Attachment 2_Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 10 3 2024.pdf

CUI

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

PROJECT & PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

SUPPORT SERVICES

1. Introduction

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) has been developed to implement:

DoD 5000.72, Contracting Officer Representative (COR) Certification FAR 46.401, Government Contract Quality Assurance DFARS 237.172, Service Contracts Surveillance DFARS 246.401, Government Contract Quality Assurance

The dual purpose of the QASP is to outline how the Government will: (a) assess and document a contractor’s performance in accordance with the requirements set forth in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), and (b) assess contract success. Specifically, the QASP details an effective and systematic surveillance method for each listed service, using defined metrics to measure and document the Contractor’s performance. Continual contract assessment focuses on ensuring the contract, as written, continues to meet the needs of the customer. This QASP will explain the following:

What will be monitored How the monitoring will take place Who will conduct the monitoring How the 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 requirements set forth in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance.

Therefore, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur.

This QASP also implements the Multi-Functional Team (MFT) concept. The goal of the MFT is to give all members/stakeholders the ability to maintain the highest quality representative service to the customers and propose/initiate improvements throughout the life of the contract.

Under this concept, continual contract assessment will be focused on ensuring that the contract, as written, continues to meet the needs of the customer. The signatures, on the attached signature page, indicate membership in the MFT. Changes of team members will require an update to the signature page.

2. Purpose This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) 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 be 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 to assure that it meets 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.

3. 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.

4. Roles and Responsibilities The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

4.1. 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 and document the final assessment of the contractor's performance in the governments past performance tracking system.

4.2. 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.

4.3. Other Key Government Personnel

Contracting Officer (Pending) E-mail address:

Contracting Specialist (Pending) E-mail address:

5. Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance This section describes the special requirements for this effort. The following sub-sections provide details of various considerations on this effort.

5.1. 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 KO 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.

5.2. Methods of Surveillance

Methods of Surveillance include but are not limited to:

• 100% Inspection - Reserved for the highest risk areas where consequence of failure is high (i.e. life or limb are threatened) or there is likelihood of mission failure.

• Random Sampling - When a service is performed relatively frequently and a statistically valid sample can be selected for audit. The most appropriate method for frequently recurring tasks.

• Periodic Sampling - Planned sampling of a service at specific predetermined dates and times. May be appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently.

• Customer Feedback – Not necessarily a valid method of surveillance but a good indicator for areas surveillance should be conducted or intensified.

5.3. 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. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

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 performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor's performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The PRS should be used to form the foundation of the COR's inspection checklist.

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used.

Performance Rating

Criteria

Excellent / Outstanding

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

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.

Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed 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

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.

6. Non-Conforming Performance. The COR will provide written notification to the Contractor each time an unacceptable observation has been recorded and ask the Contractor to correct the problem or re-accomplish the service.

The COR will report more serious (systemic in nature) deficiencies or recurring deficiencies that could indicate a trend to the KO as soon as the deficiencies are noted. The Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) will state the Contract Requirement, the specific contract reference and the specific violation(s) to the requirement. The KO will notify the Contractor and request corrective action to the specific non-conformance, identification of the root cause and corrective action for the root cause with a required suspense date. The KO may require the Contractor to re-perform any services that do not meet contract requirements at no additional cost to the Government. The Contractor will provide a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) to the COR/KO for review, approval and inclusion in the contract/order file. The KO and COR will not consider the CDR closed until all deficiencies have been corrected and all agreed upon actions of the CAP have been completed. Contractor’s failure to follow through and complete corrective actions will be reported immediately to the KO for further action. (Note: if the COR has to repeatedly perform re-inspection there could be a Government re-inspection cost which could be recovered from the Contractor). The COR will also follow-up after the Contractor has completed the corrective action to ensure that the Contractor’s corrective action was sufficient to preclude recurrence.

Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix

Objective

Required Service / Task Performance Standard

Monitoring Method

Rating PWS

PROGRAM

AND

PROJECT

DELIVERY

SUPPORT

SERVICES

Application Availability Support

PROGRAM AND

PROJECT DELIVERY

SUPPORT

SERVICESCOTS/GOTS

Continuous Availability (Non-Network / Non- Hardware)

95% 14-Day Average of Availability (Excluding Scheduled Outages)

Analysis of Progress Reports & Validated User Complaints in Ticketing System

Acceptable:

30-Day Average >= 95% Availability Unacceptable:

30-Day Average < 95% Availability

4.4.2

PROGRAM

AND

PROJECT

DELIVERY

SUPPORT

SERVICES

Data Availability Support

PROGRAM AND

PROJECT DELIVERY

SUPPORT SERVICES

Data Availability (Non- Network / Non- Hardware)

95% 14-Day Average of Availability (Excluding Scheduled Outages)

Analysis of Progress Reports & Validated User Complaints in Ticketing System

Acceptable:

30-Day Average >= 95% Availability Unacceptable:

30-Day Average < 95% Availability

4.6

After Hours Emergency Support

Non-Network / Non- Hardware Application Outage

1-Hour Application Outage Contact 4-Hour Application Service Restored

Direct Observation of Response Time

Acceptable:

45-Day Average >= 95% 4-Hour Service Restored Unacceptable:

45-Day Average < 95% 4-Hour Service Restored

2.5

Help Desk Support Service Level Expectations

Log / Track / Resolve Tier 2 & Tier 3 Tickets.

Tier 2 – 48 Hours (95% Resolution) Tier 2 – 72 Hours (100% Resolution) Tier 3 – 72 Hours (95% Resolution) Tier 3 – 168 Hours (100% Functional / Technical

Analysis of Progress Reports & Validated User Complaints in Ticketing System

Acceptable:

120-Day Average >= 95% All Tier Ticket Resolution Unacceptable:

120-Day Average < 95% All Tier Ticket Resolution

4.4.9

Solution Outlined)

* The procedures set forth in the Inspection of Services Clause will be used to remedy all deficiencies. The re-performance times will be based upon sensitivity of the issue.

NOTE: The timeframes for re-performance should be established by the KO/CS/COR, for the Services Summary items when the PWS and QASP are written.

Performance Requirement Summary (PRS)

Task

Standard

Method of Surveillance

Performance Threshold

Performance Standard

PWS 6.1 Kickoff Meeting 10 Working Days Post Award

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.1.11.1

PROGRAM

AND PROJECT

DELIVERY

SUPPORT

SERVICES

Roadmap

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.1.11.3 White Papers TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.1.11.4

Functional Requirements Documentation

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS Error!

Reference source not found.

Service Level Agreement

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.5.2 ITSM Posture

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.5.3 ITSM Strategy

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.5.5

Communication Strategy

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.5.5

Organizational Change Strategy

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.11.1

Configuration Management Plan

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.13.1

System Design Documentation

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.13.2

Database Architectural Documentation

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.13.3

User Documentation

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.13.4

System Code Documentation

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.13.5

Program and Project Management Plan Documentation

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.14

Cybersecurity /

IA

Documentation

TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 4.15 Source Code TBD by COR/ PgM/PM

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 6.4.1 Phase-In Plan 10 Working Days Post Award

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 6.4.2 Phase-Out Plan

90 Working Days Prior to Each Option Year

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 9.5

Task Management Plan

5 Working Days from Period of Performance Start Date

Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 9.6

Monthly Status Report

Monthly Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

PWS 9.7

Monthly Financial Status Report

Monthly Government inspections and acceptance

98% Acceptable Quality Level

NOTE: Government surveillance of contractor performance is not limited to the Performance Objectives as outlined in this PRS. The Government reserves the right to conduct compliance surveillance of any contractual requirement of this acquisition.