Attachment 4 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).pdf

KANSAS CITY COURIER REQURIEMENT

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1 INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the statement of work (SOW) entitled Kansas City Courier Services. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Kansas City Submission Processing Center (KCSPC) will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and to ensure that the government pays only for the level of services received.

1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of Government personnel involved in contract oversight, identifies performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate contractor performance, describes quality assurance documentation requirements, and outlines how performance results will be analyzed.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The SOW structures the acquisition around the required outcomes for secure, timely, and accurate courier services supporting the transport of IRS deposits. This QASP defines the performance management approach used by the IRS KCSPC Receipt and Control Operations and the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) to monitor and manage contractor performance to ensure expected outcomes are achieved.

Performance management is based on the Government’s ability to collect, review, and analyze performance data such as pickup and delivery times, documentation accuracy, and compliance with security requirements. This analysis enables informed decision-making regarding contractor performance.

1.2.2 Performance management focuses on outcomes rather than the specific processes used by the contractor. The contractor is given flexibility in how services are performed, provided that all required performance standards are met. This approach supports innovation and efficiency while ensuring compliance with statutory, regulatory, and security requirements, including those related to taxpayer data protection and physical security of deposits.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed under the contract. The contractor shall implement a Quality Control Plan (QCP) to monitor its own performance, including timeliness, accuracy, security, and compliance with all SOW requirements. This includes work performed by both contractor personnel and any subcontractors.

1.3.2 The Government, through the COR and designated personnel, will monitor contractor performance using the surveillance methods described in this QASP. The Government will review contractor-provided data, internal records (e.g., pickup logs and Form 10160), and other performance indicators to determine compliance with performance standards.

1.3.3 If performance deficiencies are identified, the contractor may be required to implement corrective actions. Continued failure to meet performance standards may result in contractual remedies in accordance with the terms of the contract.

1.3.4 The contractor’s QCP shall establish processes for identifying deficiencies and implementing corrective actions.

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

Contracting Officer is responsible for overall contract administration, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and resolving any contractual issues. The CO has the authority to modify the contract, enforce remedies for non-performance, and make final determinations regarding contractual matters.

The CO designates the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) to perform day-to-day performance monitoring and surveillance activities.

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative

The COR is designated in writing by the CO and is responsible for technical administration and surveillance of contractor performance.

The COR will:

• Monitor contractor performance against SOW requirements and QASP standards

• Review pickup and delivery logs, Form 10160, and other documentation

• Conduct surveillance activities, including inspections and random checks

• Document performance using quality assurance monitoring forms

• Report performance results and identify trends or deficiencies

• Coordinate with the contractor on performance issues and corrective actions

The COR is not authorized to make changes to contract terms, conditions, or pricing.

3 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

3.1 Surveillance Techniques

To minimize administrative burden while ensuring effective oversight, the Government will use a combination of surveillance methods, including:

• 100% Inspection: Used for critical performance areas such as pickup timeliness, delivery timeliness, and documentation accuracy (e.g., Form 10160).

• Random Monitoring: Conducted by the COR or designated personnel to assess compliance with security, personnel, and vehicle requirements.

• Periodic Inspection: Scheduled or unscheduled reviews of contractor operations, including vehicle inspections and personnel verification.

3.2 Customer Feedback

The contractor is expected to maintain professional communication with IRS personnel. Customer satisfaction is a key indicator of performance and may be measured through feedback and complaints from IRS staff.

Customer complaints must:

• Be documented in writing

• Clearly describe the issue

• Be submitted to the COR

The COR will investigate complaints and document findings using appropriate quality assurance monitoring forms.

Customer feedback may also be obtained through direct observation and routine interaction with IRS personnel involved in receipt and control operations.

3.3 Acceptable Quality Levels

Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) are defined in Attachment 1: Performance Requirements Summary Table.

AQLs are established based on the criticality of each task. For mission-critical functions, the required performance level is 100% compliance.

• Security of deposits

• Same-day delivery

• Incident reporting

For other performance areas, such as timeliness and documentation accuracy, AQLs are set to ensure high reliability while allowing for minimal variance. Failure to meet AQLs may result in corrective action requirements or other contractual remedies.

4 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

4.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

Performance management begins with clearly defined expectations in the SOW. Contractor performance is monitored using the surveillance methods outlined in this QASP and measured against the standards and AQLs in Attachment 1.

Performance data is analyzed to identify trends, deficiencies, and areas for improvement. Results are communicated to the contractor to support continuous performance improvement.

4.2 Monitoring Forms

Government surveillance will be documented using quality assurance monitoring forms (Attachment 2).

These forms will:

• Record inspection results

• Document compliance or non-compliance

• Capture performance trends over time

4.2.1 The COR will retain all completed monitoring forms as part of the official contract file and quality assurance record.

5 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

5.1 Determining Performance

5.1.1 The Government will use the surveillance methods described in this QASP to determine whether the contractor meets established performance standards and AQLs.

If the contractor fails to meet required performance levels:

• The contractor may be required to submit a Corrective Action Plan (CAP)

• Increased surveillance may be implemented

• Continued deficiencies may result in contractual remedies in accordance with the contract

5.2 Reporting

The COR will prepare a monthly performance report summarizing:

• Surveillance results

• Compliance with performance standards

• Identified deficiencies

• Trends and observations

This report will include supporting documentation such as monitoring forms and contractor performance data.

5.3 Reviews and Resolution

5.3.1 The COR may require meetings with the contractor to address performance issues, review trends, and discuss corrective actions.

Topics may include:

• Performance data and trends

• Identified deficiencies and root causes

• Corrective action plans

• Recommendations for improvement

The Government and contractor will work collaboratively to resolve issues; however, only the Contracting Officer may authorize changes to contract requirements.

ATTACHMENT 1: PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Required Services (Tasks)

Performance Standards

Acceptable Quality Levels

Methods of

Surveillance

Pickup Services

Delivery Services

Same-Day Delivery

Shipment Security

Documentation Accuracy

Personnel Compliance

Incident Reporting

Schedule Adherence (Peak/Non-Peak & On- Call)

Delivery Documentation Return

Courier arrives within 15 minutes of pickup time

Delivery is completed within 20 minutes of pickup

All deposits delivered same day; no overnight storage

No unattended deposits; no unauthorized stops; two couriers present; no commingling with other deliveries

Forms are complete, accurate, signed, and returned by next business day

Couriers approved (CDAL), background checks complete, IDs displayed, uniforms worn

Incidents (loss, theft, delays, accidents) reported within required timeframe

Contractor follows all scheduled and on-call service requirements

Completed Form 10160 returned by next business day with required bank signatures/time stamps

95% on-time pickups per month

95% on-time deliveries per month

100% Compliance

≥ 98% accuracy

≥ 95% compliance

≥ 98% compliance

100% inspection of IRS pickup logs (arrival/departure register)

100% inspection using Form 10160 timestamps delivery records and Form 10160

Random inspections;

incident reports; COR oversight forms

Random checks; guard validation against

CDAL

Review of incident logs and reporting timelines

Review of schedules

vs. actual service logs returned forms

ATTACHMENT 2: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE

MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

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: ___________________________________ DATE: _________________