ATTACHMENT 5 - QASP.docx
DOCX document 52 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Capacity Services Communications III (CSC III)
- Solicitation number
- HC108426R0001
- Issued by
-
Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
This is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for the Capacity Services Communications III (CSC III) contract with the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA). The QASP establishes the framework for monitoring and evaluating contractor performance across ten primary task areas: Capacity Offerings, Non-capacity Offerings, Program and Project Management, Ordering, Billing Cycle/Invoicing and Payment Process, Meeting and Reporting Requirements, Service Transition and Exit Strategy, TESA/ASSA Certification, SCRM Plan, and License Agreements and Hardware/Software Lists. Surveillance activities are overseen by the Program/Project Manager, Contracting Officer, and Contracting Officer's Representative (COR), with the COR bearing primary responsibility for continuous technical oversight and documentation of performance in a Quality Assurance file.
The QASP establishes performance standards with Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) ranging between 99.99% and 99.999% for critical capacity communications services. Key performance metrics include communications equipment availability at 99.99% for standard systems and 99.999% for high-availability systems, call order validation within one business day, hardware delivery within 30 calendar days for CONUS and 45 calendar days for OCONUS (with expedited delivery in 15 and 25 days respectively), and equipment relocation within 10 calendar days. Performance is monitored through periodic inspection, random sampling, and customer input, with results documented in Performance Assessment Reports (PARs) and Corrective Action Reports (CARs) as needed. The QASP includes performance rating definitions ranging from Exceptional to Unsatisfactory, mandatory compliance requirements including whistleblower notifications, and templates for documentation of deficiencies and corrective actions to ensure contractor accountability and Government oversight.
View the file
Other files
Show all 26
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)
1. Contract Title. Capacity Services Communications III (CSC III).
2. Purpose. This 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?
· How 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 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.
This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.
3. Roles and Responsibilities.
The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.
Program/Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides program oversight and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities.
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.
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 for the KO which will be used in documenting past performance. 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. Primary Method of Surveillance. Periodic Inspection will be conducted as required for tasks 1 through 10 and all associated subtasks outlined in the Performance Work Statement.
CUI
TASK 1: Capacity Offerings TASK 2: Non-capacity Offerings TASK 3: Program and Project Management TASK 4: Ordering TASK 5: Billing Cycle, Invoicing and Payment Process TASK 6: Meeting and Reporting Requirements TASK 7: Service Transition and Exit Strategy TASK 8: TESA/ASSA Certification TASK 9: SCRM Plan TASK 10: License Agreements and Hardware/Software Lists
Surveillance Methods
· 100 Percent Inspection. This is usually only the most appropriate method for infrequent tasks or tasks with stringent performance requirements, e.g., where safety or health is a concern. With this method, performance is inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. One hundred percent inspection is too expensive to be used in most cases.
· Random Sampling. This is usually the most appropriate method for recurring tasks. With random sampling, services are sampled to determine if the level of performance is acceptable. Random sampling works best when the number of instances of the services being performed is very large and a statistically valid sample can be obtained. Computer programs may be available to assist in establishing sampling procedures.
· Periodic Inspection. These services are monitored weekly, monthly, quarterly, semiannually, annually, etc. Periodic types of activities are perfect for periodic inspection because not only are they infrequent, but there is normally a predetermined, specified time frame within which the tasks must be accomplished. Therefore, you know exactly when to conduct the evaluations. Periodic inspections automatically become 100 percent evaluations or "100 percent checks." Inspections should be divided and scheduled by frequency: annual, semiannual, quarterly, monthly, weekly and as required. Sometimes services are required for which the time or frequency cannot be predicted, such as accident investigations, one-time special tasking by higher headquarters, etc. These would be labeled "as required inspections." Others are known and predictable such as the quarterly status report or the monthly travel report currently included in some DISA service contracts.
· Customer Input. Although usually not a primary method, this is a valuable supplement to more systematic methods. For example, in a case where random sampling indicates unsatisfactory service, customer complaints can be used as substantiating evidence. In certain situations where customers can be relied upon to complain consistently when the quality of performance is poor, e.g., dining facilities, building services, customer surveys and customer complaints may be a primary surveillance method, and customer satisfaction an appropriate performance standard. In all cases, complaints should be documented, preferably on a standard form.
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 performance surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The AQL performance Standard Table should be used to form the foundation of the COR’s inspection checklist.
5. Performance Standards.
| Performance Standard |
| Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) |
| Methods of Calculation |
Communications Equipment Availability
The percentage of time each system is available for productive use.
| Maintain communications equipment availability and related operating equipment in operating condition at a level to meet or exceed a service level of 99.99%. |
| (Total available hours for number of calendar days in reporting month – Measurement Exceptions – Time communications equipment is unavailable, unable to perform core function, or core function is significantly degraded) / (Total available hours for number of calendar days in reporting month – Measurement Exceptions) *100 = “Service Level Attained”. |
Total available hours = 24x number of calendar days in reporting month for each orderable system.
Measurement Exception: Measurement Exception: DISA or customer-initiated downtime, contractor Preventative maintenance (not break fix or hardware or software repair) that is appropriately coordinated through the Authorized Service Activity (ASA) or Authorized Service Interruption (ASI) process with DISA and the customer, and environmental failures not attributed to the contractor.
Communications Equipment Availability for High Availability Systems
The percentage of time each system is available for productive use.
| Maintain communications equipment availability and related operating equipment in operating condition at a level to meet or exceed a service level of 99.999%. |
| (Total available hours for number of calendar days in reporting month – Measurement Exceptions – Time communications equipment is unavailable, unable to perform core function, or core function is significantly degraded) / (Total available hours for number of calendar days in reporting month – Measurement Exceptions) *100 = “Service Level Attained”. |
Total available hours = 24x number of calendar days in reporting month for each orderable system.
Measurement Exception: Measurement Exception: DISA or customer-initiated downtime, contractor Preventative maintenance (not break fix or hardware or software repair) that is appropriately coordinated through the Authorized Service Activity (ASA) or Authorized Service Interruption (ASI) process with DISA and the customer, and environmental failures not attributed to the contractor.
Performance Standard
| Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) |
| Methods of Calculation |
Call Order Validation
The length of time to validate a call order.
Call orders are validated for accuracy within one business day.
Call orders received on Friday or on a day preceding a federal holiday require validation by the next business day.
Time is calculated from the date the contractor receives the call order.
Delivery of Capacity
The length of time to fulfill a validated call order.
Hardware is delivered within 30 calendar days for CONUS and 45 calendar days for OCONUS.
Expedited delivery for hardware is delivered within 15 calendar days for CONUS and 25 calendar days for OCONUS.
Time is calculated from the date the contractor validates a call order.
Delivery AQL is waivable by the Government based on vendor manufacturing lead times.
| Delivery of OEM and Onsite Hardware Support. |
| Level I (Gold): Same Business Day Return Merchandise Authorization (RMA) service for physical hardware. On site within two hours of delivery of replacement hardware. |
Level II (Silver): Next Business Day RMA service for physical hardware. On site within four hours of delivery of replacement hardware.
Level III (Bronze): Next Business Day RMA service for physical hardware. On site within four hours of delivery of replacement hardware.
Time is calculated from the date the Government initiates the RMA service; on-site support is calculated from the time the replacement hardware is delivered.
On-site support AQL may be waived by the Government if the Government request the hardware be installed during a coordinated maintenance window.
Relocations
The length of time to transfer of equipment within or between DISA site(s).
| Equipment is relocated within 10 calendar days. |
| Time is calculated from the date the Government notifies the contractor and orders relocation services. |
6. Documenting Performance:
Acceptable Performance.
The Government shall document positive performance. A Performance Assessment Report (PAR) template is attached (Appendix 2). Any report may become part of the supporting documentation for fixed price payments, award/incentive fee payments, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) entries, or other actions. Government acceptance of services permits the contractor to invoice for the service fee.
Unacceptable performance.
Unacceptable contractor performance can be identified by customer complaints (Appendix 3) or upon scheduled surveillance evaluations. When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication and may be through the PAR template (Appendix 2). The COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file and provide a copy to the KO.
When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Corrective Action Report (CAR). The CAR is forwarded to the KO for dissemination to the contractor. A CAR template is attached to this QASP (Appendix 4).
The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CAR in writing. The CAR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CAR will also state how long after receipt the contractor must present this corrective action plan to KO and COR. The Government may withhold payment for services until corrective action is taken. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability. Upon Government acceptance of the corrected services the contractor will be permitted to invoice for the service fee.
Any CAR may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, award fee nonpayment, CPARS or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.
7. Mandatory or regulatory compliance items: The contractor will provide initial proof of compliance with regulatory and compliance items contained in the contract. The Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and the Contracting Officer (KO) will evaluate the initial submission and will conduct ad hoc reviews of the contractor's compliance throughout the remainder of the contract. The contractor will monitor compliance as required by FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons, and report any issues to the KO. The contractor shall inform its employees in writing of contractor employee whistleblower rights and protections as required by DFARS 252.203-7002, Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights. The contractor shall also ensure that the clause is included in all subcontracts.
No later than 60 days prior to expiration of the period of performance, the contractor shall provide written affirmation to the COR that a written notification was provided to Contractor employees and the forum/means in which the written notification was provided (e.g., posted in hallways, cubicle spaces, common room spaces, email correspondence).
8. Acceptable Quality Level (AQL): The AQL for this project is between 99.99% and 99.999% due to the critical support provided by capacity communications. See performance standards.
9. Evaluation Method: The COR will track the response to the requirements of inspected tasks, conduct a comparison with actual maintenance performance, and otherwise verify and validate vendor performance. Help desk ticket logs will be used as documentation and compared to the AQL specific to the task.
10. Performance Rating
In evaluating the quality of the contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used (same as CPAR ratings).
| Rating |
| Definition |
| Note |
| Exceptional |
| Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds much to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with a few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. |
| To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. |
| 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. |
| To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified. |
| 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. |
| To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order. |
| 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. |
| To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, environmental deficiency report or letter). |
| 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. |
| To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters). |
Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix
Performance Standards Acceptable Quality Levels Methods of Calculation
| Surveillance |
| Results/Ratings |
Communications Equipment Availability
The percentage of time each system is available for productive use.
| Maintain communications equipment availability and related operating equipment in operating condition at a level to meet or exceed a service level of 99.99%. |
| (Total available hours for number of calendar days in reporting month – Measurement Exceptions – Time communications equipment is unavailable, unable to perform core function, or core function is significantly degraded) / (Total available hours for number of calendar days in reporting month – Measurement Exceptions) *100 = “Service Level Attained”. |
Total available hours = 24x number of calendar days in reporting month for each orderable system.
Measurement Exception: Measurement Exception: DISA or customer-initiated downtime, contractor Preventative maintenance (not break fix or hardware or software repair) that is appropriately coordinated through the Authorized Service Activity (ASA) or Authorized Service Interruption (ASI) process with DISA and the customer, and environmental failures not attributed to the contractor.
Periodic
Communications Equipment Availability for High Availability Systems
The percentage of time each system is available for productive use.
| Maintain communications equipment availability and related operating equipment in operating condition at a level to meet or exceed a service level of 99.999%. |
| (Total available hours for number of calendar days in reporting month – Measurement Exceptions – Time communications equipment is unavailable, unable to perform core function, or core function is significantly degraded) / (Total available hours for number of calendar days in reporting month – Measurement Exceptions) *100 = “Service Level Attained”. |
Total available hours = 24x number of calendar days in reporting month for each orderable system.
Measurement Exception: Measurement Exception: DISA or customer-initiated downtime, contractor Preventative maintenance (not break fix or hardware or software repair) that is appropriately coordinated through the Authorized Service Activity (ASA) or Authorized Service Interruption (ASI) process with DISA and the customer, and environmental failures not attributed to the contractor.
Periodic
Call Order Validation
The length of time to validate a call order.
Call orders are validated for accuracy within one business day.
Call orders received on Friday or on a day preceding a federal holiday require validation by the next business day.
Time is calculated from the date the contractor receives the call order.
Periodic
Delivery of Capacity
The length of time to fulfill a validated call order.
Hardware is delivered within 30 calendar days for CONUS and 45 calendar days for OCONUS.
Expedited delivery for hardware is delivered within 15 calendar days for CONUS and 25 calendar days for OCONUS.
Time is calculated from the date the contractor validates a call order.
Delivery AQL is waivable by the Government based on vendor manufacturing lead times.
Periodic
| Delivery of OEM and Onsite Hardware Support. |
| Level I (Gold): Same Business Day Return Merchandise Authorization (RMA) service for physical hardware. On site within two hours of delivery of replacement hardware. |
Level II (Silver): Next Business Day RMA service for physical hardware. On site within four hours of delivery of replacement hardware.
Level III (Bronze): Next Business Day RMA service for physical hardware. On site within four hours of delivery of replacement hardware.
Time is calculated from the date the Government initiates the RMA service; on-site support is calculated from the time the replacement hardware is delivered.
On-site support AQL may be waived by the Government if the Government request the hardware be installed during a coordinated maintenance window.
Periodic
Relocations
The length of time to transfer of equipment within or between DISA site(s).
| Equipment is relocated within 10 calendar days. |
| Time is calculated from the date the Government notifies the contractor and orders relocation services. |
| Periodic |
Appendix 2 – Performance Assessment Report
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)
(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)
| 1. CONTRACT/TASK ORDER NUMBER |
| 2. CONTRACTOR |
| 3. TYPE OF SERVICES |
4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE
| 5. COR PHONE |
| 6. SUSPENSE DATE |
I. PERFORMANCE
7. |_| DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY)
|_| NEW
|_| REPEAT
|_| NO DEFICIENCY NOTED
8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM REVIEWED
| 9. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEFICIENCY (IF DEFICIENCY BOX WAS CHECKED) |
| 10. DETAILED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT |
II. CONTRACTOR VALIDATION
11. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE |_| CONCUR |_| NON-CONCUR
12. CORRECTIVE ACTION ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE
13. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTION OF RECURRENCE OR REASON FOR NON-CONCURRENCE OF COR CITED DEFICIENCY
III. ACTION CORRECTED
14. |_| CONCUR |_| NON-CONCUR COR SIGNATURE AND DATE
15. COR REMARKS (REQUIRED)
6. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS
Appendix 3 – Customer Complaint Record
CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD
DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT
SOURCE OF COMPLAINT
ORGANIZATION
BUILDING NUMBER
INDIVIDUAL
PHONE NUMBER
NATURE OF COMPLAINT
CONTRACT REFERENCE
VALIDATION
DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT
ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR
RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY
Appendix 4 – Corrective Action Report
CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)
(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)
1. CONTRACTOR
2. CONTRACT NUMBER
3. TYPE OF SERVICES
4. FUNCTIONAL AREA
5. SUSPENSE DATE
6. CONTROL NUMBER
7. DEFICIENCY |_| MAJOR |_| MINOR
FINDING:
FINDING IMPACT:
Please respond with a written corrective action plan that details the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 5. If date was not entered in Block 5, the contractor is not required to provide a response.
8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR)
TYPED NAME AND GRADE
SIGNATURE AND DATE
9. ISSUING AUTHORITY
TYPED NAME AND GRADE
SIGNATURE AND DATE
10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE
11. COR DETERMINATION
|_| ACCEPTED |_| REJECTED
12. CLOSE DATE
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .