Attachment 2 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).docx

UNCLASSIFIED

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE (SETA)

Program Manager Special Programs (PMSP)

1 May 2021

1.0 INTRODUCTION

(U) This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance-based Performance Work Statement (PWS) for SETA Services. This performance- based plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines PSMP will use in evaluating the technical performance of the SETA contractor.

1.1 PURPOSE

1.1.1 (U) The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to measure performance and to identify the reports required and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards identified in the PWS.

1.1.2 (U) This QASP is designed to define roles and responsibilities, identify the performance objectives, define the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describe quality assurance reporting, and describe the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

1.2.1 (U) The performance-based PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service is required as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work. This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by PMSP to monitor, manage, and take appropriate action on the contractor’s performance against expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS. Performance management rests upon developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance metrics. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management. The data generated in a performance management approach provides information that indicates whether or not expected outcomes for required services are being achieved adequately by the contractor.

1.2.2 (U) Performance management also represents a significant shift from the more traditional Quality Assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether or not outcomes are being achieved and migrates away from scrutiny on compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (Federal, State, and local) and compelling business situations such as safety and health. An outcome focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved at the desired levels of performance.

1.3 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

1.3.1 (U) The contractor’s internal quality control system will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will utilize its internal quality control system to assess and report their performance to the designated Government representative.

1.3.2 (U) The Government representative will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The Government will make decisions based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 (U) The Contracting Officer (KO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration and cost control; and resolving any differences between the observations documented by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and the contractor’s performance.

2.2 (U) The KO will designate one full-time COR as the Government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as Technical Inspectors depends upon the complexity of the services measured as well as the contractor’s performance.

2.3 (U) The COR is responsible for monitoring, assessing, and communicating the technical performance of the contractor and assisting the contractor. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms (refer to Appendixes II and III) used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s work performance. Government surveillance may occur under the Inspection of Services clause for any service relating to the contract.

3.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED

(U) The contractor shall provide PMSP service support in accordance with the PWS. The performance standards are established in the paragraph of the PWS that covers the specific category of work. The acceptable level of performance is set in the acceptable quality level related to that paragraph.

4.0 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 (U) In an effort to minimize the contract administration burden, simplified methods of surveillance techniques shall be used by the Government to evaluate contractor performance. The primary methods of surveillance are reports and customer input / feedback. The Government will use appointed representatives, as well as reports and input from users/customers as sources of comments on the contractor’s performance.

4.2 (U) The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of professional communication between employees and customers is customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints. Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems.

(U) NOTE: The customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR as opposed to the contractor. The COR will accept the customer complaints and will investigate using the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form – Customer Complaint Investigation identified in Appendix III.

4.3 (U) The acceptable quality levels (AQL) located in Appendix I, Required Performance Metrics Table, for contractor performance, are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls.

5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTING

5.1 (U) The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and measured by the required performance metrics in Appendix I.

5.2 (U) The Government’s QA monitoring, accomplished by the COR (and others as designated) will be reported using the monitoring forms in Appendixes II and III. The forms, when completed, will document the COR’s understanding of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the PWS requirements are being met.

5.2.1 (U) The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA monitoring forms.

6.0 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING RESULTS

6.1 (U) The Government shall use the observation methods cited to determine whether the AQLs have been met. The Government’s evaluation is then translated into the specific negative incentives that cause adjustments to the contractor’s monthly payments.

6.2 (U) The KO may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the KO and other Government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, however if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the KO as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may discuss:

6.3 (U) In addition to QA monitoring, the COR will use the information contained in the contractor’s monthly report to assess the contractor’s level of performance for each objective measured in this QASP (detailed in Appendix I). The COR must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns of marginal or unacceptable performance. The contractor will discuss with the KO/COR satisfaction ratings receiving a “less than acceptable” rating. For such cases, the contractor should highlight its perspective on factors driving customer satisfaction and present plans to adjust service levels accordingly to bring the satisfaction rating up to an acceptable level.

6.4 (U) The KO/COR and contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long–term courses of action. Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be clearly documented. Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be incorporated as a contract modification at the convenience of the KO.

7.0. FAILURE TO PERFORM

7.1 (U) The contractor may receive deductions or even termination based on failure to perform. The following criteria apply for determining appropriate action:

1. (U) Notifications. Consisted with FAR Part 49, the KO shall notify the service provider of failure to meet standards through QA monitoring forms, cure notices, or show cause notices and shall inform the service provider project manager or designated alternate of such notices.

2. (U) Termination. If the KO determines that the contractor has failed to perform to the extent that a termination for default is justified, the KO shall issue a notice of termination, consistent with FAR Part 49.

APPENDIX 1

REQUIRED PERFORMANCE METRICS (RPM) TABLE

PERFORMANCE (ALP)

Performance meets all technical and functional requirements in the PWS, and contains pertinent, useful, and informative data and information.

Contractor’s technical performance meets all contract requirements.

Problems that are encountered are minor in nature, and are as follows:

· does not cause a delay in schedule;

· does not cause costs to increase;

· involves minimal effort to fix; and

· does not affect overall contractor performance

All matters shall be resolved in a satisfactory and timely manner.

Random Inspection

Is research complete and are they compliant with various government regulations?

Assignment of performance rating and criteria:

Excellent Performance meets all and exceeds contract requirements.

Performance delivered with no required re- performance/rework; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a highly effective manner.

Acceptable Performance and deliverables meet all contract requirements. Performance delivered with no re- performance / rework; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a satisfactory manner.

Unacceptable Many contract requirements not met. Rework required. Substantial problems were encountered and were resolved in a less than satisfactory manner.

APPROPRIATE RECOGNITION IN CPARS

Performance meets all technical and functional requirements in the PWS, and contains pertinent, useful, and informative data and information.

Contractor’s technical performance meets all contract requirements.

Problems that are encountered are minor in nature, and are as follows:

· does not cause a delay in schedule;

· does not cause costs to increase;

· involves minimal effort to fix; and

· does not affect overall contractor performance

All matters shall be resolved in a satisfactory and timely manner Random Inspection

Is the contractor meeting established timeframes?

Assignment of performance rating and criteria:

Excellent Performance meets all and exceeds contract requirements.

Performance delivered with no required re- performance/rework; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a highly effective manner.

Acceptable Performance and deliverables meet all contract requirements. Performance delivered with no re- performance / rework; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a satisfactory manner.

Unacceptable Many contract requirements not met. Rework required. Substantial problems were encountered and were resolved in a less than satisfactory manner.

APPROPRIATE RECOGNITION IN CPARS

Commitment to Customer Satisfaction and Business-like concern for its Customers’ interest including responsiveness to internal and external clients.

Contract requirements met with few minor and no significant problems encountered.

Performance meets all technical and functional requirements in the PWS, and contains pertinent, useful, and informative data and information.

Contractor’s technical performance meets all contract requirements.

Problems that are encountered are minor in nature, and are as follows:

· does not cause a delay in schedule;

· does not cause costs to increase;

· involves minimal effort to fix; and

· does not affect overall contractor performance

All matters shall be resolved in a satisfactory and timely manner.

Random Sampling.

Is the contractor committed to high customer satisfaction? How contractor proactive is to contractor?

Is the contractor providing positive value to the government?

Assignment of performance rating and criteria:

Excellent Performance meets all and exceeds contract requirements.

Performance delivered with no required re- performance/rework; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a highly effective manner.

Acceptable Performance and deliverables meet all contract requirements. Performance delivered with no re- performance / rework; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a satisfactory manner.

Unacceptable Many contract requirements not met. Rework required. Substantial problems were encountered and were resolved in a less than satisfactory manner.

APPROPRIATE RECOGNITION IN

CPARS

Performance meets all technical and functional requirements in the PWS, and contains pertinent, useful, and informative Contractor’s technical performance meets all contract requirements.

Problems that are encountered are minor in nature, and are as follows:

· does not cause a delay in schedule;

· does not cause costs to increase;

· involves minimal effort to fix; and

· does not affect overall contractor performance

All matters shall be resolved in a satisfactory and timely manner.

Random Sampling.

What is the government’s overall satisfaction with the contractor?

Assignment of performance rating and criteria:

Excellent Performance meets all and exceeds contract requirements.

Performance delivered with no required re- performance/rework; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a highly effective manner.

Acceptable Performance and deliverables meet all contract requirements. Performance delivered with no re- performance / rework; problems that are encountered are minor and resolved in a satisfactory manner.

Unacceptable Many contract requirements not met. Rework required. Substantial problems were encountered and were resolved in a less than satisfactory manner.

APPROPRIATE RECOGNITION IN

CPARS

APPENDIX II

QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD: ____________________

LEVEL of SURVEILLANCE SELECTED (Check):

ANALYSIS of RESULTS:

OBSERVED SERVICE PROVIDED PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT RATE = ______%

SERVICE PROVIDER’S PERFORMANCE (Check): ______ Meets Standards ______ Does Not Meet Standards

NARRATIVE of PERFORMANCE DURING SURVEY PERIOD:

PREPARED BY: _________________________________ DATE: _____________

APPENDIX III

QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD: _____________ DATE COMPLAINT RECEIVED _______________

SOURCE of COMPLAINT: _____________________________________ (Name)

NATURE of COMPLAINT:

RESULTS of COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION:

DATE SERVICE PROVIDER INFORMED of COMPLAINT: ______________

CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN BY SERVICE PROVIDER:

RECEIVED and VALIDATED BY: ____________________________

PREPARED BY: ________________________________ Date: ______________________

UNCLASSIFIED Page 8