2. Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Introduction The purpose of this Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for custodial services is to identify in advance what this agency will do to assure that the Contractor’s performance meets the baseline established by the contract in terms of technical requirements, schedule, quality and cost. The QASP provides the basis for the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) to evaluate the Contractor's performance. The oversight described in the QASP and in the contract will help to ensure that the performance levels required by the Performance Work Statement are attained throughout the contract term. Further, QASP provides the COR with a proactive way to avoid unacceptable or deficient performance and provides verifiable input for the required annual past performance evaluations. A copy of this QASP will be furnished to the Contractor so that any concerns the Contractor may have can be addressed prior to commencement of work.

Functions of the QASP The QASP is composed to convey the following:

· The roles and responsibilities of Government officials

· The evaluation methods to be employed by the Government in assessing the Contractor’s performance

· The monitoring forms used to evaluate and document the Contractor’s performance.

Government Roles and Responsibilities The “technical” Government personnel who will use the QASP is the COR. The COR has main technical responsibility for overall performance management of the contract. The COR has the lead in monitoring, assessing, recording, and reporting the technical performance of the Contractor. The COR will be the main interface with the Contractor concerning performance and will work closely with the Contractor’s Project Manager. The Contracting Officer (CO) makes all the key contractual decisions in obligating the Government. The COR will keep the CO informed about the emerging performance and seek the CO’s advice and input for non-technical issues that arise.

In carrying out performance monitoring, the following responsibilities are to be noted:

· Inspection can be done at all times and places so long as not to disrupt the Contractor’s effort.

· If the COR discovers performance deficiencies, the Contractor is given the first right to make the corrections.

· If the Contractor is not able to make corrections, either:

· The Government or a third party can do so at the Contractor’s expense or

· The Government can accept the performance and seek an equitable adjustment.

· Acceptance acknowledges that the performance conforms to the requirements and that the Government will take title and ownership of the outputs.

· The ultimate determinant of performance is the contract.

NOTE: The Contractor has a key responsibility here as well: namely, to have a Quality Control Plan in place and be using it to assure the proper performance by correcting deficiencies as performance emerges. The COR (through the CO) can request a copy of the Quality Control Plan at any time.

Performance Evaluation Methods The primary functions that the COR will carry out are performing inspections, handling nonconformance and acceptance. These functions will be done to the tasking and deliverable facets of the effort. Specifically, such duties will entail the following:

· Carry out periodic inspections by establishing an Inspection Schedule using the Quality checklists from the Contractor’s Quality Control Plan (as appropriate) and/or the set of Government Performance Requirements Summaries.

· Random Inspections will be done on a monthly basis by the COR or evaluator not to exceed four (4) times per month. Report findings obtained from the periodic inspections to the Contracting Officer.

· Use the Contract Discrepancy Report Form (see below), which will be provided to the Contractor, to

(1) Communicate discrepancies discovered during the periodic inspections; (2) note the impacts of what was not completed, and any recommendation for rework or re-performance; and (3) follow up to ensure non-conformances are corrected.

· Hold weekly review meetings. Follow through to ensure agreed-upon actions are undertaken by the Contractor.

· Provide timely feedback on submitted deliverables. Provide feedback to the Contractor in time to incorporate comments for resubmittal.

· Review changes to the Quality Control Plan before having the Contracting Officer sign off.

· Perform annual and final Performance Evaluations.

When an observation indicates defective performance, the COR will require the contract manager or representative to initial the observation made. The initialing of the observation does not necessarily constitute concurrence with the observation, only acknowledgment that he or she has been made aware of the defective performance.

The Contractor shall perform or re-perform any work, which was not performed in a satisfactory manner, at the Contractor’s expense. In the event the Contractor fails to provide the manpower necessary to accomplish the work requested, the Government reserves the right to assign and place a sufficient number of federal employees on the job or hire personnel to accomplish the work. The cost of such federal employee so used shall be charged against the Contractor and the amount of all costs to the Government incurred as a result of such action shall be deducted from any payment due the Contractor. Also, if federal employees are not available, the amount due the Contractor for the month in which the failure occurs will be adjusted.

Performance Requirement Summaries In general, the Tasking and Deliverables done by the Contractor will be evaluated in terms of how well the requirements of the contract are satisfied. The COR will periodically perform Inspection on the Tasking and Deliverables to ensure there is a match between actual and expected performance. If discrepancies occur, the Contract Discrepancy Report (see below) will be used to communicate these performance concerns to the Contractor and follow through to ensure performance gaps are closed. The Contracting Officer will be kept in the loop often in terms of the Inspection findings and means to resolve identified performance concerns. Note: the periodic performance feedback given to the Contractor by the COR doing Inspection can be “golden” in terms of providing timely and insightful feedback about any “mid-course corrections” the Contractor may need to make to ultimately achieve the contract requirements. In addition, the information obtained from such incremental surveillance activities will form the basis for the COR completing the Performance Criteria and their Ratings form (see below).

The actual Inspection that is done by the COR includes using Performance Requirement Summaries (PRSs).

A. Requirement Element:

This is a Task or Deliverable or an aspect of Task or Deliverable that will be evaluated by the COR. The Performance Requirements Summaries’ table is developed to include Tasks and each set of Deliverables.

B. Acceptable Quality Level (AQL):

The Performance Work Statement (PWS) delineates the levels of performance expected from the Contractor. During the actual Contractor performance, the COR will evaluate the current level of performance, by using one or more AQLs given in the Performance Requirements Summaries. In many instances, these AQLs originate from internal or external standards. The basic reason for using AQLs is to know whether the Contractor is or is not moving toward attaining the required level of performance. A major challenge is ensuring that there is a match between the discovered AQL’s and the feedback about actual performance.

Then, over time, use of these AQLs can, where needed, improve the expected versus actual performance “fit.”

C. Monitoring Method:

This is the means by which the COR will verify that the AQLs are providing effective performance feedback information.