Vendor_Inquiries.docx

1. On page 4 of the RFI document, the number of pages for the capability statement has not been specified (e.g. “…but not exceed __pages…”). Is there an overall page limitation to the response? Are there any other page limitations for any section within the capability statement? Are there any formatting or other requirements within the response?

There are no page limitations on the capability statement.

2. In the RFI document, it states at the top of page 3 that “The Contractor’s PM must be available to come to the HQ Office in Washington, DC on an as-needed basis as determined by HUD, not to exceed 60 hours per month, except during the transition periods.” This is confirmed in the draft PWS in section 1.7 Place of Performance and in section 5.4.1 Project Manager. However, further on page 3 in the RFI document, under “CONTEMPLATED PLACE OF PERFORMANCE”, it is stated “At the contractor’s facility except for the Project Manager who will be expected to be on-site at HUD HQ’s.” Can the Government please confirm if the PM must be on-site full-time or only on an as-needed basis?

The RFI will be corrected to read - The PM must be available to come to the HUD HQ Office in Washington, DC on an as-needed basis as determined by HUD, not to exceed 60 hours per month, except during the transition periods. During the transition in and transition out period the PM may be required to be at HUD'S HQ Office in Washington DC up to 120 hours per month.

3. In section 3 of the draft PWS, as the Government will not provide facilities or equipment, what type of facilities, equipment, materials and other supplies are necessary for the Contractor to supply in order to meet the requirements of this contract? We would like to be able to estimate other direct costs for this requirement.

There are no specific requirements for facilities or equipment for this proposed acquisition. All necessary facilities and equipment to successfully perform the tasks identified in the PWS shall be identified and provided by the Contractor.

4. In section 5.3 of the draft PWS, is it possible to access the SharePoint site referenced in this link: http://hudsharepoint.hud.gov/sites/apps/iWorks/SitePages/Home.aspx?

Access will be granted once a contract is awarded.

5. In section 5.3.1 of the draft PWS, can the Government please provide more details on the types of training needed to fulfill this requirement? Where will this training take place and is the Contractor responsible for facilities, equipment, materials and other supplies to conduct this training?

The training is for HUD users. HUD will provide facilities and equipment for in-person trainings.

6. In section 5.3.2 of the draft PWS, can the Government please provide more details on the types of programming support (e.g. SharePoint, other applications and/or computer programming languages) needed to fulfill this requirement?

Sharepoint, possible Outlook, Office 360, and one drive.

7. In section 6 of the draft PWS, can the Government please provide more details on the deliverables and their acceptance criteria for this requirement? For example, when is the Transition-Out Plan due?

At this time a delivery schedule has not been developed. For the Transition-out plan we anticipate that the draft plan would be submitted 60 days after contract award. No later than 90 days after contract award the final transition-out plan would be due. It is also expected that the transition-out plan be kept up-to-date throughout the duration of the contract.

8. In section 7 of the draft PWS, can the Government please provide the summary chart referenced which lists the contract's primary requirements, the associated performance standards, the expected target performance, and the methods of surveillance?

See attached QASP.

9. Can the Government please provide the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) referenced in sections 3.5, 4.71, and 7 of the draft PWS?

See attached QASP.

10. Is there a page limitation on the capability statement? No

11. How many Full Time Employees (FTE's) are on or expected to be on contract? Other that the Project Manager there are no specific expectations on the Contractor’s staffing. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to propose/provide adequate staff to meet all of the tasks outlined in the PWS.

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Single Family Housing (SFH) Handbook Support Services 08/17/2017 Version 1.0

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Single Family Housing (SFH) Handbook Support Services 1 Vision

The Office of Single Family Housing needs the services of a Contractor to provide SFH Policy Handbook development, communications support, policy business process automation and project management.

1 INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) entitled Single Family Housing (SFH) Support Services. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Single Family Housing will use in ensuring the required performance standards or service levels are achieved by the Contractor.

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 The PWS structures the acquisition around "what service or quality level is required", as opposed to "how the Contractor should perform the work" (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by Single Family Housing 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. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the Contractor.

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. 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. 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. The Contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

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 Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and the Contractor. The CO will designate one full-time 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 (COR)

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 used to document the inspection and evaluation of the Contractor's work performance. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause 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, "Surveillance Matrix". If the Contractor meets the required service or performance level, it will be paid the monthly amount agreed on in the contract.

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. The primary methods of surveillance are: (include those that apply)

· Random Sampling - (insert the process which will be used to conduct the random sampling)

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

· Periodic Inspection - The COR typically performs the periodic inspection on a monthly basis.

· Customer Feedback

4.2 Customer Feedback

The Contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints.

Performance management drives the Contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems. The customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the CO and/or COR, as opposed to the Contractor.

Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR.

Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.

4.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

The Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) included in Appendix 1, "Surveillance Matrix", for Contractor performance are structured to allow the Contractor to manage how the work is performed. For certain critical activities such as those involving editing services, website assessment, and policy BPA maintenance and support 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.

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 are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Appendix 1.

5.2 Monitoring Forms

The Government's QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, may be reported using the following monitoring forms: Appendix 2 - "Corrective Action Report (CAR)", Appendix 3 - "Customer Complaint Record", and Appendix 4 "Performance Assessment Report" (PAR). 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. The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSEMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

The Government will use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards/service levels/AQLs 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.

6.2 Reporting

At the end of each month, the COR/SME will prepare a written report for the SFH management 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, 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, COR/SME and/or other Government IPT personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR 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 trend analysis,

· 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,

· [insert any additional items to be discussed during reviews]

6.3.2 The CO and 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 at the discretion of the CO.

6.4 Surveillance Matrix

The Surveillance Matrix (Appendix 1) is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the Contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance. The Government performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the Contractor's performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The PRS should be used to form the foundation of the COR's inspection checklist.

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used.

[If your organization requires that you use a different rating mechanism, insert it here.]

Performance Rating Criteria

Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix

5.1 SFH Policy Handbook Development.

5.1.1 Editing Services.

a) 100% accurate technical editing services for SFH Handbook documents and other policy documents.

AQL: Zero deviation

b) 100% ability to concurrently edit multiple documents in the priority identified by the COR.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: Deliverables How: 100% visual examination and verification of accuracy in all deliverables submitted Frequency: After submission of each draft and after submission of each final deliverable.

Who: COR or SME Standard(s): Inspection applies to all standards

5.1.2 Consolidated SF Handbook.

a) 100% accuracy in maintaining the consolidated SFH Handbook, including table of contents, glossary, and acronym list.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: COR or SME.

How: 100% visual examination and verification of accuracy in all deliverables submitted Frequency: Continuous

5.1.3 Index Creation.

a) 100% accuracy in creating and maintaining the SF Handbook index.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: Index Creation How: 100% visual examination and verification of accuracy in all deliverables submitted Frequency: Continuous

5.2 Website Assessment.

a) On an on-going basis assessments of SFH websites shall be conducted.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: Annual report that provides findings and recommendations summarizing the on-going assessment of HUD's websites.

How: 100% visual examination and verification of accuracy in all deliverables submitted Frequency: Annually

5.3 Policy BPA Maintenance and Support.

a) 100% accurate modification, maintenance, and support of the policy development SharePoint solution.

AQL: Zero deviation

b) Develop and provide a turnover plan for the BPA maintenance and support tasks.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: Policy BPA Maintenance and Support How: 100% visual examination and verification of accuracy in all deliverables submitted Frequency: Continuous

5.3.1 Training.

a) Provide accurate and informative training.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: training How: 100% visual examination and verification of accuracy in all deliverables submitted Frequency: Randomly

5.3.2 Maintenance and Modification.

a) 100% accuracy in providing programming support for the modifications to the BPA tool.

AQL: Zero deviation

b) Develop and provide a turnover plan for the BPA maintenance and support tasks.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: Maintenance and Modification How: 100% visual examination and verification of accuracy in all deliverables submitted Frequency: Continuous

5.3.2.1 BPA SharePoint Tool Report Development.

a) 100% accuracy in developing and maintaining the Automated Policy Development User Guide.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: BPA SharePoint Toll Report Development How: 100% visual examination and verification of accuracy in all deliverables submitted Frequency: Continuous

5.3.2.2 End-user Support.

a) 100% availability to provide trouble-shooting assistance AQL: Zero deviation

What: End-user Support How: Review of the monthly end-user support progress report.

Frequency: Monthly

5.4 Project Management Support.

a) 100% project management support, including status reports, meeting, managing and updating schedules, etc.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: Project Management Support How: Review of reports, schedules, and logs.

Frequency: Continuous

5.4.1 Project Manager.

5.4.2 Meetings

a) 100% logistical support for the preparation and execution of meetings. This includes, scheduling and meeting minutes.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: meetings How: 100% participation in the meetings and 100% review of the meeting minutes.

Frequency: Continuous

5.4.3 Administrative Reporting Requirements.

a) Provide a monthly status report that includes an executive summary; progress from the previous reporting period; pending deliverables; and program challenges.

AQL: Zero deviation

What: Administrative Reporting Requirements How: Review of monthly status report.

Frequency: Monthly

Appendix 2 - Corrective Action Report (CAR)

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. FUNCTIONAL AREA

5. SUSPENSE DATE

6. CONTROL NUMBER

7. DEFICIENCY |_| MAJOR |_| MINOR

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

Please respond with a written corrective action plan that details the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 5. If date was not entered in Block 5, the contractor is not required to provide a response.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

11. COR DETERMINATION

|_| ACCEPTED |_| REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

Appendix 3 - Customer Complaint Record

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NUMBER

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY

Appendix 4 - Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. |_| DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY)

|_| NEW

|_| REPEAT

|_| NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM REVIEWED

II. CONTRACTOR VALIDATION

11. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE |_| CONCUR |_| NON-CONCUR

12. CORRECTIVE ACTION ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE

13. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTION OF RECURRENCE OR REASON FOR NON-CONCURRENCE OF COR CITED DEFICIENCY

III. ACTION CORRECTED

14. |_| CONCUR |_| NON-CONCUR COR SIGNATURE AND DATE

15. COR REMARKS (REQUIRED)

6. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS