply

Level of Surveillance: Check whether the form is a monthly or quarterly report as required by the COR designation. If the report is being utilized to report a random check or to report an issue, check as needed.

Percentage of items sampled during survey: Provide the percentage of work being sampled. For example a self-report should be 100%. A field survey of one of 3 work areas would be 33%.

Percentage of completion of task order: Provide the percentage of total task order completed. This can be provided by the contractor.

Analysis of Results:

Enter the evaluation rating as listed below:

Exceptional – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Good - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Satisfactory - Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task contain some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal - Performance does not meet contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed reflect a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the task or sub-task contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s actions appear or were ineffective.

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period: Provide narratives to justify the evaluation rating

Sign and date the form and provide to CO.