Attachment 7 - QASP.docx

QASP Template ver. 2.2 _APRIL2021

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

For Calibration Support Services Contract Number: < upon award, enter contract/task order number> Contract Description: Material Coordination/Shipping/Receiving, calibration, and repair services of specialized instruments used to perform quantitative and qualitative measurement of various physical phenomena. The specialized instruments are utilized to monitor systems and equipment operation, perform scheduled maintenance, or detect and isolate faults.

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

1. PURPOSE.

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?

· 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. However, the Government will coordinate changes with the contractor. 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 Contracting Officer (KO) and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

The following FAR clauses may apply depending on contract type:

52.246-4 Inspection of Services – Fixed-Price

2. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

The Government Quality Assurance Team (GQAT) consists of the Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), and Technical Advisors (TA)/Principal Investigators (PIs). The GQAT will monitor performance in accordance with the performance standards defined in the Statement of Work (SOW). The roles and responsibilities of the GQAT members are as follows:

a. Contracting Officer - The KO shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The KO shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The KO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned KO: See the contract for current KO assignment.

b. Contracting Officer’s Representative - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall ensure 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. The COR’s specific duties are delineated in the COR Appointment Letter.

Assigned COR: See the contract for current COR assignment.

c. Technical Advisors/Principal Investigators - The TAs/PIs advise the COR on the quality of contractor performance. However, the TA/PI that requisitions the work may not determine if the services meet the requirements defined in the SOW unless the requiring department has an approved Separation of Functions Mitigation Plan.

Assigned TAs/PIs:

TAs/PIs are identified in individual task orders/TIs.

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES:

See the contract for the current contractor’s representative, including the Senior Technical Representative (STR).

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Performance standards define required levels of service. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets, or does not meet these standards. Performance standards and associated Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) are defined in the Performance Requirements Summary Table (PRS Table) attached to the contract.

5. INCENTIVES.

The Government will not include any specific incentives as part of this contract.

6. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE.

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP. The surveillance method applicable to each performance standard is listed in the PRST, attached to the contract.

Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the contractor's representative when a defect is identified and inform the representative of the specifics of the problem. The COR shall also document any identified defects in the COR’s Status Report to the KO. The COR shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting performance standards/AQLs.

a. DIRECT OBSERVATION. (Includes on-site inspections and can be performed periodically or through 100% surveillance.)

The COR is collocated in the building where work is being performed. The COR will have weekly opportunities to observe both work in process and completed work product.

b. MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (MIS). (Evaluates outputs through the use of management information reports. Best used for general surveillance and may need to be supplemented by periodic inspections.)

The COR will have periodic discussions with the Metrology and Calibration Lab (MCL) Manager. The MCL Manager performs various queries of the Metrology Calibration Management System (MCMS) database to monitor Work in Process (WIP) data related to time expended for execution and categorical volumes of tasking in process. In the discussions with the MCL Manager, the COR will be informed of any noteworthy trends either above or below the established norm.

c. PERIODIC INSPECTION. (Uses a comprehensive evaluation of selected outputs. Inspections may be scheduled [Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or annually] or unscheduled, as required.)

d. USER SURVEY. (Combines elements of validated user complaints and random sampling. Random survey is conducted to solicit user satisfaction. Appropriate for high quantity activities that have historically been satisfactory. May also generate periodic and 100% inspections.)

The MCL Manager conducts a yearly survey. The results of the survey are available to the COR and any significant positive or negative trends can be investigated for attribution to the contractor.

e. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. (Relies on the user of the service to identify deficiencies. Complaints are then investigated and validated. Highly applicable to services provided in quantity and where quality is highly subjective.)

The COR reports to the same Branch Head responsible for the MCL. Periodic discussions with the Branch Head will keep the COR informed of any significant customer complaints which the COR will then investigate and validate for action as appropriate.

f. 100% INSPECTION. (Evaluates all outputs. Most applicable to small quantity, but highly important services. May be used where there are written deliverables and stringent requirements such as tasks required by law, safety, or security.)

g. PERIODIC SAMPLING. (Variation of random sampling. However, sample is only taken when a deficiency is suspected. Good follow-up to MIS analysis. Sample results are applicable only for the specific work inspected. Since sample is not entirely random, it cannot be applied to total activity performance.)

When either positive or negative trends are identified by the MCL Manager, the COR will conduct sampling of the applicable process to discern the cause of the trend.

h. RANDOM SAMPLING. (Designed to evaluate the outputs of the award requirement by randomly selecting and inspecting a statistically significant sample. Highly recommended for large quantity repetitive activities with objective and measurable quality attributes.)

i. PROGRESS OR STATUS MEETINGS.

The MCL Manager holds weekly Team meetings of the staff to discuss observations being made of the trends in MCMS and actual work product observed in the physical lab. This provides a mechanism for discussing general trends both positive and negative and to review the status of tasking that appears to need more attention. The COR is informed by the MCL Manager of the meeting discussions and from time to time the COR will attend these meetings for direct observation.

j. ANALYSIS OF CONTRACTOR’s PROGRESS REPORTS. (Evaluate cost, schedule, etc.)

The COR will review and evaluate the cost, schedule, and any noteworthy highlights found in the contractor’s progress reports. This data will be compared and validated to the data that has been submitted to Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) system.

k. PERFORMANCE REPORTING. (Evaluate metrics for a specific time period. Develop metrics or use metrics found in MIS.)

Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions (to include payment deductions) against the contractor. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause in the contract is the authority for the KO’s actions.

7. OTHER MONITORING REQUIREMENTS.

a. The COR shall monitor compliance with contract clause 52.222-50 “Combating Trafficking in Persons” and immediately notify the KO of any suspected violations.

8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.

a. GENERAL DOCUMENTATION.

The COR shall document performance in the COR Status Report to the KO, and shall document performance annually in the Contractor Performance Assessment Ratings System (CPARS).

b. UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the KO and the contractor within 5 days. This will normally be via email unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COR shall document the discussion, place it in the COR File, and include it as an attachment to the COR’s Status Report.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) and send it to the KO for approval. Once approved, the COR shall send the CDR to the contractor's representative with a copy to the KO. A CDR template is attached to this QASP.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR shall 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 CDR shall also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this Corrective Action Plan to the COR. The Government shall review the contractor's Corrective Action Plan to determine acceptability.

Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, award fee nonpayment, or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.

9. EVALUATION AREAS

During performance, the COR will assess the following evaluation areas:

1) Technical/Quality of Product or Service (Quality)

2) Schedule/Timeliness (Schedule)

3) Management or Business Relations (Management)

4) Regulatory Compliance

10. RATINGS

The COR shall use the ratings to evaluate and document performance as defined in the Department of Defense (DoD) Guidance for the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).

11. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT.

During contract performance, the COR shall take periodic measurements, as specified in the AQL column of the PRST, and shall analyze whether the negotiated frequency of measurement is appropriate for the work being performed.

CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT (CDR)

1. Contract Number: <insert number>

2. TO: (Contractor Task Manager or on-site representative) <insert name>

3. FROM: (Name of COR) <insert name>

4. Date observed discrepancy: <insert date>

5. DISCREPANCY OR PROBLEM:

<Describe in detail. Identify any attachments.>

5. Corrective Action Plan:

A written Corrective Action Plan < is / is not > required.

< If a written Corrective Action Plan is required include the following. > The written Corrective Action Plan shall be provided to the undersigned not later than < # days after receipt of this

CDR. >

Prepared by: <Enter COR’s name>

Received by:

< 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.>