AttachJ-QASP.docx

Attachment J – Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs Passport and Travel Card Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs Passport and Travel Card Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

1.0 Introduction

a. The Program Manager, Bureau of Consular Affairs of the U.S. State Department (CA) has the mission to procure and deploy personnel, equipment and materiel, and provide ongoing services to implement and support the Passport Card program as directed by CA . The goal for U.S. support to the is to increase overall capabilities to enhance border security within the Western Hemisphere.

b. The Passport Card is an alternative to the traditional book-style passport for presentation at U.S. land and sea border crossings. The Passport Card is functional in the Department of Homeland Security People Access Security Service (PASS) system, an integrated, automated border-crossing identification system including programs such as NEXUS, Secure Electronic Network for Travelers’ Rapid Inspection (SENTRI), and Free and Secure Trade Program (FAST).

c. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) establishes procedures and responsibilities for monitoring, reviewing, and reporting the Contractor’s performance for the services outlined in the Passport card program. The QASP will be supported by the contract Contracting Officer’s Representatives (COR) who is referenced in this document as Quality Assurance Evaluators (QAE).

2.0 Purpose

The purpose of the QASP is to assure that the CA Program Office is receiving the services specified in the contract and that the services meet the performance standards specified herein. By employing a fully developed QASP, CA, and the Contractor achieve an understanding of performance expectations and how performance will be measured against those expectations. A complete and robust QASP ensures that all aspects of the contract are measured and receive fair and proper weight in the overall evaluation. Results of the QASP evaluation are a direct and significant input to the performance of this contract.

3.0 Contractor Quality Control (QC)

a. The Contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The Contractor measures that quality through the Contractor’s own QC Program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this regardless of whether the work is performed by Contractor employees or performed by subcontractors.

b. This QASP enables CA to take advantage of the Contractor’s QC Program. The SOW was structured to include the Contractor’s Quality Control Program as a delivered service. CA will validate the Contractor’s QC Program by 1) evaluating the QC Plan and 2) evaluating the execution of the QC Plan. The latter evaluation will be accomplished by measuring the variance between CA’s Quality Assurance (QA) findings and the Contractor’s own QC results. By validating the Contractor’s QC Program, CA can more effectively use its own resources to focus attention on critical and resource intensive Passport Card functions. The contract for Contractor QC is specified in each Sub-Task as Quality Control Plan and Continuous Improvement.

4.0 Quality Assurance

a. Quality Assurance is defined as the functions and associated actions performed by CA , the CA Program Officer, and the COR to ensure that contracts are performed in accordance with specified standards, and that an appropriate level of Contractor quality control activities is in place and operational. CA elements shall execute its QA Program through direct observation supplemented by input from customers served by the Contractor.

b. Successful quality assurance is a team effort. The Contracting Officer administers the contract; the COR provides technical direction to the Contractor; both the GTM and CA Program Officers shall perform Quality Assurance Evaluators (QAEs) to observe and evaluate performance. Together, they provide an orchestrated team effort, which is essential to provide quality assurance for all aspects of the Passport card program. The QA effort must carefully balance oversight, evaluation, and monitoring of Contractor operations so that compliance with performance standards within the contract is evaluated from observation.

5.0 Quality Assurance Evaluators

QAEs are tasked to execute first-level QASP activities. A description of their qualifications and responsibilities follows:

a. QAEs may be full or part-time and must be thoroughly familiar with the work that they are evaluating along with the applicable standards, regulations, and applicable Host Nation codes. They must be thoroughly knowledgeable of the content and intent of relevant sections of the SOW to their area of evaluation.

b. This QASP is the basic working document for QAEs. QAEs must be thoroughly trained and qualified in appropriate sampling and surveillance techniques to maintain the degree of objectivity necessary for valid, unbiased sampling.

c. Guided by the contract QASP, QAEs establish surveillance programs for each Functional Area of the Passport card program. In the execution of the QASP, QAEs determine what, when, and how various required services will be observed.

d. Based on surveillance results, QAEs recommend specific actions to the COR. These may include a change to the surveillance level, a COR/Contractor meeting, issuance of a Contractor Discrepancy Report (CDRs), or other action designed to improve Contractor performance.

e. QAEs should not direct the Contractor and should make no commitments to the Contractor. The QAE – Contractor relationship is informational only. Interpretation will be performed only by the contract CO or the COR for technical matters.

6.0 Organization for Surveillance

CA will clearly identify their organization structure and lines of communication to execute their quality assurance program. This will typically center around the COR, GTM, CA and CA sub-organizations with lines of communication to the CO and program and project. The Contractor will document its Quality Control structure in its management plan. The Contractor’s QC organization shall have a direct line of communication to its Corporate Structure, the Contractor’s Program Manager, and CA’s COR.

7.0 Evaluation Methods

The methods of evaluating Contractor compliance may vary depending on the tasks specified by the contract. The COR is responsible for selection of the method(s) to be used and the specific detailing of the method(s). In determining the evaluation method, the COR should consider what the contract specifically calls for, how performance can be observed, and if the proposed method of surveillance is adequate to assure the required level of performance has been achieved. The following describes alternative methods of observation:

7.1 100 Percent Evaluation This is the appropriate method of evaluating infrequent tasks or tasks with stringent performance contracts, e.g., where safety or health is a concern. With this method, performance is inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. One hundred percent inspection is too expensive to be used in most cases.

7.2 Random Sampling

This is an appropriate method of surveillance for recurring tasks. Random sampling works best when the number of instances of the services being performed is very large and a statistically valid sample can be obtained.

7.3 Periodic Evaluation

This method, sometimes called “planned sampling,” consists of observing tasks on a scheduled basis. It is appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently or periodically, but where 100 percent evaluation is neither required nor practicable. A predetermined plan for inspecting part of the work is established using subjective judgment and analysis of agency resources to decide what work to inspect and how frequently to inspect it.

7.4 Customer Input

Although usually not a primary method, this is a valuable supplement to more systematic methods. For example, in a case where random sampling indicates unsatisfactory service, customer complaints can be used as substantiating evidence. In certain situations where customers can be relied upon to complain consistently when the quality of performance is poor, e.g., dining facilities, building services; customer surveys and customer complaints may be a primary surveillance method.

8.0 STRUCTURE OF THE QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

This QASP is structured to provide a composite rating for the entire contract to be used by CA as one major input in the performance of the contract. This QASP supports an assessment process to conduct and document evaluations, develop quantitative ratings, and compile these into monthly, quarterly, and annual performance ratings.

8.1 Evaluation Components and Data Items

The QASP is organized around the SOW and is synthesized into the following evaluated components below. -Section C of the SOW contains technical points for performance evaluation and assessment. The purpose of these contract data items is to collect evaluation data to rate the Contractor’s commitment to successful performance during the life of the final awarded contract.

QUALITY ASSURANCE

Note: all days are business days; availability % excludes scheduled downtime Monitoring Method to be Used

Deliverables

“As-needed” technical support personnel to help implement any Passport Card-driven changes to current passport processes or material required for integration of the Passport Card solution into the current passport environment. Contractor shall meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

Technical Support: The vendor will provide technical assistance support to the Government as needed and requested. 95% of all requests for support must be acknowledged within four hours and resolved within 15 days.

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

100% of passport card stock and delivery requirements specified by the SOW are met, or exceeded.

To include all card types (Card Stock Pre-Printing; ICC Tag Requirements; Passport Card Test Stock; Pre-Printed RFID enable Other Travel Card Stock) and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

The government will monitor data integrity with Machine Readable Zone and far-field RFID card readers. Barcode readability will be assessed with a barcode reader in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

No deviation from the standard unless a deviation is approved by the COR and a contract modification is issued by the Contracting Officer.

No defective cards allowed.

100% inspection

100% quality control check of RFID chip performance prior to delivery

100% during the life of the Passport Card Vendor will credit cost for any cards found to be defective, as well as all costs associated and, apply it to the following month’s invoice. (I.e. if in September 2017 we had three agencies and two centers return 286 cards, then October’s invoice will have credit for the cost of 286 cards reflected).

Performance Measure Frequency of Measurement: Upon every delivery and/or as found during Agency personalization process.

Performance Standard:

Met = Deliverable quality met and final acceptance received.

Did Not Meet = Deliverable quality not met and/or final acceptance not received.

Equitable Adjustment Calculation: The Government will require that the successful offeror provide a fully loaded rate for each passport card. If any card is found to have not met the minimal/acceptable requirements in terms of quality, the Government shall reject the non-compliant passport cards and the contractor shall deduct the full rate for each card returned from the invoice. The Government will not accept a replacement for the cards found to be non-compliant.

Deliverables that meet or exceed the delivery dates specified by the SOW and/or, COR (if applicable).

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to delivery schedules.

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to expedited delivery schedules.

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

95% of secure document packaging requirements specified by the SOW are met, or exceeded

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to secure document packaging.

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to marking requirements.

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to transportation requirements.

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

100% of inventory data transfer requirements specified by the SOW are met, or exceeded.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to Inventory Data Transfer Requirements.

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

100% of emergency / safety stock and ready for shipment on-hand stock specified by the SOW are met, or exceeded.

No deviation from the standard unless a deviation is approved by the COR and a contract modification is issued by the Contracting Officer.

DoS 100% inspection of all deliverables by COR.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to safety stock requirements.

DELIVERABLES

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to final accepted transition plan requirements.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to final transition plan requirements.

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

a. Each Offeror shall provide a COOP plan within 45 calendar days after award of contract. The COOP Plan shall describe in detail how the Offeror will respond to interruptions in production process (man-made or natural) and how they will ensure availability of products to maintain continuity of operations during regular business operations and during surge periods. The COOP plan should also include details on how the contractor will maintain a six month level of emergency stock in a secure storage location and how emergency shipments will be made.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to COOP requirements.

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to QCP requirements?

C.4.6 D.2.

H.1.2 Monthly Status Report-

Deliverables that are in full compliance; and meet or exceed the minimum standard requirements; and have no material quality issues in accordance with the applicable section of the SOW. Report deliverables written in a clear, concise, and accurate manner.

The vendor will provide this report monthly to the government. The consolidated report will contain both Agency returns for manufacturing defects, card shipments (identifying type/cause of defect)and, any operational issues for the month and corrective actions. This includes such as, when cards are delivered late; packaging concerns; issues related to responsiveness; file manifest issues; complaints; and, scheduling issues. This information is to be accurate and self-reported by the contractor within the monthly report. The government may compare this self-report against the record of performance in its own files.

This report should also include resolutions or steps to mitigate and update ongoing or re-occurring issues. Open issues remain on the monthly report until resolved to the government’s satisfaction.

Due by the 15th day of the following month after performance.

Report must be accurate, show all Agency/Centers returns for manufacturing /quality Defects; number of defect returns to manufacturer will be validated and reflected as a credit on following monthly invoice within 30 days. Any disputed defects will be referred to the document design office for assessment/action and will be resolved within 30 days in accordance with the SOW.

DoS 100% inspection of all deliverables by COR.

CPARS records will accurately reflect adherence to monthly status reporting requirements.

9.0 Executing the QASP

9.1 QAE Assignments:

Execution of this contract QASP will be best supported when a QAE has responsibility for an entire data item within a specified area. In this case a single QAE could have overall responsibility for the area, receiving evaluations from other QAEs as necessary. A QAE may be responsible for more than one area – this will be a function workload and staffing. Each QAE shall continue to provide a daily schedule to ensure evaluations are conducted at prescribed frequencies.

9.2 Frequency of Evaluation:

The frequency of evaluations is established to ensure consistency in surveillance and confidence in results. There is a balance between the frequency of evaluations, the manpower available to perform the evaluations, and the need to monitor contractor operations to ensure performance.

9.3 Number of Observations

Frequencies and number of observations (samples) are based on Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs). While AQLs are prescribed in the SOW, it will be necessary for the QAE to determine the level and then determine the appropriate number of observations.

9.4 Incidental Observations

At times, the COR or QAE will observe unsatisfactory performance by the Contractor that is not part of the normal evaluation. These observations will be noted.

10.0 Documentation

All surveillance activities must be documented to provide the required audit trail to justify award term determinations. The official language of the contract is English and all documentation will be prepared in English except as specified in the Deliverables. The documented audit trail of the surveillance activities is required by FAR 46.104(c), Contract administration office responsibilities, which states, “Maintain, as part of the performance records of the contract, suitable records reflecting, (1) The nature of contract quality assurance actions, including, when appropriate, the number of observations made and the number and type of defects; and (2) Decisions regarding the acceptability of the products, the processes, and the contracts, as well as action to correct defects.”

10.1 QAE Documentation Responsibility

The QAEs’ entire observation and evaluation effort must be fully documented in clear, understandable language that is not ambiguous or vague. QAEs should develop monthly surveillance schedules based on the surveillance check sheets applicable to each QAE’s area of responsibility. These schedules must be submitted to the COR for approval. Surveillance results must be recorded as well as any contacts with Contractor personnel so that misunderstandings do not result. Documentation must be timely and dated, i.e., reports with surveillance observations must be written concurrently or immediately thereafter. This will preclude misstated information that could be contested in a dispute.

10.2 Documentation Files

All documentation resulting from surveillance is made a permanent part of the contract file. The IO-COR/QAE must keep the documentation files during the term of the contract and either monthly or as directed by the contract CO, and transfer the files to the CO for inclusion in the official file. It is the responsibility of the COR to establish and maintain this information. This includes any type of Contractor-generated reports and inventories.

10.3 Surveillance Folders

A surveillance folder will be maintained for each data item. The location and personnel assigned to maintain the folder will be specified by the contract COR. Individual COR/QAE personnel may be required to maintain separate folders due to location or convenience. If the functional area is small the COR may choose to maintain the folder in a central location where assigned COR/QAE personnel have access.

10.4 Each folder will contain as a minimum:

a. COR letter(s) of designation

b. QAE letter of designation to non-GTM

c. Applicable portions of the contract (SOW)

d. Corrective Action Request letters and logs

e. Contractor/CA communication records

f. Monthly Status Reports

10.5 Conversation Records

The COR and COR/QAEs should keep written notes of every phone or in-person conversation with the Contractor pertaining to surveillance. These notes should be dated, legible, and maintained in the surveillance folder.

10.6 File Management

CA shall handle all QASP electronic files for safe file management, backup, and year-end closeout/archive as designated by the contract COR.

11.0 Reports

The COR will identify the internal reporting contracts that personnel in each Functional Area may need to meet compliance with this QASP. Area reporting to support the QAE program consists of immediate impact and monthly status reporting as outlined in section 8.2.6 above.

11.1 Impact Reporting

Any situation or occurrence which poses a significant program impact will be reported to the COR using the most expeditious manner available.

12.0 Discrepancies

If the Contractor receives continuous low ratings in a particular area the COR/QAE or CA Program Officer/QAE may provide feedback to the Contractor Communication will be via phone, email, feedback and formally recorded in writing to make the Contractor aware of the problem(s). This will allow the Contractor an opportunity to correct the deficiency before it becomes worse or affects the performance contracts. This feedback to the Contractor’s project management identifies an area not meeting full performance and should quote the specific SOW contract and what is deficient. Often this may be an area not closely monitored by project management and now needs attention.

12.1 Discrepancy Report

The Contractor is responsible for recording all discrepancies whether identified by CA or by the vendor itself. These discrepancies shall be a part of the monthly report submitted by the vendor on per section 8.2.6 above. .

12.2 Customer Complaints

Customers (i.e. Passport Agencies and Centers GTMs are requested to register complaints with the program office and COR via email in PPTBooks email collective as soon as possible after either experiencing or discovering a discrepancy. These issues will be brought to the attention of the contractor as soon as possible for resolution.

12.2.1 Customer complaints should not be used exclusively to rate the Contractor’s performance. Customer complaints can be very misleading since they tend to over-represent dissatisfied customers and under-represent satisfied customers who provide input less often. Customer complaints should be used only in conjunction with the monthly observations to assist the QAE in focusing on potential problems.