Attachment 1 - Beale Travis QASP OSRO May 2022.pdf

ATTACHMENT 1

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is an organized written document specifying the surveillance methodology to be used for surveillance of Contractor performance. The QASP shall be incorporated as a separate document attached to this PWS.

1.0 CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

In accordance with FAR 42.1502, the Government will record past performance information for acquisitions over $150,000 utilizing the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). The CPARS process allows contractors to view and comment on the Government's evaluation of the contractor's performance before it is finalized. Once the contractor’s past performance evaluation is finalized in CPARS, it will be transmitted into the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). Contractors are required to register in CPARS, so contractors may review and comment on past performance reports submitted through the CPARS.

CPARS https://www.cpars.gov/

PPIRS http://www.ppirs.gov

2.0 QUALITY STANDARDS

Quality will be measured IAW meeting the objectives stated in the PWS. Therefore, acceptance of deliverables and satisfactory work performance shall be based on the objectives described in the Service Summary table below.

As a minimum, the COR will monitor, review, and report on the contractor’s performance and compliance with all Service Summary (SS) items shown below. Service Summary elements are the critical performance objectives that relate directly to mission essential items. The purpose of proper documentation during surveillance will be to substantiate CPAR assessment. The MFT may evaluate all or part of the PWS requirements with this in mind. The performance thresholds referenced in the table describes the framework for development of minimum acceptable levels of service required for each criteria/essential objective. Performance levels that fall below a satisfactory threshold (as defined) will result in the COR promptly notifying the CO.

Performance Objective PWS Section Performance Threshold Method of

Surveillance

Timeliness of Deliverables

Section 3 E: Deliverables submitted 5 or more business days ahead of schedule

Government Inspection

VG: Deliverables submitted 2-4 business days ahead of schedule

S: Deliverables submitted on schedule or 1 business day ahead of schedule https://www.cpars.gov/ http://www.ppirs.gov/

Performance Objective PWS Section Performance Threshold Method of

Surveillance

M: Deliverables submitted 1-4 business days after schedule

U: Deliverables submitted 5 or more business days after schedule

Deliverables prepared by contractor are accurate

Section 3 E: Addresses all aspects of the requirement; deliverables are clear and concise with no errors

Government Inspection

VG: Addresses all aspects of the requirement; deliverables are clear and concise with 1-2 errors that do not detract from acceptability of the deliverable

S: Addresses all aspects of the requirement; deliverables are clear and concise; noted technical and administrative errors did not detract from acceptability of the deliverable

M: Addresses all aspects of the requirement; deliverables are unclear and not concise; noted technical and administrative errors detracted from acceptability of the deliverable

U: Fails to address all aspects of the requirement; deliverables are unclear / not understandable / lengthy; errors were technical and administrative in nature and made deliverable unacceptable

3.0 METHODS OF SURVEILLANCE

A. Periodic Inspection

Periodic sampling is similar to random sampling, but it is planned at specific intervals or dates. It may be appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently. Selecting this tool to determine a contractor’s compliance with contract requirements can be quite effective, and it allows for assessing confidence in the contractor without consuming a significant amount of time.

a. It is essential that the COR conduct the exact number of surveillances on the surveillance schedule for an effective quality assurance program.

b. The COR shall conduct surveillance of the contractor’s performance by determining whether or not the performance meets the standards contained in the contract.

c. The COR shall record surveillance results. Surveillance documentation shall include as a minimum, the date, time, and location the surveillance was conducted, rating results of the surveillance (i.e., Excellent, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory), PWS paragraph number referencing the requirement, a short description of the requirement being surveyed, applicable remarks, and signature of the COR conducting the surveillance. When the COR determines that contractor performance is unacceptable, the specific reason for the unacceptable performance shall be recorded on the COR’s surveillance documentation.

B. 100% Inspection

As the name implies, all outputs in the designated lot would be observed by the inspector. For example, with a service requirement for required reports, all reports listed in the lot would be examined for acceptance.

a. When utilizing this method of surveillance, the COR shall inspect items every instance they occur.

b. The COR will determine technical acceptability and compliance based on the performance threshold.

C. Customer Feedback

Customer feedback is firsthand information from the actual users of the service. It should be used to supplement other forms of evaluation and assessment, and it is especially useful for areas that do not lend themselves to the typical forms of assessment. However, customer feedback information should be used prudently. Sometimes customer feedback is complaint-oriented and subjective in nature, and it may not always relate to actual requirements of the contract. Such information requires thorough validation.

a. Customer Feedback, positive or negative, shall be collected, validated, and documented and become part of the official contract file.

b. All negative feedback shall be validated by the COR prior to contacting the CO.