A03.23 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) - HEC MATOC.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

For: Hydrologic Engineering Software Development for the Hydrologic Engineering Center (CEIWR-HEC), Davis, California, Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC).

Contract Number: TBD

Contract Description: The Contractors shall provide all personnel, management, supervision, equipment, material, tools, quality control, and other items necessary to provide water resource engineering and planning engineering software development; water resources data, methodologies, tools and models; training services; analysis and assessments; and studies for the Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC).

Contractor’s name: TBD

1. PURPOSE

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. This QASP explains the following:

· What will be monitored.

· How monitoring will take place.

· Who will conduct the monitoring.

· How monitoring efforts and results will be documented.

This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance.

This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the contractor. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

2. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

a. Contracting Officer (CO) - The CO shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The CO shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned CO: David A. Kaplan (awards up to $10M); Doug Pohlman (awards up to $50M)

Contracting Organization/Agency: USACE, Humphrey’s Engineer Support Activity (HECSA)

b. Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR) - The COTR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COTR shall keep a quality assurance file. The COTR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned COTR: Lea Adams

c. Other Key Government Personnel – Chris Dunn, Kristy Riley, Matt Fleming and Greg Karlovits

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s program manager for this contract.

a. Program Manager – TBD at award

b. Other Contractor Personnel - TBD at award

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet these standards.

Each Contractor shall submit a time and cost estimate for each proposed delivery order/task order and shall submit plans for performance of the work. At a minimum, the Contractors' plans will include: (1) a statement of understanding of the task; (2) a description of the approach to the task; (3) a list of participants by expertise (also by name if other than those submitted in the Contractors' original qualifications package); (4) level of effort estimated by labor category, e.g. principal investigator, research assistant, administrative support and; (5) a cost estimate. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL). The Acceptable Quality level 1 is the percentage of tasks that meet the standards listed in the table below.

5. INCENTIVES

The Government shall use Exercise of Option Period as incentives. Incentives shall be based on exceeding, meeting, or not meeting performance standards.

6. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COTR shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

a. DIRECT OBSERVATION. (Can be performed periodically or through 100% surveillance.)

1, 2, 3, 4, and 5

b. 100% Review (Evaluates all outcomes.)

1, 2, 3, 4, and 5

c. Progress or status meetings.

1, 2, 3, 4, and 5

8 DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE

a. ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE

A Performance record shall be documented using the attached Surveillance Form upon completion of each Task Order. A Form shall be completed for each Task Order initiated under this contract. Forms shall be completed by the Government’s Project Manager and submitted to the COTR.

Monthly status reports reflecting the performance of the Contractor shall be completed in the Surveillance Performance Module of the Procurement Integrity Enterprise Environment.

The Government shall document both positive and negative performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action.

b. UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COTR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COTR shall document the discussion and place it in the COTR file.

When the COTR determines formal written communication is required, the COTR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) and present it to the contractor's program manager.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CDR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the COTR. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for any contractual action deemed necessary by the CO.

10. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT

a. Frequency of Measurement.

During contract performance, the COTR will periodically analyze whether the negotiated frequency of surveillance is appropriate for the work being performed. This analysis will be based on the Surveillance Forms to be submitted by the Governments Project Manager upon receipt and review of each product. Forms shall be submitted to the COTR.

b. Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings.

The COTR shall meet with the contractor yearly to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment.

TBD at Award – Contractor Program Manager

Lea Adams – Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative

CEIWR-HEC Date:

MEMORANDUM FOR

SUBJECT: Surveillance Form for Contract W912HQ22D0012, Task Order # Comment by Adams, Lea G CIV USARMY CEIWR (USA): TBD

1. This form is respectfully submitted as required by the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan for the subject contract.

2. Cost Award Amount: Final Cost after all Mod’s:

Cost within allowed variation: (Y/N)

3. Timeliness

Date product due: Date product delivered: Product delivered within allowed variation: (Y/N)

4. Quality

Describe whether product quality satisfies requirement of the Government’s SOW: ______________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. Prepared by: