Attachment 7 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.pdf

Solicitation Number 70FB8023R00000031

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Logistics Planning and Construction Services Contract (LPSC)

1. PURPOSE.

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the Logistics Planning and Construction Services Contract (LPSC). 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 shall 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 contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

The following FAR clause applies to this contract type:

52.246-4 Inspection of Services – Fixed-Price 52.246-5 Inspection of Services – Cost Reumbursement 52.246-6 Inspection-Time-and-Material and Labor-Hour

2. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

a. Contracting Officer (CO) - The CO 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 CO shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned CO: Lassey Wilson-Bahun Organization or Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Telephone: 202-716-2916 Email: Lassey.wilsonbahun@fema.dhs.gov

b. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. At the conclusion of the contract or when requested by the CO, the COR shall provide documentation to the CO. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to mailto:Lassey.wilsonbahun@fema.dhs.gov authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The contractor shall refer any changes they deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the CO for action.

Assigned COR: Lisa Villalona Telephone: 202-655-0721 Email: Lisa.villalona@fema.dhs.gov

Assigned ACOR: Carl Kahn Telephone: (225) 910-5244 Email: carl.kahn@fema.dhs.gov

c. Other Key Government Personnel – Technical monitors (TM) will be assigned to each task order/work order in support of the COR. These TMs will be determined in subsequent orders and will provide input on performance to the COR.

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES:

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s representatives for this contract.

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

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

c. Principal - <upon award, enter name> Telephone: <enter number> Email: <enter address>

d. Other Contractor Personnel - <upon award, enter name or delete these lines if not applicable> Title: <enter title> Telephone: <enter number> Email: <enter address>

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet these standards.

The Performance Requirements in the Performance Work Statement includes performance standards. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

6. METHODS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE.

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

mailto:Lisa.villalona@fema.dhs.gov mailto:carl.kahn@fema.dhs.gov

Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the contractor's task manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR, with assistance from the CO, if needed, shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific performance standard/AQL.

a. DIRECT OBSERVATION: Performed periodically at 1% to 100% depending upon size and scope of the mission.

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION: Performed periodically at 1% to 100% depending upon size and scope of the mission.

c. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS: Investigate customer complaints and the issues and/or problems as they arise.

d. PROGRESS OR STATUS MEETING: Ensure proper attendees are at all meetings. All questions must be responded to within 1 day of receipt.

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 becomes the basis for the CO’s actions.

7. QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN TABLE

Service Output Performance Objective Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) Method of

Inspection Incentive (positive or negative)

Administer quality control program (QCP) including subcontractor management in accordance with QCP

The QCP is defined as the number of instances the COR must correct the Contractor either by issuing a written notice or by involving the CO.

Intervention by the CO is when the CO becomes involved in the resolution of an issue, but the issue does not rise to the level of a formal memorandum from the CO. For example, the CO sends an informal email regarding an issue that cannot be resolved between the COR and Contractor (either field or

HQ COR).

Exceptional:

There are no QCP performance quality issues during the period of performance.

Very good:

There are QCP performance quality issues during the period of performance; however, none of the quality issues rise to a level that requires a written notice from the COR or CO intervention.

Satisfactory:

There is no more than one (1) written notice from the COR and/or one CO intervention.

Marginal:

There is more than one (1) and less than three (3) QCP performance quality issues that require either a written notice from the COR or CO intervention.

Unsatisfactory:

The CO issues a cure notice; the Contractor is terminated for default; and/or more than three (3) quality issues that require either a written notice from the COR or CO intervention.

Direct observations, validated user/customer complaints, and progress or status meetings

Positive or negative review in

CPARS

Submit management report as required

Submitted PM report of scheduled, completed, and outstanding tasks within 5 business days of request

Exceptional:

100% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timeline; report content is relevant and of superior quality.

Very good:

98% to less than 100% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines; report content is relevant and of acceptable quality.

Satisfactory:

94% to less than 98% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines; report content is relevant and of acceptable quality.

Marginal:

90% to less than 94% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines; report content is relevant and of acceptable quality.

Unsatisfactory:

Less than 90% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines; report content is not relevant and/or of unacceptable quality.

Direct observations, periodic inspection, validated user/customer complaints, or progress/ status meetings

Positive or negative review on

CPARS

Operational and Technical Field Support

Provide planning and administrative support, developing and providing technical analyses, contract surveillance, project monitoring, and other specialty and general construction work related to direct housing missions

Outstanding:

100% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Very good:

98% to less than 100% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Satisfactory:

94% to less than 98% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Marginal:

90% to less than 94% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Unsatisfactory:

Less than 90% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Direct observations, periodic inspection, validated user/customer complaints, or progress/ status meetings

Mission Transportation Planning Support

Identified transportation requirements for hauling TTHUs from the point of origin provided by FEMA to the designated staging area in the disaster area of operation.

Exceptional:

100% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Very good:

98% to less than 100% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Satisfactory:

94% to less than 98% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Direct observations, periodic inspection, validated user/customer complaints, or progress/ status meetings

Positive or negative review on

Marginal:

90% to less than 94% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Unsatisfactory:

Less than 90% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Mission Installation Planning Support

Provided information on points of contact for state and local authorities, local codes, ordinances, permitting requirements, installation and local transportation restrictions, and necessary from the installation perspective.

Examined existing commercial manufactured home or recreational vehicle parks to determine if there is the possibility of expansion, and utilize information received from state and local officials to locate vacant land for a possible group site/s.

Outstanding:

100% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Very good:

98% to less than 100% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Satisfactory:

94% to less than 98% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Marginal:

90% to less than 94% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Unsatisfactory:

Less than 90% of the reports and information are provided within the specified timelines.

Direct observations, periodic inspection, validated user/customer complaints, or progress/ status meetings

Positive or negative review on

CPARS

Project Management and Operational Field Support

Provided project management and planning support, developed innovated tools and resources to support FEMA missions and improved business processes without complaints about the quality of products and/or services provided

Exceptional:

100% of the products and/or services submitted are accepted with no complaints.

Very good:

98% to 100% of the products and/or services submitted are accepted and does not require correction from the COR or CO.

Satisfactory:

94% to 98% of the products and/or services submitted are accepted and does not require correction from the COR or CO.

Marginal:

90% to 94% of the products and/or services submitted are accepted and does not require correction from the COR or CO.

Unsatisfactory:

Less than 90% of the products and/or services submitted requires correction from the COR or CO to correct the product.

Direct observations, periodic inspection, validated user/customer complaints, or progress/ status meetings

Positive or negative review on

CPARS

Architectural Engineering & Construction Management

Managed services for contract personnel engaged in planning, design, and/or construction functions by performing oversight and control of contractor resources producing

Outstanding:

100% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Very good:

Positive or negative review on cost estimates, project schedules, data input and manipulation, project designs, quality assurance of construction projects, and other technical aspects of the direct housing mission

98% to less than 100% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Satisfactory:

94% to less than 98% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Marginal:

90% to less than 94% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Unsatisfactory:

Less than 90% of the reports and data are provided within the specified timelines.

Supply Chain Analysis Network Support

Provided analyses on private sector supply chain resilience and provided recommendations to maximize non-interrupted supply chain capacity for the stabilization and restoration of pre-disaster supply chain flows

Exceptional:

100% of the data and reports are accurate and provided within the specified timelines.

Very good:

98% to less than 100% of the data and reports are accurate and provided within the specified timelines.

Satisfactory:

94% to less than 98% of the data and reports are accurate and provided within the specified timelines.

Marginal:

90% to less than 94% of the data and reports are accurate and provided within the specified timelines.

Unsatisfactory:

Less than 90% of the data and reports are accurate and provided within the specified timelines.

8. RATINGS.

Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. A rating scale shall be used to determine a positive, neutral, or negative outcome. The following ratings shall be used:

EXCEPTIONAL: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit.

VERY GOOD: Performance meets contractual requirements and excceds many to the Government’s benefit. Performance accomplished with some minor problems.

SATISFACTORY: Performance meets contractual requirements. Performance accomplished with some minor problems.

MARGINAL: Performance does not meet contractual requirements. A serious problem identified for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions.

UNSATISFACTORY: Performance does not meet contractual requirements.

9. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.

a. ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.

The Government shall document positive performance. A report template is attached. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for fixed fee payments, award fee payments, or other contractual actions.

b. UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), and present it to the contractor's program manager or on-site representative. A CDR template is attached to this QASP.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR 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 CDR will 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 contractual actions deemed necessary by the CO.

10. FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT.

a. Frequency of Measurement.

During contract/order performance, the COR will periodically analyze whether the negotiated frequency of surveillance is appropriate for the work being performed.

b. Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings.

The COR shall meet with the contractor once per year to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment. Final assessments will be conducted at the conclusion of the contract or task order.

<The COR shall sign this document.>

Contracting Officer’s Representative Date