Attachment 0005 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) 28 July 2021

For Repair of

HORIZONTAL/VERTICAL SITUATION INDICATORS

Contract Number: TBD

Contractor’s Name: TBD (hereafter referred to as the contractor).

1. Purpose

The purpose of this surveillance plan is to provide the Communication Electronics Command, Integrated Logistics Support Center – Engineer Soldier Aviation Directorate (CECOM ILSC – ESA) with the procedures necessary to monitor the performance of the Horizontal/Vertical Situation Indicators Repair Contract. It provides detailed methods for identifying, recording and reporting deficiencies observed in the program.

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 and their Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) actions to assure they meet contract standards.

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

2.1. Quality Assurance Representative (QAR). The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) QAR is responsible for the inspection and acceptance of hardware at the contractor site.

2.2. Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO). The PCO will review, collect and retain the COR reports of contractor assessments as part of the contract file and ensure compliance with the contract terms. The PCO will also ensure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract.

2.3. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). The COR will provide continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance during contract execution.

The COR will also capture the results of the contractor assessments in a COR report that is delivered semi-annually to the PCO. Finally, the COR will be responsible for documenting successful performance or recommending remedies for unacceptable performance to the PCO as soon as the COR becomes aware of such conditions.

2.4. The contractor is responsible for managing performance and quality controls to ensure that products tendered to the Government meet the terms of the contract.

3. Inspection Procedures

The functions surveyed will be Technical, Schedule, Management and Cost requirements of each of the task orders issued under the contract. Overall performance on a task order basis will be reviewed quarterly by the COR. This contract is a one (1) year ordering period followed by four (4) option periods. The contract type is Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP), Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ).

The work performed under this contract will be subjected to 100% inspection by the COR and DCMA QAR. The following paragraphs describe the inspection process for each of the general categories of technical, schedule, management and cost performance measured against the task orders. A performance assessment matrix is included as Appendix A of this QASP. The surveillance matrix is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance and frequency the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

3.1 Technical

Technical performance will be evaluated on a real time basis and reviewed quarterly by the COR. The contractor’s monthly Repair Status Reports will serve as the trigger for this quarterly review. Factors that may be evaluated and monitored are as follows:

• Acceptance

• Repair Status Report – Content Completeness

The DCMA QAR will inspect 100% of the hardware that undergoes repair by reviewing the acceptance test documentation. The Repair Status Report shall include scope of repair (i.e. parts replaced, labor performed), failure mode, repair time, and the cost for each unit repaired. The COR will review the Status Repair Report to assess technical performance in accordance with the Performance Assessment Matrix (Appendix A).

3.2 Schedule

The contractor’s schedule performance will be reviewed and evaluated by the COR on a task-by-task basis. Each quarter the COR shall review schedule elements of the Government Furnished Equipment Status Report to evaluate schedule performance in accordance with the Performance Assessment Matrix (Appendix A). Factors that may be evaluated and monitored are as follows:

• Repair Turn-Around Time

• Government Furnished Equipment Status Report – Schedule

3.3 Management

The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own 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 by subcontractors. The contractor’s Quality Control Program (QCP) will establish 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 COR. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QCP.

3.4 Cost

All work performed under this contract is on a Firm Fixed Price basis. Cost evaluations or assessment are not applicable. Cost data reported in the Government Furnished Equipment Status Report may be used by the Government for cost evaluation purposes prior to subsequent contracts.

3.5 Performance Ratings Definitions

The performance ratings below reflect definitions at FAR 42.1503 Table 42-1. The COR will use these rating to evaluate the quality of the contractor’s performance.

Performance Rating Definition

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’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

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

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

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

Note 1: Plus or minus signs may be used to indicate an improving (+) or worsening (-) trend insufficient to change the evaluation status.

Note 2: N/A (not applicable) should be used if the ratings are not going to be applied to a particular area for evaluation

4 Performance Reporting

4.1 Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

A report template for documenting contractor performance is attached as Appendix B.

The COR shall document positive performance in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) at http://www.cpars.csd.disa.mil/cparsmain.htm.

Because this contract is firm fixed price, no monetary incentives are associated with acceptable performance.

4.2 Corrective Action Report (CAR)

A corrective action report shall be submitted by the COR when the contractor receives a performance rating of unsatisfactory in a particular task (see Appendix A) for consecutive quarterly rating periods or if an unsatisfactory rating is received for more than one task during a single quarterly rating period. The COR may initiate a CAR anytime unacceptable performance is determined critical in nature and requires formal corrective action; and whenever an unfavorable trend is detected in contractor performance. A report template for corrective action reporting is provided in Appendix C.

http://www.cpars.csd.disa.mil/cparsmain.htm

Appendix A - Surveillance Matrix

Required Service Performance Standard Acceptable Quality Level Surveillance Method Ratings Test & Inspection (T&I) Requirements/Reporting

PWS para. 4.2

100% Compliance IAW PWS for recording data, repair categorization and determining material requirements

95% Accuracy when measuring predicted material requirements against actual requirements reported IAW PWS para. 4.3

100% Inspection, Review of submitted Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) items

Initial Acceptance Test Exhibits presented for government inspection

PWS para.7.3

100% Compliance IAW

PWS

100% Compliance for Mechanical Inspection

100% Compliance for Operational Testing

100% Inspection, Review of submitted CDRLs

Acceptance Testing for Overhauled Indicators

PWS paragraph 4.3

100% Compliance IAW

PWS

100% Compliance with requirements. Any deficiencies corrected prior to final acceptance

100% Inspection, Provide data deliverables IAW CDRLs identified in

PWS

100% Compliance IAW

PWS

95% Accuracy and completeness with first draft.

100% Accuracy with one correction/rewrite.

Random Inspection, Delivery Schedule

PWS para. 5.0

Test & Inspection, Initial Acceptance Test Exhibits and Production delivery IAW with PWS

100% Compliance with T&I schedule

100% Compliance with Initial Acceptance Test Exhibits schedule

100% Compliance with repair turn-around time

100% Monitoring of deliveries

Inspection Metrologies:

M1: Inspection of Reports. All reports shall be reviewed upon receipt. The reviewer will report any flaws in the document and categorize the flaws (Editorial, Format, and/or Substance).

Appendix B – Performance Assessment Report

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

Appendix C – Corrective Action Report

0BCORRECTIVE 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.

1B8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR)

2BTYPED NAME AND GRADE

3BSIGNATURE AND DATE

4B9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

5BTYPED NAME AND GRADE

6BSIGNATURE AND DATE

10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

11. COR DETERMINATION

ACCEPTED REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE