Attachment 10 - 20240402 - D3I2 TO QASP.pdf

CUI

W9113M24R0070 Attachment 10 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Design, Development, Demonstration and Integration II (D3I2) Domain 1

02 APR 2024 (REV 00)

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

for Design, Development, Demonstration, and Integration II (D3I2)

Domain 1

Contract Number: [Enter Contract Number Here] Task Order (TO) Number: [Enter TO Number Here]

Task Order Title: [Enter TO Title Here] Contractor’s Name: [Enter Name of Contractor Here]

Version/Date: 0X/DD MON YEAR

Contracting Officer’s Representative’s (COR) Signature

Contracting Officer ‘s Signature

1. PURPOSE.

a. This QASP provides an effective and systematic method for monitoring, evaluating, and documenting contractor performance of the performance work statement (PWS) requirements at the task order (TO) level. The Government will monitor contractor performance to assess the acceptability of the services provided and not the details of how the contractor accomplishes the work. The Government will use the QASP to determine if the contractor's performance meets the performance standards contained in the TO. The QASP establishes procedures on how this assessment/inspection process will be conducted.

The Government retains the right to inspect all services and supplies furnished under the indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity task orders in accordance with the provisions of the contract. This QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate performance and explains the following:

(1) What will be monitored;

(2) How monitoring will take place;

(3) Who will conduct the monitoring; and

(4) How monitoring efforts and results will be documented.

b. This QASP does not detail how the contractor should accomplish the work.

Rather, it is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the TO. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair and consistent in evaluating performance.

c. This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may revise it on a regular basis. The Government will coordinate changes with the contractor only in cases where revision to this document impacts the Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) in Appendix A of the TO PWS. Updates will ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful and enforceable document.

2. AUTHORITY.

This QASP is in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part Subpart 46.4, Government Contract Quality Assurance, and requiring agency instructions and regulations. Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under FAR Part 46, Quality Assurance, Inspection of Services clauses, which provides for inspection, acceptance, and documentation of the service called for in the contract or TO. This acceptance is to be executed by the responsible contracting officer (KO) or a duly authorized representative.

3. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

a. To fully understand the roles and responsibilities of all of the parties involved, it is important to first understand the differences between the Contractor’s Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) and the Government’s QASP.

(1) The contractor, and not the Government, shall be responsible for managing work, ensuring that performance is satisfactory and compliant with basic contract and TO clauses, and performing quality control and quality assurance functions to ensure that products and/or services meet task order requirements. Additionally, the contractor shall be responsible for taking all actions necessary to correct unsatisfactory, deficient, or non-compliant work. The QAPP is neither part of the TO nor is it intended to duplicate the contractor's quality control plan. As a QAPP is a living document, flexibility in the QAPP is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on contractor performance.

(2) The QASP is used to provide Government surveillance oversight of the Contractor’s quality control efforts to ensure that they are timely, effective, and are delivering the results specified in the contract and/or TO. The QASP is not intended to duplicate the contractor’s QAPP.

b. The following Government personnel will oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

(1) KO. The KO ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract, and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The KO also ensures that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the contract. The KO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance. The KO is the only individual with the authority to enter into, administer, or terminate contractual actions, and make related determinations and findings on behalf of the Government.

(2) COR. The COR is the individual designated in writing by the KO to act as his/her authorized representative to assist in administering the contract. The COR is responsible for monitoring, evaluating, and documenting contractor performance. The COR will work to perform the following functions.

(a) Discuss performance requirements with the contractor during the pre-performance conference.

(b) Establish a schedule for routine monitoring events, if applicable.

(c) Review, monitor, and evaluate all items (services performed, work products, and/or delivered items) as listed on the Performance Assessment Report in accordance with the stated performance measures. Verification of the level of performance compliance shall be performed by analysis, demonstration, inspection, or test. The evaluator shall determine the degree to which contractor performance meets the established performance standards.

(d) Verify timeliness of deliveries.

(e) Hold performance assessment meetings with the requiring agency’s technical representative.

(f) Complete and/or compile performance documents for each evaluation period at the TO level.

(g) Ensure that the narrative of all observations is accurate and factual in every aspect. The narrative shall be legible and provide the evaluator’s observations, evaluation, and conclusions in precise descriptive language. Generalities, personal opinions and vague or ambiguous statements are not acceptable.

(h) Provide an updated copy of the COR Monthly Performance Evaluation Report to the KO upon completion of the evaluation via the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module or if using Secure Environment Contracting (SEC) procedures, via encrypted Non-classified Internet Protocol Router or Secured Internet Protocol Router email.

(i) Meet with the KO to provide and/or discuss the following requirements.

(i) Report the results of the contractor surveillance.

(ii) Report the acceptance of services.

(iii) Determine the Government’s plan of action in the event of unacceptable, unsatisfactory, deficient, or non-compliant contractor performance.

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

a. Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets, or does not meet these standards.

b. The Quality Standards and Surveillance Methods Matrix includes performance standards. The Government will use these standards to determine contractor performance and compare Contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level

(AQL).

c. Relative definitions related to the Quality Standards and Surveillance Methods Matrix are provided below.

(1) “Major issue” – any issue that requires elevation to the KO for resolution.

(2) “Minor issue” – any issue that can be resolved by the COR.

(3) “TO schedule” – initial schedule created by the Government and agreed to by the contractor. Any changes to this schedule over time require acceptance by both the Government (KO) and the contractor (the contract personnel interacting with the KO and COR and performing the technical tasks under the TO on a regular basis).

5. METHODS OF SURVEILLANCE.

a. Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR will always contact the KO when an issue is identified to inform the KO of a specific issue. The COR, with assistance from the KO, will be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific Performance Standard/AQL. Suitable surveillance methods are listed below.

Customer complaint. A method where the customer discovers unacceptable performance or a defect in service, and prepares a customer complaint record.

Periodic surveillance. The COR will periodically assess the contractor’s performance by either watching actual performance, physically checking an attribute of the completed tasks, or inspecting the task or its results to determine whether or not the performance meets the standard contained in the contract.

One-hundred (100) % inspection. In this surveillance method, the COR will inspect the contractor’s performance each time the task is performed.

Random sampling. Random sampling is the most appropriate method for frequently recurring tasks. A typical use of this surveillance method is lot sampling. Initially, the COR will evaluate randomly selected samples of the activity to determine the acceptability of the entire requirement. Random sampling is statistically based and assumes the Government receives acceptable performance by the contractor if a given percentage or number of schedule inspections are found to be acceptable.

b. The COR will use a variety of methods of surveillance identified in the quality standards and surveillance methods below. Each method relies on COR feedback from direct observation. This feedback will be provided to the KO at least quarterly.

Feedback must be in writing, detailed, and signed.

c. Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions against the Contractor. In such cases, the suitable Inspection of Services clause(s) in the contract (or TO) becomes the basis for KO action(s).

d. Please note that the contract’s Product Service Code (PSC), “AC13 – National Defense Research and Development Services; Department of Defense – Military;

Experimental Development” is exempt from Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) reporting per the PSC Mapping Matrix. However, with administrative contracting officer (or KO as appropriate) and requiring activity concurrence, performance assessments may be completed in CPARS at the TO level, depending on the TO security classification.

6. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.

Documentation must be accurate and thorough. Completeness, currency, and accuracy support both satisfactory and unsatisfactory performance. In addition to providing documentation to the KO, the COR will maintain a complete quality assurance file using the SPM tool or if an SEC TO, maintain a complete quality assurance file on a limited access network drive. This file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any other actions related to the Government’s performance of quality assurance. The records will be retained for the life of the basic contract and TO, whichever is later. The COR will ensure these records are loaded into the SPM module or provided to the KO for his/her review upon termination of COR duties, completion of the contract, or other request by the

KO.

a. Acceptable performance.

The Government shall document positive performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for fee payments or other actions.

b. Unacceptable performance.

(1) When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the KO and the KO shall inform the contractor (this will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication; if verbal communication is necessary, the COR shall document the discussion, place it in the COR file using the SPM tool, as applicable, and forward it to the KO).

(2) When the KO determines that formal written communication is required, then the KO (with assistance from the COR) shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), and present it to the appropriate contractor point of contact (such as the contractor's task manager or on-site representative). A CDR template is attached at Enclosure 1.

(3) The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor will correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence.

The CDR will also state how long (after receipt) the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the COR and the KO. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

(4) Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for fixed fee deductions or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.

c. Taking corrective actions.

(1) The Government will promptly notify the contractor of any unsatisfactory, unacceptable, deficient, non-conforming, and/or non-compliant performance. The contractor shall have the opportunity to review the Government’s determination and provide comments.

(2) Any contractor performance problems that result from the failure of the Government to fulfill any of its obligations under the contract or TO, upon which contractor performance is dependent, will not be assessed and documented as contractor deficiencies or non-compliance, to the extent of Government liability.

(3) The contractor shall be responsible for correcting all unsatisfactory, unacceptable, deficient, and/or non-compliant performance. For firm fixed-price contracts, the cost of re-performing unsatisfactory, unacceptable, deficient, or non-compliant work will be the sole responsibility of the contractor.

(4) For labor-hour contracts, the cost of re-performing unsatisfactory, unacceptable, deficient, and/or non-compliant work will be reimbursed at the approved labor hour rate less an amount for profit, as prescribed by paragraph (f) of the clause entitle Inspection— Time-and-Material and Labor-Hour (May 2001) (FAR 52.246-6), which is included in this contract.

(5) Disputes between the contractor and the COR regarding surveillance results should be referred to the KO.

(6) Failure of the contractor to take appropriate and timely corrective action will result in the Government’s issuance of cure or show-cause notices or pursue other remedies set forth in the provisions of the contract or as provided by law.

(7) When unsatisfactory work is not corrected or unacceptable work is not re-performed to the Government’s satisfaction, in addition to other available remedies, the Government may reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value received.

Additionally, the Government reserves the right to include any incidents of unsatisfactory, unacceptable, deficient, and/or non-compliant performance - especially if uncorrected - in the contractor’s past performance record.

d. In accordance with the appropriate contract Inspection of Services clause(s), if any of the services do not conform to contract requirements, then the Government may require the contractor to perform the services again in conformity with contract requirements at no increase in the contract amount. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-performance, then the Government may take action in accordance with the appropriate contract Inspection Services clause(s).

7. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT.

While the contractor is fully expected to comply with all requirements in the TO PWS, the Government’s assessment of contractor performance will focus mainly on the objectives listed in the AQL row of the Quality Standards and Surveillance Methods Matrix. As a result, in order to adequately monitor the contractor, the COR surveillance will be performed on a quarterly basis or more frequently if needed. The COR will monitor the contractor’s performance to ensure it meets the standards of the TO. Unacceptable performance may result in the KO taking any of the following actions: (1) require the contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements; (2) reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services; and/or (3) require the contractor to re-perform the service.

8. PRS, Quality Standards, and Surveillance Methods.

As appropriate, the following PRS, quality standards, and surveillance methods will be used at the TO level.1

1 Note that the stated PRS, quality standards, and surveillance methods can be tailored at the TO level if required by the supported requiring activity/customer as approved by the responsible KO.

CUI

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY, QUALITY STANDARDS, AND

SURVEILLANCE METHODS

QUALITY STANDARDS AND SURVALLIANCE METHODS

a. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE: Quality of Product or Service PERFORMANCE STANDARD: Contract requirements met with little rework/ re-performance required and with few minor and no significant problems encountered.

Performance meets all technical and functional requirements, and is highly responsive to changes in technical direction and/or the technical support environment. Assessments, evaluations, analyses, recommendations, and related input are thorough, reliable, highly relevant to requirements and consist of substantial depth and breadth of subject matter.

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL): Contractor delivery of products and/or services meets all contract requirements. Performance occurs with no required re-performance/ rework at least 90-94% of time. Problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a timely and satisfactory manner.

METHOD OF SURVEILLANCE: One-hundred percent (100%) inspection of Deliverable Data and Reports. Combination of Periodic and Random inspection of rendered services.

PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE: Assignment of performance rating for QUALITY objective.

EXCEPTIONAL: Performance and deliverables meet all and exceed many requirements.

Performance delivered with no required performance/rework 99-100% of time; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a highly effective manner.

VERY GOOD: Performance and deliverables meet all and exceed some requirements.

Performance delivered with no required performance/rework 95-98% of the time;

problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in an effective manner.

SATISFACTORY: Performance and deliverables meet all requirements. Performance delivered with no re-performance/rework 90-94% of the time; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a satisfactory manner.

MARGINAL: Some requirements not met and/or performance delivered with no re-performance/rework required 80-89% of the time; problems encountered were resolved in a less than satisfactory manner.

UNSATISFACTORY: Some requirements not met and/or performance delivered with re-performance/rework required more than 20% of time.

b. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE: Adherence to TO Schedule PERFORMANCE STANDARD: Milestones, periods of performance, and/or deliverable submission dates are met or exceeded.

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL): Contractor meets delivery requirements 90-94% of the time (excluding government-caused delays).

METHOD OF SURVEILLANCE: One-hundred percent (100%) inspection of Deliverable Data and Reports. Combination of Periodic and Random inspection of rendered services.

PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE: Assignment of performance rating for SCHEDULE objective.

EXCEPTIONAL: Milestones/performance dates met 99-100% of the time (excluding Government- caused delays).

VERY GOOD: Milestones/performance dates met 95-98% of the time (excluding government- caused delays).

SATISFACTORY: Milestones/performance dates met 90-94% of the time (excluding Government- caused delays).

MARGINAL: Milestones/performance dates met 80-89% of the time (excluding Government-caused delays).

UNSATISFACTORY: Schedule/performance dates are not met more than 20% of time (excluding Government-caused delays).

c. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE: Efficient and Effective Cost Control PERFORMANCE STANDARD: Effectively forecast, manage, and control contract cost. The extent to which the contractor demonstrates a sense of cost responsibility, through the efficient use of resources will be assessed.

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL): TO performance requirements met within total awarded ceiling price/cost estimate.

METHOD OF SURVEILLANCE: One hundred (100%) Inspection of monthly Funds & Man-hour Expenditure Reports/Cost Funds Status Report (CSFR) and/or Status Reports.

PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE: Assignment of performance rating for COST CONTROL objective.

SATISFACTORY: TO performance requirements met within total awarded ceiling price/cost estimate.

UNSATISFACTORY: TO performance requirement are not met within total awarded ceiling price/cost estimate.

d. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE: Management of Personnel PERFORMANCE STANDARD: Provide a qualified and stable workforce.

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL): Retention of qualified personnel is maintained at least 90% of the time.

METHOD OF SURVEILLANCE: Combination of periodic and random inspection of rendered services.

PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE: Assignment of performance rating for Management of Personnel objective.

EXCEPTIONAL: Retention rate of a qualified and stable workforce maintained at 95-100%.

VERY GOOD: Retention rate of a qualified and stable workforce maintained at 91-94%.

SATISFACTORY: Retention rate of a qualified and stable workforce maintained at 90%.

MARGINAL: Retention rate of a qualified and stable workforce maintained at 70-89%.

UNSATISFACTORY: Retention rate of a qualified and stable workforce maintained is less than 70%.

e. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVE: Combatting Trafficking in Persons, FAR 52.222-50 requirements PERFORMANCE STANDARD: 100% compliance with Combating Trafficking in Persons, FAR 52.222-50 requirements.

ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL (AQL): Contractor notifies 100% of its employees of the US Government’s zero tolerance policy (as it relates to Combating Trafficking in Persons, FAR 52.222-50); and actions that will be taken against employees for violations of this policy.

Such actions may include, but are not limited to, removal from the contract, reduction in benefits, or termination of employment.

METHOD OF SURVEILLANCE: Combination of periodic and random inspection of rendered services.

PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE: Assignment of performance rating for Management of Personnel objective.

SATISFACTORY: Contractor notifies 100% of its employees of the US Government’s zero tolerance policy (as it relates to Combating Trafficking in Persons, FAR 52.222-50); and actions that will be taken against employees for violations of this policy. Such actions may include, but are not limited to, removal from the contract, reduction in benefits, or termination of employment.

UNSATISFACTORY: Contractor doesn’t notify 100% of its employees of the US Government’s zero tolerance policy (as it relates to Combating Trafficking in Persons, FAR 52.222-50); and actions that will be taken against employees for violations of this policy.

Such actions may include, but are not limited to, removal from the contract, reduction in benefits, or termination of employment.

Enclosure 1

Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR)

The COR may initiate a CDR at any time, including whenever the number of quarterly recorded defects for a performance standard exceeds the allowable number of defects;

anytime unacceptable performance is determined critical in nature and requires formal corrective action; and whenever an unfavorable trend is detected in Contractor performance.

1. Contract Number: [Enter contract number].

2. Task Order Number: [Enter task order number].

3. TO: [Enter Contractor Task Manager or On-Site Representative].

4. FROM: [Enter name of COR].

5. Date and time observed discrepancy:

6. Discrepancy or Problem:

[Describe in detail. Identify any attachments.].

7. Corrective action plan:

A written corrective action plan [is / is not] required.

If a written corrective action plan is required include the following: The written Corrective Action Plan will be provided to the undersigned not later than [insert # of days] days after receipt of this CDR.

Prepared by: [Enter COR’s name].

Signature – COR Date

Received by: [Enter Contractor TO Manager’s name]

Signature - Contractor TO Manager Date