Attachment 0005 - QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR

AUTOMATION INSTALLATION ENTRY (AIE) NEXT

PRODUCTION AND TECHNOLOGY INSERTION

15 AUGUST 2022

PREPARED BY:

Product Manager Force Protection Systems

AUTOMATED INSTALLATION ENTRY AIE (QASP)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Purpose

2.0 Authority

3.0 Contract Scope

3.1 Contract Quality Assurance

4.0 Roles and Responsibilities

4.1 PM FPS

4.2 Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)

4.3 Contract Specialist (KS)

4.4 Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

4.5 PM FPS Program Analyst

4.6 DCMA & Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)

4.7 Contractor

5.0 Methods of Quality Assurance Surveillance

5.1 Surveillance Folder

5.2 Incentives

5.3 Evaluation Areas of Contractor Performance Assessment Report

5.4 Monthly COR Activity Report

5.5 Performance Rating Definitions

Table 1: Performance Rating Definitions (FAR Part 42.1503, Table 42-1)

5.6 Timely Feedback to Contractor

5.7 Monthly Surveillance Schedule

5.8 Quality Surveillance

5.9 Remedies for Non-Conformance and Monitoring Forms

5.9.1 AIE Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

5.9.2 AIE Customer Complaint Form

5.9.3 AIE Corrective Action Report (CAR)

5.10 Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)

5.11 Disputes

6.0 Contract Deficiency Reports

7.0 Acceptance of services

8.0 Record Retention

APPENDIX A. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

APPENDIX B. ACRONYMS

APPENDIX C. CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT

APPENDIX D. CUSTOMER COMPLAINT REPORT TEMPLATE

APPENDIX E. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT

APPENDIX F: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

1.0 Purpose

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the Statement of Work (SOW) for the AIE Next Indefinitely Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. This performance-based plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Program Manager Force Protection Systems (PM FPS) will use in evaluating the technical performance of the Contractor. The role of the Government in quality assurance (QA) is to ensure contract standards are achieved. This QASP is used to determine if the contractor’s performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The QASP establishes procedures on how this assessment/inspection process will be conducted. It provides detailed steps for a continuous oversight process:

a. Defines roles and responsibilities;

b. Identifies the performance standards and Acceptable Quality Levels

(AQLs);

c. Defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the Contractor’s performance;

d. Describes quality assurance reporting; and,

e. Describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

2.0 Authority

This QASP was developed in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 46, Quality Assurance, and the relevant Clauses for Inspection of support services and production systems to establish the procedures for monitoring, reporting, and evaluating the performance of the Contractor. The Government acceptance of supplies and services will be executed by the PCO or designated COR. The frequency and method of the Government’s monitoring (inspection), review responsibilities, and reporting requirements are set forth within this QASP.

3.0 Contract Scope

The Contract establishes the requirements for the production of AIE, insertion of Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) technology upgrades, and fielding to Army installations. The contract will be an IDIQ type with production and support services defined in the base contract SOW and each respective Delivery Order

(DO).

3.1 Contract Quality Assurance

Per the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 246.4, Government Contract Quality Assurance, and the SOW, the Government will monitor and record Contractor performance, as stated in this QASP.

AIE Next SOW Quality Assurance References

a. Section 3.2.6.1 Software Quality Assurance Plan

• The Contractor shall develop and implement a Software Quality Assurance Plan to provide quality assurance of software processes and deliverables.

• The plan shall describe the Contractor’s subsystem and system-level processes used to ensure software products undergo Computer Software Configuration Item (CSCI) level testing and validated in accordance with the systems engineering requirements decomposition.

• Major events include, but are not limited to Software Quality Audits, Software Configuration Audits, and Software Qualification Testing.

• Software Quality Assurance shall flow to vendors and subcontractors that produce software products used in meeting program requirements.

b. Section 3.2.5.1 Contractor’s Management Plan

• The Contractor shall provide a Contractor’s Management Plan which includes a Program Management Structure that identifies the education and experience level of key personnel. Among the key personnel includes a Quality Assurance Manager.

• The Contractor’s Management Plan shall include quality assurance and risk management with mitigation strategies.

c. Section 3.2.5.4 Integrated Program Review (IPR)

• The Contractor shall conduct a monthly IPR with the Government.

IPRs shall cover status of each awarded DO, CDRL submissions, program risks and mitigations, information assurance, financial status, quality/performance metrics, contractual actions and Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) sustainment status.

As corrective actions are identified, the PCO may notify the Contractor of required modifications to the plan during the Period of Performance (POP).

4.0 Roles and Responsibilities

The following Government personnel will oversee and implement surveillance activities.

4.1 PM FPS

The PM will provide primary program oversight. While the PM may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on project matters, the PM is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or any contract changes on behalf of the Government. The PM will recommend a COR to the PCO, ensure the COR is trained before performing any delegated duties, and support the COR performance assessment activities.

4.2 Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)

The Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG), Belvoir Division will assign a PCO that is duly appointed with the authority to enter into, administer, or terminate contract actions, such as basic awards or modifications, and make related determinations and findings on behalf of the Government. See FAR Part 1.602 for authority and responsibilities.

The PCO will ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting and compliance with the Contract terms and conditions. The PCO will serve as the official Government agent with authority to modify and interpret the Contract with the Contractor. The PCO will be the only Government official who can authorize contract actions that may result from review of Contractor performance. The PCO will also ensure that the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment.

The PCO will rely on the COR to provide information and recommendations regarding Contractor performance. While the PCO may delegate many of the day-to-day contractual administration duties to the COR, certain contractual actions will be retained as the sole purview of the PCO, including negotiation and issuance of contract modifications, issuance of Contract Deficiency Reports, issuance of “show cause” letters, Contract termination, Contract closeout, and Contractor claims and disputes resolution. The PCO will designate in writing a COR. The PCO will ensure the COR is trained before performing any duties and supports COR performance assessment activities.

The PCO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of adequacy of Contractor performance.

Assigned PCO: Danny Lester ACC-APG Belvoir Division Telephone: (703) 704-0818 Email: danny.w.lester.civ@army.mil

4.3 Contract Specialist (KS)

The KS acts as an acquisition consultant serving as a liaison between the Contractor and PM FPS as well as a liaison between the Contractor and the Army Contracting Center – Aberdeen Proving Ground.

Assigned KS: Brian Petchel ACC-APG Belvoir Division Telephone: (703) 704-1275 mailto:danny.w.lester.civ@army.mil

Email: brian.k.petchel.civ@army.mil

4.4 Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

The COR will be an individual designated in writing by the PCO to act as the authorized representative to assist in the administration of the contract. The COR will be responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of Contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on behalf of the Government. For any changes that may affect contract price, terms, or conditions, the COR will alert the PCO for potential resolution or action. The source of authority for the COR is the PCO Delegation Memorandum. See FAR Part 1.604 and DFAR 201.602-2 for definition of responsibilities.

Assigned COR: Richard Goehring Telephone: 703-629-2125 Email: Richard.h.goehring3.civ@army.mil

4.5 PM FPS Program Analyst

The Program Analyst will be an individual designated by PM FPS to act as the authorized representative to assist in the administration of the financial management of the contract.

4.6 Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) & Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)

Contract administrative responsibilities shall be assigned IAW the PCO’s delegation letter.

4.7 Contractor

The Contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The Contractor measures the quality of all work performed under this contract, regardless of whether the work is performed by Contractor employees or by subcontractors, through the Contractor’s own Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP). The Contractor’s QAPP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the AIE SOW. 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 is responsible for implementing an inspection system conforming to requirements of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001:2015 or equivalent and is acceptable to the Government. Complete records of all inspection work performed by the Contractor shall be made available to the mailto:brian.k.petchel.civ@army.mil mailto:Richard.h.goehring3.civ@army.mil

Government during contract performance. The Contractor is responsible for carrying out its obligations under the contract by:

a. Controlling the quality of supplies and services.

b. Delivering to the Government for acceptance only those supplies or services that conform to contract requirements.

c. Ensuring that vendors or supplies of raw materials, parts, components, subassemblies, etc., have an acceptable quality control system, and maintaining substantiating evidence that the supplies or services conform to contract quality requirements, and furnishing such information to the Government upon request.

5.0 Methods of Quality Assurance Surveillance

The goal of the QASP is to ensure that contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. The COR's contribution is their professional, non-adversarial relationships with the KO, PM and the contractor, which enables positive, open and timely communications. The foundation of this relationship is built upon objective, fair, and consistent COR evaluations of contractor performance against contract requirements. The COR uses the methods contained in this QASP to ensure the contractor is in compliance with contract requirements. The COR function is responsible for a wide range of surveillance requirements that effectively measure and evaluate the contractor's performance.

Additionally, this QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, not the government, is responsible for management and QC/QA actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract. Various methods exist to monitor performance.

The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used in the administration of this QASP. The primary method of surveillance will be 100% inspection in the form of assessing Systems Performance Verification (SPV) results to ensure the Contractor’s installed AIE system performance complies with the SOW requirements.

5.1 Surveillance Folder

A surveillance folder will be used by the primary COR to perform surveillance of Contractor performance and adherence to contract requirements. The folder has the following divisions:

a. COR appointment letter, PCO letter of designation, and Training Record;

b. SOW and other pertinent parts of the contract;

c. QASP;

d. Surveillance Reports;

e. Correspondence: Customer and user comments;

f. Data and technical reports; and,

g. Any other relevant documentation involving contractor performance.

5.2 Incentives

There are no incentives planned for this contract.

5.3 Evaluation Areas of Contractor Performance Assessment Report

The COR will perform quarterly assessment and will file an annual assessment of the following evaluation factors.

a. Schedule and Timeliness of Deliverables – The COR will assess the Contractor’s adherence to the required delivery schedule by looking at the Contractor’s efforts during the period that contribute to or affect the schedule variance. This will take into consideration the significance of scheduled events, and will also assess the effectiveness of corrective actions taken by the Contractor. The Contractor will be rated on the responsive to Government tasking and their timely submissions of required support services and deliverables, as required by the contract. In addition, the Contractor will be rated on their conduct of scheduled reviews and their timely submission of review materials, per the agreed upon process and associated timelines as required by the contract.

b. Cost / Resource Control – The COR will assess the Contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling cost. The COR will assess the causes and Contractor-proposed solutions for the existence of cost overruns, and underruns, where performance is adversely impacted.

In addition, the Government will assess the extent to which the Contractor demonstrates cost responsibility through the efficient use of resources.

The Contractor will use the funding authorized under each respective DO to meet requirements within the POP. The Contractor shall not exceed the material, travel, or other cost-reimbursable CLINs without prior written PCO approval. The Contractor will be evaluated on the successful control of resources dedicated to the SOW tasks.

c. Management – The COR will assess the turnaround, completeness, and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, the cooperativeness of the Contractor, and customer satisfaction.

Contractor’s success with management of subcontracts will be assessed by the COR. The Contractor’s ability to identify and apply resources required to meet schedule requirements, assign responsibility for tasks/actions required by the SOW, and communicate appropriate information to affected program elements in a timely manner will also be assessed. The COR will assess the Contractor’s program management and technical risks and the associated risk mitigation plans to determine if there are any impacts to PM FPS’s project objectives. Contractor management should put adequate systems in place to most efficiently perform the contract and protect the Government interests. For example, the Contractor’s QAPP and ISO 9001 or equivalent certifications should address Government property management, quality control, subcontracting, and accounting systems.

d. Other Areas – The COR will assess additional evaluation areas within the terms and conditions of the contract or unique to the SOW.

5.4 Monthly COR Activity Report

A brief monthly activity report will be uploaded to the Virtual Contracting Enterprise (VCE)-COR tool at https://arc.army.mil/COR/. The report will include a summary of inspections performed with results, summary of any customer complaints with analysis, summary of contract discrepancies, results of data analysis (Risk), recommended adjustments to surveillance, invoices accepted, next month’s surveillance schedule, and any other materials pertinent to that month’s contract surveillance. A Copy of the monthly report will be given to the KO. Issues and concerns that cannot be resolved at the working level or which impact contractual requirements shall be reported to the KO for resolution and contractual action.

5.5 Performance Rating Definitions

The Government ratings and narrative must leverage off of FAR Part 42.1503, Table 42-1 “Evaluation Ratings Definitions” as follows:

Rating Definition Note

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.

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government.

A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should not have been any significant weaknesses identified.

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.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should not be any significant weaknesses identified.

https://arc.army.mil/COR/

Rating Definition Note

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.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the Contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should not have been significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that Contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

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 proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the Contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the Contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

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 Contractor corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the Contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the Contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

Table 1: Performance Rating Definitions (FAR Part 42.1503, Table 42-1)

5.6 Timely Feedback to Contractor

Timely feedback to the Contractor on unacceptable performance will be provided by the COR and documented in writing. Prompt feedback is essential so that the Contractor can develop and implement a corrective action plan. The Contractor's corrective action must be reported to the PCO for tracking purposes.

5.7 Monthly Surveillance Schedule

The COR will develop a monthly schedule of surveillance. The surveillance outlined in the schedule will be as detailed and in-depth as necessary to provide the Government with the objective quality evidence required to support acceptance of the services provided by the Contractor. It will identify the method of surveillance, the date of inspection, place of inspection, activity to be monitored, and who will conduct the surveillance. Dates and times can be altered without a formal change to the schedule as long as all inspections are performed.

[The DA Form 5475-R (COR/QAE Surveillance Schedule) http://armypubs.army.mil/eforms/pdf/A5475.PDF may be tailored for this purpose.] The monthly schedule will be completed no later than seven calendar days prior to the beginning of the period it covers and uploaded into the COR VCE online tool (https://arc.army.mil/COR/). (Upload to “Miscellaneous Documents” under document type “Surveillance Schedule.”)

5.8 Quality Surveillance

Quality surveillance of contractor performance will be performed as stated in the Government’s QASP. The Government, through implementation of its QASP, will monitor the Contractor’s performance on a continuing basis. However, the volume of tasks performed by the Contractor makes technical inspections of every task and step impractical. Accordingly, tasks will be monitored using a variety of surveillance techniques as described below. In addition, precise documentation is required to record, evaluate, and report the Contractor’s performance. As a result, all documentation resulting from surveillance will be made part of the contract file. During the Monthly Program Reviews the contractor, Contracting Officer, and PM staff will discuss contract performance, resolve issues, discuss customer complaints, and provide positive interaction and feedback to all parties. This process will provide a list of any unresolved deficiencies to the Contractor’s Quality Assurance Representative (QAR).

Performance evaluation will be accomplished by monitoring compliance with the performance requirements as described in the Contract and in the QASP. The method of evaluation will depend on the service type, and each service type may be assessed by more than one method. Generally accepted surveillance methods will be used by the Government and are described in its QASP. These methods include, but are not limited to:

a. 100% Inspection – The Government will evaluate 100% of designated tasks. This surveillance method is appropriate for tasks where 100% inspection is required and is practical.

b. Partial Inspection – The Government will evaluate less than 100% of designated tasks and on a selective basis. This surveillance method is appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently and where 100% inspection is neither required nor practical.

c. Operational Monitoring – The Government will examine reports generated by automated tools, logs, and websites.

d. Performance Reviews - The contractor will attend Contract Performance Reviews, as required. These meetings will focus on overall contract performance. Specific dates, locations, agenda, and attendance requirements will be specified by the Contracting Officer at least 30 calendar days prior to each meeting.

5.9 Remedies for Non-Conformance and Monitoring Forms

In accordance with FAR 46.407 Nonconforming supplies or services, the PCO should reject support services and production systems not conforming in all respects to contract requirements. If the monitoring methods (inspections) indicate an unacceptable product or performance, the COR will notify the Contractor POC of the deficiencies for correction. The PCO ordinarily must give the Contractor an opportunity to correct or replace nonconforming support services and production systems when this can be accomplished within the required delivery schedule. If deficiencies are not corrected within the required time frame, the COR should notify the PCO for action. If the Contractor disagrees with the noted discrepancy and an agreement cannot be reached, the COR will notify the PCO for a final decision. The following forms are used to record non-conformance:

a. Appendix B - Corrective Action Report

b. Appendix C - Customer Complaint Report

c. Appendix D - Performance Assessment Report

d. Appendix E - Sample Quality Assurance Monitoring Form

5.9.1 AIE Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

The PAR will be used to report all minor discrepancies and will be generated by the COR and sent to the Contractor for corrective action. Contractors will be given 10 days to correct the items stated in the PARs, unless they have requested an extension. If three or more minor discrepancies are found, the COR will combine them and process a Performance Assessment Report (PAR). See Appendix D below.

5.9.2 AIE Customer Complaint Form

The COR will furnish instructions for this form to the Customer if the Customer pursues on filing a complaint of a service or product not meeting the Customer’s expectations. In addition, the Customer will receive the contract requirements that are associated with the service or product. The Customer must provide supporting evidence of complaint or feedback. After the COR validates feedback or complaint demonstrating Contractor noncompliance, the COR will process a PAR or CAR to the PCO. All Customer Complaint reports will be validated by the COR prior to notifying the Contractor. See Appendix C below.

5.9.3 AIE Corrective Action Report (CAR)

The CAR will be used to report a situation when there are three or more minor discrepancies or one or more major discrepancies documented. The CAR will be generated by the COR and forwarded to the PCO for action. A copy will be provided to the Contractor representative by the PCO. CARs are required to be corrected within 30 calendar days. Depending on the complexity of the finding, the Contractor may be allowed up to six months to correct a CAR. The COR will request that the Contractor provide the status of CARs on a monthly basis. The COR will keep an electronic log of all CARs and will keep a hard copy of CARs in the contract surveillance file. See Appendix B below.

5.10 Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)

CPARS (www.cpars.gov) will be prepared at least annually, documenting Contractor performance for this contract (See FAR Part 42.1502). More frequent updates may be made as required to document a significant improvement or degradation of the level of contract performance.

5.11 Disputes

Every attempt will be made to resolve all disputes arising under this contact using the Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) as outlined in FAR 33.214. If resolution cannot be made under ADR, the PCO will render a final decision.

6.0 Contract Deficiency Reports.

The COR will report more serious (systemic in nature) deficiencies or recurring deficiencies that could indicate a trend by using the DA Form 5479-R, Contract Discrepancy Report http://armypubs.army.mil/eforms/pdf/A5479.PDF. The Contract Discrepancy Report will state the Contract Requirement, the specific contract reference and the specific violation (s) to the requirement. The COR will forward copies of Contract Discrepancy Reports to the KO within one working day. The KO will notify the Contractor and request corrective action to the specific non-conformance, identification of the root cause and corrective action for the root cause with a required suspense date. The KO may require the Contractor to re-perform any services that do not meet contract requirements at no additional cost to the Government. The Contractor will return a copy of the completed and signed DA Form 5479-R along with their Corrective Action Plan (CAP) to the KO for review, approval and inclusion in the contract/order file. The http://www.cpars.gov/ http://armypubs.army.mil/eforms/pdf/A5479.PDF

KO should include the COR in the review of the CAP and re-inspection of services that were found deficient to ensure the CAP included adequate root cause analysis, corrective action for the root cause and that it was accomplished in the timeframe agreed upon. The KO and COR will not consider the CDR closed until all deficiencies have been corrected and all agreed upon actions of the CAP have been completed. Contractor’s failure to follow through and complete corrective actions will be reported immediately to the KO for further action. (Note: if the COR has to repeatedly perform re-inspection there could be a Government re-inspection cost which could be recovered from the Contractor).

The COR will also follow-up after the Contractor has completed the corrective action to ensure that the Contractor’s corrective action was sufficient to preclude recurrence.

7.0 Acceptance of services

When all services have been deemed acceptable and there is documented objective quality evidence to support acceptable performance, the Government will accept the services provided and authorize payment. This is done by approving the Contractor’s invoice in Wide Area Workflow https://wawf.eb.mil/

8.0 Record Retention

The Contractor shall use the Government-designated data repository as an Integrated Date Environment (IDE), which provides information sharing among participants to include a comprehensive document repository for all programmatic documents and deliverables. All records pertaining to this contract will be provided to the KO upon the completion of the contract.

https://wawf.eb.mil/

APPENDIX A. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Required Services Performance

Standards Acceptable

Quality Levels Method of

Surveillance

SOW para. 3.2.6.2 and

3.2.6.5 – The Contractor shall develop a System Description and Architecture

IAW CDRL A001.

Deliverable shall be submitted 30 days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 35 days from Delivery Order award date and have no more than 5 errors per submission.

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.2 – Accreditation documentation shall be develop and delivered IAW CDRLs A002 and A003.

CDRLs shall be provided within 5 calendar days of completion of monthly lab and site scans. CDRLs shall be 100% timely and accurate.

CDRLs shall be provided within 8 calendar days of completion of monthly lab and site scans no more than twice per year. CDRLs shall be 100% accurate.

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.2.8 – The Contractor shall conduct a

PIA IAW CDRL A004

following technology upgrades that result in changes to the way PII is collected, stored, protected, shared and managed.

Conduct of PIAs shall be 100% in compliance with the

SOW/CDRL

PIAs shall have no more than 3 errors per execution.

100% Bi-annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.3 – The Contractor shall provide a FMECA Report IAW CDRL A005.

Initial draft shall be submitted 90 days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Reports shall be submitted within 90 days of DO award date no less than 95% of the time and have no more than 2 errors per submission.

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.6.4 – The Contractor shall submit ECPs IAW CDRL A006.

Submissions are thorough and contain all required technical information per the

CDRL.

ECP submissions shall contain all required technical information no less than 95% of the time

100% quarterly Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.6.1 – The Contractor shall deliver a System Update & Implementation Plan IAW

CDRL A007.

Initial draft shall be submitted 60 calendar days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted within 60 days from DO award no less than 100% of the time and have no more than 3 errors per submission.

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.4.4.1 – The Contractor shall perform a physical site survey and deliver a report IAW CDRL A008.

Submission shall be five (5) business days from completion of site survey and shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Deliverables shall be submitted within 5 business days of site survey no less than 95% of the time and have no more than one error per submission.

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.4.4.2 – The Contractor shall develop an

IEP IAW CDRL A009.

Submission shall be ten (10) business days from Site Survey report submission and shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Deliverables shall be submitted within 10 business days of Site Survey report submission no less than 100% of the time and have no more than 2 errors per submission.

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.4.4.2.1 – The Contractor shall develop/submit a CJIS Security Plan IAW CDRL A010.

Initial draft shall be submitted 30 days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Submission within 30 days from DO award no less than 100% of the time and have no more than 5 errors per submission.

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.4.4.3.2 – The Contractor shall provide a PCA Plan IAW CDRL A011

Initial draft shall be submitted 60 calendar days prior to the first planned audit activity and shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Deliverables shall be submitted 60 calendar days prior to the first planned audit activity and have no more than 5

100% Monthly errors per submission.

SOW para. 3.2.4.4.3.2 – The Contractor shall provide a PCA Report IAW A012

Draft reports shall be submitted 10 business days after completion of PCA and shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Deliverables shall be submitted 10 business days after completion of PCA and have no more than 2 errors per submission

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.4.4.3.3 – The Contractor shall update per-site TDPs IAW CDRL A013

Submissions shall be within 5 calendar days of completion of PCA and PVT and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted within 5 calendar days of completion of PCA and PVT and have no more than 2 errors per submission

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.5.1 – The Contractor shall provide a Management Plan IAW

CDRL A014

Initial draft shall be submitted 30 days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 30 days from DO award date and have no more than 2 errors per submission

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.4.2 and

3.2.5.2 – The Contractor shall develop an IMS IAW

CDRL A015

Following initial submission, subsequent monthly submissions shall be received by the Govt on the 10th of each month and shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Deliverables shall be 100% timely and have no more than 2 errors per submission

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW para. 3.2.4.2 and

3.2.5.3 – The Contractor shall provide a Bi-Weekly Schedule Report IAW

CDRL A016

Initial submission shall occur 5 business days from Delivery Order award date and subsequent reports shall be submitted bi-weekly. All submissions shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Deliverables shall be submitted 5 business days from Delivery Order award date and have no more than 3 errors per submission

100% Bi-Weekly

SOW para. 3.2.5.5 and

3.2.7.4 – The Contractor shall provide a Monthly Status Report IAW CDRL A017

The Contractor shall submit this monthly report on the 10th of each month and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted by the 10th of each month and have no more than one error per submission

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.6 – The Contractor shall prepare, submit and maintain a

SEMP IAW CDRL A019

Initial draft shall be submitted 60 days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 60 days from Delivery Order award date and have no more than 5 errors

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.6.7.1 – The Contractor shall provide an integrated System Installation and Checkout Test Report IAW CDRL A020

Submissions shall be within 5 business days of completion of CVT and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 5 business days of completion of CVT and have no more than 2 errors per submission

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW paras 3.2.4.4.3.1, 3.2.6.7.2, 3.2.6.7.3, and

3.2.6.7.4 – IAW CDRL A021

All submissions shall be 100% in compliance with the

SOW/CDRL

All submissions shall be 100% in compliance with the SOW/CDRL and have no more than 3 errors per submission

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW paras 3.2.6.7.2 and

3.2.6.7.3 – IAW CDRL A022

All submissions shall be 100% in compliance with the

SOW/CDRL

All submissions shall be 100% in compliance with the SOW/CDRL and have no more than 3 errors per submission

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW paras 3.2.6.7.2, 3.2.6.7.3, and 3.2.6.7.4 –

IAW CDRL A023

All submissions shall be 100% in compliance with the

SOW/CDRL

All submissions shall be 100% in compliance with the SOW/CDRL and have no more than 3 errors per submission

100% Monthly Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.6.7.4 and

3.2.6.7.5 – the Contractor shall conduct failure

FACAR shall be submitted NLT 3 calendar days after

Deliverables shall be submitted NLT 4 calendar

100% Monthly analysis and prepare a

FACAR IAW CDRL A024

failure occurs and shall be 100% timely and accurate days after a failure occurs and have no more than 1 error

SOW para 3.2.6.8.1 – The Contractor shall deliver a Configuration Management Plan IAW CDRL A025

Initial draft shall be submitted 60 days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 60 days from Delivery Order award date and have no more than 3 errors

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.7.2.1 – The Contractor shall deliver a Sustainment Transition Plan

IAW CDRL A026

Initial draft shall be submitted 180 calendar days prior to scheduled transition date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 180 calendar days prior to scheduled transition data and have no more than 3 errors

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.7.2.2, 3.2.7.2.8, and 3.2.7.2.11 – The Contractor shall deliver an Integrated Logistics Support Plan (ILSP) IAW

CDRL A027

Initial draft shall be submitted 90 days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 90 days from Delivery Order award date and have no more than 3 errors

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.7.2.3 – the Contractor shall conduct a

LORA IAW CDRL A028

Initial draft shall be submitted 120 calendar days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverable shall be 100% in compliance with the SOW/CDRL and have no more than 3 errors

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.7.2.4 – The Contractor shall deliver Logistics/Maintenance related documentation IAW CDRLs A029, A030, A031, and A032

All submissions shall be 100% in compliance with the

SOW/CDRL

Deliverables shall be 100% in compliance with the SOW/CDRL and have no more than 3 errors each

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.7.2.7 – The Contractor shall provide a Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) IAW

CDRL A034

Initial draft shall be submitted 90 days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 90 days from Delivery Order award date and have no more than 3 errors

100% Annual

SOW para 3.2.7.2.9 – The Contractor shall provide response to Help Desk submissions within 24 hours and commence repairs within 48 hours IAW CDRL A035

Initial submission shall 15 business days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 15 days from Delivery Order award date and have no more than one error

100% Bi-Weekly Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.10 – The Contractor shall develop a Safety Assessment Report

IAW CDRL A036

Initial draft shall be submitted 30 days from Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

Deliverables shall be submitted 30 days from Delivery Order award date and have no more than 5 errors

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.7.3 – The Contractor shall deliver training related documentation IAW CDRLs A037 and A038

CDRLs shall be provided within 90 calendar days of Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Deliverables shall be submitted within 90 calendar days of Delivery Order award date and have no more than 3 errors per submission

100% Annual Inspection by

COR

SOW para 3.2.7.2 – the Contractor shall provide SW License Renewals IAW

CDRL A039

CDRLs shall be submitted 30 calendar days of Delivery Order award date and shall be 100% timely and accurate

CDRLs shall be submitted 30 calendar days of Delivery Order award date and shall have no more than two (2) errors

100% Inspection by COR

SOW para 3.2.7.2.12 – the Contractor shall support non-warranty repairs IAW

CDRL A040

CDRLs shall be submitted 30 calendar days of Delivery Order award date and initiate repairs within 48 hours of Govt approval

Deliverables shall be 100% timely and have no more than 2 errors per submission

100% Inspection by COR

SOW para 3.2.3.1 – the Contractor shall deliver a Functional Configuration Audit Plan IAW CDRL A041

Initial draft shall be submitted 45 calendar days prior to the first planned audit activity and shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Deliverables shall be submitted 45 calendar days prior to the first planned audit activity and have no more than 5 errors

100% Monthly

SOW para 3.2.3.1 – the Contractor shall deliver a Functional Configuration Audit Report IAW CDRL A042

Draft reports shall be submitted 5 business days after completion of FCA and shall be 100% timely and accurate.

Deliverables shall be submitted 10 business days after completion of FCA and have no more than 2 errors per submission

100% Inspection by COR

SOW para 3.2.6.2.1 – the Contractor shall deliver an Interface Requirements Spec IAW CDRL A043

Initial draft shall be submitted 30 calendar days of Delivery Order award and shall be 100% in compliance with the SOW and

CDRL

Final deliverable shall be submitted 15 calendar days after receipt of Govt comments and have no more than 3 errors

100% Inspection by COR

SOW para 3.2.6.2.2 – the Contractor shall deliver a SW Design Description IAW CDRL A044 and Database Design Description IAW

CDRL A046

Initial draft shall be submitted 30 calendar days of Delivery Order award and shall be 100% in compliance with the SOW and CDRLs

Final deliverable shall be submitted 15 calendar days after receipt of Govt comments and have no more than 3 errors

100% Inspection by COR

SOW para 3.2.6.2.3 – the Contractor shall deliver an Interface Design Description

IAW CDRL A045

Initial draft shall be submitted 30 calendar days of Delivery Order award and shall be 100% in compliance with the SOW and

CDRL A043

Final deliverable shall be submitted 15 calendar days after receipt of Govt comments and have no more than 3 errors

100% Inspection by COR

APPENDIX B. ACRONYMS

ACRONYM MEANING

ACO Administrative Contracting Officer

ADR Alternate Dispute Resolution

AQL Acceptable Quality Levels

CAR Corrective Action Report

CAP Corrective Action Plan

CDRL Contract Data Requirements List

CLIN Contract Line Item Number

CLS Contractor Logistics Support

CMRA Contract Manpower Reporting Application

COR

C

Contracting Officer’s Representative

COTS Commercial Off The Shelf

CPARS Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System

CSCI Computer Software Configuration Item

DCMA Defense Contracts Management Agency

DFARS Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement

DO Delivery Order

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulations

AIE Automated Installation Entry

IAW In Accordance With

IDIQ Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity

IPR Integrated Program Review

ISO International Organization for Standardization

KS Contract Specialist

MIL-STD Military Standard

OPSEC Operations Security

PAR Performance Assessment Report

PCO Procuring Contracting Officer

PM Product Manager

PM Program Manager

POC Point of Contact

POP Period of Performance

QA Quality Assurance

QAR Quality Assurance Representative

QAPP Quality Assurance Program Plan

QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

SPV Systems Performance Verification

TO Task Order

VCE Virtual Contracting Enterprise

APPENDIX C. CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT

AIE CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

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

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. FUNCTIONAL AREA

5. SUSPENSE DATE

6. CONTROL NUMBER

7. DEFICIENCY MAJOR MINOR

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

Please respond with a written corrective action plan that details the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 5. If date was not entered in Block 5, the contractor is not required to provide a response.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (QAP)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

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

11. QAP DETERMINATION

ACCEPTED REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

APPENDIX D. CUSTOMER COMPLAINT REPORT TEMPLATE

AIE CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NUMBER

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY

APPENDIX E. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT

AIE 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 (QAP) SIGNATURE AND DATE

5. QAP PHONE 6. SUSPENSE DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT

APPLY)

NEW

REPEAT

NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or SOW 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 QAP CITED DEFICIENCY

III. ACTION CORRECTED

14. CONCUR NON-CONCUR QAP SIGNATURE AND DATE

15. QAP REMARKS (REQUIRED)

16. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS

APPENDIX F: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection

Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: _____ %

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance during Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: _________________________DATE: _________________