Attachment G Exhibit 7 - Consolidated QASP and Broker Evaluation Sheet.pdf

Exhibit 7

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Real Estate Acquisition Support Services

Interim ☐ / Final ☐

Contract Number/Task Order Number: Blank until Task order award

Project Name/Location: Blank until Task Order award

Contract/Order Description: This Real Estate Acquisition Support Services package provides support effective communication between Office of Real Property (ORP) and offeror in procurements; provide expertise in market research and commercial real estate transactions and financing; data and documentation organization, assembly and storage; and increased efficiency in lease contracting actions for project(s) that involve multiple vendors (lessors).

Contractor’s Name: Blank until Task Order award

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to monitor Contractor performance. This QASP describes:

What will be monitored, How monitoring will take place, Who will conduct the monitoring, How monitoring efforts and results will be documented

Government Roles and Responsibilities

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities:

a. Contracting Officer (CO) and/or Contract Specialist (CS) - The CO/CS shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract/order terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The CO/CS shall also assure that the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this task order. The CO/CS is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the level of acceptability of the Contractor’s performance.

Assigned CO: Blank until Task Order award

b. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)/Project Manager (PM) - The COR/PM is responsible for technical administration of the task order and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR/PM shall keep a quality assurance file. This file shall contain all quality assessment reports. The COR/PM is not authorized to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned COR: Blank until Task Order award

Contractor Project Manager(s) Representative:

a. Project Manager(s) – Blank until Task Order award

b. Other Contractor Personnel – Blank until Task Order award

Performance Standards and Methods

Performance Standards define required performance for each of the performance objectives. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the Contractor exceeds, meets, or does not meet these standards.

Minimum Contract Quality Standards of the PWS for each of the performance criteria are Document Quality, Personnel Technical Quality, Timeliness, and Business Relations. The Government may utilize the NBC Broker Performance Evaluation Sheet, provided at the end of this document. The Contracting Officer Representative/Project Manager (COR/PM) shall use any or a combination of the surveillance methods listed below in assessing performance using this QASP.

Surveillance Area

Performance Standards Method of Assessing Performance

Document(s) Quality

Compliance with task order terms and conditions, adherence to performance work statement (PWS) deliverable(s) including Module 1, 2 and/or 3 100% of the time

Observation & COR assessment, and customer feedback

Positive / Negative documentation in CPARS.

Timeliness Timely responses to open task(s) and deliverable(s) document requirements detailed in Task Order PWS are on time, accurate, and error free 98% of the time

Document(s) revision and re-submittal to VA within five business days of rejected deliverable(s).

Review deliverable(s), status reports. status meetings, Observation & COR assessment, and customer feedback

Positive / Negative documentation in CPARS.

Personnel Technical Quality

The Contractor delivers service as required in the PWS and within the technical specified in task order task or CLINs 100% of the time

Observation & COR assessment, and customer feedback

Positive / Negative documentation in CPARS.

Business Relations

The Contractor meets all requirements specified in this task/CLIN(s) on time and error free 100% of the time

Observation & COR assessment, and customer feedback

Positive / Negative documentation in CPARS.

After task order award, both the contractor’s Project Manager and the VA COR shall sign this document.

Signature – Contractor Project Manager

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative

Broker Performance Evaluation Sheet

National Broker IDIQ Contract I. Instructions

The evaluation should include a clear, plain language description of the principal purpose of the contract or order. The evaluation should reflect how the contractor performed. The evaluation should include clear relevant information that accurately depicts the contractor’s performance and be based on objective facts supported by program and contract or order performance data. The evaluations should be tailored to the contract type, size, content, and complexity of the contractual requirements.

Evaluation factors for each assessment shall include, at a minimum, the following:

i. Technical (quality of product or service).

ii. Cost control (not applicable for firm-fixed-price or fixed-price with economic price adjustment arrangements).

iii. Schedule/timeliness.

iv. Management or business relations.

Evaluation factors may include subfactors.

II. CPARs Table 42-1: Evaluation Rating Definitions

Rating Definition Notes

(a) 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.

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.

(b) 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.

(c) 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.

Rating Definition Notes

(d) 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, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

(e) 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).

III. Project Information – Please fill in the following fields that have not been pre-populated.

Project Number: [Pull from Task Order] Project Title: National Broker IDIQ Contract; [Task Order Name] Vendor/Broker Name: [Pull from Vendor File Request Form] Vendor/Broker Address: [Pull from Vendor File Request Form] Unique Identity ID (DUNS): [Pull from Vendor File Request Form] Product/Service Code: R402 NAICS Code: 531210 Evaluation Type:

Period of Performance Being Assessed:

Contract Number: [Pull from Task Order] Estimated/Actual Completion Date:

IV. Broker Evaluation Results

Name of Assessing Official:

Title of Assessing Official:

Organization:

Phone Number:

Date:

Rating Factor Rating Comments/Justification

Technical Quality

Document Quality

Business Relations

Timeliness/Schedule

Regulatory Compliance

Recommendation of Assessing Official:

Broker Name: _____________________

Broker’s Signature: _____________________

Date: ____________________

Assessing Official Name: _____________________

Assessing Official’s Signature: _____________________

Date: ____________________

Send final executed document to NBCTasking@va.gov and OFATasking@va.gov. Please retain a copy of this document.