Attach 2 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan QASP 09 Dec 2021.pdf

BASE OPERATING SUPPORT (BOS)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Contract FA300222R0002

9 December 2021

47TH FLYING TRAINING WING, LAUGHLIN AFB, OK

BASE OPERATING SUPPORT QASP

47thFLYING TRAINING WING, LAUGHLIN AFB, Chapter 1 – Purpose and Scope

1.1. Purpose 4

1.2. Scope 4

1.3. Functional Area Plans 4

Chapter 2 – Performance Assessment Planning & Preparation

2.1. Planning and Preparation 4

2.2. Roles and Responsibilities 5

2.3. Required Training 11

Chapter 3 – Performance Assessment

3.1. Performance Assessment 12

3.2. Surveillance Methods 12

3.3. Other Surveillance Methods 14

3.4. Surveillance Schedule 14

3.5. Contract Data Requirements List 15

3.6. Assessment of Contractor Quality Control Programs 16

3.7. Assessment of Non-SS Items 16

3.8. Remedies for Unacceptable Performance 16

Chapter 4 - Documentation of Service Provider Performance

4.1. Documenting Performance 17

4.2. Discrepancy Documentation 17

4.3. Repeat Write Ups 17

Chapter 5 – Performance Assessment Reporting

5.1. Monthly Summary Surveillance Report 17

5.2. Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) 17

5.3. Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) Purpose 17

Chapter 6 –Performance Assessment Follow-Up

6.1. Follow-up Methods 18

6.2. Service Provider Corrective Action 18

6.3. Final COR Recommendation 19

6.4. Disputes 19

6.5. Certification of Services 19

Attachments:

Attachment 1 – Acronyms Attachment 2 – Service Summaries

All Service Civil Engineering Grounds Vertical Transportation Equipment Supply Services Transportation

Chapter 1

Purpose and Scope

1.1. Purpose. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) has been developed and will be implemented IAW FAR 46.401, DFARS 246.401, DFARS PGI 237.172, AFFARS MP5346.103, AFFARS MP5301.602-2(d), Performance-Based Services Acquisition (PBSA) guidelines and AFI 63-

138. It is designed to provide an effective surveillance method of monitoring the Service Provider (SP) performance for each listed objective on the Service Summary (SS) in the contract as well as for all other contract requirements. The QASP provides a systematic method for observing, validating and documenting the services provided.

1.2. Scope. This plan covers the Base Operating Support (BOS) functional areas for the BOS contract performed at Laughlin AFB (LAFB). This QASP is based on the premise that the SP, not the government, is responsible for performance management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract.

1.3. Functional Area Plans. Functional area specific plans for surveillance methodologies and approaches are forthcoming. These plans will be drafted and approved as part of the development of each functional area Performance Work Statement (PWS) for this acquisition.

Chapter 2

Performance Assessment Planning & Preparation

2.1. Planning and Preparation. The planning and preparation phase of SP performance management should be a standard process conducted by the Functional Commander (FC), Lead Functional Contracting Officer Representatives (COR) and CORs over the course of the contract execution. There are several tools and resources available to the government to aid in the management of the SP’s performance. The first stop in the planning and preparation phase for the FC, Lead Functional COR and CORs should be the PWS. This document will provide the guidelines of what services have been contracted by the government and more importantly what levels of service are expected and acceptable. The guidelines by which to manage the execution of these services are outlined within this QASP. In addition to these documents, the FC, Lead Functional COR and CORs should familiarize themselves with the SP’s policies and procedures in order to obtain a solid understanding of how the SP manages their people and programs. The best way to obtain this information is through regular partnering meetings with the SP.

2.1.1. Partnering is the process of fostering a cooperative relationship between the government and the SP that promotes achievement of mutually beneficial goals during a government contract period or project.

2.1.1.1 The most important step in partnering is for each party to first seek to understand the goals, objectives, and interests of the other party. This will create a “win-win” situation. Efficient partnering has specific attributes that contribute equally to its success. They are common goals, effective communication, collaborative problem solving and synergies in mission execution. These attributes seek to accomplish the ultimate goal of cooperation and shared vision.

2.1.2. The Defense Acquisition University (DAU) website offers a Continuous Learning Course (CLC045) called Partnering. It is highly recommended that each FC, Lead Functional COR and COR review this course for a better understanding of the concept of partnering and its effects on working relationships.

2.2. Roles and Responsibilities.

2.2.1. Program Manager (PM). HQ AETC/A4PM is the PM prior to award and after contract award.

The PM is responsible for management oversight of all contracted activities. Specifically, the PM shall be responsible for monitoring cost, schedule, technical performance, and risk assessment/mitigation on the contract.

a) Technical Performance. The PM shall oversee technical performance of the contract IAW the PWS. The PM, with the Lead Functional COR and Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), shall serve as an advisor to the FC with respect to acceptable levels of performance by the SP.

Unacceptable levels of performance by the SP shall be handled IAW this QASP.

b) Financial Management. The PM, Lead Functional COR and ACO shall be responsible for assessing the SP’s financial execution of the contract and reporting this information to wing leadership on an as needed basis.

c) Risk Assessment. The PM shall work with wing leadership, Lead Functional COR and the FC to assess overall program risks for SS items not being met. Once a risk assessment has been made, the PM shall work with the FC, Lead Functional COR and ACO to establish an appropriate risk mitigation plan to alleviate the non-conformance.

NOTE: The FC retains all responsibility for the success or failure of the contracted function, the same as if the contracted function was a governmental activity. Issues regarding contract requirements not being met should be addressed between the FC, Lead Functional COR and the SP’s PM overseeing the activity in question prior to escalation to the SP’s director. However, when circumstances arise that cannot be worked at the Lead Functional COR level, the ACO should notify the FC and for determination/assistance.

2.2.2. Chief of the Contracting Office (COCO). The COCO is 47th Contracting Flight (47 CONF) Commander, or in the absence of the Commander, the 47 CONF Director of Business Operations, Specifically, the COCO shall ensure the following:

a) Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC) is appointed to integrate the quality contract requirements into the quality assurance program.

b) Functional area leadership receives tailored training for PBSA and Quality Assurance (QA).

c) QAPC individual training plans are tailored to the local mission and local QAPC responsibilities.

d) Consistent guidance to customers is given by the QAPC and other functional areas such as the Acquisition Centers of Excellence or similar offices.

e) Serve as the alternate for the QAPC in the event of extended absence if no other alternate or deputy has been appointed.

2.2.3. Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO). Appointed (warranted) government agents authorized to administer contracts. The ACO is the only person authorized to contractually obligate the government or direct the SP. The ACO designate specific QA surveillance responsibilities and authorities, using the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Joint Appointment Module (JAM), giving them the authority to formally evaluate and accept SP services.

a) Contract Interpretation. The ACO is responsible for contract interpretation and shall serve as the advisor for developing contract incentives/remedies, as appropriate, that are tied to performance objectives and performance thresholds. The ACO shall have final decision authority regarding contract language disputes with the SP.

b) Contract Administration. The ACO shall be responsible for overall contract administration and contract file documentation. The ACO ensures all contract documentation is maintained IAW applicable regulations/Air Force Instructions (AFI), and provides Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) to the Lead Functional COR, A4PM PM and others on a need to know basis.

c) Quality Assurance. The ACO is responsible for ensuring appropriate QA has been conducted before accepting services under the contract.

d) Training. The ACO shall be responsible for ensuring functional area leadership receives contract-specific (Phase II) tailored training for PBSA and Quality Assurance in coordination with the QAPC.

2.2.4. Functional Commander. The FC is the government’s functional authority for the contracted function at LAFB. The FC for the installation is 47th Mission Support Group (47 MSG)/Deputy Director, or as further delegated. Specifically, the FC shall:

a) Attend training within 30 days after commencement of duties IAW AFFARS MP5301.602-2(d). This training is scheduled by the QAPC and will be tailored to the FC’s needs.

b) Execute performance management and oversight of the delivery of contracted services.

c) Identify specific services that are mission essential in accordance with DFARS 237.76 “Continuation of Essential Contractor Services.”

d) Monitor mission changes that may drive the need for a contract modification and coordinate with the ACO.

e) Fulfill COR appointment and supervisory duties as applicable and as prescribed in AFI63-138 paragraph 2.10.

f) No less than quarterly, review SP performance documentation prepared by CORs to ensure performance complies with contract objectives.

g) Approve the QASP.

h) Ensure a Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) is accomplished no less than annually by the Contracting Flight.

i) Establish, lead and maintain the Multi-Functional Team (MFT) throughout the life cycle of the acquisition.

j) Prepare slides and brief the BOS contract at the Annual Execution Review.

2.2.5. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) Supervisor.

a) Must have an active PIEE account and use JAM and Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM). CORs who have oversight responsibilities of COR performance, COR files, and COR reports in SPM must register in PIEE for the SPM “Manager” role.

b) Must provide a qualified COR nominee and must review and approve COR nominations in JAM.

Must ensure the COR has technical, professional and administrative qualifications both by training and experience within the area to be surveilled commensurate with responsibilities.

c) Must annually review COR qualifications and contract surveillance files, including COR input into JAM and SPM.

d) Review SP performance documentation prepared by COR personnel to ensure performance is compliant with contract objectives. Review problem areas identified by the COR to facilitate COR and ACO coordination to resolve the problems.

e) Ensure performance of COR duties and participation in the pre-award process are addressed in annual performance evaluations.

f) Ensure the COR completes the OGE 450, if required. Ensure there is no personal conflict of interest with performance of COR duties.

g) Ensure adequate resources are provided for performance of COR duties prior to award and throughout contract performance.

h) Ensure the COR attends all required initial and refresher COR training.

2.2.6. Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC). Base-level individual, normally from the contracting activity, selected to coordinate the Quality Assurance program. The QAPC is responsible for training the Functional Commanders, Lead Functional CORs and CORs on surveillance methods and overseeing the effectiveness of the quality assurance surveillance program. The QAPC shall be responsible for all requirements outlined in AFFARS MP5346.103 and AFFARS MP5301.602-2(d).

Works with the FC, Lead Functional CORs, CORs and ACO to identify, document, and troubleshoot contract compliance issues. Assists the MFT with access to PIEE system modules mandated for use in Performance Management, including but not limited to JAM and SPM.

2.2.7. Lead Functional Contracting Officer Representative (COR). Responsible for reporting surveillance and documentation of contract performance to the FC, and the ACO. The Lead Functional COR shall:

a) Verify that the SP meets contract obligations as specified in the contract.

b) Review/document QASP, functional area appendices and checklists as required for adequacy.

Responsible for the technical adequacy, accuracy and sufficiency of functional area QASP appendices describing specific technical approach and methodology for surveillance. Forwards updated QASP appendices and checklists to QAPC as changes occur.

c) Review the SP’s quality control program for acceptable quality level and recommends acceptability to the ACO through the Functional Commanders.

d) Ensure each COR is initially evaluated to determine qualifications, experience, and ability to accomplish scheduled inspections and contract surveillance functions. The Lead Functional COR, in coordination with the QAPC, ensures all required training is completed by all new CORs as described in paragraph 2.3 of this QASP. All required training shall be scheduled and coordinated through the QAPC.

e) Ensures each COR performs their duties IAW this QASP and the COR Designation memorandum (PIEE JAM COR Smart form).

f) Assist the ACO in inspecting and surveilling PWS requirements of the contract managing the applicable government-furnished property clause of the contract.

g) Prepare and sign a monthly Performance Summary Report based upon COR surveillance activities within that month. Upload the signed report to SPM no later than the 5th business day of the month.

The Lead Functional COR shall determine whether performance was satisfactory or unsatisfactory for the month.

h) Review of SP proposals. All facets of the proposal, within the technical expertise of CORs, will be evaluated to include number of personnel, skill level of personnel, man-hours proposed, and all associated costs.

i) Assist HQ AETC/A4PM, FC, QAPC, and/or the ACO in determining contract cost estimates.

j) Perform surveillance activities.

k) Review and evaluate SP-submitted value engineering change proposals.

l) Provide assistance to the Wing Safety Office, or equivalent, in mishap and incident reporting.

m) Review SP regulations and/or instructions prior to acceptance and publication.

n) Verify the statistical information provided by the SP that concerns the standards specified in the PWS or appendices of the contract.

o) Gather past performance information and provide to Contracting Squadron.

p) Attend QAPC/Lead Functional COR meetings when scheduled, or provide an alternate.

q) Review SP and governmental strike plan annually. Submit updated/revised governmental strike plan as required to the ACO.

r) Ensure COR QA files are maintained as required.

s) Ensure the COR(s) use PIEE, JAM and SPM as required and as designated.

2.2.8. Contracting Office Representative (COR). The CORs primary purpose is to surveil and document. CORs are the “eyes and ears” of the Wing Commander, FC, A4PM PM and ACO relative to the actual application of the contract; however, they are not a quality control function. Another important part of the CORs responsibilities is to partner with the SP regularly to ensure open communications between the government and SP. The COR is to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating SP’s performance, against scheduled and regulatory requirements and the terms of the contract. CORs will not direct work or re-accomplishment of work, change the contract, or formally interpret the contract. The ACO resolves these types of issues. CORs are prohibited from training or advising the SP and/or performing contracted tasks or quality control work. Specifically, the COR shall:

a) Know the specifications and requirements of the contract.

b) Know and maintain proficiency in contract surveillance procedures and requirements. Maintain technical competency in assigned functional areas, and assist with formulating the PWS. Review SP-developed instructions noting necessary changes/updates. Accomplish contract surveillance by evaluating and documenting SP performance and inform the Lead Functional COR and FC when SP performance does not meet performance thresholds.

c) Know and apply the procedures for documenting surveillance.

d) Perform surveillance according to surveillance schedules.

e) Maintain scheduled competency in assigned surveillance areas.

f) Attain qualification in the appropriate areas before performing duties unsupervised.

g) Review the deficiency and mishap SP reports for accuracy, adverse trends, and mission accomplishment.

h) Serve as a member of the source selection team when selected.

i) Develop surveillance schedules.

j) Review SP regulations and/or instructions prior to acceptance and publication.

k) Ensure SP does not answer higher headquarter suspense/request without prior approval from local leadership, except when directed by a Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) listed in the PWS for each Functional Section to include Section 2. Please refer to Chapter 3, Item 3.5. - CDRL for more information.

l) Use proper chain of command when elevating issues to upper management.

m) Maintain a QA file with all COR training documents/certificates, contract documentation (i.e.

copy of the contract, contract modifications, PWS and QASP), all surveillance documentation, and any other documents pertinent to this contract. All files shall be maintained in SPM.

n) Complete self-nomination and maintain COR training documents and certificates in JAM and SPM.

o) Ensure you have received full COR training and COR designation memorandum, with the authorized roles and responsibilities signed by the ACO, prior to performing surveillance duties.

2.2.8.1. Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Joint Appointment Module (JAM)/Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) Tool. PIEE JAM and SPM are the Department of Defense Instructions (DoD) mandatory web-accessible management application designed to nominate/appoint, track, maintain COR training certificates, perform post-award actions, and, if necessary, terminate COR responsibilities. CORs are required to register for SPM COR role through PIEE; then self-nominate in JAM. Once approved, PIEE SPM serves as the web-based portal for all relevant post-award COR actions and documents to include monthly status reports/surveillance documents, trip reports, on service contracts. Access JAM/SPM through the PIEE website https://piee.eb.mil. Recommend CORs complete the PIEE web based training (WBT) for JAM (COR Nomination Initiated by COR), SPM (COR Surveillance and Oversight Overview) to better understand both applications within PIEE. In addition, see the JAM/SPM frequently asked questions (FAQ) for further guidance.

2.2.9. Performance Management Council (PMC)/Base Operating Support (BOS) Multi- Functional Team (MFT) Meeting. Performance Management Council (PMC). The purpose of the Performance Management Council is for the Government and the service provider to collectively review the service provider’s performance on a quarterly basis. Areas addressed are: SS performance, surveillance results, contract administration and current issues. The areas addressed may change depending on current leadership concerns/issues. Slides for this meeting are created by the Lead Functional CORs and the SP and submitted to the ACO.

2.2.9.1. The meetings are scheduled on the 47 MSG master meeting schedule; therefore, all responsible parties are aware of their frequency.

2,2.9.2. Members of the PMC/MFT include, but not limited to, the SP, the Wing Commander, Group Commands, ACO(s), FCs, Lead Functional CORs, and CORs.

2.2.10. Multi-Functional Team (MFT) Roles and Responsibilities. The MFT is a customer-focused team instituted under the authority of Senior Leadership. The purpose of the MFT is to create an environment that shapes and executes an acquisition. The emphasis is on teamwork, trust, common sense, and agility. The goal is to obtain efficiencies, improve performance, and save costs throughout the acquisition lifecycle. The MFT is composed of stakeholders in the acquisition. These stakeholders are responsible for this acquisition throughout the life of the requirement. For a list of the stakeholders for this acquisition, see the attached signature page. See MFT Member Appointment letter for MFT role and responsibilities in contract file and as stated within the QASP, which is IAW AFI 63-138 Chapter 6 and DoDI 5000.02.

2.3. Required Training. All COR nominees must complete self-study training, Phase 1and Phase 2 Training, and COR Refresher Training, and Combating Trafficking in Person in Defense Acquisition University (DAU). CORs must complete these trainings, and be designated with COR roles and responsibilities through a PIEE JAM COR. Designation Smart form by the CO before performing surveillance duties on new or existing contracts IAW MP5301.602-2(d) and DoDI 5000.72 “DoD Standard for Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) Certification”. The COR nominee must complete the required on-line Defense Acquisition University (DAU) COR trainings IAW MP5301.602-2(d) and DoDI 5000.72 Enclosure 5 and 6; and the CO/QAPC’s required trainings. The CO will conduct Phase 2 Contract Specific training and provide a certificate of completion. The CO will provide or determine any required COR refresher training (see QASP Para 2.3.1). Air Force/AFPC directives, Federal Aviation Regulations, PWS, and Technical Manuals will be used as reference materials to complete COR’s knowledge base.

2.3.1. COR Refresher Training. Refresher training will be IAW DoDI 5000.72 “DoD Standard for Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) Certification”, Enclosure 5 and Enclosure 6 (Table 2).

CORs are required to complete refresher ethics training annually, and refresher COR-specific training and Combating Trafficking in Persons (CTIP) training every three (3) years; or sooner if necessary.

2.3.2. Combating Trafficking in Persons (CTIP). DOD has a zero tolerance policy for human trafficking.

CORs are the first line of defense in the battle against human trafficking and must complete initial Combating Trafficking in Persons (CTIP) training, and refresher CTIP training every three (3) years. As the COR monitors the contractor and its employees, Combating Trafficking in Persons should rank among the COR’s chief priorities. CORs must be diligent in ensuring that contractors and contractor personnel are not trafficking in persons. During surveillance, the COR will monitor the contractor’s performance regarding trafficking in persons for compliance with all that is required IAW FAR clause 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons.

The COR must inform the Contracting Officer if the contractor, contractor personnel, subcontractor, or subcontractor personnel have failed to comply with the requirements of the clause at FAR 52.222-50. After receiving this information, the Contracting Officer shall provide information for any investigation and enforcement to:

Program Manager DoD CTIP Law Enforcement and Support

OUSD (P&R) DHRA

4800 Mark Center Dr Suite 06J25-01 Alexandria, VA 22350-4000

Reports may also be made:

• On-line at http://ctip.defense.gov/ ;

• On-line via the National CTIP Hotline website at http://www.polarisproject.org/;

• By e-mail to CTIPReports@OSD.Pentagon.mil; or

• By phone to the National CTIP Hotline at 1-888-373-7888 http://ctip.defense.gov/ http://www.polarisproject.org/%3B

NOTE: The COR must report any suspected violations or activities to the ACO (See FAR Subpart 22.17, Combating Trafficking in Persons and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation (DFARS) Subpart 222.17, Combating Trafficking in Persons).

NOTE: CORs should not personally investigate suspected incidents of Trafficking in Persons, but should forward all reported or suspected violations to the ACO immediately.

NOTE: The SP must take appropriate action should a violation occur. For corrective procedures and remedies for non-compliance, see FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons.

Chapter 3

Performance Assessment

3.1. Performance Assessment. Performance assessment is evaluating, assessing, and documenting the SP’s performance IAW the overall QASP. The premise behind performance assessment is that the SP, not the government, is responsible for managing and ensuring that performance meets the terms of the contract. It is the government’s responsibility to monitor performance and hold the SP accountable for performance. All areas of the contract shall be surveilled and the performance of the SP shall be assessed and reported in accordance with this QASP.

3.1.1. Service Summary (SS). The SS identifies the major service requirements the United States Government (USG) is acquiring and provides a basis for measurement between actual SP performance and specific contract requirements. The USG has the right to inspect all services, not just Performance Objective (PO) items. The following table shows a Performance Thresholds and frequency of surveillance. SSs are found in in each functional section of the PWS and broken down by Performance Objective, PWS Reference, and Performance Thresholds. This table details what and how often each requirement is inspected or surveilled.

PERFORMANCE

OBJECTIVE PWS REFERENCE PERFORMANCE THRESHOLD

02.2.2. Meet suspense

deadlines within the prescribed timeframes.

2.1.24. No more than 5% of all responses per month

(within each respective PWS section) shall be met with no greater than an 8 hour delay.

3.2. Surveillance Methods. The COR will ensure contract compliance through various surveillance methods including but not limited to periodic inspections, random sampling, customer feedbacks and complaints, SP metrics, 100% surveillance, and third party audits. Surveillance methods listed in paragraph 3.2.1. through 3.2.6. are scheduled inspections.

3.2.1. Periodic Inspections. These items are inspected using periodic surveillance as determined by the COR. The results of the periodic surveillance inspections may be used as the basis for actions (other than payment deductions) towards the SP. Periodic surveillance may be daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, etc. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause becomes the basis for the ACO’s actions. Periodic inspections may be conducted via over the shoulder inspections, spot sampling, or review of the SP reports and other deliverable documents.

3.2.2. Random Sampling. Random sampling is an appropriate method for frequently recurring tasks. A typical use of this surveillance method is lot size sampling. Initially, the COR will evaluate randomly selected samples of the activity to determine the acceptability of the entire requirement. This method reduces the time the COR must spend on surveillance duties, and yet still gives a reasonably accurate picture of a service’s overall acceptability.

3.2.3. Customer Complaints. Customer complaints will be registered in PIEE allowing the FC to review as required. Customer Complaints must be submitted through email for documentation purposes. The Lead Functional COR or designated COR will review all customer complaints.

3.2.3.1. When a Customer Complaint SS is present, the COR must collect, review and document the complaint within seven (7) business days prior to the SP. After COR review, the complaint will go to the SP for review/action. The SP shall provide a response with a root cause, corrective and preventive action within seven (7) business days to the COR. The SP shall notify COR of acceptance or unacceptance of customer complaint. If the SP and COR disagree on the validity of the customer complaint, the Lead Functional COR is responsible to submit SP and COR review to ACO for determination. The ACO will review and determine if it is a valid customer complaint within fourteen (14) business days. Once the ACO determines if it is a valid customer complaint or not, the SP shall notify the customer through email with a corrective and preventive action taken within three (3) business days of issuance of ACO determination.

3.2.3.2. COR Inquiry: If COR does not have sufficient information regarding a possible concern, issue or clarification. The COR may inquire information from the SP through email with the subject line “COR Inquiry” to get clarification from the SP. COR Inquiries may be considered a customer complaint after all the information is collected and reviewed. If COR deems it can be a customer complaint, then email shall be forward to the SP for review/action.

NOTE: Customer complaints, once validated, are a means of surveillance and are alternative to formal surveillance methods. The COR is the point of contact and must collect all customer complaints. Locally devised form or email may be used for this purpose. All complaints are validated and any resulting resolution of such complaints must be documented with the information required on the customer complaint form. Customer complaint forms become a permanent part of the COR surveillance records.

3.2.3.3. The COR will contact each customer involved with this contract, periodically to assure there is an understanding of the contract requirement by all appropriate personnel and they have a sufficient number of complaint forms.

3.2.4. Service Provided Metrics. Each department or functional area has SSs which are part of the PWS. However, these are not the only requirements that are measured. Every “shall” statement within the PWS shall be measured. This includes Section 2 of the PWS which is applicable to all areas. Changes to

SSs changes can only occur with a modification to the contract. The SP is required to submit monthly metrics for quality inspections being performed no later than 5th business days of the month to the Lead Functional COR.

3.2.5. One-Hundred Percent Inspection. When this type of surveillance is used, the COR must inspect and evaluate the SP’s performance each time it is performed. The result of the SP’s overall performance is then evaluated to determine acceptability of the lot.

3.2.6. Third Party Audits or Assessments. Third party audits or assessments refer to SP evaluation by a third party organization that is independent of the government and the SP. All documentation supplied to, and produced by, the third party should be made available to the government by the SP.

3.3. Other Surveillance Methods. The following are types of surveillances that may be used throughout the contract period to evaluate SP performance when structured surveillances do not exist.

3.3.1. Budget Monitoring. The Lead Functional COR will monitor the SP’s compliance and advise him/her of budgetary trends when needed. CORs will surveil supply listings to ensure supplies ordered are those needed to perform the mission and that funds are provided for these purchases. The COR will ensure the SP includes the COR on routing for all purchase requests. The COR will ensure SP includes governing reference for authorization of purchases on all purchase requests. Financial plans, unfunded requirements and funding documents developed by the SP will be coordinated with and surveilled by the COR. The COR will be included on the routing slips as well as all purchase requests.

3.3.2. Exercise/Contingency Surveillance. The SP’s participation in exercises/contingencies will be surveilled by a COR assigned to the Wing Inspection Team (WIT). CORs may be appointed to the WIT.

As a minimum, service area related exercises will be surveilled using appropriate checklists.

3.3.3. Unscheduled Inspections. "As Observed" inspections are unscheduled inspections. They occur when discrepancies or deficiencies are observed or discovered that are not directed. The unscheduled inspections is a more reactive approach that is utilized when a component, equipment, structure, or an area that was observed and considered non-compliance.

3.4. Surveillance Schedule. The Lead Functional COR will oversee the development and approve a monthly schedule of surveillance based on the requirements of FAR Part 46, MP5346.103 and MP5301.602, and this QASP. Surveillance schedules should be based on contract and PWS requirements, should specify all work requiring surveillance, specify the method of surveillance and frequency. The surveillance schedule will be completed no later than seven (7) duty days prior to the beginning of the period it covers and a copy will be sent to the ACO and FC. The FC must sign the schedule prior to upload to SPM. The schedule is “CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION” and is not releasable outside of authorized government personnel.

3.4.1. Surveillance Schedule Changes. The Lead Functional COR will make changes to monthly surveillance schedules in SPM, as changes occur. Any changes to the SS will be accomplished through a contract modification.

3.4.2. Determining surveillance frequency. During performance assessment planning, the Lead Functional COR shall consider using operational risk, service complexity and criticality as factors in deciding the performance assessment plan from month to month. If a particular function of the SP’s performance has a continuing record of acceptable performance, and unacceptable performance would not likely result in loss of life to AF personnel or damage to government property, surveillance of that function may be reduced. If the SP’s performance of a function is less than satisfactory, surveillance of that function should be increased. When this is determined to be appropriate, the Lead Functional COR, with FC and ACO approval, will adjust the surveillance schedule.

3.4.3. Monthly Surveillance Shortfall. If minimum monthly surveillance requirements cannot be accomplished due to equipment non-availability or special circumstances, the reason(s) for missing inspection will be documented on the end of the month’s summary report.

3.4.4. Waiver of scheduled observation area inspections. If the Lead Functional COR determines a SP work center has a continuing record of acceptable performance, its scheduled observation area inspection may be waived for one observation period (month, quarter, etc.), if approved by the FC and the ACO. The Lead Functional COR will include comments concerning the waived observation area inspection in the monthly summary report. Surveillance will never be waived for more than one prescribed period and the surveillance frequency will go back to normal if the SP performance shows signs of less than acceptable performance.

3.4.5. The Lead Functional COR will monitor surveillance results to ensure no particular work areas/sites and/or office areas are being disproportionately inspected. The Lead Functional COR may, however, deviate from random selection to ensure a broad cross-section of the service area is being inspected to investigate potential problems or if trends indicate a need. It is essential that CORs accomplish sufficient in-depth inspections in all areas to measure the quality of SP performance and provide an effective measurement/assessment to ensure overall performance meets contract requirements.

Compliance with applicable directives prescribed by the PWS, SP-developed Quality Control Program (QCP), Contract Sections, and plans/instructions will be part of the surveillance.

3.5. Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL). With the exception of data specifically required in certain situations, all data-generating or record-keeping data requirements are listed on a locally developed form for, Contract Data Requirements List. The CDRL provides a contractual method to direct the SP to prepare and deliver data that meets specific approval and acceptance criteria.

Sometimes there is a specific FAR or DFARS requirement to use a CDRL.

3.5.1. A properly prepared DD Form 1423:

a) Defines approval criteria

b) Provides a reference to the tasking document

c) Identifies appropriate distribution statements

d) Allows the SP to accurately price the data needed

3.5.2. Detailed instructions for completion of the CDRL are in DoD Manual 5010.12-M. The PWS tasks that produce data requirements should be referenced in Block 5 of the CDRL (contract reference).

3.5.3. The Point of Contact (POC) for a CDRL may be Higher Headquarters or LAFB personnel, depending on the requirement. CORs are often selected as POCs. The POCs for CDRL DD Form 1423 deliverables shall:

a) Maintain a tracker for each data item

b) Document both receipt and acceptance

c) Accept or reject deliverables within a reasonable time

d) Retain all submitted deliverables in the contract file

3.6. Assessment of SP Quality Control Programs (QCP). The PWS establishes the overarching requirements of the SP’s quality control system. Each COR must be knowledgeable of PWS and incorporate its requirements into their surveillances of SP performance.

3.6.1. Each COR must be conversant with the SP’s QCP. The SP’s QCP shall be located in the COR’s files. The COR should ensure they are included as a reviewer on the routing of any new Quality Documents (QD) and changes/updates to these documents.

3.6.2. The CORs’ primary job is to observe and document the SP’s performance. However, it is very easy for a COR organization to become the SP’s quality control without realizing it. The COR organization must continually evaluate their role and ensure the SP is truly responsible for the quality of services provided. Some warning signs that a COR organization has become, or is becoming the SP’s QC include CORs finding problems that the SP’s QC isn’t, SP management only fixes problems that are identified by the CORs, SP employees are more intimidated by CORs than the SP’s QC, and the SP is not proactive on quality.

3.7. Assessment of Non-Service Summary (SS) Items. All other tasks required under the contract may be inspected on a random basis at a frequency determined by Lead Functional COR.

3.8. 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 ACO may require the SP to perform the services again in conformity with the contract requirements, at no increase in contract amount. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-performance, the government may:

a) Require the SP to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements.

b) Reduce the contract line item price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed.

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

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

ii. Terminate the contract

NOTE: All remedies listed above including re-performance must be directed by the ACO.

Chapter 4

Documentation of Service Provider Performance

4.1. Documenting Performance. SP performance shall be thoroughly documented by the CORs. All surveillance shall be input into PIEE and the electronic Surveillance Master COR Log. CORs will maintain a notebook to document inspections on site. The notebook will be used as a method of ‘check and balance’ for completeness of monthly inspections against the electronic Surveillance Master COR Log. Surveillance is another avenue to document exceptional performance by the SP as well as documented discrepancies.

4.2. Discrepancy Documentation. All discrepancies documented during COR surveillances/inspections log shall be documented in PIEE. If the COR determine that the discrepancy warrants the submission of a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), the CDR shall be submitted within seven (7) business days. Each COR will possess an electronic QA file folder to store all documentation pertaining to the surveillances conducted.

4.2.1. Required Information. Specific PWS and/or AFI paragraph references shall be used when documenting non-conformance as applicable in the CDR.

4.3. Repeat Write Ups. CORs shall review completed CDRs to identify repeat discrepancies. When repeat discrepancies are found, the COR issues another CDR clearly annotating the deficiency as a repeat.

Chapter 5

Performance Assessment Reporting

5.1. Monthly Summary Surveillance Report: Prepare and sign a Monthly Summary Surveillance Report based upon COR surveillance activities within the month. Upload the signed report into PIEE no later than the fifth (5th) business day of the month. The Lead Functional COR will determine whether performance was acceptable or un-acceptable and reason for unacceptable performance.

5.2. Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). During the source selection process, every SP past performance on other contracts is critical selection criterion. Due to the competitive nature of the source selection process, SP know that a proven track record is a big key to securing future contracts and they work hard to preserve their credibility and performance record. The ACO, FC, and Functional COR are responsible for completing the CPAR annually. The most common tool used to enter this data is the CPARS. This system receives reports and tracks SP performance. If there are significant changes in SP performance, the assessing official (FC and ACO) can do an out-of-cycle CPAR.

5.2.1. Management Oversight of Services (MOS). COR shall evaluate and document SP’s performances in accordance with the procedures outlined in this QASP and maintain surveillance documentation. The results of surveillances shall be maintained as Past Performance information and utilized to prepare and support annual CPARS reporting, if required. Information will also be used to complete reporting requirements in accordance with Management Oversight of Services (MOS). As a reminder, all COR documentation maintained over the life of the contract will be turned over to the ACO at the end of the performance to be made a part of the official contract file.”

5.3. Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) Purpose. CDRs document contractual non-compliance issues.

CDRs are generated to inform the SP of noncompliance issues, request correction of the immediate problem and identification of any process deficiencies that may exist and lead to reoccurrence of the problem. Any non-compliance against a SS can be submitted as a CDR after ACO validates discrepancy.

5.3.1. CDR Procedures. CDRs should be initiated by the COR responsible for the service area where a noncompliance issue is identified within seven (7) business days after inspection. CDRs should clearly communicate the non-compliance and its impact so it is easily understood by the SP and reviewing officials.

After initiation, CDRs shall be coordinated on by the Functional COR or FC and routed to the ACO. The ACO will validate the non-compliance against contract requirements, assign a tracking number and send the CDR to the SP. The SP will be given a suspense to provide a response to the contracting office. Once the service provider’s response is received, the contracting office will provide to the appropriate COR for analysis of the corrective action and determination if additional action is required. After receiving the answered CDR from the SP, the COR responsible for the report will perform the initial review of SP comments. If the root cause analysis, corrective action, and preventative action are acceptable, the COR will concur with the finding. If allparties concur that the response is acceptable and validated (if required), the report will be considered closed. CDRs will be closed once the contracting office determine appropriate action to correct the problem and prevent reoccurrence has been taken. CORs will maintain a copy of all CDRs in the appropriate surveillance CDR Master Folder. CDRs, their level and open/closed status will be reported at PMRs.

Chapter 6

Performance Assessment Follow-Up

6.1. Follow-up Methods. Follow-ups are accomplished using several methods that include: follow-up inspections accomplished behind the SP’s QC, follow-up inspections on individual training records, routine/daily review of SP responses to COR discrepancies in the Surveillance Master COR Log identified as a follow-up, and formal notification of adverse trends in performance and/or failure to meet contract standards.

6.2. Service Provider Corrective Actions. In the event the SP’s response/corrective actions are considered unacceptable, the COR will add a comment to the finding and notify the Lead Functional COR on the justification for non-acceptance. The Lead Functional COR will coordinate with SP management and discuss reasons for COR non-acceptance. The SP will be encouraged to reconsider, take appropriate corrective actions, and resubmit their response. After each response, the review process is repeated.

Excessive iterations of this process should be avoided. More than two iterations of this process are considered excessive and should be escalated using the CDR Escalation process below.

NOTE: The COR shall complete reviews of the SP’s response to the original CDR within five (5) business days. If this suspense is not met, the FC shall be advised and reason for delayed government response shall be annotated.

6.2.1. CDR Escalation. In the event that the SP and the COR cannot come to an agreement with respect to corrective and preventative actions, the FC shall escalate the CDR to the ACO. At a minimum the FC shall provide a summary of the issue, background information as to why agreement cannot be reached between the COR and the SP, previous actions taken to reconcile with the SP, supporting documentation to include a copy of the CDR and any email traffic, and a recommended corrective action to the ACO.

6.3. Final COR Recommendation. If all measures fail and the SP does not return the areas to acceptable levels of performance, depending on the seriousness of the circumstances and impact to the mission, the Lead Functional COR will advise the FC, PM, QAPC, and the ACO. Because the ACO is the agent used to execute the FC’s organizational authority in correcting SP performance, the ACO may choose one of the following courses of action:

a) Direct re-performance of work. If CORs identify that the SP is not meeting a contract standard; the ACO can direct the SP to re-perform the work. Re-performance of services gives the SP the opportunity to re-accomplish an unacceptable service without assessing a financial penalty.

b) Letter of Concern. This can be written by the ACO or Wing Leadership to the SP’s PM or Director expressing concern for the particular area of non-conformance. It lays the foundation for formal remedies.

c) Cure Notice. A cure notice provides SPs an opportunity to fix a problem within a specified amount of time before the ACO implements the contract termination process.

d) Show Cause Notice. If the FC believes uncorrected SP performance needs more attention, the ACO will issue a show cause notice. In most cases, the ACO issues a show cause notice after the cure notice expires and they advise SPs that the government is considering contract termination.

The purpose of a show cause notice is to give the SP an opportunity to present his case that his continuing substandard performance was beyond his control. If a SP fails to prove his case or respond to a show cause notice, the government can continue with terminating the contract for default.

e) Termination Notice. If the ACO, FC, Wing Leadership and AETC/A4PM agree that the SP’s failure to perform threatens the mission, the ACO will issue a notice of termination. The SP has the right to appeal under the disputes clause.

f) Withholding of Payment or Non-payment. Withholding of payment or non-payment can be implemented at any time during the processes listed above. Withholding of payment means payment will not be given until the service is performed to standard. Non-payment will occur if it is too late to perform the service. In that case, payment will not be issued at all.

6.4. Disputes. Every attempt will be made to resolve all disputes arising under this contract/plan using the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) as outlined in FAR 33.214. If no resolution can be made under ADR, the ACO will render a Contracting Officer’s final decision.

6.5. Certification of Services. At the end of each contract payment period as defined in the resulting award of this acquisition, and upon request of the Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF) Acceptor, the COR shall certify the services were received in accordance with contract payment terms and conditions. A COR and WAWF Acceptor will be identified for this requirement.

Review & Acceptance. The Multi-Functional Team member signatures below indicate their review and acceptance of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan for the Laughlin Air Force Base BOS contract.

These signatures indicate review and acceptance with the plan as of the dates indicated and will remain in effect until the plan is changed.

Coordination Review:

9 Dec 2021

MR. TARONE WATLEY Date 47th Deputy Director Installation Support, Mission Support Group

Lacradia Gadison 1 Dec 2021

MS. LACRADIA GADISON Date HQ AETC/A4PM Program Manager

30 Aug-21 851 Date: 2021.08.30 20:25:39 -05'00'

MR. ALEJANDRO R. DE HOYOS Date 47th Quality Assurance Program Coordinator

2 September 2021

CANDICE E. ARCURI, 2d Lt, USAF Date Administrative Contracting Officer

MR. LOUIS MUNOZ Date 388 ESS Quality Assurance Program Coordinator

HOYOS.ALEJANDRO.R.1394878 HOYOS.ALEJANDRO.R.1394878851

ATTACHMENT 1 -ACRONYMS

Acronym Definition

ACO Administrative Contracting Officer

ADR Alternate Dispute Resolution

AFFAR Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation

AFI Air Force Instruction

BOS…