C1a -70FB7020R00000002 Attachment 2 QASP RCTSD VIPR.pdf

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

Resource and Capability Transportation Support during Disasters (RCTSD)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

1. INTRODUCTION

The contractor shall perform according to the requirements in the RCTSD Performance Work Statement (PWS). Contractor activity will be monitored by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), with assistance from the Technical Monitor and/or other designated staff to ensure full compliance with contract terms and conditions. The contractor’s performance will be evaluated from the inception of the task order issuance until the demobilization of the transportation support requirement and subsequent retrograde services requirement. This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled Resource and Capability Transportation Support during Disasters. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Logistics Management Directorate (LMD)/ Distribution Management Directorate (DMD)/ Transportation Management Branch (TMB) will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor. Due to the criticality and the nature of this contract in providing assistance to survivors of disasters, FEMA must monitor and evaluate performance to ensure that quality services, supplies, and worked performed are rendered in an expedited manner with nominal impediments.

The role of the government is to perform quality assurance to ensure that contract and task order requirements are appropriately achieved.

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 The purpose of the QASP is to describe the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed by the contractor. The QASP provides a means for evaluating whether the contractor is meeting the performance standards/quality levels identified in the PWS and the contractor’s quality control plan (QCP), and to ensure that the government receives the level of quality specified.

1.1.2 This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the FEMA integrated project team (IPT), identifies the performance objectives, defines the methodologies used to monitor and evaluate the contractor’s performance, describes quality assurance documentation requirements, and describes the analysis of quality assurance monitoring results.

1.2 Performance Management Approach

1.2.1 The PWS structures the acquisition around “what” service or quality level is required, as opposed to “how” the contractor should perform the work (i.e., results, not compliance). This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by Logistics Management Directorate (LMD)/ Distribution Management Directorate (DMD)/ Transportation Management Branch (TMB) to monitor and manage the contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives communicated in the PWS are achieved. Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

1.2.2 Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. An “outcomes” driven approach provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.3 Performance Management Strategy

1.3.1 The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QCP) plan. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

1.3.2 The government representative(s), chiefly the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determinations regarding performance measurement metric data outlined in the Key Performance Parameters (KPP’s) and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is executed effectively.

2. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The Contracting Officer

The contracting officer (CO) is responsible for monitoring contract compliance, contract administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the LMD/ DMD/ TMB. The CO ensures performance of all requirements of the IDIQ Contract and Task Orders (TO) to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract and/or TO. The CO safeguards the interest of the government in the contractual relationship.

The CO will receive all discrepancy reports and forward them to executive management of the contractor for action upon each occurrence of a noted discrepancy. Contracting Officer (CO): Isaac Chapple, Contracting Officer’s Representatives (COR): Derek Chappell, and program manager (PM): Jerry Thomas and the contractor. The CO’s designated full-time COR is the government authority for performance management. The number of additional representatives serving as technical inspectors depends on the complexity of the services rendered, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the CO.

2.2 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

The COR is appointed in writing by the CO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. COR limitations are contained in the written appointment letter. The COR is responsible for technical administration of the project and ensures proper government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the government’s behalf. Any changes that the contractor deems may affect contract price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the CO for action. The COR will have the responsibility for completing QA monitoring forms used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s work performance. An alternate COR will be appointed as well to the overall IDIQ. Some task orders will have a different COR than the overall IDIQ COR, but they will also represent the government per the direction contained in the written appointment letter. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause for any service relating to the contract.

3. IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY

LEVELS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are included under Attachment 2, “Key Performance Parameters.”

4. METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 Surveillance Techniques

In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. The primary methods of surveillance are:

Random Sampling, which shall be performed by the COR upon the issuance of a tsk order.

100% Inspection –The COR, shall inspect and evaluate performance each time a task is performed.

Reports Work Orders or Task Orders Property Transfer Reports (PTR) Actual receipt of repairs Call Logs Contractor Maintenance/Deactivation logs and/or phone

4.2 Customer Feedback

The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction.

Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints.

Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems but the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the CO, as opposed to the contractor.

Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing, the detailed nature of the complaint, which must be signed, and forwarded to the CO/COR. The CO/COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate using the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form

– Customer Complaint Investigation, identified in Attachment 3.

4.3 Acceptable Level of Service

The minimum Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) for contractor performance (included in the Key Performance Parameters (KPPs)) is “Complete Compliance”. There is no monetary reward or penalty proposed, rather adherence or noncompliance to the KPPs will be reflected in the contractor’s CPARS rating. All items contained in the KPPs are deemed critical activities, such as those involving obtaining a cross docking facility and acquiring the Fully Operational Capacity (FOC) levels of resources, the desired performance level is established at 100 percent.

5. QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 The Performance Management Feedback Loop

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Performance standards are expressed in the PWS and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in the KPP.

5.2 Monitoring Forms

The government’s QA surveillance accomplished by the COR, will be reported using the monitoring forms in Attachments 2 and 3. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results are being achieved.

5.2.1 The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

6. ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.1.1 Government shall use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance objectives/service levels have been met. If the contractor has not met the minimum requirements, the contractor will be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels. Additionally, failure to meet the performance objectives/service levels will result in the contractor’s dismissal from the task order award process.

6.2 Quality Assurance Reporting

6.2.1 At the conclusion of each task order execution, the COR will prepare written reports summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. These written reports will include the contractor’s submitted report and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Attachment 2), which will become part of the QA documentation. These reports enable the government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including scope/cost/scheduling objectives.

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

6.3.1 The COR may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the CO and other government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The CO or COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, including appropriate self-assessments by the contractor; however, if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the COR as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis Issues and concerns of both parties Projected outlook for upcoming task orders and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

6.3.2 The CO must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

6.3.3 The COR and contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long-term courses of action.

Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be clearly documented. Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be approved by the CO and incorporated as a contract modification.

ATTACHMENT 1:

SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD:

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Weekly As needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD: ______ %

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________ DATE: _________________

ATTACHMENT 2: KEY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

The Key Performance Parameters are defined as those attributes or characteristics of this requirement that we consider critical or essential in performance of this contract. They are required to successfully meet the mission of FEMA.

Performance Objective

PWS

Ref.

Performance Standard

Methods of Surveillance

Acceptable Quality Level

Start and Continuous Service

2.1, 2.5 Fully functional within 48 hours of task order award

Direct Observation

Analysis of contractor’s progress

Performance monitoring and/ or customer input

Periodic Inspection

Complete Compliance terms of the IDIQ PWS & Task Order PWS.

Task Order Service Status Report

2.5.1 Weekly Analysis of

contractor’s progress

Complete Compliance terms of the IDIQ PWS & Task Order PWS.

Task Order Delivery Report

2.5.2 Interim Report:

After vessel departure from port of embarkment; or as requested and negotiated with

COR

Final Report- Within 5 business days aftertask order completion.

Analysis of contractor’s progress

Complete Compliance terms of the IDIQ PWS & Task Order PWS.

Damage and Loss Reports

1.4.3 Within 24 hours following occurrence or discovery

Direct Observation

Analysis of contractor’s progress

Complete Compliance terms of the IDIQ PWS & Task Order PWS.

Objective

PWS

Ref.

Performance Standard

Methods of Surveillance

Acceptable Quality Level

Detailed Yard Report

2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.6

Daily during Task Order performance

Analysis of the IDIQ PWS & Task Order PWS.

Container Staging Area Daily Report

2.6 Daily during Task

Order performance

Analysis of the IDIQ PWS & Task Order PWS.

Departure Visibility Report

2.2.2, 2.3, Within 24 hours of vessel departure

Analysis of the IDIQ PWS & Task Order PWS.

Arrival Visibility Report

2.2.4, 2.3

Within 24 hours of vessel arrival at the sea port of debarkation

Analysis of the IDIQ PWS & Task Order PWS.

Equipment Report 2.3 Prior to equipment loading in the air port of embarkation

Analysis of the IDIQ PWS & Task Order PWS.

Objective No. Measures Performance Standard

1 –Response- Delivery Timeframe for Resources

Delivery within required timeframe for containers shall be specified in each task order.

Timeframe contingent on delivery mode of transportation.

Urgent Requirements Acceptable Quality Limit (AQL) – 98% of the time on schedule Other Requirements AQL – 95% of the time on schedule

2 - Deliver required reports.

Delivery in accordance with the Deliverable Table (Section 10)

No more than 90% of the reports to appropriate government contact may be later than the specified time period.

ATTACHMENT 1: