Attachment 4 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

ELECTRONIC FINGERPRINTING CHANNELER SERVICES

Issued

3/7/2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

2 GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

2.2 Contract Specialist

2.3 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

2.4 Other Key Government Personnel

3 CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE

4 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY LEVELS

5 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

5.1 Surveillance Techniques

5.2 Customer Feedback

5.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

6 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

6.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

6.2 Monitoring Forms

7 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

7.1 Determining Performance

7.2 Reporting

7.3 Reviews and Resolution

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS) MATRIX

ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

ATTACHMENT 3: CONTRACT DEFICIENCY REPORT (CDR)

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled ELECTRONIC FINGERPRINTING CHANNELER SERVICES. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Peace Corps will use to ensure the Contractor achieves the required performance standards or service levels.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (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 and

➢ How monitoring efforts and results will be documented.

1.1.2 This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Instead, 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.

1.1.3 This QASP is a “living document,” and the Government may review and revise it regularly. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the contractor. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, practical, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

The following FAR clauses may apply depending on contract type:

➢ 52.246-4 Inspection of Services – Fixed-Price, or

➢ 52.212-4 –Contract Terms and Conditions – Commercial Items

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the Contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by Volunteer Recruitment and Selection to monitor and manage the Contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing the capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether the Contractor is achieving expected outcomes for the project.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management assesses whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach eliminates scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the Contractor to play a prominent role in how the work is performed as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the Contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate as long as the expected critical outcomes are achieved and/or the desired performance levels are met.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The Contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The Contractor measures that quality through the Contractor’s quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether Contractor employees or SubContractors perform the work. The Contractor’s quality control plan (QCP) 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 shall develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated Government representative. The Contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. This QASP enables the Government to use the Contractor’s QC program.

1.3.2 The Government representative(s) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the Contractor to determine how the Contractor performs against communicated performance objectives. The Government will determine incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the Contractor of those decisions. The Contractor shall make the required changes in processes and practices to manage performance effectively.

2 GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

2.1 The Contracting Officer

2.1.1 The Contracting Officer (CO) 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. The CO shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract.

The CO will designate a COR as the Government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as technical points of contact (TPOC) depends on the complexity of the services measured and the Contractor’s performance. It must be identified and designated by the CO.

2.2 Contract Specialist

2.2.1 The Contract Specialist (CS) acts as an acquisition consultant and serves as a liaison between the contract office and CONTRACTOR NAME.

2.3 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

2.3.1 The CO designated the COR in writing to act as their authorized representative to assist in administering the contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter.

The COR is responsible for the technical administration of the project and ensures proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. Any changes the Contractor deems may affect the contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the CO for action. The COR is responsible for QA monitoring reports and/or forms 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.

2.4 Other Key Government Personnel

2.4.1 This may include Performance Monitors, Inspectors, etc., who act on behalf of the COR to monitor performance.

3 CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s Program Manager and Task Manager for this contract. Communication should occur with them during QASP development.

It will help if they review the draft QASP and accept the final version.

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

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

Other Contractor Personnel - Title: <enter title> Telephone: <enter number> Email: <enter address>

4 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY

LEVELS

4.1 Required Performance Standards

4.1.1 The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included in the PWS and Attachment 1, “Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) matrix.” If the Contractor meets the required service or performance level, it will be paid the monthly amount agreed on in the contract. Failure to meet the required service or performance level may result in a reduction of the monthly amount.

5 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

5.1 Surveillance Techniques

5.1.1 To minimize the performance management burden, the Government shall use simplified surveillance methods to evaluate Contractor performance when appropriate. The primary methods of surveillance are:

➢ PERIODIC INSPECTION – The Government will inspect less than 100% of a designated deliverable or performed service on a periodic basis. This surveillance method is appropriate for a deliverable or performed service that occurs infrequently and where 100% inspection is neither required nor practical. Reviews may be scheduled Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Annually or Unscheduled, as required.

➢ VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS – The COR may assess various communication methods from users of the service to identify deficiencies. Complaints are then investigated and validated. Reviews may be scheduled Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Annually or Unscheduled, as required.

➢ PROGRESS OR STATUS MEETINGS—The COR provides data analytic support and captures the Quality Assurance requirements needed for static, repeatable reports, the development of those reports, and setting the data library with the foundation for building ad hoc reporting capabilities.

➢ MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (MIS) – The Government may evaluate outputs through the use of management information reports. This includes Notice of Findings and Recommendation (NFR) that track tasks, plans, and projects to completion, consolidated results, performance trend and root cause analysis, monitor corrective actions, and review/write policies and training plans. Support proper Power BI and Dashboard utilization by training, briefings, assisting, and answering inquiries from the Government. Recommend process improvement and implementation strategies.

Reviewed upon completion of system development.

➢ DIRECT OBSERVATION – The Government will observe the Contractor perform preventative maintenance and draft/submit inspection reports in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The method can be performed periodically or through 100% surveillance. Reviews may be scheduled Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Annually or Unscheduled, as required.

➢ PERFORMANCE REPORTING – The COR may evaluate metrics for a periodic or specific time period. Sustain and enhance all Power BI and Dashboard modules and provide data analytic support to satisfy evolving PWS requirements. These are developed metrics or metrics found in MIS.

➢ 100% INSPECTION – The Government will inspect 100% of each deliverable or service performed. The surveillance method is appropriate where 100% inspection is required and is practical (Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Annually or Unscheduled, as required.)

➢ USER SURVEY – The COR may combine elements of Validated User Complaints and Random Sampling. Random surveys are conducted to solicit user satisfaction.

5.1.2 The following are examples (not exhaustive) of alternative methods for surveillance:

➢ RANDOM SAMPLING – The Government will randomly sample less than 100% of a designated deliverable or performed service on a random basis. This surveillance method is appropriate for a deliverable or performed service that occurs infrequently and where 100% inspection is neither required nor practical.

➢ PERIODIC SAMPLING—The COR may take a sample when a deficiency is suspected.

This is a follow-up to the MIS analysis. Sample results are applicable only to the specific work inspected. Because the sample is not entirely random, this surveillance will not be applied to total activity performance.

➢ ANALYSIS OF CONTRACTOR'S PROGRESS REPORTS – The COR may evaluate cost, schedule, etc.

5.2 Customer Feedback

5.2.1 The Contractor must establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication 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.

5.2.2 Performance management drives the Contractor to be customer-focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems.

However, the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR instead of the Contractor.

5.2.3 To be considered valid, customer complaints must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, be signed, and be forwarded to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate.

5.2.4 Customer feedback may also be obtained from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or random customer complaints.

5.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

5.3.1. The acceptable quality levels (AQLs) included in Attachment 1 (PRS) matrix for Contractor performance are structured to allow the Contractor to manage how the work is performed. For certain critical activities, such as those involving Phase 3 Publishing Dashboards and Implementation Support, the desired performance level is established at 100 percent. Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance.

6 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

6.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

6.1.1 The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in Attachment 1.

6.2 Monitoring Forms

6.2.1 The Government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the COR, will be reported in writing. The COR will document the Government’s assessment of the Contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results are achieved.

6.2.2 The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance reports.

7 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

7.1 Determining Performance

7.1.1 The Government will use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards/service levels/AQLs have been met. If the Contractor still needs to meet the minimum requirements, it may be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels.

7.2 Reporting

7.2.1 At the end of each month, the COR will prepare a written report summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. This written report, which includes the Contractor’s submitted monthly report, will become part of the QA documentation. It will enable the Government to demonstrate whether the Contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including technical/scheduling objectives.

7.3 Reviews and Resolution

7.3.1 The COR may require the Contractor’s project manager or a designated alternate to meet with other Government personnel as necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the Contractor, including appropriate self-assessments by the Contractor; however, if the need arises, the Contractor shall meet with the COR as often as required or per the Contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

➢ Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis

➢ Issues and concerns of both parties

➢ Projected outlook for upcoming months and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis

➢ Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

➢ Issues arising from the performance monitoring processes

7.3.2 The COR or Government designee will coordinate and communicate with the Contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

7.3.3 The COR and Contractor should formulate tactical and long-term courses of action jointly. Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be documented. Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be incorporated as a contract modification at the CO's convenience.

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS) MATRIX

PWS

REF.

PERFORMANCE

OBJECTIVE

PERFORMANCE

STANDARD

ACCEPTANCE

QUALITY LIMIT

(AQL)

MAXIMUM

ALLOWABLE DEGREE

OF DEVIATION FROM

REQUIREMENT (AQL)

METHOD OF

SURVEILLANCE

REMEDIES/CON

TRACTOR

CORRECTIVE

ACTIONS

1 6.2.1.12 Collection of fingerprints nationwide

Provide nationwide access to service locations and mobile sites to improve geographic coverage.

Meets/exceeds AQL Zero Deviations 100% Inspection

Document in

CPARS.

Contractor corrects at no additional cost to the Government

6.2.1.13

6.2.13.1

Support

Provide appointment scheduling and scheduling support.

The Contractor shall establish administrative procedures for submitting individuals’ information to the Peace

Corps-approved sources and make its procedures available to Peace Corps users.

At least a 95% compliance rate is to be calculated monthly. The source of this data will be maintained by the

Contractor using contact log data.

No more than three validated complaints per month

100% Inspection

Direct Observation

Validated User/Customer

Complaint

User Survey

Document in

CPARS.

Contractor corrects at no additional cost to the Government

3 7.2 Quality Control Plan

The Offeror shall provide a draft Quality Control Plan (QCP) demonstrating how quality (performance standards) will be met within 30 days after receipt of award (ARO), and the final QCP for approval within 45 days ARO to the COR and the Contracting Officer.

Meets/exceeds AQL No more than three validated complaints per month

Complaint

Document in

CPARS.

Contractor shall correct at no additional cost to the Government.

No payment will be made until the acceptable product is received. The Contractor shall not invoice until the COR provides an email confirming acceptance of the project work plan.

4 7.3 Contract Reports

Contractor shall provide the following:

1. Meeting Minutes five business days after the conclusion of the meeting.

2. Monthly Reports by the third business day of the month to track the ongoing status of all Peace Corps candidates sent for fingerprinting and when those prints are sent to DCSA.

3. Final Report within 30 calendar days prior to the completion of each option period, if exercised, and each modification

At least a 95% compliance rate is to be calculated monthly. The source of this data will be maintained by the

Contractor using their Management Information

System.

Zero Deviations

Complaint

Management Information System

(MIS)

Performance Reporting

Progress or Status

Meetings

Document in

CPARS.

Contractor corrects at no additional cost to the Government

ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

Direct Observation Management Information System (MIS) User Survey

Validated User/Customer Complaints Analysis of contractor's progress reports

Periodic Sampling Progress or Status Meetings Performance reporting

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Annually Unscheduled, as required

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: ______ %

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: _Michale Coleman__________________ DATE: __3/22/2024______

ATTACHMENT 3: CONTRACT DEFICIENCY REPORT (CDR)

The COR may initiate a CDR at any time, including whenever the number of monthly recorded defects for a performance standard exceeds the allowable number of defects, anytime unacceptable performance is determined critical in nature and requires formal corrective action, and whenever an unfavorable trend is detected in contractor performance.

Contract Number: <insert number>

Contractor Project Manager: <insert name>

From: <insert name of COR>

Date and time observed discrepancy:

Contract Discrepancy:

<Describe in detail. Identify any attachments.>

Corrective action plan:

A written corrective action plan < is / is not > required.

< If a written corrective action plan is required, include the following. > The contractor shall provide the COR with the Corrective Action Plan not later than < # days after receipt of this

CDR. >

Prepared by: <Enter COR’s name>

3/22/2024

X Michael coleman

Signed by: MICHAEL COLEMAN COR’s Signature Date

Received by: <Enter contractor project manager’s name>

Contractor Project Manager’s Signature Date