Attachment 2 QASP.pdf

OPPA Ground Station as a Service (GSaaS)

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

ATTACHMENT 2

1. Purpose. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) has been developed to provide the standard of surveillance for monitoring the OPPA Ground Station as a Service (GSaaS) contract and to provide a systematic approach for conducting the surveillance.

2. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

a. 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 assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned CO: Sabrina McIntyre Organization or Agency: NOAA/AGO/SIAD Email: Sabrina.mcintyre@noaa.gov

b. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. At the conclusion of the contract or when requested by the CO, the COR shall provide this documentation to the CO. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The contractor shall refer any changes they deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the CO for action.

Assigned COR: Wei Xia-Serafino Telephone: 301-713-7138 Email: wei.xia-serafino@noaa.gov

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES:

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s representatives for this contract.

a. Program Manager - <upon award, enter name> Telephone: <enter number> Email: <enter address>

b. Task Manager - <upon award, enter name> Telephone: <enter number> Email: enter address

4. Performance Standards. The QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate the service the

Contractor is required to furnish. The COR will assess the Contractor’s performance to ensure the Contractor is performing up to the specified standards. The performance standards for this Performance Work Statement (PWS) are stated in the Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) included in section 15 of this QASP.

mailto:Sabrina.mcintyre@noaa.gov mailto:wei.xia-serafino@noaa.gov

5. Management and Oversight. The QASP is based on the premise that the Contractor and not the Government, is responsible for the management and any Quality Control action required to meet the terms of the contract. The performance requirements recognize that the Contractor is not a perfect manager and that unforeseen requirements and uncontrollable problems do occur. Good management and use of an adequate Quality Control Plan will allow the Contractor to operate within specific performance requirements. QASPs are designed to be objective, fair and consistent in evaluating Contractor performance against the provided standards.

6. Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs). AQLs have been established in the PRS and provide performance standards that the Contractor will meet in performing the contract. In the event the Contractor does not meet the established AQLs, the Contracting Officer has the right to exercise the negative incentives stated in this QASP.

7. Primary Method of Surveillance/Evaluation. The COR will perform evaluation based on using one of the various methods outlined in the PRS table included in this QASP. The following methods may be incorporated into the PRS to monitor contract performance:

100% inspection: Inspection where specific characteristics of every performance unit are examined and tested to determine conformance with requirements.

Random inspection: Sampling method in which each unit of the population has an equal chance of being selected.

Customer Surveys and Feedback: A review method where customers and end users are surveyed to provide input on specific service levels.

8. Negative Incentives. If any of the performance requirements does not meet the AQL set in the PRS table, the COTR shall document the discrepancy(s) and shall notify the Contractor promptly, and the Contracting Officer, on a monthly basis, for appropriate action. When the performance is below the AQL standard, the Government may implement a negative incentive that includes increased surveillance and/or Contractor reporting, as well as, documentation on the Contract Performance Report (CPR).

9. Notification. The COR will notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, of unacceptable quality levels.

The Contracting Officer will promptly provide written notification of discrepancies on a monthly basis, or immediately if the situation significantly affects the well-being of the project. The Contractor will be given the opportunity to respond, in writing, to each discrepancy.

10. Response. The Contractor shall provide a written response to the cause and the corrective action to prevent recurrence within 10 working days after receipt of Contracting Officer’s notification. The Contractor should cite specific quality assurance program procedures or new procedures instituted to prevent recurrence.

11. Records. The COR will maintain contract surveillance files as directed by the Contracting Officer.

Surveillance files will include, in part, the following documentation for this Fixed-Price contract:

• COR designation and appointment letters

• A copy of the contract and all contract modifications

• Copies of all Task/Delivery Orders,

• QASP and any other tools, checklists, etc.

• All correspondence including Contracting Officer notifications and the Contractor’s responses

• Contractor monthly status reports

• Evidence of satisfactory performance provided by Project Officers monthly

• Quarterly technical reviews

• Surveillance reports and a summary of the Surveillance Logs will be prepared by the COR, and submitted to the Contracting Officer annually.

• Out-of-cycle reports may be submitted in support of unacceptable performance identified during the performance period by the COR, or when there is a significant change in performance that alters the assessment in one or more evaluation areas.

12. Ratings. The following criteria will be used for performance evaluations: Exceptional, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory. Upward or downward arrows may be used to indicate an improving or worsening trend insufficient to change to the assessment status.

a. Exceptional. Indicates performance clearly exceeds contractual requirements. The area of evaluation may contain a few minor problems for which corrective action appears highly effective.

b. Satisfactory. Indicates performance clearly meets contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains some minor problems for which the corrective actions appear satisfactory.

c. Marginal. Indicates performance meets contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains one or more serious problems for which corrective actions have not yet been identified, appear only marginally effective, or have not been fully implemented.

d. Unsatisfactory. Indicates the Contractor is in danger of not being able to satisfy contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The area of evaluation contains one or more serious problems for which the corrective actions appear ineffective.

13. Documentation. Documentation used and referenced to perform surveillance will consist of monthly reports, Contractor plans and procedures, schedules, customer feedback and contract data requirements.

a. Recording Observations. Use Surveillance Logs to record information on scheduled observations and deficiencies noted. Each observation is recorded on the log. The documents then become a formal record for reference. The Contractor is to be told each time that a deficiency is found during scheduled observations. The COR makes a notation on the Surveillance Log of the date and time the deficiency was discovered, and subsequently requests that the Contractor initial the notation, documenting notification of the deficiency only.

b. Potential Unacceptable Performance. The COR must identify the specific service that is unacceptable and the possible causes, and ask a number of questions which if answered, will probably pinpoint the source of the problem.

c. Documenting Unacceptable Performance. The COR must attempt to resolve the problem with the Contractor. The original log and the attempted solution (along with an evaluation of results) are forwarded to the Contracting Officer through the COR.

Based on the severity of the discrepancy and the success of the solution, the COR will notify the Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall complete a response to the unacceptable evaluation if requested by the Contracting Officer or by its own choice.

14. Taking Action.

a. The COR may evaluate the Contractor’s performance and document any non-compliance, but only the Contracting Officer may take action against the Contractor for an unacceptable rating.

b. When the Contractor’s performance is unacceptable and a formal action is indicated, the COR will determine what action is appropriate for the specific circumstances and make a recommendation to the Contracting Officer.

15. Documentation. The COR retains a copy of all inspection schedules and surveillance activity logs during the course of the contract, and forwards them for inclusion in the contract file at the end of the surveillance period. However, when a specific service becomes unsatisfactory during a surveillance period, the inspection documentation supporting the contract discrepancy report is promptly forwarded to the Contracting Officer.

16. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS)/PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS).

The performance standards identified below are to be monitored under this QASP. Additional performance standards may be identified in task orders. The Contractor is responsible for delivery of the monthly reports.

Objective Standard Inspection, Type and Frequency

Scheduled contacts completed

95% of scheduled contacts successfully completed.

Number of passes scheduled, number of contacts declined, and number of contacts completed.

Reported monthly.

Receive performance per pass

Eb/N0 margin greater than 3 dB for 95% of completed contacts.

Automated Eb/N0 metric recorded for each contact at suitable time or elevation intervals.

Reported monthly.

Data delivery performance

Less than 60 seconds time elapsed from loss of signal to either the designated primary or backup data management system point of presence.

Time elapsed from end of data acquisition to completion of data delivery.

Reported monthly.

System availability

95% of scheduled contacts are attempted.

Return to service within 48 hours.

Derived from monthly reports listed above.

Reported monthly.

ATTACHMENT 2