Attachment 1 QASP.docx
DOCX document 39 KB Posted
- Attached to
- OEHE GIS Support Services
- Solicitation number
- 75H70125R00030
About this file
The document is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for an Indian Health Service (IHS) Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Support Services contract. The QASP outlines the government's methodology for monitoring and evaluating contractor performance across four primary service areas: GIS Program Management, Help Desk support, Training Resources, and Data Conversion. The contract will be a single-award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) small business set-aside with a base year and four one-year option periods, not exceeding 5.5 years total.
The solicitation is structured as a tiered evaluation prioritizing Indian Small Business Economic Enterprises (ISBEE), then woman-owned small businesses, and finally other small businesses. The contract will be awarded as a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) under NAICS code 541330 with a $47 million size standard. Proposals must be submitted electronically in PDF format to thupten.tsering@ihs.gov, with the evaluation conducted using tradeoff criteria. The contract's purpose is to support GIS implementation within the IHS Office of Environmental Health and Engineering (OEHE) Program, including feature service schema development, quality assurance, policy support, application development, and technical training.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| B05 Amendment 4.pdf | ||
| Amendment 3 Attachment 2 Rate Schedule v2.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| B01 25R00030 v3.pdf | ||
| B05 Amendment 3.pdf | ||
| Amendment 3 Attachment 1 RFI Response 1-209.pdf | ||
| Amendment 3 Attachment 3 Technical Experience Form v2.docx | DOCX document | |
| B05 Amendment 2.pdf | ||
| B01 25R00030 v2.pdf | ||
| B05 Amendment 1.pdf | ||
| DSFC_GIS_Utility_DataDictionary_Schema_BlankGDB.zip | ZIP file | |
| Amendment 1 Attachment 2 DSFC GIS Utility Data Dictionary 20230818.pdf | ||
| Amendment 1 Attachment 1 RFI Response 1-147.pdf | ||
| Amendment 1 Attachment 3 DSFC GIS Utility Data Dictionary - Fields For Completion 20230818.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| B01 25R00030.pdf | ||
| B01 25R00030.pdf | ||
| Attachment 5 IHS IEE Representation Form_Jan 2022.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 Rate Schedule.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 4 PPQ Form.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 3 Technical Experience Form.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 19
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Version – Version 1
IHS Sustainability Program Office of Environmental Health and Engineering
Contract Number: XXXXXXXX
Contract Description: IHS OEHE GIS SUPPORT SERVICES
Contractor’s Name: XXXXXXX
1. Introduction The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) contains the high-level technical and professional requirements to support the IHS Sustainability Program and Healthcare Facility Sustainability Auditing strategies needed to manage and provide the proper quality of information technology support rendered by the Contractor. It focuses on how service quality will be delivered along with targets in the form of AQL’s. These AQL’s define the parameters for the services provided.
2. Work Requirements The detailed work requirements of the IHS OEHE GIS Support Services contract are set forth in the Performance Work Statement.
In brief, the work requirements correspond to responsibilities under the following categories:
· Item 1 GIS Program Manager
· Item 2 Help Desk
· Item 3 Training Resources
· Item 4 Data Conversion
3. Purpose This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan is a government-developed document 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 the detailed process for a continuous oversight process:
· What will be monitored
· How monitoring will take place
· Who will conduct the monitoring
· How monitoring efforts and results will be documented
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. It is the government’s responsibility to be objective, fair and consistent in evaluating contractor performance.
The QASP is not part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the contractor’s quality control plan. This QASP is a living document. Flexibility in the QASP is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on contractor performance.
The government may provide a copy of the QASP to the contractor to facilitate open communication. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen or uncontrollable circumstances might occur that are outside the control of the contractor.
Bottom line, the QASP should ensure early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance.
4. Authority Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Part 46 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Inspection of Services clauses, which provides for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the service called for in the contract or order. This acceptance is to be executed by the contracting officer or a duly authorized representative.
5. Roles and Responsibilities The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.
Program/Project Manager (PM) or Functional Services Manager (FSM) – The PM/FSM provides primary program oversight, nominates the COR, ensures the COR is trained before performing any COR duties and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities. While the PM/FSM may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, they are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or any contract changes on the government’s behalf.
Assigned PM/FSM: provided at time of award.
Contracting Officer (CO) – The CO shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The CO shall also ensure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. Determine the final assessment of the contractor’s performance.
Assigned CO: Andrew Hart Organization or Agency: Division of Engineering Services (DES) Telephone: 206-375-4443 Email: andrew.hart @ihs.gov
Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The COR shall keep a Quality Assurance file that accurately documents the contractor’s actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the CO. The COR is required to provide an annual performance assessment to the CO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the primary tool for surveillance of the contractor’s quality program and help the COR to document contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.
Contractor Representatives
The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s Program Manager and Task Manager for this contract. (Complete this section after the contract award)
Contractor Program Manager – Telephone: XXXX Email: XXXX
Contractor Task Manager – Telephone: XXXX Email: XXXX
6. Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance
6.1. Contract 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 CO, 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.
6.2. Performance Rating 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 contractor’s performance.
Performance Rating Definition
| Exceptional (1) |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the government’s expectation. 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 (2) |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s expectations. 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 (3) |
| 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 (4) |
| 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 (5) |
| 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.
7. Performance Reporting
| Required Services (Tasks) |
| Rating Score |
| Comments (Positive and/or Negative) |
Item 1: GIS Program Manager
Item 2: Help Desk
Item 3: Training Resources
Item 4: Data Conversions
8. Corrective Actions
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .