C04b_Attachment 2 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan 1232SA26Q0815.docx
DOCX document 70 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Roll Up Door Biocontainment Enclosures
- Solicitation number
- 1232SA26Q0815
About this file
This is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for the USDA Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service contract 1232SA26Q0815 for "EDS & TTA Roll Up Doors Bio Enclosure" work at the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF) in Manhattan, Kansas. The QASP establishes the systematic methods and procedures that USDA personnel will employ to measure contractor performance and ensure compliance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements. The plan outlines three primary performance objectives: (1) design and delivery of product data, installation manuals, and operations and maintenance documentation for three overhead door biocontainment enclosures that account for different door opening features; (2) proper installation, gap sealing, and smoke testing of the enclosures to ensure they operate without leakage and function as specified; and (3) professional management of the design and installation within the contract period of performance, with design completion allowing sufficient time for material procurement and installation. Performance will be monitored through Contracting Officer Representative (COR) and end-user review and approval of designs, functional inspection and testing of installed enclosures, and comparison of task completion against the contractor's schedule, with outcomes reflected on the contractor's CPARS performance rating.
The QASP defines roles and responsibilities across the contractor, Contracting Officer, COR, and customer end-users. The contractor must implement a Quality Control Plan (QCP) describing methods to ensure all products and services meet established performance standards and Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs), maintain quality control records for audit, and appoint a single quality control point-of-contact. The CO maintains overall contract administration authority while the COR executes day-to-day surveillance, issues Contract Discrepancy Reports for non-conformance, and makes recommendations for corrective action. The plan allows for surveillance level adjustments based on performance progression—reducing surveillance for consistently excellent performance and increasing it for consistent deficiencies. Non-performance is documented through discrepancy reports and remedial actions, with the contractor responsible for correcting deficient work at no additional cost to the government. The QASP includes example appendices for discrepancy reporting, quality assurance monitoring forms, and inspection checklists to be used during contract surveillance.
View the file
Other files
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
US Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan
Contents
| Project Name | 3 | |
| Solicitation / Contract Number | 3 | |
| Section 1: Introduction | 3 | |
| 1.1 | Purpose | 3 |
| 1.2 | QASP Relation to the Contract | 3 |
| 1.2.1 | QASP Revisions | 3 |
| 1.2.2 | Surveillance of Performance Progression | 3 |
| 1.3 | QASP Relation to the Quality Control Plan (QCP) | 3 |
| Section 2: Performance Description | 3 | |
| 2.1 | Performance Standards and Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) | 3 |
| 2.1.1 | Allowable Deviation | 4 |
| 2.1.2 | Substantially Complete | 4 |
| 2.2 | Non-Performance | 4 |
| 2.2.1 | Documentation | 4 |
| 2.2.2 | Remedial Actions | 4 |
| Section 3: Contractor and Government Responsibilities | 4 | |
| 3.1 | Contractor Responsibility | 4 |
| 3.2 | Government Responsibility | 5 |
| 3.2.1 | Contracting Officer (CO) | 5 |
| 3.2.2 | Contracting Officer Representative (COR) | 5 |
| 3.2.3 | Customers | 5 |
| Section 4: Surveillance Methods to Perform Quality Assurance | 5 | |
| 4.1 | Surveillance Methods | 5 |
| 4.2 | Analysis and Results | 6 |
| Appendix A: Example Performance Requirement Summaries | 8 | |
| Appendix B: Example Discrepancy Report | 9 | |
| Appendix C: Customer Feedback Record | 10 | |
| Appendix D: Example Guide / Inspection List | 11 | |
| Appendix E: Example Quality Assurance Monitoring | 12 | |
| Appendix F: Example Customer Complaint Investigation | 13 | |
| Appendix G: Example Surveillance Activity Checklist | 14 |
Project Name EDS & TTA Roll Up Doors Bio Enclosure Solicitation / Contract Number Insert Solicitation / Contract Number
Section 1: Introduction This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) EDS & TTA Roll Up Doors Bio Enclosure. Work includes but is not limited to offsite and onsite services for designing, fabricating, and installing biocontainment enclosures at three (3) overhead coiling doors. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines that the USDA, REE, ARS, PA, NBAF 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. 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).
2.1.2 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 1 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan. 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 a 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.
3.2.3 Customers
Insert this Section if applicable Customers or organizations/offices that the Contractor provided support may be requested to assist the COR in conducting QA to provide information relating to the Contractor’s performance through Customer Feedback. Information gained from the Customer Feedback may be used in conjunction with other methods of observation to rate the performance of the Contractor.
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.
4.2 Analysis and Results
When the inspections and service 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:
| Performance Objective |
| Required Task or Deliverable |
| Performance Standard |
| Method of Surveillance |
| Positive/Negative Incentive |
% for NOT meeting the Task
| PWS Item 3.3 Enclosure Designs and deliverables |
| Design, product data, installation & O&M manuals for the three overhead door enclosures |
| Designs and documentation account for the different door opening features and meets the salient features specified in the PWS section 3.3 |
| COR and End Users review and approval of the designs and documents |
| Outcome will be reflected on the contractor’s CPARS |
PWS Item 3.3 Enclosure Installation and testing
| Proper installation, gap sealing, and smoke testing of the enclosures |
| Enclosures are installed without leakage and function as specified in the PWS |
| COR and End Users will inspect and function test the installed enclosures |
| Outcome will be reflected on the contractor’s CPARS |
PWS Item 3.2 Project management
| Management of enclosure design and installation |
| Management of the design is completed in a timeframe that affords enough time for material procurement and installation withing the period of performance. Installation and documentation is completed professionally within the period of performance |
| COR will compare task completion against the contractor’s schedule |
| Outcome will be reflected on the contractor’s CPARS |
[THIS PAGE IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES]
The Contacting Officer must include as attachments or exhibits the appropriate performance requirement summary, forms, checklists, etc. in the QASP that will be used during surveillance / monitoring for the applicable contract.
Appendix A: Example Discrepancy Report The following document is only an example, which is not all inclusive, that can be revised and used, if applicable, in the QASP as attachments or exhibits.
| 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
Appendix E: Example Quality Assurance Monitoring The following document is only an example, which is not all inclusive, that can be revised and used, if applicable, in the QASP as attachments or exhibits.
CONTRACT NUMBER: ______________________________________
SERVICE or STANDARD:
SURVEY PERIOD:
SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check the applicable item):
Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check the applicable item):
| Monthly | Quarterly | As needed | |
| PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: | ______ % |
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:
Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______% Service Provider’s Performance (Check the applicable item):
Meets Standards Does Not Meet Standards Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:
Prepared By: _______________________________ Date: ______________ image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .