Att 07 QASP_CSP.docx

Enclosure (6) Contract Surveillance Plan/Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan for AEGIS

1. Purpose

This requirement consists of both performance-based and non-performance-based tasking; therefore, a Contract Surveillance Plan (CSP) and a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) are both required. This hybrid CSP/QASP is a Government developed and applied document used to ensure systematic Quality Assurance (QA) methods are used in the administration and surveillance of tasking under the Contract. The intent is to ensure the Contractor performs In Accordance With (IAW) the Statement of Work/Performance Work Statement (SOW/PWS), and the Government receives the quality of services called for in the C-Type contract.

The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) Webster Outlying Field (WOLF) Ship & Air Integrated Warfare (SAIW) Division, operating under the organic Lead Systems Integrator® (oLSI®) model, has requirements to provide engineering, technical, logistics, integration, training, and testing support services to deliver fully-integrated and tested Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence (C4I) electronic Radio Communications Systems (RCSs) for shipboard installation.

This Contract will have Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) term and CPFF completion Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for labor and cost reimbursable CLINs for Other Direct Costs (ODCs). The Contract will have a period of performance of a base year and eight option years. A properly executed CSP/QASP will assist the Government in achieving the objectives of this procurement.

2. Authority

Authority for issuance of this hybrid CSP/QASP is provided under Contract Section E – Inspection and Acceptance, which provides for inspection and acceptance of the services, products, and documentation called for in the Contract that will be executed by the Contracting Officer (KO) or a duly authorized representative.

3. Scope

To fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the distinction in terminology between Quality Control Plan (QCP) and the CSP/QASP. The Contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for the QCP, which defines the management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth in the Contract.

The hybrid CSP/QASP provides Government surveillance oversight of the Contractor’s efforts to assure they are timely, effective, and delivering the results specified in the Contract.

4. Government Resources

The following definitions for Government resources are applicable to this plan:

KO: A person duly appointed with the authority to enter into a contract (Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)), or a person with the authority to administer contracts (Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)) and make related determinations and findings on behalf of the Government. The PCO will be stated in the resulting Contract. The ACO will be designated in the resulting Contract. KOs are designated via a written warrant that sets forth limitations of authority.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR): An individual appointed in writing by the PCO to act as their authorized representative to assist in administering the Contract. The COR will be appointed in the resulting Contract. The limitations of authority are contained in the letter of appointment.

Government Project Lead (GPL): The COR designates individual GPLs to assist in administering specific efforts under the Contract.

5. Responsibilities

The following Government resources will have responsibility for the implementation of this hybrid CSP/QASP:

KO: The KO (PCO or ACO) ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the Contract, and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The KO assures that the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the Contract. The KO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance.

COR: The COR is responsible for technical administration of the Contract and assures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes that the Contractor deems may affect the Contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the KO for action.

GPL: The GPL is responsible for assisting in administering specific efforts under the Contract. A GPL cannot, in any manner, alter the scope of the Contract, make commitments, or authorize any changes on the Government’s behalf.

b. CSP/QASP: This document will be used by the COR, ACOR, and GPLs in the technical administration of this Contract. In addition to the below instructions, the form to be used for documentation of QA surveillance is the hybrid checklist provided herein.

7. Surveillance

Enclosures (1) through (3) set forth the performance standards, incentives, and surveillance methods for the Contractor, COR, ACOR, and GPLs while Enclosures (4) through (6) provide the checklist and means for the COR to document the results of the surveillance and will be provided to the KO.

8. Documentation

In addition to providing reports to the KO, the COR will maintain a complete QA file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the Government’s performance of the QA function, including the originals of the QA Checklists. All such records will be maintained for the life of the Contract. The COR shall forward these records to the KO at termination or completion of the Contract.

9. Enclosures

Enclosure (1): Quality Standards – Performance Work Statement and Statement of Work Enclosure (2): Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) Data Quality Standards Enclosure (3): Incentives Enclosure (4): Contract Surveillance Plan (CSP) Enclosure (5): Contract Surveillance by Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) Enclosure (6): Annual Surveillance Summary

ENCLOSURE (1): QUALITY STANDARDS - BY STATEMENT OF WORK

ENCLOSURE (1): QUALITY STANDARDS - BY PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

ENCLOSURE (2): CONTRACT DATA REQUIREMENTS LIST (CDRL) DATA QUALITY STANDARDS

Enclosure (2)

ENCLOSURE (3): INCENTIVES

The following incentives shall apply to performance under this Contract.

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for further CLIN awards.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for further CLIN awards.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for further CLIN awards.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for further CLIN awards.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for further CLIN awards.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for further CLIN awards.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for further CLIN awards.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for further CLIN awards.*

(-) Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for further CLIN awards.*

* The Government reserves the right not to award option Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) if the Contractor does not meet the acceptable performance standards, and/or meet all regulatory requirements.

All Performance Work Statement/Statement of Work (PWS/SOW) and Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) tasks, including sub-tasks, will be assessed focusing on the following.

Quality of Product or Service: Assess the Contractor’s effort to transform operational needs and requirements into an integrated solution. Areas of focus may include the planning and management of program tasks, the quality of support provided throughout all phases of contract execution, the integration of program management specialties, management of interfaces, and the management of a totally integrated effort of all program management concerns to meet cost, performance, and schedule objectives. Assess how successfully the Contractor meets program quality.

Schedule: Assess the Contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule by assessing the Contractor’s efforts during the assessment period that contribute to or affect the schedule variance. Also address significance of scheduled events (e.g., design reviews), discuss causes, and assess the effectiveness of Contractor corrective actions.

Cost Control: Assess the Contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract cost. Is the Contractor experiencing cost growth or under-run? If so, discuss the causes and Contractor proposed solutions for the cost overruns. For contracts where task or contract sizing is based upon contractor-provided person hour estimates, the relationship of these estimates to ultimate cost should be assessed. In addition, the extent to which the Contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility, through the efficient use of resources in each work effort will be assessed.

Business Relations: Assess the timeliness, completeness, and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the Contractor’s reasonable and cooperative behavior, effective business relations, and customer satisfaction.

Management: Assess the Contractor’s success with timely award and management of subcontracts. Discuss the extent to which the Contractor discharges its responsibility for integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the Contract; identifies and applies resources required to meet schedule requirements; assigns responsibility for tasks/actions required by the Contract; and communicates appropriate information to affected program elements in a timely manner. Assess the Contractor’s risk mitigation plans.

Utilization of Small Business (SB): The Request for Proposal (RFP) and FAR Subpart 19.7 and 15 U.S.C. 637 contains statutory requirements for complying with the SB Subcontracting Program. Assess whether the Contractor provided maximum practicable opportunity for SB (including Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs) and Indian Tribes) (including Small-Disadvantaged Businesses (SDBs) (which also includes ANCs and Indian Tribes), Women-Owned SBs (WOSBs), HUBZone, Veteran-Owned SBs (VOSBs), Service-Disabled Veteran Owned SBs (SDVOSBs), and ANCs and Indian Tribes that are not SDBs or SBs to participate in contract performance consistent with efficient performance of the Contract. Evaluation will focus on the metrics of actual SB utilization as compared to the Contract required targets and the Contractor’s submitted SB plan.

Other areas: Assess additional evaluation areas unique to the Contract or that cannot be captured elsewhere.

The evaluation ratings are as follows:

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

Very Good Performance: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

Satisfactory Performance: Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal Performance: Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects 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: Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

Enclosure (3)

ENCLOSURE (4): CONTRACT SURVEILLANCE PLAN (CSP)

Quarterly Surveillance:

The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will perform a quarterly assessment of quality, schedule, cost control, business relations, management, utilization of Small Business (SB), and other areas as applicable utilizing the evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (3).

QUARTERLY EVALUATION – BY Performance Work Statement/Statement of Work (PWS/SOW)

Measure

Enclosure (4)

ENCLOSURE (5): CONTRACT SURVEILLANCE BY CONTRACT DATA REQUIREMENTS LIST (CDRL)

Method/Measure

Total Number of Deliverables Submitted:

Total Number of Deliverables Submitted Late:

Total Number of Deliverables Requiring Revision:

Percentage of Deliverables Submitted Late:

Percentage of Deliverables Requiring Revision:

Enclosure (5)

ENCLOSURE (6): ANNUAL SURVEILLANCE SUMMARY

The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will perform an assessment of overall contract performance utilizing the evaluation rating definitions listed in Enclosure (3). This assessment will be completed annually covering the previous 12 months.

Method/Measure

Annual Surveillance Completed by: _______________________

Date Completed: ________________