Attachment 0002 Draft_QASP_03MAY2024.docx

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

(QASP)

Crane Army Ammunition CAAA Gage Lab Calibration Services 03 May 2024

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plans (QASP) is pursuant to requirements listed in the performance-based Performance Work Statement (PWS) entitled Civilian and Military Personnel Human Resources Support Services. This performance-based plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the Office of the Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army (OAA) will use in evaluating the technical performance of the contractor.

1.1 PURPOSE

1.1.1 The role of the Government in quality assurance (QA) is to ensure contract standards are achieved. The purpose of the QASP is to identify the methods and procedures the Government will use to evaluate contractor actions while performing the requirements in the PWS. It is designed to provide an effective surveillance method by monitoring contractor performance for each listed performance objective in the Attachment 1 Performance Requirements Summary (PRS).

1.1.2 The QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate the services the contractor is required to perform as specified in the PWS and the Contract.

1.1.3 The QASP has been developed by the requiring activity. It is designed to provide direction to personnel performing contract surveillance activities. Personnel surveying the contract terms and conditions and PWS requirements will periodically review the QASP throughout the life of the contract.

1.1.4 The QASP is designed to define roles and responsibilities, identify the performance objectives, define the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describe quality assurance reporting, and describe the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around what service or quality level is required, as opposed to how the contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by Crane Army Ammunition Activity to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, if the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract if the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.3 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. The contractor’s QCP will also set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

1.3.2 The Contracting Officer Representative (COR) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determinations regarding incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 Contracting Officer Representative The COR is responsible for quality assurance guidance and to ensure that contract quality requirements, provisions, standards, and thresholds are defined, practical, enforceable, necessary, and verifiable.

2.1.1 The COR evaluates and documents contractor performance in accordance with the QASP and PWS.

2.1.2 The COR shall notify the Contracting Officer (KO) of any significant performance deficiencies using a Corrective Action Report (CAR) with supporting documentation. The CAR will be completed and submitted in the Product Data Reporting and Evaluation Program (PDREP) system in Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE).

2.1.3 The COR will upload copies of ALL surveillance documentation to the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Joint Appointment Module/Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (JAM/SPM) modules, unless otherwise directed by the KO.

2.1.4 The COR will submit a monthly report to the KO concerning performance of services rendered under this contract.

2.1.5 The COR recommends improvements to the QASP and PWS throughout the life of the contract.

2.2. Contracting Officer The KO is responsible for safeguarding the interests of the United States Government in contractual relationships. Only the KO is authorized to bind the Government and then, only to the extent of the authority delegated to them through the issuance of a warrant.

2.2.1 The KO delegates authority for inspection and/or acceptance in accordance with the terms of the contract.

2.2.2 The KO informs the contractor of the names, duties, and limitations of authority for all quality assurance personnel assigned to the contract.

3.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED

The contractor shall provide services in accordance with the PWS. The requirement standards are established in the paragraph of the PWS that covers the specific category of work (Repair, PM, replace parts and materials). The acceptable level of performance is set in the acceptable quality level related to that paragraph as found in the PRS.

4.0 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 In an effort to minimize the contract administration burden, simplified methods of surveillance techniques shall be used by the Government to evaluate contractor performance. The primary methods of surveillance are random checks, observations, inspections, complaints and review of those records and files that are required to be maintained and delivered under this PWS. The Government will use appointed representatives, as well as reports and input from CAAA employees and visitors as sources of comments on the contractor’s performance.

4.2 The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of professional communication between employees and customers is customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints. Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems.

NOTE: The customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR as opposed to the contractor. The COR will accept the customer complaints and will investigate using the Contractor Complaint Form (Attachment 2).

4.3 The acceptable quality levels (AQL) located in the PRS (Attachment 1) for contractor performance are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls. For certain critical activities such as those involving facility environment, security, chemical biological, radiological, and toxin activities, and accident control, the desired performance level is established at one hundred percent (100%). Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance at the Program Office.

5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTING

5.1 The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and measured by the required performance metrics in PRS (Attachment 1).

5.2 The Government’s QA monitoring, accomplished by the COR, will be reported using the COR Monthly Report in PIEE. This form, when completed, will document the COR’s understanding of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the PWS requirements are being met.

5.2.1 The COR will complete this form in the PIEE JAM/SPM and retain a copy of the report in their COR file.

6.0 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING RESULTS

6.1 The Government shall use the observation methods cited to determine whether the AQLs have been met. The Government will evaluate the results that then will be translated into the specific Incentives/Reductions of the PRS (Attachment 1). The monthly evaluation results may cause adjustments to the contractor’s monthly payments, should performance not meet the AQL’s.

• Monthly performance measured by the metrics and trends

• Issues and concerns of both parties

• Repair status

• Issues arising from independent reviews and inspections

6.4 In addition to QA monitoring, the COR will use the information contained in the contractor’s monthly report to assess the contractor’s level of performance for each objective measured in the QASP (detailed in Attachment 1). The KO/COR must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns of marginal or unacceptable performance. The contractor will discuss with the KO/COR satisfaction ratings receiving as a “less than acceptable” rating. For such cases, the contractor should highlight its perspective on factors driving customer satisfaction and present plans to adjust service levels accordingly to bring the satisfaction rating up to an acceptable level.

6.5 The KO/COR and contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long–term courses of action. Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be clearly documented. Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be incorporated as a contract modification at the convenience of the KO.

7.0. FAILURE TO PERFORM

7.1 The contractor may receive deductions or even termination based on failure to perform. The following criteria apply for determining appropriate action:

• Notifications. Consistent with FAR Part 49, the KO shall notify the service provider of failure to meet standards through QA monitoring forms, cure notices, or show cause notices (see Attachment 2, Contract Deficiency Report) and shall inform the service provider manager or designated alternate of such notices.

• Deductions. The Government has the right to deduct a specified dollar for failure to meet performance standards. The amount is identified in the Performance Requirements Incentives/Reductions.

• Termination. If the KO determines that the contractor has failed to perform to the extent that a termination for default is justified, the KO shall issue a notice of termination, consistent with FAR Part 49.

7.2 Unacceptable Performance If the number of complaints/defects exceeds the performance threshold for any objective, the COR will determine the possible cause of this unacceptable performance. Government-caused complaints/defects will not be counted against the contractor. The same applies to any other requirement of the contract when Government-caused complaints/defects are the cause of unacceptable contractor performance. If the contractor’s performance is judged unacceptable for any requirement by the COR, the COR will inform the KO for resolution. Significant performance deficiencies must be submitted to the KO using a CAR and include supporting documentation.

8.0 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

This PRS identifies the services required by the PWS over which the Government will exercise surveillance.

Performance Evaluation. Performance of a service will be evaluated to determine whether or not it meets the performance threshold. The contractor shall provide the Government a written response as to why the performance threshold was not met, how performance will be returned to acceptable levels, and how recurrence of the cause will be prevented in the future. When documentation does not meet performance thresholds, revising and resubmitting the documentation at no cost to the Government is the preferred method for correcting unacceptable performance. Performance Objectives, Indicators, Thresholds, and Surveillance Methods. The services required by the contractor are summarized into performance objectives and indicators, along with the minimum standards that relate directly to mission essential items. The performance threshold briefly describes the minimum acceptable levels of service required for each requirement. These thresholds are critical to mission success.

Note 1: Positive incentives for meeting or exceeding the expected standards or performance may result in an above average rating in the Contractor’s past performance evaluation at the end of the contract performance period. Negative performance will be reflected on the Contractor’s past performance evaluation.

Attachment 1

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS)

This Performance Requirements Summary includes performance standards. The Government will use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

PERFORMANCE

OBJECTIVE

Reoccurring: No less than 95% on time submittals Inspections, observations, and employee/customer feedback.

Additionally, IAW 7.6, calibration certificates must be provided electronically through email for each item calibrated or found out of tolerance at any time of delivery within 5 business days after on sight calibration. These calibration certificates shall be available through a dedicated website for easy reference.

At that time, a new schedule will be determined.

The evaluation ratings are as follows:

ATTACHMENT 2 CONTRACTOR COMPLAINT FORM

Date:

Contract Number: Task Order Number:

Contractor’s Program Manager’s Name:

Phone Number:

Name of Contractor Company:

Company POC & Phone Number:

Name of individual filing the complaint:

Names of Individuals Involved in the complaint:

Names of individuals that have been notified of complaint (COR, PM, Company, etc):

Date the incident occurred:

Describe the incident:

Government Response:

COR Signature:

Contractor’s Signature:

Attach continuation sheet(s) if necessary.