Attmt 0006 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 20220610.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR

Program Executive Office - Intelligence Electronic Warfare & Sensors (PEO IEW&S), Project Title: Cybersecurity Support Services

Date: TBD

Project Manager: Intelligence Systems & Analytics (PM IS&A)

SFAE-IEWS-IA

6580 Surveillance Loop, Building 6006, 2nd Floor, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005

Contents

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Authority

2.0 Roles and Responsibilities

2.1 Government Roles

2.1.1 Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO aka KO)

2.1.2 The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA)

2.1.3 Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

2.1.4 Technical Monitors (TM)

2.1.5 Program/Project Manager (PM)

2.2 Contractor

3.0 Methods of Surveillance

3.1 Customer Feedback

3.2 Contract Deliverables…………………………………………………………………………………...6

3.3 Travel Approval Requirement……………………………………………………....………………….6

4.0 Performance Requirements Summary (PRS)

4.1 Surveillance Matrix

4.2 Quality Control Program

5.0 Documentation

6.0 Revisions to QASP

7.0 Performance Rating Definitions

Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix Appendix 2 - Corrective Action Report (CAR) Appendix 3 - Customer Complaint Record Appendix 4 - Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

1.0 Introduction

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) for PM IS&A Cybersecurity Support Services. This performance-based plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines PM IS&A will use in evaluating the technical performance of the Contractor.

1.1 Purpose

The role of the Government in quality assurance (QA) is to ensure contract standards are achieved. This QASP is used to determine if the contractor’s performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The QASP establishes procedures on how this assessment/inspection process will be conducted. It provides the detailed process for a continuous oversight process:

• What will be monitored

• How monitoring will take place

• Who will conduct the monitoring

• How monitoring efforts and results will be documented

The contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards using its Quality Control Plan. The QASP provides the structure for the government’s surveillance of the contractor’s performance to assure that it meets contract standards. It is the government’s responsibility to be objective, fair and consistent in evaluating contractor performance.

The QASP is not part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the contractor’s quality control plan.

This QASP is a living document. Flexibility in the QASP is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on contractor performance.

The government may provide a copy of the QASP to the contractor to facilitate open communication. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen or uncontrollable circumstances might occur that are outside the control of the contractor.

The QASP should ensure early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance.

1.2 Authority

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Part 46 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Inspection of Services clauses, which provides for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the service called for in the contract or order. This acceptance is to be executed by the contracting officer or a duly authorized representative.

2.0 Roles and Responsibilities

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

2.1 Government Roles

The following definitions for Government resources are applicable to this plan:

2.1.1 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.

Assigned KO: Erin Hynes Organization or Agency: Army Contracting Command – Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG) Telephone: 443-861-5368 Email: erin.l.hynes.civ@army.mil

2.1.2 The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA)

Under delegated authority, the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) will be responsible for the administration of the contract after contract award. The ACO is delegated responsibility for the administrative functions provided for under Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplemental (DFARS) 242.202(a)(i), as appropriate and authorized by interagency agreements between DCMA and the Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground (ACC-APG).

The Contracting Officer (KO), the ACO, the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), and the Technical Monitor (TM) will coordinate as required to ensure that multi-layered administration of the contract is performed. The KO, ACO, COR, and the TM are responsible for the maintaining the contract file and supporting contract administration documentation.

2.1.3 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 to the KO which will be used in documenting past performance. The 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.

Primary Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is:

Assigned COR:

Organization or Agency: PM IS&A Address: 6580 Surveillance Loop Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 Email:

Phone: (443) 861-

Alternate Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is:

Assigned COR:

Organization or Agency: PM SAI Address: 6580 Surveillance Loop Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 Email:

Phone: (443) 861-

2.1.4 Technical Monitors (TM)

The TM will be nominated based upon demonstration of the appropriate experience, training, and ethical behavior by PM IS&A and will be appointed by the KO. The TM will be responsible for assisting the COR in performing continuous contract surveillance oversight of the Contractor’s compliance with the contract requirements, for reporting contractor performance to the KO, and for mailto:%20erin.l.hynes.civ@army.mil mailto:%20erin.l.hynes.civ@army.mil maintaining COR files. The TM will execute the responsibilities as delegated by the KO and will monitor contractor performance as it is executed in accordance with the contract requirements and performance standards. The TM will supplement the technical and site specific information necessary for the COR to submit the monthly report to the KO. The TM is not authorized to make any commitments or changes that affect price, quality, quantity, delivery, or any other terms or conditions of the contract. The TM `may perform delegated duties at the contractual place of performance to ensure ground level surveillance, as required.

2.1.5 Program/Project Manager (PM)

The PM provides primary program oversight, nominates the COR, ensures the COR is trained before performing any COR duties and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities. While the PM may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, they are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or any contract changes on the Government’s behalf.

Representatives from PM IS&A are responsible for inspection and acceptance of all data deliverables from the Contractor, as required by the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) and are responsible to ensure that Contractor performance related issues are directed to the COR, the ACO and the KO as required. Representatives from PM IS&A who engage the Contractor are not authorized, at any level, to make any commitments or to issue changes to the contract. The PM IS&A staff will ensure that the COR is provided the appropriate training, to include refresher training, and that the COR’s workload is appropriately scheduled to permit adequate attention to the COR duties.

2.2 Contractor

The Contractor is responsible for managing performance in accordance with the contract terms and conditions. The Contractor is responsible for reporting issues which may affect price, quality, quantity, delivery, or other terms and conditions of the contract directly to the KO and the ACO in a timely manner. The Contractor is responsible for delivering all CDRLs, services, and products in accordance with the contractual requirements and the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

3.0 Methods of Surveillance

The goal of the QASP is to ensure that contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented.

The COR's contribution is their professional, non-adversarial relationships with the KO, PM and the contractor, which enables positive, open and timely communications. The foundation of this relationship is built upon objective, fair, and consistent COR evaluations of contractor performance against contract requirements. The COR uses the methods contained in this QASP to ensure the contractor is in compliance with contract requirements.

The COR function is responsible for a wide range of surveillance requirements that effectively measure and evaluate the contractor's performance. Additionally, this QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, not the government, is responsible for management and QC/QA actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract. Various methods exist to monitor performance. The below listed methods of surveillance shall be used in the administration of this QASP.

3.1 Customer Feedback – Customer feedback may be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints/suggestions. Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR shall maintain a summary log of all formally received customer complaints as well as a copy of each complaint in a documentation file. The COR shall also keep the tabulated results of all customer satisfaction surveys on file.

NOTE: The customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the COR as opposed to the contractor. The COR will accept the customer complaints and will investigate using the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form – Customer Complaint Record identified in Appendix 3.

3.2 Contract Deliverables

100% Inspection: A 100% Inspection will be performed on all contract deliverable as defined by the contract, the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL).

Contract Surveillance - Methodologies to Monitor Performance The Government will employ multiple surveillance methods to ensure that the full range of contractor performance is appropriately monitored. The Government shall utilize 100% inspection where stringent performance requirements and risk of failure would negatively impact the overall program mission. The Government will utilize periodic inspection, at critical milestones and where appropriate to assess contractor cost and schedule performance. As appropriate, the Government will solicit customer input.

Performance Quality Periodic Inspection: Periodic inspection will be performed on a regular basis to assess the quality of the Contractor’s work performance in performing the tasks required by the PWS and as identified in the Performance Matrix under section 7.0 below. Quality considerations include the demonstration of senior level expertise in meeting the contract requirements, overall customer satisfaction, as provided by customer input, and the amount of rework required for contract deliverables. Negative feedback, in the form of a complaint issued to the TM or COR must generate the appropriate Corrective Action.

3.3 Travel Approval Requirement

Submission of the Travel Requests (TRs) and Extended Work Week (EWW) requests have to be in a timely manner for Government approval. Outside Continental United States (OCONUS) TR/EWW requests need to be provided 45 days prior to the travel date to the COR for approval. Contiguous United States (CONUS) requests need to be provided 14 days prior to travel for COR approval.

4.0 Performance Requirements Summary (PRS)

The following Performance Based Service Contracting (PBSC) items are identified within the contract PWS and are to be monitored under this QASP. The related surveillance metrics and performance requirement levels are detailed below.

4.1 Surveillance Matrix

The Surveillance Matrix 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 performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor's performance as it relates to the performance element standards.

Task Performance Standard

Acceptable Quality Level

Surveillance Method and Assessment

Contract Deliverables Defined by contract, CDRL, or PWS.

100% of CDRLs delivered and Government comments are satisfactorily adjudicated/addressed.

100% Inspection

Performance Defined by Appendix 1: Performance Matrix

0-1 complaints per month; 2-3 complaints per quarter; see Appendix 1:

Performance Matrix

Periodic Review

Timeliness – Contract Deliverables

Defined by contract, CDRL, or PWS.

95% on time deliverable.

100% Inspection

Customer Input Defined by contract and

PWS

0-1 complaints per month; 2-3 complaints per quarter

Periodic Review

Corrective Action Reports

All complaints must have Corrective Action Reports (CARs) Generated.

0-1 complaints per month; 2-3 complaints per quarter

100% Inspection

4.2 Quality Control Program

The contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract.

5.0 Documentation

The COR will, in addition to providing documentation to the KO, maintain a complete QA file. The file will contain copies of all reports, evaluations, recommendations, and any actions related to the Government’s performance of the QA function, including the originals of all completed attachment forms. All such records will be retained for the life of this contract. The COR shall forward these records to the KO at termination or completion of the contract, or at KO’s request.

6.0 Revisions to QASP

Revisions to this surveillance plan are the joint responsibility of PM IS&A and the KO.

7.0 Performance Rating Definitions

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used.

Performance Rating

Criteria

Excellent / Outstanding

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefits. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with no problems and contractor actions were highly effective. The Acceptable Quality Level is exceeded for all tasks.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government benefits. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. The Acceptable Quality Level is exceeded for some tasks and met for all tasks.

Good Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. The Acceptable Quality Level is met for all tasks.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear marginally effective or were not fully implemented. The Acceptable Quality Level is met for some but not all tasks or performance is under 25% the Acceptable Quality Level for one task or more tasks.

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. The Acceptable Quality Level is not met for most tasks and is 50% under the Acceptable Quality Level for one or more tasks.

Appendix 1 – Surveillance Matrix

CDRL PWS

Reference

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Surveillance Method

CDRL A001

Contract Invoicing and Payment Report

1.8.1 DI-MGMT-81651 90% acceptable on

first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent submission to Government

Reviewed by TM or COR

CDRL A002

Sexual Assault / Sexual Harassment and Awareness Policy

1.6.2.7 1.8.2

AR 600-20 and

AR 190-40

This applies only to the training plan.

Serious incident reports do not need to be provided to the TM and / or

COR.

90% acceptable on first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent submission to Government

Reviewed by TM or COR (training plan only)

CDRL A003

Technical and Management Work Plan (Contractor’s Transition Plan)

1.7.10 1.7.10.1 1.7.10.2 1.7.10.3 1.8.3

DI-MGMT-81117A

(Tailored)

90% acceptable on first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent submission to Government

Reviewed by TM or COR

CDRL A004

Contractor’s Progress and Status Report

1.5.2 1.6.2 1.8.4

DI-MGMT-81928

DI-MGMT 80441D

(Tailored)

DI-MISC-81943

(Tailored)

DI-MGMT-82160

90% acceptable on first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent submission to Government

Reviewed by TM or COR

CDRL A005

Quality Control Plan

(QCP)

1.7.3.1 1.8.5

DI-QCIC-81794A 90% acceptable on first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent

Reviewed by TM or COR submission to Government

CDRL A006

OCI Mitigation Plan

1.7.9 1.8.6

DI-MISC-80048 90% acceptable on first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent submission to Government

Reviewed by TM or COR

CDRL B001

Engineering Change Proposal

1.8.7 4.2.4

DI-SESS-80639E 90% acceptable on first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent submission to Government

Reviewed by TM or COR

CDRL B002

Risk Management Framework (RMF) Package Deliverables

1.8.8 4.2.4 4.3.3 4.4.1

DI-MGMT-82001A 90% acceptable on first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent submission to Government

Reviewed by TM or COR

CDRL B003

Software/Firmware Change Request

1.8.9 4.2.4

DI-MISC-81807 90% acceptable on first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent submission to Government

Reviewed by TM or COR

CDRL B004

TECHNICAL

REPORT –

STUDY/SERVICES

1.8.10 4.2.4 4.3.3 4.4.1

DI-MISC-80508B 90% acceptable on first submission to Government

100% acceptable on subsequent submission to Government

Reviewed by TM or COR

Appendix 2 - Corrective Action Report (CAR)

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

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 - Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

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