Attachment 2 - QASP and QASP Matrix.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE

SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

2 OVERVIEW

2.1 Development

2.2 Methodology

2.3 Contractor Responsibility

2.4 Government Responsibility

2.5 Non-conformance

3 CRITICAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Overview Of Contract Requirements (CR)

4 SURVEILLANCE METHODS

4.1 Overview

4.2 One Hundred (100) Percent Surveillance

4.3 Planned Sampling

4.4 Random Sampling

4.5 Customer Feedback

4.6 Combining Methods Of Surveillance

5. Incentives/Disincentives…………………………………………………………………..4

5.1 Annual Report……………………………………………………………………...……..4

5.2 Contract Deficiency Report ……………………………………………………………...5

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purpose. The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is designed to assist the Government in monitoring the quality and quantity of services performed by the contractor. The plan complies with the requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The QASP consists of the following parts:

1.1.1. Quality Assurance Requirements - contains an overview and general description of the elements relating to the quantity and quality of the services required by the PWS. It references functional and performance requirements for all areas of the contract.

1.1.2. Quality Assurance Methods - provides an assessment of the risks and benefits associated with choosing a particular surveillance method for a given performance requirement. It also identifies any critical logistics, protocol, mission sensitive or similar considerations that, if not dealt with appropriately, may adversely impact the successful performance of PWS requirements. The Contracting Officer (KO) will use information from this section to decide on the level of quality assurance (QA) resources which can be supported and the amount of risk which can be assumed.

1.1.3. Contract Administration Organization - provides guidance on appropriate staffing for the contract administration team.

1.1.4. Quality Assurance Surveillance Schedule - guides the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) through scheduling and documenting the performance of the Contractor that is performing the work described in the PWS.

1.1.5. Sampling Plans, provide systematic methodologies to be used by the COR(s) in evaluating the performance of PWS requirements.

2. OVERVIEW

2.1. Development. This QASP has been developed to provide the CORs an effective and systematic surveillance method for the functions described in the PWS.

2.2. Methodology. This QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate the services the Contractor is required to furnish, e.g., quality, quantity, timeliness, etc., and not the details of how the Contractor accomplishes the work. This QASP identifies the various surveillance methods that assure the Government of satisfactory Contractor performance.

2.3. Contractor Responsibility. This QASP is based on the premise that the Contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for management and Quality Control (QC) actions to meet the terms of the contract. The performance requirements and measures outlined in the PWS recognize Contractor performance will not be perfect, and unforeseen and uncontrollable problems do occur. However, good management and the use of an adequate QC plan will allow the Contractor to operate within specified performance requirements.

2.3.1. The Contractor is the owner of the QC process and will institute changes as necessary to ensure the desired outcomes specified in the PWS are met. The Contractor is responsible for developing, implementing, and modifying the quality control process.

2.4. Government Responsibility. The Government's intention is to minimize the level of the Government’s involvement and level of inspections and allow the Contractor to responsibly perform to, or exceed, the PWS standards. If the Contractor's performance is not satisfactory, and it appears that the Contractor's QC process has not produced the desired result, the COR has the option to increase quality assurance surveillance in order to protect the Government's best interest.

2.5. Non-conformance. Any non-conformance with contract requirements is a “defect.” The terms “defective” and “discrepancy” are used interchangeably and reference a service output that does not meet the associated standard as defined in the PWS. If any Government action or lack of action causes unacceptable performance, which results in a defect, then these defects shall not be counted against the Contractor. All costs associated with rework due to Contractor defects are the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contracting Officer can use the “Inspection of Services” (FAR 52.212-4) clause in the contract to address non-performance, defective performance and performance that does not meet the standards required by the PWS.

3. CRITICAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

3.1. Overview of Contract Requirements (CR). The following Contract Requirements (CR) are referenced in the PWS.

3.1.1. Contractor Quality Control Plan. Refers to the contractor supplied plan to ensure compliance with PWS paragraph 3 Work Specifications.

3.1.2. Contract Deliverables. Refers to deliverables furnished as prescribed in PWS Section 3.

3.1.3. Overall Contract Performance. Refers to overall contract performance as prescribed in the

PWS and Task Order.

3.1.4. Invoicing. Refers to PWS paragraph 2b, sent directly to requirement owner and not processed via Third Party Payment Vendor.

3.1.5. Combating Trafficking in Persons. Refers to compliance with FAR 52.222-50 Combating Trafficking in Persons (March 2015)

3.1.6. Privacy Act of 1974. Refers to privacy act statement in PWS.

4. SURVEILLANCE METHODS

4.1. Overview. This section discusses the risks and benefits of acceptable quality assurance surveillance methods.

4.2. One Hundred (100) Percent Surveillance. With this method, performance is inspected/evaluated at each service occurrence. The results of the Contractor’s overall performance are then evaluated to determine acceptability of the lot.

4.3. Planned Sampling. This method, sometimes called “periodic sampling,” consists of the evaluation of tasks selected on other than a 100 percent or random basis. It may be appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently, and where 100 percent inspection is neither required nor practicable. In this case, the decision of what to inspect, when to inspect, and how often to inspect is established using subjective judgment.

4.4. Random Sampling. With random sampling, services are sampled to determine if the level of performance is acceptable.

4.5. Customer Feedback. Customer feedback may be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer feedback. Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed and must be forwarded to the Contractor. The Contractor shall maintain a summary log of all formally received customer complaints as well as a copy of each complaint in a documentation file.

4.5.1. The Contracting Officer will determine what action, in compliance with the contract, to take if the Contractor continuously receives customer complaints for the same services. The CORs should provide relevant documentation to the Contracting Officer to aid in remedial action.

4.6. Combining Methods of Surveillance. These various methods of surveillance are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, if more than one factor is pertinent to a specific function or individual task, they should be considered in the selection of the surveillance method(s).

5. INCENTIVES/DISINCENTIVES.

5.1. Annual Report. The COR makes an annual report on Contractor Performance (CPARS or other annual report). The contractor’s failure to achieve satisfactory performance under the contract, reflected in the COR’s annual report, may result in termination of the contract and may also result in the loss of future Government contracts. Additionally, the contractor’s failure to achieve satisfactory performance under the contract may also result in the non-exercise of available options.

5.2. Contract Deficiency Report. For each item that does not meet acceptable levels, the Government may issue a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR). CDRs will be forwarded to the Contracting Officer with a copy sent to the contractor. The contractor must reply in writing within 5 days of receipt identifying how future occurrences of the problem will be prevented. Based upon the contractor’s past performance and plan to solve the problem, the Contracting Officer will determine if any further action will be taken.

6. QASP MATRIX.

Deliverable or Service

Requirement

Performance Element

Performance Requirement

Surveillance Method Frequency Acceptable Quality Level

QASP CR

3.1.1.

Contractor Quality Control

Plan

Paragraph 3(e)

PWS

QC activities, inspections, and corrective actions completed as required by the plan.

Inspection by the COR

Customer/Requirement Owner Feedback

Per the Contractors

QC plan;

As required for corrective actions.

100% Compliance with the contractor plan.

All verbatim records shall be completed in conformance with format established by NJS Quirk and the

Manual for Courts - Martial.

3.1.2.

Contract

Deliverables:

Transcriptions

Communication

PWS Section 3 deliverables furnished as prescribed in the PWS, and Task Orders, and, as applicable.

Inspection by the Customer/Recruitment

Owner.

The Customer/Requirement Owner will review all deliverables to ensure consistency to the PWS tasks.

COR will validate customer complaints.

100% inspection of all contract deliverables per order.

100% of deliverables submitted timely.

Errors and deficiencies are minor and correctable within 3 working days.

Deficiencies are assessed for possible solutions and then resolved.

3.1.3.

Overall

Performance:

Work Specifications

PWS Section 3

Overall contract performance of sufficient quality to earn a

Satisfactory (or higher) rating in the COR’s annual report on Contractor

Performance.

Assessment by the Requirement Owner

Per order

All performance elements rated

Satisfactory (or higher).

For quality, Timeliness, Accuracy, and Conformance with NJS Quirk and the

Manual for

Courts - Martial.

Valid

Customer complaints are minimal (less than

10% of the target population).

Deficiencies are corrected within 3 working days at no additional cost to the

Government.

3.1.4.

Invoicing

PWS Paragraph 2b

Sent directly to the

Requirement Owner timely and accurate.

Payments shall not be processed via Third Party

Payment Vendor

Requirement Owner review & acceptance of the invoice

Per order 100% accuracy

QASP CR

3.1.5

The Contractor shall ensure compliance with FAR 52.222-50 Combating Trafficking in Persons (March

2015) PWS

paragraph 6

100% Compliance

The Contracting Officer will review as needed.

IAW FAR

52.222-50

100% Compliance with clause.

QASP CR

3.1.6

The Contractor shall ensure compliance with the Privacy Act of

1974 PWS

paragraph 4

100% Compliance

The Contracting Officer will review as needed.

As required for corrective actions

100% Compliance with Statement

INCENTIVES/DISINCENTIVES:

The contractor’s failure to achieve satisfactory performance under the contract, reflected in the COR’s annual report, may result in termination of the contract and may also result in the loss of future Government contracts and/or task and delivery orders. The contractor’s failure to achieve satisfactory performance under the contract and/or task or delivery orders may result in the non-exercise of available options.

For firm fixed price task or delivery orders, in accordance with the inspection of services provisions of the contract, the contractor will be incentivized to provide quality products in a timely manner since the Government can require the Contractor, at no additional cost, to replace or correct work that fails to meet contract requirements.

For each item that does not meet acceptable levels, the Government may issue a Contractor Discrepancy Report (CDR). CDRs will be forwarded to the Contracting Officer with a copy sent to the contractor. The contractor must reply in writing within 5 days of receipt identifying how future occurrences of the problem will be prevented. Based upon the contractor’s past performance and plan to solve the problem, the Contracting Officer will determine if any further action will be taken.

If performance is within acceptable levels, it will be considered to be satisfactory. If not, overall performance may be considered unsatisfactory.