ATT4_QASP.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for

Joint Interoperability of Tactical Command and Control Systems

16 January 2024

1. Purpose

2. Authority

3. Roles and Responsibilities

3.1 Program / Project Manager

3.2 Contracting Officer (KO)

3.3 Contracting Officer's Representative (COR)

3.4 Other Key Government Personnel

3.5 Contractor Representatives

4. Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance

4.1 Contract Surveillance

4.2 Performance Requirements

Appendix 1 - Corrective Action Report (CAR) Appendix 2 - Customer Complaint Record (CCR) Appendix 3 - Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

1. Purpose This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government-developed document used to determine if the Contractor's performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The QASP establishes procedures on how this assessment/inspection process will be conducted. It provides the detailed process for a continuous oversight process:

What will be monitored How monitoring will take place Who will conduct the monitoring How monitoring efforts and results will be documented

The Contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards using its Quality Control Plan. The QASP provides the structure for the Government's surveillance of the Contractor's performance to assure that it meets contract standards. It is the Government's responsibility to be objective, fair and consistent in evaluating Contractor performance.

The Government may provide a copy of the QASP to the Contractor to facilitate open communication.

In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen or uncontrollable circumstances might occur that are outside the control of the Contractor.

The QASP should ensure early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance.

2. Authority Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Part 46 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Inspection of Services clauses, which provide for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the service required in the contract or order. This acceptance is to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

3. Roles and Responsibilities The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

3.1 Program / Project Manager

The PM provides primary program oversight, nominates the COR, ensures the COR is trained before performing any COR duties and supports the COR's performance assessment activities. While the PM may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, they are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or any contract changes on the government's behalf.

3.2 Contracting Officer (KO)

The KO 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 KO designates/appoints the COR. The KO shall also ensure that the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract as well as determine and document the final assessment of the Contractor's performance in the Government’s past performance tracking system.

Assigned KO: Marlanea Kirkbride Organization or Agency: MCTSSA Telephone: (760) 725-8195 Email: marlanea.kirkbride@usmc.mil

3.3 Contracting Officer's Representative (COR)

The COR is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the Contractor's performance.

The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The COR shall keep a Quality Assurance file that accurately documents the Contractor's actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the Contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the KO. The COR is required to provide an annual performance assessment to the KO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the primary tool for monitoring Contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government's behalf.

Assigned COR: Kevin Armstrong Organization or Agency: MCTSSA TED Interoperability Branch Telephone: (760) 725-0529 Email: kevin.r.armstrong@usmc.mil

3.4 Other Key Government Personnel

This may include performance monitors, inspectors, technical experts, or others who provide information that helps the COR monitor Contractor performance.

Assigned Liaison Officers Organization or Agency: MCTSSA:

TBD

3.5 Contractor Representatives

The following employees of the Contractor serve as the Contractor's Program Manager for this contract. (Complete this section after the contract award)

Program Manager - <upon award, enter name> Telephone: <enter number> Email: <enter address>

Other Key Contract Personnel - <upon award, enter name or delete these lines if not applicable>

Title: <enter title> Telephone: <enter number>

Email: <enter address>

4. Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance This section describes special requirements and provides details of various considerations for this effort.

4.1 Contract Surveillance

The goal of the QASP is to ensure that Contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. The COR's contribution is their professional, non-adversarial relationships with the KO, PM and the Contractor, which enables positive, open and timely communications. The foundation of this relationship is built upon objective, fair, and consistent COR evaluations of Contractor performance against contract requirements. The COR uses the methods contained in this QASP to ensure the Contractor is in compliance with contract requirements. The COR is responsible for a wide range of surveillance requirements that effectively measure and evaluate the Contractor's performance. Additionally, this QASP is based on the premise that the Contractor, not the government, is responsible for management and QC/QA actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract.

4.2 Performance Requirements

The performance requirements delineated in the PWS will provide the performance objectives and standards that must be met by the Contractor. These documents also detail 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 performance standards should be used to form the foundation of the COR's inspection checklist.

There are five surveillance methods that can be used to evaluate the Contractor’s performance:

Planned Sampling Inspection, 100 Percent Inspection, Customer Complaints, Unscheduled Inspections, and Random Sampling Inspections.

Planned Sampling Inspection consists of planned sampling at specific dates or time intervals. It may be appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently, and where 100 percent inspection or random sampling inspections is not desired.

100 Percent Inspection is an inspection method whereby all outputs are monitored. This method provides the best indication of contractor performance and the most documented basis for determining contract payment actions. However, it requires extensive COR resources, and therefore, is not practical for most service requirements. 100 percent inspection is preferred when the PWS requirement is so critical that nonperformance would pose a direct risk to the safety of personnel or property, or when the work occurs infrequently and the output population is small.

Customer Complaints is an effective surveillance tool. In times of resource constraints, the use of customer complaints provides an effective and efficient means of monitoring contractor performance. Customers should be made aware of the minimum contractor performance requirements to be sure that customer complaints are valid indicators of actual contractor performance. The COR must investigate each customer complaint and validate the accuracy before any action will be taken.

Unscheduled Inspections consists of planned sampling at unspecified dates or time intervals. It may be appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently, and where 100 percent inspection or random sampling inspections is not desired.

Random Sampling Inspections are utilized when a service is performed relatively frequently and a statistically valid sample can be selected for audit. Random Sampling is a means of evaluation by observing or inspecting some part (a sample), but not all, of a population or lot of the contract requirements to assist the government with determining whether standards set forth in the contract have been met.

4.3 Performance Reporting

In evaluating the quality of the Contractor’s performance for Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) required pursuant to DoD Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 242.1502 the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 42.15, the following performance ratings provided in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 42.15 must be used.

Performance Rating

Criteria

Exceptional 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 meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the government benefits. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

Good Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were satisfactory.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements.

The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions.

The Contractor’s proposed actions appear marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the Contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

In addition, the COR shall use the following performance evaluation tools.

a. Corrective Action Report (CAR) A Corrective Action Report is attached. Any performance report may become part of the supporting documentation for this contract.

b. Customer Complaint Record (CCR) A customer Complaint Record is attached. Any performance reports may become a part of the supporting documentation for this contract.

c. Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

The Government will document performance. A Performance Assessment Report is attached. Any performance reports may become a part of the supporting documentation for this contract.

Appendix 1 - 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 2 - Customer Complaint Record (CCR)

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 3 - Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

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

1. CONTRACT/TASK ORDER NUMBER 2. CONTRACTOR 3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE 5. COR PHONE 6. SUSPENSE DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY)

NEW

REPEAT

NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM REVIEWED

9. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEFICIENCY (IF DEFICIENCY BOX WAS

CHECKED)

10. DETAILED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

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)

16. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS