36C24720Q0230-013.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Contract No.: TBD Customer: TBD Project Title: Armored Car Service

Prepared By:

Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Acquisition Operations Office’s Name Office’s Address

Table of Contents

PART 1: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

1.1 Introduction

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) has been developed to implement current Performance-Based Service Acquisition (PBSA) guidance. It is designed to meet the needs of the organization and assess and document contractor performance in accordance with the requirements set forth in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), in order to measure contractor success. The QASP also provides the Contractor Officer Representatives (COR) with an effective and systematic surveillance method for each required service.

This QASP describes:

· What will be monitored;

· How monitoring will take place;

· Who will conduct the monitoring; and

· How monitoring efforts and results will be documented.

This QASP is based on the premise the contractor, not the Government, is responsible for the management and quality control actions needed to meet the standards of the contract. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 12.208, Contract Quality Assurance, “Contracts for commercial items shall rely on contractors’ existing quality assurance systems as a substitute for Government inspection and testing before tender for acceptance unless customary market practices for the commercial item being acquired include in-process inspection. Any in-process inspection by the Government shall be conducted in a manner consistent with commercial practice.” A Quality Control Plan (QCP) shall be required from the contractor. This QASP was developed with the assistance of the contractor’s QCP.

Copies of the original QASP and revisions 208shall be provided to the Contractor and Government officials responsible for surveillance activities. The Government can change the method of surveillance at any time, as long as it does not violate the contractual standards.

1.2 Authority

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under FAR Part 46, Inspection of Services clauses, which provides for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the service called for in the contract or order. This acceptance is to be executed by the contracting officer or a duly authorized representative.

1.3 Government Responsibilities and Representation

Contracting Officer (CO) and / or Contract Administrator (CA):

· Ensures acquisition processes (i.e., market research, gathering past performance information, source selection, issuing solicitations, evaluating proposals and awarding the contract) are aggressively performed;

· Delegates authority for inspection and/or acceptance to COR, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract. Informs the contractor of the names, duties, and limitations of authority for all COR assigned to the contract;

· Is the sole approving authority for all decisions resulting from this QASP.

1. The CO for this contract is:

Organization:

2. The CA for this contract is:

Organization:

Contracting Officer Representatives (COR):

· Assists in preparing the PWS and QASP, if necessary;

· Performs inspections to evaluate and document the contractor’s performance; notifies the CO of any significant performance deficiencies; submits all relevant documentation to the CO;

· Maintains QA documentation, and recommends changes/improvements to the contract, PWS, QASP, or other requirements throughout the life of the contract to provide more effective operations or eliminate unnecessary costs;

· Responsible for completing the contractor’s CPARS report, at the completion of the contract or Task Order.

1. The COR for this contract is:

Organization:

1.4 Contractor Responsibilities and Representation

Contractor:

· Complies fully with the terms and conditions of the contract;

· Maintains and implements a Quality Control Plan (QCP).

· The QASP is developed with the assistance of the contractor’s QCP.

· Tenders to the Government for acceptance only those services that conform to contract requirements.

· Recommends any changes to the QCP and /or QASP that will provide more effective operations or eliminate unnecessary costs.

1. The Contractor for this contract is:

Address:

2. Contractor Representative

a. Name:

b. Title:

c. Email:

d. Phone No.:

1.5 Performance Management Approach

The PWS sets forth “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the Contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This QASP defines the performance management approach taken by the Strategic Acquisition Center (SAC) to monitor the contractor’s performance, ensuring the expected performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessments, and the cornerstone of performance mangagement is the ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data.This analysis yields information indicative to what extent the expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

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. A “results” focus by the Government provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract or order as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.6 Performance Management Strategy

The contractor measures quality through their own QCP. The contractor’s QCP includes all work performed under this contract or order regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. This QASP is not part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the contractor's QCP. The contractor’s QCP sets forth the procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor shall possess a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. The contractor shall monitor and assess throughout the period of performance of the contract or order as to either meeting or not meeting the performance objectives detailed in the PWS.

A surveillance matrix (template given in Part 4) will be created and used to assess the work performed by the contractor. The surveillance matrix outlines the following: performance objectives and their acceptable standards; location of performance objective in the PWS; and the COR’s method of surveillance. The Government representative shall monitor performance by the contractor to determine their performance against the performance objectives given in the surveillance matrix.

When a contractor performance issue occurs, the COR will notify the CO/CA. The COR and CO/CA will engage the contractor’s representative to resolve the discrepancy. The contractor shall make the required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

At the completion of the contract or order, the CO will complete the mandated CPARS report. The CO may delegate this authority to the COR with a Memo to File. The Contractor shall have input prior to finalization.

1.7 Revisions

Revisions to the QASP shall only be accomplished with the approval of and by the CO.

PART 2: PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

Performance Levels

Acceptable Performance The Government shall document acceptable performance levels (APL) within the surveillance matrix. All performance objectives required by the PWS shall have an APL associated with them. Any report shall become part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action as well as justification for providing the contractor with positive incentives.

Positive Incentives N/A.

Unacceptable Performance The Government shall document unacceptable performance accordingly. This will always be in writing. If circumstances necessitate immediate verbal communication, communication will be followed in writing by the CO/CA. The COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

Negative Incentives

Performance Ratings

Performance Rating Criteria

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

The ratings given above are those used by the CPARS. These ratings are used in order to easily and efficiently report on a contractor’s performance upon the conclusion of a contract or order.

PART 3: SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURES

Introduction

These surveillance procedures have been developed to implement Performance-Based Service Acquisition (PBSA) guidance. They are designed to provide the COR instructions on how to perform surveillance and document findings on this contract.

The COR will perform QA procedures following the QASP, on a quarterly basis.

Any nonconformance with contract requirements is a “deficiency”. The term “deficiency” is used in reference to not meeting the APLs listed in the surveillance matrix.

The APLs recognize unforeseen and uncontrollable problems do occur and may be above the contractor’s control. CORs are to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating the contractor’s performance against the performance objectives.

Performance Documentation

The templates provided in Part 4 of this document will serve as the templates for all documentation.

When the CO/CA determines formal written communication is required for the deficiency, the COR shall prepare a Service Discrepancy Report (SDR) & Contractor Corrective Action Report (CAR), and present it to the Contractor's representative. The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of this document in writing (may be electronic) to the CO/CA. The Service Discrepancy & Contractor Corrective Action Report shall state how long after receipt the contractor has to take corrective action. It shall also specify, in block 8, if the contractor is required to prepare a CAR in block 13, which instructs the government representative how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. All SDRs shall become part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action, including negative incentives, deemed necessary by the CO/CA.

The COR shall submit their Performance Based Service Assessment, all validated Customer Complaint Records (CCR), Customer Feedback Reports (CFR), and SDRs to the CO no later than 5 working days following the assessment date in which the actual surveillance occurred. All documentation will be used to support the Contractor’s evaluation and ratings in the CPARS.

Submission & Evaluation of Corrective Action Report Once the contractor is notified by the COR of a deficiency in their performance, by a SDR, they may be required to complete a CAR. This requirement shall be indicated on the form. The CAR must be completed by the contractor and resubmitted to the COR within 10 business days of receiving the SDR, unless extenuating circumstances prevent them from conforming to this deadline. The CO/CA will determine whether the proposed CAR is sufficient in remedying the issue. If further actions need to be taken against the contractor, in accordance with the Inspection of Services clause, it will be at the CO/CA’s discretion. The CO/CA will, in turn, re-send copies of the completed SDR (includes their comments and signature) to the COR and the contractor’s representative for their records within 10 days of receipt of the contractor’s CAR.

Contractor Notification

The contractor will be notified by the COR via email of the results of an assessment no later than 15 working days upon its completion.

The COR must always contact the contractor’s designated representative and inform him/her of any deficiency that was observed. The SDR will serve as the COR’s notification tool to the Contractor.

Methods of Performance Surveillance

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use one or several of the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

Customer Complaint When the customer discovers unacceptable performance or a decifiency in service, they shall notify the COR and submit a Customer Complaint Record (CCR). Customer complaints shall be submitted on the CCR template in Part 4. The customer will keep one copy and forward a copy to the COR, either manually or electronically. The COR shall review, and if necessary investigate, the item and determine if the complaint is contractually valid. If valid, it is forwarded to the contractor’s representative for corrective action. Within 5 days of receiving the CCR, the COR will notify the customer of the action being taken in regards to the filed complaint.

In addition, the COR or individual customer(s) may wish to submit positive feedback about the Contractor’s performance. This positive feedback may be submitted on the Customer Feedback Record (CFR) in Part 4. In the event the COR wants feedback from customers on scheduled timeframes, those customers with no complaints shall submit their feedback on a CFR.

Periodic Surveillance When periodic surveillance is used, inspections shall be performed at the frequency identified for each performance objective or on a random basis. The frequency of inspection is established (i.e. daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly) but the specific time of occurrence need not be specified. If the COR discovers unacceptable performance or a deficiency in service, they shall generate a Service Discrepency Report (SDR) identifying the deficiency(ies). The SDR will then be submitted to the contractor for corrective action through the CAR.

Random Sampling The COR may use random sampling. As with all the other surveillance methods, when the COR discovers unacceptable performance or a defect in service, they shall generate a SDR identifying the discrepancy, and a CAR shall be required by the Contractor.

100% Inspection Inspections are performed every time service occurs. This method may be required when the service has a critical impact on safety or mission, or occurs infrequently, or stringent requirements exist.

Remedies for Unacceptable Performance

In accordance with the contract Inspection of Services clause, if any of the services do not conform to contract requirements, the government may require the contractor to re-perform the services in conformity with contract requirements at no increase in contract amount. This includes, but is not limited to, termination of contractor personnel and recruitment of substitute personnel that are equally qualified within established timeframes. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-performance, the government may:

· Require the contractor to take necessary action to ensure future performance conforms to contract requirements; and

· Reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed.

If the Contractor fails to promptly perform the services again or to take the necessary action to ensure future performance is in conformity with contract requirements, the government may:

· By contract or otherwise, perform the services and charge to the contractor any cost incurred by the government that is directly related to the performance of such service; or

· Decrease the invoice amount in relation to performance; or

· Issue a Cure Notice; or

· Issue a Show Cause Notice; or

· Terminate for Default.

The CO will determine the action to be taken against the contractor. The CO/CA will, in turn, send copies of the decision to the COR and the Contractor for their records.

Contractor Evaluation at Completion of Contract/Order

Upon completion of the contract or order, the contractor’s performance will be reported in CPARS by the designated official. The CPARS rating will be a result of the ratings given by the COR during contract inspection.

PART 4: DOCUMENT TEMPLATES

SURVEILLANCE MATRIX

Performance Levels (APL) Inspection

Unsatisfactory = Contractor does not pick-up sealed deposit bags as scheduled

Unsatisfactory = Contractor does not provide notification when a pick-up or delivery will be late

Unsatisfactory = Contractor does not provide notification within one (1) hour

Collections presented to the Contractor for transport and delivery shall not be intermixed with collections from other sources, this includes the private sector or other Government agencies. Collections are to remain segregated at all times.

Satisfactory = Collections are not intermixed with collections from other sources

Unsatisfactory = Collections are intermixed with collections from other sources

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

A copy of this record goes to each of the following: COR, Contractor, and Contracting Officer.

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD (CCR)

DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NO.

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY

SERVICE DISCREPANCY REPORT (SDR) & CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

SERVICE DISCREPENCY REPORT (SDR) & CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. DATE

4. SUSPENSE DATE

5. CONTRACT DESCRIPTION

6. COR DOCUMENTED DEFICIENCY

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

7. CONTRACTING OFFICER REPRESENTATIVE (COR)

NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

8. CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT REQUIRED

|_| YES |_| NO

9. CO/CA RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

10. CO DETERMINATION

|_| ACCEPTED |_| REJECTED

11. CLOSE DATE

12. CONTRACTING OFFICER (CO)

NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

13. CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT:

Please respond with a written corrective action plan, within this block, detailing the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 4.

PERFORMANCE BASED SERVICE ASSESSMENT

PERFORMANCE BASED ASSESSMENT REPORT (If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number.)

1. CONTRACT/TASK ORDER NO.

2. CONTRACTOR

3.DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE

4. CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE

5. COR PHONE

6. INSPECTION DATE

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Excellent/ Outstanding

Applicable

TOTAL RATINGS

(Total of each rating in each column.)

FINAL ASSESSMENT RATING

(Average rating based on the totals above.)

7. COR EXPLANATION (Required for rating of “Excellent/Outstanding”. If a rating of “Unsatisfactory” was given, a Service Discrepency Report must be completed.)

CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE AND DATE (Once inspection is completed)

CONTRACTING OFFICER SIGNATURE AND DATE (Once received)

CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE AND DATE (Once report is received)

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK RECORD (CFR)

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK RECORD (CFR)

DATE/TIME OF EVENT

DETAILS OF EVENT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NO.

INDIVIDUAL’S NAME

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMMENT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF OBSERVATION

OTHER COMMENTS OR NOTES

RECEIVED BY (NAME & DATE)