Attachment 2-832674792-QASP.docx

DOCX document 63 KB Posted

Attached to
HVAC Lifecycle Replacement with Installation and Disposal Services
Solicitation number
832674792
Issued by

About this file

This is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for the HVAC Lifecycle Replacement with Installation and Disposal Services contract (Solicitation 832674792) issued by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) to support JITC Fort Huachuca. The QASP establishes the framework for monitoring and evaluating contractor performance on the replacement of six (6) Package 3-Ton HVAC units, including removal of old units and disposal of materials and debris. The document defines roles and responsibilities for the Contracting Officer (KO), Contracting Officer's Representative (COR), and Program/Project Manager (PM) in conducting ongoing surveillance activities. Surveillance will employ a combination of 100 percent inspection and periodic inspection methods, with the COR maintaining a Quality Assurance file to document actual performance against contractual standards.

The QASP establishes an Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) of 95 percent and outlines specific performance standards across multiple areas: Project Management Plan submission within 15 days of contract award with no more than one revision required; Warranty Management Plan submission 30 days prior to final acceptance; zero safety violations or incidents; daily coordination with the COR with 100 percent issue reporting within 24 hours; 95 percent on-schedule completion of HVAC unit replacements (target 3 days per unit); daily site cleanliness maintenance with no more than one valid complaint per week; and 100 percent functional testing and operational validation of all installed units prior to Government acceptance. Performance will be rated on a five-tier scale (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory) using Performance Assessment Reports (PAR) for acceptable performance and Corrective Action Reports (CAR) for deficiencies. The document includes templates and procedures for documenting performance, managing customer complaints, and tracking corrective actions throughout the period of performance.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
HC102826R0046002.pdf PDF
832674792-PWS Final v2 dtd 8-11-2026.docx DOCX document
832674792-Pre-Site Survey Q and A Final.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
HC102826R0046001.docx.pdf PDF
Attachment 4-CDRL A002.pdf PDF
Attachment 3-CDRL A001.pdf PDF
Attachment 5-JITC VISITOR REQUEST INSTRUCTIONS.pdf PDF
HC102826R0046.pdf PDF
Attachment 1-EPL.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet

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

CUI

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1. Contract or Task Order Title : Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Six (6) - 3 Ton Units Lifecycle Replacement project

2. Purpose:

This QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. This QASP explains the following:

· What will be monitored?

· How monitoring will take place.

· Who will conduct the monitoring?

· How monitoring efforts and results will be documented.

This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur.

This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

3. Roles and Responsibilities:

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

Program/Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides program oversight and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities.

Contracting Officer (KO) – The KO 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 KO shall also ensure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. Determine the final assessment of the contractor’s performance.

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 KO. The COR is required to provide an annual performance assessment to the KO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the primary tool for documenting contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.

Other Key Government Personnel- This may include performance monitors, inspectors, technical experts.

4. Primary Method of Surveillance:

· 100 Percent Inspection. This is usually only the most appropriate method for infrequent tasks or tasks with stringent performance requirements, e.g., where safety or health is a concern. With this method, performance is inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. One hundred percent inspection is too expensive to be used in most cases.

· Periodic Inspection: These services are monitored weekly, monthly, quarterly, semiannually, annually, etc. Periodic types of activities are perfect for periodic inspection because not only are they infrequent, but there is normally a predetermined, specified time frame within which the tasks must be accomplished. Therefore, you know exactly when to conduct the evaluations. Periodic inspections automatically become 100 percent evaluations or "100 percent checks." Inspections should be divided and scheduled by frequency: annual, semiannual, quarterly, monthly, weekly and as required. Sometimes services are required for which the time or frequency cannot be predicted, such as accident investigations, one-time special tasking by higher headquarters, etc. These would be labeled "as required inspections." Others are known and predictable such as the quarterly status report or the monthly travel report currently included in some DISA service contracts.

Surveillance Matrix

The Surveillance Matrix (Appendix 1) is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. .

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance Standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance. The Government performance surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The AQL performance Standard Table should be used to form the foundation of the COR’s inspection checklist.

5. Performance Standards:

6.1. Project Management – submit a document that consist of all variables listed within the attached project plan outline

95% of all tasks require a reporting process in order to keep the Government informed of the progress of all requirements and the proper operation of all equipment

Minimum Acceptable:

> 95% of infractions observed will not meet the Governments turnover of acceptance of services, equipment, or functionality Calculation:

Review of documentation must meet the required standards to be acceptable. Areas of operations must be maintained in a clean, neat, and orderly fashion due to the number of personnel working in the area. Safety, removal, and installation of equipment must meet basic standards of acceptability in order to meet the Governments standards.

6.2. Coordination with the Government – maintain constant communications with the Government in order to provide continuous situational awareness.

6.3 Removal and Installation – remove all HVAC systems and install new HVAC Systems

6. Documenting Performance:

Acceptable Performance.

The Government shall document positive performance. A Performance Assessment Report (PAR) template is attached (Appendix 2). Any report may become part of the supporting documentation for fixed price payments, award/incentive fee payments, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) entries, or other actions. Government acceptance of services permits the contractor to invoice for the service fee.

Unacceptable performance.

Unacceptable contractor performance can be identified by customer complaints (Appendix 3) or upon schedule surveillance evaluations. When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication and may be through the PAR template (Appendix 2). The COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file and provide a copy to the KO.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Corrective Action Report (CAR). The CAR is forwarded to the KO for dissemination to the contractor. A CAR template is attached to this QASP (Appendix 4).

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CAR in writing. The CAR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CAR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the KO and COR. The Government may withhold payment for services until corrective action is taken. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability. Upon Government acceptance of the corrected services the contractor will be permitted to invoice for the service fee.

Any CAR may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, award fee nonpayment, CPARS or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.

7. Mandatory or regulatory compliance items:

The contractor will provide initial proof of compliance with regulatory and compliance items contained in the contract. The Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and the Contracting Officer (KO) will evaluate the initial submission and will conduct ad hoc reviews of the contractor's compliance throughout the remainder of the contract. The contractor will monitor compliance as required by FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons, and report any issues to the KO. The contractor shall inform its employees in writing of contractor employee whistleblower rights and protections as required by DFARS 252.203-7002, Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights. The contractor shall also ensure that the clause is included in all subcontracts.

8. Acceptable Quality Level (AQL):

The AQL for this project is 95% due to the critical support provided by Government Equipment and Personnel..

9. Evaluation Method:

The COR will document the time of verbal notification to the contractor. The COR will document the official time and date of notification by email to the contractor and the Contracting Officer. The COR will review deliverables and installation work and otherwise verify and validate contractor performance. The contractor shall enter in the record the official time the systems are installed to full operational status. The COR will confirm the date and time of problem resolution in the record.

10. Performance Rating

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used (same as CPAR ratings).

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 have been NO 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 have been no significant weaknesses identified.
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 have been NO 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’s 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 the contractor’s 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).

Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix

Performance Standards Acceptable Quality Levels Methods of Calculation

Surveillance
Results/Ratings

Contractor must submit a complete and accurate Project Management Plan (CDRL A001).

Contractor must submit a complete and accurate

Warranty Management Plan (CDRL A002).

Contractor adheres to all OSHA and safety requirements throughout the project.

Contractor coordinates daily with the COR, reporting all issues, concerns, and progress.

Removal and installation of a single HVAC system is completed within the agreed-upon timeframe (target 3 days).

All work areas are kept clean of debris and materials on a daily basis.

Each new HVAC system is tested per manufacturer's checklist and validated as fully operational.

Target Criteria:

Plan submitted within 15 days of contract award. No more than one revision required for approval.

Plan submitted 30 days prior to final acceptance. Contains all required elements. No more than one revision required.

Zero safety violations or incidents resulting from non-compliance.

100% of issues and concerns are reported to the COR within 24 hours of identification. Daily meeting held unless waived by COR.

95% of HVAC unit replacements are completed on schedule. Any delays are communicated and approved by the COR at least 24 hours in advance.

No more than one valid complaint regarding site cleanliness per week, validated by COR inspection. Site is 100% clean upon project completion.

100% of installed units pass all functional and operational tests prior to Government acceptance.

Calculation:

Review of Deliverables.

Review of Deliverable Periodic Inspection reports

Periodic Inspection (Daily Log/Meeting Minutes Review)

100% Inspection Periodic Inspection (Daily) 100% Inspection

Measurement Interval – Periodic throughout the POP for all physical work

Measurement Period – POP duration

Method of Surveillance – Periodic and 100 percent inspections

Reporting Frequency: - End of POP and discovery of discrepancy.

(Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory)

(A rollup of assessment of the Surveillance Inspection Results to develop an overall rating for this objective)

Appendix 2 – 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)

6. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS

Appendix 3 – Customer Complaint Record

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 4 – Corrective Action Report

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 (COR)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

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

11. COR DETERMINATION

|_| ACCEPTED |_| REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

CUI

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .