Attachment 4 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

Contract Number: < upon award, enter contract number> Contract Description: St. Stephen Switchgear Installation

Contractor’s Name: < upon award, enter name of contractor > (hereafter referred to as the contractor).

1. 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 procedure for a continuous contract oversight process:

• What will be monitored

• How monitoring will take place

• Who will conduct the monitoring

• How monitoring efforts and results will be documented

The QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate the services performed as well as the structure for the Government’s surveillance of the Contractor’s Quality Control (QC) actions to ensure they meet contract standards. This plan will enable other qualified and authorized Government employees to perform surveillance should the need arise. The Government is responsible for objective, fair, and consistent evaluation of Contractor performance. The QASP also provides the basis for determining what action(s) will be recommended to the Contracting Officer (KO) for deficient contractor performance and payment. If no surveillance is performed, then the Government accepts the service as is.

The QASP should ensure early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance. 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 QASP is not part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the Contractor’s Quality Control Plan (QCP). The Contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards using its QCP. 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.

2. 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.

• Subpart 237.172, Service Contracts Surveillance, of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement.

3. Acronyms and Definitions

3.1. Acronyms

CA Corrective Action CAP Corrective Action Plan CDR Contract Discrepancy Report COR Contracting Officer’s Representative CS Contract Specialist CTIP Combatting Trafficking in Persons KO Contracting Officer PRS Performance Requirements Summary PWS Performance Work Statement QA Quality Assurance QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan QC Quality Control QCP Quality Control Plan PM Resource Manager

3.2. Definitions

Discrepancy. For purposes of Quality Assurance (QA), includes both discrepancies (nonconformance) and deficiencies (nonperformance).

Job. A job describes an individual, separate, and defined element of work to be performed.

Service Requirement. A job performed to the specified standard is acceptable. The Contractor will be paid for acceptable performance.

4. Roles and Responsibilities

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides primary location oversight, nominates the COR, ensures the COR is trained before performing any COR duties and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities. While the PM may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, they are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or any contract changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned PM: David Trawick Organization or Agency: CESAM-OP-HTSC Email: David.L.Trawick@usace.army.mil

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 the final assessment of the Contractor’s performance.

Assigned KO: PeKita Taliaferro-Littles Organization or Agency: CESAM-CT Email: Pekita.Taliaferro@usace.army.mil

Contract Specialist (CS) – The person assigned by the KO to perform the day-to-day administrative functions of the contract. This is the person the COR will interact with the most.

Assigned CS: Richard Bonnell Organization or Agency: CESAM-CT Email: Richard.W.Bonnell@usace.army.mil

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 (QA) 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 surveillance of the Contractor’s quality program and help the COR to document Contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf. For IDIQ contracts, CORs will be assigned to task orders awarded under the IDIQ rather than the contract.

Assigned COR: David Trawick Organization or Agency: CESAM-OP-HTSC Email: David.L.Trawick@usace.army.mil

Contractor Representatives

The following employees of the Contractor serve as the Contractor’s Program Manager and Task Manager for this contract. (Complete this section after the contract award)

Contractor Project Manager - <upon award, enter name> Telephone: <enter number>

Email: <enter address>

Contractor's Work Supervisor- <upon award, enter name> Telephone: <enter number> Email: <enter address>

Contractor Quality Control System Manager- <upon award, enter name> Telephone: <enter number> Email: <enter address>

Contractor Quality Control Inspector(s) - <upon award, enter> Title: <enter title> Telephone: <enter number> Email: <enter address>

Contractor Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO)- <upon award, enter> Title: <enter title> Telephone: <enter number> Email: <enter address>

5. Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance

CONTRACT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS. This QASP provides for the Government’s oversight of the Contractor’s QC efforts to assure timely, responsive services are provided in accordance with the Contract/Order. The Contractor is responsible for management and QC actions to meet the terms of the contract. The role of the Government is to perform QA to ensure contract standards are achieved.

Quality Control Plan. The Contractor's QCP requirements are defined in C-1.18 QUALITY CONTROL of the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

GOVERNMENT QUALITY ASSURANCE. This QASP is based on the premise that the Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and QC actions to meet the terms and conditions of the contract. The role of the Government is to perform QA to ensure contract standards are achieved and that the Contractor’s quality control system is working. The Government recognizes that the Contractor is not a perfect manager and that unforeseen and uncontrollable problems do occur. Good management and use of an adequate QCP will allow the Contractor to provide the required services.

5.1. Performance Requirements

5.1.1. Performance Rating Definitions

The performance ratings below reflect definitions at FAR 42.1503 Table 42-1. The COR will use these rating to evaluate the quality of Contractor’s performance when completing Monthly Status Reports (MSR) and/or Contract Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS).

Performance

Rating Definition

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were 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 evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were 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 evaluated 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.

5.1.2 Performance Requirements Summary

The Performance Requirements Table is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the Contractor. This Summary details the method of surveillance and frequency the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements.

5.1.3. Performance Objectives/Performance Standards

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 Performance Requirement Summary (PRS) should be used to form the foundation of the COR’s inspection checklist.

5.1.4. Nonconformance. The Contractor will be notified, in person, each time an unacceptable observation has been recorded and the Contractor will be asked to correct the problem or re-accomplish the service. All valid non-conformances observed by the Government will be documented. The contract requirement, the specific discrepancy, the date and time it was discovered will be recorded by the COR and the Contractor will initial the entry. The Contractor will be given a reasonable suspense date to correct the discrepancy If the Contractor cannot correct the discrepancy within the specified time, the KO will be notified.

All Government-discovered Contractor nonconformances shall be documented at the time of discovery. Documentation will, at a minimum, include the contract and order number, reference to the specific contract requirement, the specific discrepancy to the requirement, where it was discovered, the date and time it was discovered, focal point for the Contractor who was notified and suspense date for Contractor response. Nonconformances shall be classified in one of three categories: Level I (Minor), Level II (Major) or Level III (Critical).

5.1.4.1 Contract Discrepancy Reports. The COR will report more serious (systemic in nature) discrepancies or recurring discrepancies that could indicate a trend using the Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), or the Smart Form in SPM. The CDR will state the Contract Requirement, the specific PWS reference and the specific violation (s) to the requirement. The COR will forward the CDR to the KO within one working day. After review, the KO will forward the CDR to the Contractor for response. The Contractor shall return the completed and signed Smart Form in SPM along with a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) by the suspense date indicated. The CAP should identify the root cause of the nonconformance, a corrective action (CA) for the root cause, propose a CA to the non-conformance and the date the CA will be completed. To ensure it includes adequate analysis of and CA for the root cause, the KO should include the COR in the review of the CAP. 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 COR will inspect services reperformed to ensure they were completed satisfactorily within the timeframe agreed upon. The KO and COR will not consider the CDR closed until all discrepancies have been corrected and all agreed upon actions of the CAP have been completed.

Contractor’s failure to follow through and complete CAs will be reported immediately to the KO for further action. The COR will also follow up after the Contractor has completed the CA to ensure that the Contractor’s CA was sufficient to preclude recurrence. Once reviewed and approved by the KO, the CDR and CAP will become a permanent part of the contract/order file.

• Level I (Minor) nonconformance is defined as a nonconformance that is not likely to materially reduce the usability of the supplies or services for their intended purpose; or is a departure from established standards, having little bearing on the effective use or operation of the supplies or services. Minor nonconformance can usually be corrected on the spot, between the COR and the Contractor, with no further CA needed. CORs are designated the authority to issue verbal Level I CDRs, the CORs will notify the KO when the CDR is issued and document those CDRs in their monthly status reports. Written CDRs will be signed and issued by the KO. At a minimum, the COR will document the issue in the MSR in SPM.

• Level II (Major) nonconformance is defined as a nonconformance, other than critical, that is likely to result in failure of the supplies or services, or to materially reduce the usability of the supplies or services for their intended purpose. Discrepancies that are recurring (a number of Level I nonconformance documented by the Government) or for a non-responsive Contractor indicating a trend or failure of the Contractor's QC can also be classified as a Level II CDR. The KO will issue all Level II CDRs in writing to the appropriate Contractor management Level in order to emphasize the seriousness of Contractor's failure to comply with requirements and the possible contractual remedies for failing to take appropriate CA. The written CDR shall require the Contractor to develop a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) which identifies the root cause, CA for the root cause, CA for the specific nonconformance and the date the CA will be completed.

• Level III (Critical) nonconformance is defined as a nonconformance that is likely to result in hazardous or unsafe conditions for individuals using, maintaining, or depending upon the supplies or services; is likely to prevent performance of a vital agency mission;

is for a repeated or uncorrected Level II CDR; or is for a non-responsive Contractor to a Level II CDR. Critical nonconformance's shall result in the issuance of a written CDR to the Contractor requiring the development of a CAP by the Contractor which identifies the root cause, CA for the root cause, CA for the specific nonconformance and the date the CAs will be complete. The Chief of Contracting will issue all Level III CDRs to Contractor senior management in order to emphasize the seriousness of Contractor's failure to comply with requirements and the possible contractual remedies for failing to take appropriate CA.

5.1.6. Acceptance of Services. When all services have been deemed acceptable and there is documented objective quality evidence to support acceptable performance, accept the services provided and authorize payment. This is done upon receipt of a valid invoice from the Contractor and accomplishing a Receiving Report in the Corps of Engineers Financial Management System (CEFMS).

5.2. Contract Surveillance

The goal of the QASP is to ensure that Contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. The COR’s contribution is a professional, non-adversarial relationships with the KO, PM 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.

5.2.1. Methods of Surveillance used 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.

• Periodic Inspection, Judgmental Inspection, Unscheduled Inspection or Planned Sampling - This method, sometimes called "planned sampling,” consists of the evaluation of tasks selected on other than a 100% or random basis.

• Random Inspection - The COR conducts impromptu evaluations of the Contractors work, measured against contract requirements whenever necessary to assure a sufficient evaluation of the Contractor's performance.

• Customer Feedback – Not necessarily a valid method of surveillance but a good indicator of areas where surveillance should be conducted or intensified. This method is normally used to supplement other surveillance methods.

5.2.2. Monthly Surveillance Schedule. A monthly schedule of surveillance may be developed that will identify the method of surveillance, the date of inspection, place of inspection, activity to be monitored, and who will conduct the surveillance. The monthly schedule will be completed no later than seven calendar days prior to the beginning of the period it covers and uploaded into the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Surveillance and Performance Monitoring (SPM) module.

5.2.3. Inspection instructions/checklist. An optional inspection instructions/checklist may be used to explain how to perform the inspection, what observations should be made, and the specific details of what is acceptable performance. Completed checklists will be uploaded into SPM module.

5.2.4. Documentation of Inspections. All inspections/observations will be documented and will include as a minimum date and time, who performed the inspection, what was inspected, to what standard and the results. Successful or exceptional performance will be documented as well as discrepancies in Contractor performance.

5.2.6. COR Monthly Status Report. A brief monthly activity report will be uploaded to the SPM module at https://piee.eb.mil/. The report will include a summary of inspections, any customer complaints, summary of contract discrepancies, invoices accepted and anything else pertinent to that month’s contract surveillance.

5.2.7. Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Documented surveillance data IAW this QASP will be used as objective data to support CPARS ratings.

Interim CPARS will be completed annually and a final report will be done upon contract completion.

Per DoD Class Deviation 2013-O0018, Past Performance Evaluation Thresholds and Reporting Requirements issued 24 September 2013, the performance reporting in CPARs is mandatory for service contracts expected to exceed $1,000,000.

6. Quality Assurance Surveillance File. The official COR Quality Assurance Surveillance File will be maintained by the COR.

https://piee.eb.mil/ https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/USA005039-13-DPAP.pdf

1. Purpose

DATE/TIME FEATURE OF WORK

Standards

ON

TIME

QUALITY PROPER

PROCEDURE

REWORK

ORDERED

COMPLETED

REMARKS

Remove Switchgear for Unit 1

a) Performance In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety In accordance with Specifications and EM 385- 1-1

Install Switchgear for Unit 1

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

Remove Switchgear for Unit 2

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

Install Switchgear for Unit 2

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

Remove Switchgear for Unit 3

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

Install Switchgear for Unit 3

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

Remove 480V Switchgear

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

Install 480V Switchgear

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES TABLE

DATE/TIME FEATURE OF WORK

ON

TIME

QUALITY PROPER

PROCEDURE

ORDERED

COMPLETED

REMARKS

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES TABLE

Switchgear Training For Government Personnel**

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

Remove 480V SS Transformer

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

Install 480V SS Transformer

In accordance with Technical Specifcations

b) Safety

Sheet1