C04_Attachment III - QASP_1232SA26Q0517.pdf

US Department of Agriculture (USDA)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

Contents Project Name Solicitation / Contract Number Section 1: Introduction

1.1 Purpose

1.2 QASP Relation to the Contract

1.2.1 QASP Revisions

1.2.2 Surveillance of Performance Progression

1.3 QASP Relation to the Quality Control Plan (QCP)

Section 2: Performance Description

2.1 Performance Standards and Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs)

2.1.1 Allowable Deviation

2.1.2 Substantially Complete

2.2 Non-Performance

2.2.1 Documentation

2.2.2 Remedial Actions

Section 3: Contractor and Government Responsibilities

3.1 Contractor Responsibility

3.2 Government Responsibility

3.2.1 Contracting Officer (CO)

3.2.2 Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

Section 4: Surveillance Methods to Perform Quality Assurance

4.1 Surveillance Methods

4.2 Analysis and Results

Appendix A: Discrepancy Report

Project Name Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center Janitorial Services

Solicitation / Contract Number

REQ #1168452

Section 1: Introduction This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled Janitorial Services. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines that the USDA, Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to measure performance and to identify the reports required and the resources to be employed. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards identified in the PWS. This QASP is designed to define roles and responsibilities, identify the performance objectives, define the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describe quality assurance reporting, and describe the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 QASP Relation to the Contract

1.2.1 QASP Revisions

The Contracting Officer Representative (COR) may make revisions or changes to the QASP procedures and surveillance methods or increase or decrease the degree of surveillance methods at any time during the contract performance period. Changes to the Metric must be incorporated into the PWS, Performance Requirement Summary (PRS) and QASP by a bilateral modification to contract that is issued by the Contracting Officer (CO). A copy of the QASP is provided to the contractor to enable the contractor to enhance its Quality Control (QC) program to perform in accordance with its Quality Control Plan (QCP).

1.2.2 Surveillance of Performance Progression

As the performance period progresses, the levels of surveillance may be altered for service areas where performance is either consistently excellent or unsatisfactory. If consistently good performance, then the amount of surveillance may be reduced. If observations reveal consistent deficiencies, increased surveillance may be implemented.

1.3 QASP Relation to the Quality Control Plan (QCP)

The QCP is a required element of contract and the Contractor shall adhere to its established quality control processes and procedures in managing and performing work as described in the contract. While the QCP represents the way in which the Contractor will ensure its quality and timeliness of services, as defined in the PWS, the QASP represents the way in which the Government personnel specified in Section 3: Contractor and Government Responsibilities, Paragraph 3.2, Government Responsibilities will evaluate the contractor’s performance. The contractor’s QC program and the residual organization’s QASP should be complementary programs that ensure successful contractor performance.

Section 2: Performance Description Performance of the contractor will be monitored through the surveillance methods described in Section 4: Surveillance Methods to Perform Quality Assurance to assess the Contractor’s performance against PWS requirements.

2.1 Performance Standards and Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) For selected activities in the PWS, the PRS provides a performance standard and an AQL as outlined in Appendix A. A performance standard is the expected level of contractor performance. An AQL defines the level of performance that is satisfactory. Depending on the service evaluated and the evaluation method selected, performance standards and AQLs may be stated as a number of occurrences or as a percentage. Performance standards and AQLs for random sampling and 100 percent inspection are generally stated as percentages. For periodic inspections, performance standards may be stated as either percentages or as absolute numbers.

The contract requires the Contractor to perform all work as specified. Any inaccuracies or omissions in services or products are referred to as “defects” on the part of the Contractor. The Contractor shall be responsible for all identified defects and may be required to perform the work at no cost to the government. The AQLs take into account that in some instances an allowable level of deficiencies (deviations) is possible while overall performance continues to meet the government’s desired level of service.

2.1.1 Allowable Deviation

The AQLs define the level or number of performance deficiencies the Contractor is permitted to reach under this contract. AQLs take into account the difference between an occasional defect and a gross number of defects. AQLs can be expressed as a percentage of or as an absolute number (e.g., three per month). There may be instances where 100 percent compliance is required, and no deviation is acceptable (e.g., where safety is involved).

2.1.1.1 Restroom sanitation: 98%

2.1.1.2 Trash removal: 100% (safety sanitation requirement)

2.1.1.3 Floor cleaning: 95%

2.1.1.4 Glass cleaning: 95%

2.1.2 Substantially Complete

In some cases, service outputs are evaluated using subjective values (e.g., excellent, satisfactory, unsatisfactory). The criteria for acceptable performance and for defects must be defined for these service outputs. The concept of “substantially complete” should be the basis for inspections based on subjective scales. Work is considered “substantially complete” where there has been no significant departure from the terms of the contract and no omission of essential work. In addition, the Contractor has performed the work required to the best of its ability and the only variance consists of minor omissions or deficiencies.

2.2 Non-Performance

Non-performance occurs when the contractor’s performance does not meet the AQL for a given requirement.

Requirements may contain multiple performance elements, and therefore, deficiencies may occur in one or more aspects of performance (e.g., timeliness, accuracy, completeness, etc.) or subject areas of effort.

When surveillance indicates that the contractor's service output is not in compliance with the contract requirements, the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) must determine whether the Contractor or the Government caused the deficiency. If the cause of the defect rests with the Government, corrective action must be taken through Government channels. If the cause of the defect is due to action or inaction by the contractor, the contractor is responsible for correction of the problem at no additional expense to the Government.

2.2.1 Documentation

Documentation of work non-performed or unacceptable work is essential for tracking Contractor performance. The COR will document deficient work by compiling facts describing the inspection methods and results and to substantiate nonconformance with the contract. A sample documentation reporting form is provided in Appendix B. The documentation, with any recommendations, will be forwarded to the CO. In the case of the Contractor, the COR will decide whether to elevate the problem to the CO for corrective action.

2.2.2 Remedial Actions

The Federal Acquisition Regulation allows for penalties in the event that the Contractor fails to perform the required services. Penalties are defined as those actions taken under the direction of the CO against the contractor within the general provisions of the contract for nonconformance to the PWS and PRS.

Section 3: Contractor and Government Responsibilities

3.1 Contractor Responsibility

The Contractor is responsible for delivering products or services in accordance with the contract. Implementing its QCP, which describes the Contractor’s methods for ensuring all products and services under the contract meet established performance standards and AQLs. Maintaining, and providing for audit, quality control records and reports and all records associated with the investigation and complaint resolutions. Appointing a single quality control point-of-contact to act as a central recipient of communication from the COR or CO.

3.2 Government Responsibility

3.2.1 Contracting Officer (CO)

The CO is responsible for administering and monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by COR and the contractor’s performance. The CO may delegate various day-to-day contract administration duties to an Administering ACO (ACO) and/or the COR for performance management and administrative actions such as invoice approval and issuance of Contract Discrepancy Reports may be, and normally are, delegated by the CO to the COR. The CO shall approve any revisions to the QASP processes or standards.

3.2.2 Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

The COR, is designated in writing, by the CO. The COR will ensure that the QA function is properly executed, plays a key role in contract administration and performs the contract surveillance and monitoring. Some key contract administration duties include, but are not limited to, performs surveillance as required by this QASP; make recommendations to the CO for issuance of Contract Discrepancy Reports or letters of commendation and acceptance or rejection of completed work and for administrative actions based on unsatisfactory or non-performed work, and revisions or changes to the QASP;

and assists the CO in identifying necessary contract modifications and preparing reports of Contractor performance and cost.

The COR may use the form(s) included in the Appendices to perform the inspection or other forms as approved by the CO. The Contractor overall guidance is also provided by FAR 37.6 and 52.212-4 and any other related contract terms and conditions.

Section 4: Surveillance Methods to Perform Quality Assurance

4.1 Surveillance Methods

The surveillance methods used in the QA process are the Government’s tools to monitor the Contractor’s products and services. The best means of determining whether the Contractor has met all contract requirements is to inspect the Contractor’s service products and analyze the results. Further, documented inspection results are an effective tool in contract administration that can confirm the successful achievement of all performance requirements or highlight areas where defects exist and improvements are necessary.

4.1.1 Surveillance is conducted based on task frequency.

4.1.1.1 Daily tasks will be inspected 2–3 times per week

4.1.1.2 Weekly tasks will be inspected once per week

4.1.1.3 Monthly tasks will be inspected once per month, immediately after completion

4.1.1.4 Critical Tasks (e.g., trash removal, safety-related items) will be inspection for every occurrence

4.1.2 The COR will perform random, unannounced inspections using the Discrepancy Report (Appendix B). If no deficiencies are found, the task is recorded as 100% compliant.

4.1.3 Documented complaints or observations from facility users may trigger supplemental inspections.

4.2 Analysis and Results

When the inspections and validations have been completed, the COR will perform an analysis of the Contractor’s performance. The purpose of the analysis is to ensure Government is receiving high-quality products and services from the Contractor. The COR will review the results, rate the Contractor’s compliance with the performance standards and AQLs, and characterize the Contractor’s overall performance. Analysis of all types of contract monitoring will result in one of the following outcomes:

4.2.1 In the event there are performance deficiencies, the COR will notify the Prime Contractor Representative by noon central time the next business day following the service inspection in writing indicating the section of the PWS by number where the deficiencies occurred.

4.2.2 Upon notification, the Prime Contractor Representative shall be allowed three business days to correct the deficiency.

4.2.3 If the deficiency is not corrected within three business days or the correction is not accepted by the COR, the COR will document the overall service visit as a percentage performance level less than 100%.

4.2.4 If a three-month performance level of combined number of deficiencies drops below 85%, the Contracting Officer will be notified to pursue corrective action.

Appendix A: Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Monitoring Form

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

MONITORING FORM

DIVISION/BRANCH/OFFICE: Click or tap here to enter text.

CONTRACTOR: Click or tap here to enter text.

CONTRACT/TASK ORDER NUMBER: Click or tap here to enter text.

DATE: Click or tap to enter a date. TIME: Click or tap here to enter text.

REVIEW PERIOD: Click or tap here to enter text.

PWS Task Area:

Surveillance Methods:

Random Sampling – Most appropriate for recurring tasks. Services are sampled to determine whether the level of performance is acceptable. Works best when the number of instances of the services being performed in large and a statistically valid sample can be obtained.

100% Inspection – Most appropriate for infrequent tasks or task with stringent performance requirements.

Performance is inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. The most expensive and should not be used in most cases.

Periodic Inspection – Evaluates tasks selected on other than 100% or random basis. It may be appropriate for tasks that occur infrequently and where 100% inspection is neither required nor practicable. A predetermined plan for inspecting part of the work uses subjective judgment and analysis of agency resources to decide what work to inspect and how frequently.

Customer Input – Can be used in conjunction with other surveillance methods customer input can be used as substantiating evidence. Customer surveys and feedback may be a primary surveillance method and customer satisfaction an appropriate performance standard. Customer Input should be documented, preferably on a standard form.

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Input Level of Surveillance:

Weekly Bi-Weekly Monthly Quarterly As needed Percentage of Items Sampled During Survey Period: Click or tap here to enter text.

Narrative of Performance: (Describe in detail, include PWS Reference and attach supporting documentation (if necessary)

Government Evaluation: (Acceptance, Partial Acceptance, or Rejection)

Actions Taken By the Contractor:

Contractor Response: (Cause, Corrective Action, or Actions to Prevent Recurrence)

Additional Comments:

Reviewer Name: Signature & Date:

Contractor Representative: Signature & Date:

Contractor Officer Representative:

Signature & Date:

Contracting Officer: Signature & Date:

[THIS PAGE IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES]

Appendix B: Performance Requirements Summary (PRS)

The PRS identifies performance objectives, standards, metrics, surveillance methods, and acceptable quality levels used to evaluate contractor performance. The PRS supports the performance-based acquisition approach described in Section 2.

Performance Requirement

Performance Standard

Performance Metrics

Acceptable Quality Level

Method of Surveillance

Daily – Restrooms Restrooms cleaned, disinfected, stocked

No soil; fixtures descaled; floors mopped; supplies stocked

98% Random sampling 2– 3× weekly

Daily – Trash Removal

Trash removed and secured

All containers emptied; liners replaced

100% 100% inspection

Daily – Breakroom Surfaces clean/disinfected

Counters/tables wiped; floors clean

95% Random sampling weekly

Daily – Entry/Halls Floors swept/dust‑mopped

No debris; edges clean

95% Random sampling weekly

Twice‑Weekly – Halls/Stairwells

Floors wet‑mopped Uniform appearance; no streaks

95% Periodic weekly

Twice‑Weekly – Labs Lab floors debris‑free No visible dust;

edges clean

95% Periodic weekly

Weekly – Carpets Carpets vacuumed No visible litter/soil 95% Random sampling weekly

Weekly – Glass Glass/mirrors cleaned No film/smudges 95% Periodic weekly

Weekly – Mats Entrance mats vacuumed

Free of soil/grit 95% Random sampling weekly

Weekly – Dusting Furniture/cabinets dusted

No visible dust 95% Periodic weekly

Monthly – Lab Floors Machine scrub floors Uniform clean appearance

95% Periodic monthly

Monthly – Restroom Deep Clean

Deep clean of restroom surfaces

No stains/scale;

grout clean

95% Periodic monthly

Monthly – Offices/Breakroom

Dust corners CE‑to‑floor

No dust accumulation

95% Periodic monthly

Daily – Drinking Fountains

Polished/disinfected No streaks/scale 98% Random sampling weekly

Twice‑Weekly – Stairs

Sweep/mop stairs No debris; treads clean

95% Periodic weekly

Daily – High‑Touch Disinfection

Disinfect handles/rails No residue;

documented

98% Random sampling 2× weekly

Monthly – Recycling Recycling removed All containers emptied

95% Periodic monthly

Admin – Weekend Notice

Advance notice provided

Written notice 3 BD prior

100% Admin check

Admin – Deficiency Correction

Corrections within 3

BD

100% corrected on time

100% Follow‑up inspection

Appendix C: Discrepancy Report

DISCREPANCY REPORT 1. DISCREPENCY REPORT NO.

2. TO: (Contractor / Project Manager Name) 3. FROM: (Name of COR)

CONTRACT NUMBER: DATE:

PREPARED ORAL NOTIFICATION RETURNED BY CONTRACTOR ACTION COMPLETE

4. DISCREPENCY OR PROBLEM (Describe in Detail. Include PWS references. Attach Continuation Sheet if Necessary)

5. SIGNATURE OF COR

6. TO: (Name of COR) 7. FROM: (Contractor / Project Manager)

8. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE AS TO CAUSE, EFFECT, CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTIONS TO PREVENT RECURRENCE (Attach Continuation Sheet if necessary. Cite applicable Contractor QC program procedures or new QC procedures)

9. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR REPRESENTIVE 10. DATE

11. GOVERNMENT EVALUATION (Acceptance, partial acceptance, or rejection. Attach Coordination Sheet if necessary)

12. GOVERNMENT ACTIONS (Cure notice, show cause, other)

CLOSE OUT

KTR NOTIFIED

NAME AND TITLE SIGNATURE DATE

COR