B.1.5 - QASP_PRS-SAM - v20210904.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

ATF’s Changing Cultures For: {Contractor Name}

Submitted by {to be disclosed @ award} for Task Order/Contract #. {___________________}

DJA-21-AWWS-PR-0431| Page 1 of 5

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1. Purpose. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a living document that identifies the systematic methods and procedures the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives (ATF) will use to monitor contractor performance to evaluate whether the contractor is meeting the mission-essential elements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The QASP is designed to provide an effective, surveillance method by monitoring contractor performance for each listed performance objective in the Performance Requirements Summary (Section 7).

1.1.1. This QASP is designed to provide direction to personnel performing contractor-surveillance activities. Personnel surveying the contract terms and conditions and PWS requirements will periodically review the QASP throughout the life of the task order/contract and ensure the government only pays for the level of services received.

2.0. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1. Contracting Officer (CO). The CO shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting and compliance with the contract terms. She shall safeguard the interests of the United States Government in the contractual relationship. The CO shall also ensure the contractor receives impartial, fair and equitable treatment under this task order/contract and determine the final assessment of the contractor’s performance.

2.2. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). The appointed COR shall:

a. serve as the eyes and ears for the CO.

b. provide continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance to ensure it meets the contract requirements for: Performance, Cost, and Schedule.

c. ensure contract quality requirements, provisions, standards, and thresholds are defined, practical, enforceable, necessary, and verifiable.

d. document contractor performance in accordance with this QASP and the PWS.

e. report early identification of performance problems to the CO and notify her of any significant performance deficiencies using a Contractor Discrepancy Report (or similar document) with supporting documentation.

f. recommend improvements to the QASP and PWS throughout the life of the task order/contract.

g. evaluate/assess contractor’s performance annually via the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (and internally on a quarterly basis).

2.3. Other Government Personnel. The Government may also use performance monitors, inspectors, technical experts or others to provide information that helps the COR monitor the contractor’s performance.

QASP & PRS / ATF’s Changing Cultures, #DJA-21-AWWS-PR-0431 | Page 2 of 5

3.0. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

3.1. Scope of Work. The scope of this task order/contract is to acquire counseling services per the

PWS.

4.0. QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

4.1. Quality-Control Program (QCP). The contractor is responsible for management and quality-control actions to meet the terms of the task order/contract. The contractor shall provide details of these controls in its QCP document.

5.0 SURVEILLANCE

5.1 The COR will perform monthly surveillance, at the contractor’s site/via its platform, of the quality and effectiveness of the contractor’s data deliverables as well as the services provided. Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the contractor's Quality Manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform said manager of the specifics of the problem.

The designated COR shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific performance standard at an acceptable-quality level (AQL).

5.2 Unacceptable Performance. If the number of complaints/defects exceeds the performance threshold for any objective, the COR will determine the possible cause of this unacceptable performance.

Government-caused complaints/defects will not be counted against the contractor. The same applies to any other requirement of the task order/contract when Government-caused complaints/defects are the cause of unacceptable contractor performance. If the COR judges contractor’s performance unacceptable for any requirement, she will document the discrepancy as non-conformance and inform the CO (if needed) for resolution. The COR must submit significant (major non-conformance) performance deficiencies to the CO using a Contractor Discrepancy Report (or similar document) and include supporting documentation.

6.0 DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS

None

7.0 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS)

7.1 Overview. The PRS details and identifies the contractor requirements by performance objectives that relate directly to mission-essential elements from the PWS. The performance standard/threshold describes the minimum acceptable levels of service required for each requirement.

There is a minimum, acceptance-quality level for those standards critical to mission success.

7.2 Performance Evaluation. The COR will evaluate the contractors’ performance to determine whether it meets the performance threshold. Revising and resubmitting the documentation at no cost to the Government is the preferred method for correcting unacceptable performance. The contractor shall provide the Government a written response as to why the performance threshold was not met, how performance will be returned to acceptable levels, and how recurrence of the cause will be prevented in the future.

QASP & PRS / ATF’s Changing Cultures, #DJA-21-AWWS-PR-0431 | Page 3 of 5

QASP & PRS / ATF’s Changing Cultures, #DJA-21-AWWS-PR-0431 | Page 4 of 5

7.3 Evaluation Ratings. The below ratings will be used to assess the contractor’s performance.

a. Exceptional – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the task(s) and sub-task(s) being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

b. Very Good – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

c. Satisfactory – Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task contain some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

d. Marginal – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the task and sub-task being assessed 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.

e. Unsatisfactory – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements, and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the task or sub-task contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

7.4 Surveillance Methods. Various methods of surveillance exist to monitor performance. The COR must use at least one (1) of the below surveillance methods in the administration of this QASP.

a. PLANNED - DIRECT OBSERVATION. Can be performed periodically or through 100% surveillance.

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. Uses a comprehensive evaluation of selected outputs. Inspections may be scheduled Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Annually or even unscheduled, as required.

c. PERIODIC SAMPLING. Uses a variation of random sampling, however, sample is only taken when a deficiency is suspected. Sample results are applicable only for the specific work inspected. Since sample is not entirely random, it cannot be applied to total activity performance.

d. 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.

e. USER SURVEY. Combines elements of validated user complaints and random sampling.

Surveys are conducted to solicit user satisfaction/dissatisfaction. Random surveys are appropriate for high-quantity activities that have historically been satisfactory. May also generate periodic and 100% inspections.

f. 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.

g. 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.

QASP & PRS / ATF’s Changing Cultures, #DJA-21-AWWS-PR-0431 | Page 5 of 5

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

Objective/Tasks Standards Method of Measurement AQL Method of

Surveillance

Provide certified Counseling to ATF employees and/or their family members via individual and/or group sessions as it relates to the stated criteria in the PWS.

Timely Delivery

The program began and ended at the specified dates and times.

95%

User Survey

Customer Satisfaction

Feedback (positive and negative) will be considered.

Preparedness

The research met stated objectives of the course and counselor/therapist was prepared and present for the participants.

Perform personal-assessment exams to the participants.

Quality and Relevancy to the

PWS and the participant(s)

The program met stated objectives of the course.

99%

Provide informative materials to the participants.

Customer Satisfaction

Feedback (positive and negative) will be considered.

99%