Attachment G Exhibit 7 - Consolidated QASP and Broker Evaluation Sheet - Template.docx
DOCX document 34 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 36C10F26R0045
About this file
This is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) and Broker Evaluation Sheet template for Real Estate Acquisition Support Services under an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Construction and Facilities Management.
The QASP establishes a systematic framework for monitoring contractor performance across four primary evaluation areas: Technical Quality, Cost Control, Schedule/Timeliness, and Management or Business Relations. Technical Quality requires deliverables to be complete, accurate, properly formatted, and free of material errors, assessed through review of deliverables, observation, and customer feedback. Cost Control applies only when the Task Order identifies a Government-approved benchmark or negotiation objective, evaluated against lease rates and cost outcomes. Schedule/Timeliness requires the contractor to meet delivery dates and milestones at least 98% of the time, with rejected deliverables resubmitted within five business days. Management or Business Relations requires professional and responsive working relationships with Government personnel while complying with communication and procurement-integrity requirements. The Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) maintains a quality assurance file documenting all assessments, supporting documentation, contractor comments, and corrective-action records. The Broker Evaluation Sheet provides five rating levels—Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unsatisfactory—with detailed definitions and guidance for documenting performance. Evaluations include fields for project information, rating factors with comments, identification of strengths and deficiencies, corrective actions, and supporting documentation to inform annual CPARS evaluations and IDIQ-level performance trends.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment I Exhibit 9 - Commission Verification Worksheet.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment N - Price Cost Schedule Commission Rates.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment L - Licensing Lawful Authority Sheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment E Exhibit 5 _ Forecast of Potential Broker Projects by Region.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment H Exhibit 8 - Broker Commission Agreement - Template.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment F Exhibit 6 - Master Lease File Checklist SEPT 2026.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment B Exhibit 2 - Approved Training Course Providers.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment D Exhibit 4 - OCI.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment J - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx | DOCX document | |
| 36C10F26R0045.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment K - Region Coverage Areas.docx | DOCX document | |
| Firm_Name_Attachment M - RFP Questions.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment C Exhibit 3 - Individual COI and NDA Revised 02.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment A Exhibit 1 - Laws and Regulations.pdf |
Show all 14
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
Exhibit 7
QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)
Real Estate Acquisition Support Services Interim ☐ / Final ☐
IDIQ Contract Number: Blank until Contract award
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 supports effective communication between Office of Real Property (ORP) and offerors in procurements; provides expertise in market research and commercial real estate transactions and financing; supports data and documentation organization, assembly and storage; and increases efficiency in lease contracting actions for project(s) that involve multiple vendors (lessors).
Contractor’s Name: Blank until Contract award
This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to monitor Contractor performance. This QASP describes:
· What will be monitored; and
· How monitoring will take place; and
· When monitoring will take place: and
· Who will conduct the monitoring; and
· 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 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) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the task order and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. This file shall contain all quality assessment reports, supporting documentation, Contractor comments, and corrective-action records. Interim and final TO performance assessments completed under this QASP may be used to support annual CPARS evaluations of the Contractor’s performance under the IDIQ contract. 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 Technical Quality, Cost Control when applicable, Schedule/Timeliness, and Management or Business Relations. Document Quality, Personnel Technical Quality, and compliance with Task Order and PWS requirements are evaluated under Technical Quality. The Government will use the Broker 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 |
| Technical Quality |
| The Contractor provides personnel, services, and deliverables that comply with the applicable Task Order, PWS, specifications, CLINs, and other authorized requirements. Deliverables must be complete, accurate, properly formatted, and free of material errors. |
| Review of deliverables; observation; COR/PM assessment; customer feedback; and documentation of performance results in the quality assurance file. |
| Cost Control |
| When the applicable Task Order establishes a Government-approved cost-control benchmark, target, or negotiation objective, the Contractor supports the Government in achieving lease rates and other lease-cost outcomes that meet or improve upon that benchmark. The Contractor’s performance will be evaluated using objective, documented comparisons to the applicable Task Order or VA-established benchmark. |
| Review of the approved Task Order cost-control benchmark or negotiation objective; lease-rate and cost analyses; negotiation-support documentation; executed lease terms; and Government validation of the resulting comparison. Mark N/A when no applicable benchmark or cost-control requirement is identified in the Task Order. |
Schedule/ Timeliness
| The Contractor meets delivery dates, milestones, and response times established in the applicable Task Order, PWS, or other authorized Government direction at least 98% of the time. The Contractor corrects and resubmits rejected deliverables within five business days, unless another Task Order-specific timeframe applies. |
| Review of deliverables, project schedule, status reports, status meetings, observation, COR/PM assessment, and customer feedback. |
| Management or Business Relations |
| The Contractor maintains professional, responsive, and effective working relationships with Government personnel and complies with applicable communication, conflict-of-interest, and procurement-integrity requirements. |
| Observation, COR/PM assessment, customer feedback, review of communications and required records, and documentation of performance results in the quality assurance file. |
Cost Control: Cost Control applies only when the applicable Task Order identifies a Government-approved cost-control benchmark, target, or negotiation objective. The Task Order shall identify the benchmark, the measurement method, the data source, and the responsible Government official for validating results. In the absence of an identified benchmark or applicable cost-control requirement, Cost Control shall be marked “N/A.”
After task order award, both the contractor’s Project Manager and the VA COR shall sign this document.
Contractor Acknowledgment:
| _______________________________________ | _________________ | |
| Signature – Contractor Project Manager | Date |
VA COR:
| _______________________________________ | _________________ | |
| Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative | Date |
Broker Performance Evaluation Sheet 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 (N/A unless a Cost Control requirement is expressly established in the applicable Task Order.).
iii. Schedule/timeliness.
iv. Management or business relations.
· Evaluation factors may include subfactors.
II. Task Order Performance 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. |
| (d) Marginal |
| Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects serious problems 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 a Marginal rating, identify a significant event in each evaluation area in which the contractor had difficulty overcoming the problem and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool used to notify 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 evaluation area in which the contractor had difficulty overcoming the problems 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 Entity ID (UEI): [Pull from Vendor File Request Form]
· Product/Service Code: R402
· NAICS Code: 531210
· Evaluation Type:
· Period of Performance Being Assessed:
· IDIQ Contract Number: [Insert base IDIQ contract number]
· Task Order 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
Cost Control
Schedule/Timeliness
Management or Business Relations
CPARS-Supporting Information Identify significant strengths, deficiencies, recurring performance trends, corrective actions, unresolved concerns, and other documented information relevant to evaluation of the Contractor’s overall performance under the IDIQ contract. Identify applicable supporting records, including quality-assurance reports, correspondence, deficiency notices, corrective-action documentation, deliverable reviews, or other contemporaneous documentation.
Strengths/Positive Performance:
Deficiencies/Performance Concerns:
Corrective Actions and Status:
Recurring Trends or IDIQ-Level Considerations:
Supporting Documentation Identified:
Recommendation of Assessing Official:
Assessing Official Name: _____________________ Assessing Official’s Signature: _____________________ Date: ____________________
Contractor Acknowledgment/Comments:
Broker Name: _____________________ Broker’s Signature: _____________________ Date: ____________________ Send final executed document to NBCTasking@va.gov and OFATasking@va.gov. Please retain a copy of this document.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .