(CUI) ATTCH 8 TMOS CLS Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP).pdf

UNCLASSIFIED // FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Aerospace Management Systems Division

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center Weather Systems / Weather Systems Branch

(AFLCMC/ESAW)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for the

AN/TMQ-53 Tactical Meteorological Observing System

(TMOS)

Contractor Logistics Support (CLS)

Solicitation Number: FA2330-26-R-B006

4 March 2026

Prepared by: AFLCMC/HBAW, 75 Vandenberg Drive, Building 1630 Hanscom AFB MA 01731

Distribution Statement C: Distribution authorized to U.S. Government Agencies and their Contractors (Administrative or Operational Use) (Jan 2026). Other requests shall be referred to AFLCMC/ESAW, 75 Vandenberg Drive, Building 1630, Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-2103.

HANDLING AND DESTRUCTION NOTICE. For classified documents, DoD civilians or military personnel will follow procedures outlined in DoDM 5200.01, Volume 3, and Enclosure 3: DoD Contractors will follow procedures outlined in DoDM 5220.22, Sections 11-19. For sensitive unclassified documents, destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

ii

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

iii

REVISION HISTORY

Revision Date Description Pages / Sections Affected

Original 4 March 2026 Baseline Publication All iv v

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

1.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT APPROACH

1.3 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 THE CONTRACTING OFFICER

2.2 FOCAL POINT (FP)

2.3 ASSESSING OFFICIAL (AO)

2.4 CPAR REVIEWING OFFICIAL (RO)

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY

LEVELS

4 METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

4.1 SURVEILLANCE TECHNIQUES

4.2 CUSTOMER FEEDBACK

4.3 ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVELS

5 QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

5.1 THE PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FEEDBACK LOOP

5.2 MONITORING SYSTEM

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 DETERMINING PERFORMANCE

6.2 REVIEWS AND RESOLUTION

7 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

8 ACRONYMSS

List of Tables

Table 1. Performance Standards vi

1 INTRODUCTION

In accordance with FAR 46.4 and DFARS 237.172, this QASP is pursuant to the requirements listed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) for the AN/TMQ-53 Tactical Meteorological Observing System (TMOS) Contractor Logistics Support (CLS). This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines AFLCMC/ESAW, and its supported organizations, will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

1.1 PURPOSE

The QASP describes the systematic methods used to monitor performance and to identify the required documentation and the resources to be employed. 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 (QAPP), and to ensure that the government pays only for the level of services received.

This QASP defines the roles and responsibilities of all members of the 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

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 AFLCMC/ESAW 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.

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. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract/delivery order as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are met.

1.3 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP). Quality control is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract/delivery order regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QAPP 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. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QAPP.

The government representative(s) will assess performance using Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The CPAR assesses a contractor’s performance, both positive and negative, and provides a record on a given contract during a specified period of time. More information pertaining to CPARS can be found at:

https://www.cpars.gov/pdfs/CPARS-Guidance.pdf

Each assessment will be based on objective data (or measurable, subjective data when objective data is not available) supportable by program and contract management data. CPAR performance expectations will be addressed in the Government and contractor’s initial post-award meeting. Potential sources of data may include, but are not limited to, the following:

Contractor operations reviews Status and progress reviews Production and management reviews Management and engineering process reviews (e.g. risk management, requirements management, etc.)

Cost performance reports and other cost and schedule metrics Other program measures and metrics such as:

o Measures of progress and status of critical resources o Measures of product size and stability o Measures of product quality and process performance o Customer feedback/comments and satisfaction ratings

Systems engineering and other technical progress reviews Technical interchange meetings Physical and functional configuration audits Quality reviews and quality assurance evaluations Functional performance evaluations Subcontract Reports

2 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 THE CONTRACTING OFFICER

The contracting officer (CO) is responsible for monitoring contract/task order compliance, contract/task order administration, and cost control and for resolving any differences between the observations documented by the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) and the contractor.

The CO will designate a COR as the government authority for performance management.

The number of additional representatives serving as technical inspectors depends on the complexity of the services measured, as well as the contractor’s performance, and must be identified and designated by the CO.

2.2 FOCAL POINT (FP)

The FP is responsible for:

1. Registering all new contracts in CPARS that exceed the threshold criteria

2. Collection, distribution and control of CPARS

3. Assisting the Assessing Official with

a. Training

b. Timely reporting

c. High integrity of program

4. Providing access to the CPARS AIS for authorized individuals on specific contracts

2.3 ASSESSING OFFICIAL (AO)

The COR is designated in writing by the CO to act as his or her authorized representative to assist in administering a contract/delivery order. 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 act as the AO and will have the responsibility for preparing and processing the CPAR. CORs are encouraged to discuss contract performance with the contractor during the performance period and CPAR process.

Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause for any service relating to the contract/delivery order. The AO’s responsibilities include:

1. Overall responsibility for execution and achievement of program goals

2. Evaluation of Contractor performance including the rating and required narrative to support the rating.

3. Preparation of documentation and assessment ensuring input from specialists and team members, when appropriate

4. Preparing and signing transmittal letters

5. Notifying the Contractor that a CPARS is ready for review

6. Entering, modifying and finalizing information in Blocks 1-21, when necessary

7. Notifying Contractor of any revisions based on Contractor comments

a. Forwarding evaluations to the CPAR Reviewing Official (RO) which are in disagreement or when requested by the Contractor or when the Contractor fails to respond to the assessment, or, in the alternative.

2.4 CPAR REVIEWING OFFICIAL (RO)

The RO is a person one level above the Assessing Official and is responsible for:

1. Providing checks and balances needed to ensure report integrity

2. Consideration and reconciliation, if possible, of any significant discrepancies between the AO’s evaluation and the Contractor’s comments

3 IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/QUALITY

LEVELS

The required performance standards and quality levels are included in the PWS and in Table 1:

Performance Standards, below. If the contractor meets the required service or performance level, the contractor will receive positive CPARS ratings. If the contractor fails to meet the required performance level, the result will be negative CPARS ratings.

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 COR will use the following methods of surveillance:

Random monitoring 100% Inspection

Periodic Inspection

Customer Survey User/Customer Complaints.

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 requires 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, must be signed, and must be forwarded to the COR. The COR will accept those customer complaints, investigate and work with the CO and contractor to resolve the issue.

Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints.

4.3 ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVELS

The acceptable quality levels (AQLs) included in Table 1 for contractor performance are structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed.

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 and performance monitoring techniques are expressed in Table 1.

5.2 MONITORING SYSTEM

The government’s QA surveillance, accomplished by the AO, will be reported using CPARS.

CPARS evaluations shall be conducted on an annual basis.

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 DETERMINING PERFORMANCE

Government shall use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards and AQLs have been met. If the Contractor has not met the minimum requirements the Contractor will receive a negative CPARS review.

6.2 REVIEWS AND RESOLUTION

Upon AO review and signature of the CPAR by the AO the Contractor will be notified and given the opportunity to review and comment to indicate concurrence/non-concurrence. If the Contractor does not concur the RO shall resolve significant discrepancies between the AO’s evaluation and the Contractor’s comments.

7 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

Table 1 below provides standards that will be used to measure contractor performance. The Contractor performance will be measured on an annual basis by the AO and depending upon performance, the Contractor will receive either a positive or negative CPARS rating. CPARS ratings are used for future source selection evaluations.

Table 1. Performance Standards

Performance Objective Performance

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Methods of Surveillance

The Contractor shall plan, manage, organize, direct, schedule and control all resources, processes, activities, and tasks to accomplish the requirements of this PWS and of the TMQ-53 TRD efficiently and effectively, and provide the level of support required to sustain the TMQ-53 at 96% Operational Availability (AO).

5, 6, 7, 8, 9, Performance is acceptable when TMQ-53 systems are sustained at 96% AO worldwide during any month under contract or correctable to 96% within 10 business days during any month under contract (with a report showing the correction provided within 10 business days at no additional cost to the Government). The Contractor shall always report the actual AO.

The Contractor shall meet all Helpdesk requirements and Helpdesk performance, including staffing, hours, trouble calls, and logging.

7.4 Helpdesk requirements and

Performance requirements are met 90% of the time and are correctable to 100% within 10 business days at no additional cost to the Government.

The Contractor shall provide spares to operating locations within 24 hours of receiving a requirement for installations in the continental United States (CONUS) and within 72 hours to port of embarkation and/or military installation as required for destinations outside of continental United States (OCONUS).

7.4, 7.6, 7.9 On-time deliveries are achieved 90% of the time and correctable to 100% within 10 business days at no additional cost to the Government.

The Contractor shall plan and execute an orderly transition.

5 Transition activities adhere to plan 95% of the time and are correctable to 100% within three business days at no additional cost to the Government.

The Contractor shall deliver quality data submittals IAW the CDRL.

2 Deliverable items received on-time with no more than two errors corrected to error free within 10 business days at no additional cost to the Government.

The Contractor shall determine proper inventory levels and repair recommendations to ensure that requisitions are filled immediately from stock on-hand.

7.6 Performance is acceptable when the

percentage of requisitions that are filled immediately from stock on-hand meets or exceeds 98%.

8 ACRONYMSS

Acronym Definition

AFLCMC Air Force Life Cycle Management Center

Ao Operational Availability

AO Assessing Official

CDRL Contract Data Requirements List

CLS Contractor Logistics Support

CO Contracting Officer

CONUS Continental United States

COR Contracting Officer Representative

CPARS Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System

DoDM Department of Defense Manual

FP Focal Point

ESAW Weather Systems Branch

IAW In accordance with

IPT Integrated Product Team

OCONUS Outside of the Continental United States

PWS Performance Work Statement

QA Quality Assurance

QAPP Quality Assurance Program Plan

QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

RO Reviewing Official

TMOS Tactical Meteorological Observing System

TRD Technical Requirements Document