SWO-MOS-PLAN-0006_QASP_02-27-2025.pdf

Effective Date: February 26, 2025

Expiration Date: February 26, 2030

Check https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

SWGS-MOS-PLAN-0006, Revision -

Space Weather Ground Services, Code 492.0

Space Weather Observations

Mission Operations Services

(SWO-MOS)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

SWO Reviewed – Not Subject to Export Control

GSFC SWGS CMO

02/27/2025

Released

DRAFT

SWO-MOS QASP SWGS-MOS-PLAN-0006, Revision -ii

Check https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov to verify that this is the correct version prior to use.

Space Weather Observations Mission Operations Services

(SWO-MOS)

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Signature/Approval Page

Prepared by:

David Nguyen

Reviewed by:

Ava Afghahi

Susan Jacobs

Scott Schnee

Laura Dunlap

Maria Amaro

David Donovan

Brian Frey

Andrew Royale

Katherine Spotz

Ken Jensen

Approved by:

Jill Taylor iii

Preface

This document provides the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan for the Indefinite Delivery /

Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Space Weather Observations Mission Operations Services (SWO-

MOS) contract. It is under SWGS configuration control. Once this document is approved, changes are handled in accordance with Class I and Class II change control requirements as described in the SWGS Configuration Management Procedures, and changes to this document will be made by complete revision.

Any questions should be addressed to:

SWGS Configuration Management Office

NASA/GSFC

Code 492.0

Greenbelt, MD 20771 iv

Change History Log

Revision Effective

Date

Description of Changes

(Reference the CCR & CCB/ERB Approval Date)

Revision - 02/26/2025 Baseline Release following the approval of SWGS-CCR-0011 v

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Vision

1.2 Mission

1.3 Purpose

1.4 Authority

2 RELATED DOCUMENTATION

3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1 Government Representatives

3.2 Contractor Representatives

4 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS AND METHODS OF SURVEILLANCE

4.1 Contract Surveillance

4.2 Surveillance Methodologies

4.2.1 Participation in and Inspection of Contractor-Led Agile Activities

4.2.2 Inspection of Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) deliverables

4.2.3 Periodic Informal Reviews

4.2.4 Formal Reviews

4.2.5 Direct Observations

4.2.6 Validated User/Customer Complaints

4.3 Surveillance Matrix

5 PERFORMANCE REPORTING

5.1 Regular Performance Reporting

5.2 Notification of Unacceptable Quality

5.3 Record Keeping

5.4 Issues and Resolution

6 INCENTIVES AND REMEDIES

6.1 Incentives:

6.2 Remedies:

APPENDIX A: SWO-MOS SURVEILLANCE MATRIX

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Vision

The vision for the SWO-MOS Solution is to develop a scalable, multi-mission mission operations system capable of supporting the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA) space weather observation programs, ensuring the continuity and extension of critical space weather data collection from various orbital locations. The SWO-MOS system will provide health and status monitoring and trending, command and control, orbit and attitude management, mission planning, contingency operations, and anomaly recovery capabilities for spacecraft and instruments. The system will evolve from its initial implementation focused on the Space Weather Follow-On Lagrange 1 (SWFO-L1) mission into a unified, multi-mission architecture that can support multiple space weather observatories, instruments, and partnerships across different orbits.

1.2 Mission

The mission of the SWO-MOS Solution includes the following:

1. Scalability and Multi-Mission Support

The SWO-MOS Solution will scale from a single-mission system to a robust, multi-mission platform capable of simultaneously supporting multiple space weather observatories. It will integrate future missions such as those at Lagrange points, geosynchronous orbit (GEO), and a variety of hosted payloads or observatories in other orbits.

2. Interoperability and Common Operational Patterns Across Missions

The Solution will be a highly interoperable system that integrates seamlessly with

NOAA’s existing operational practices, leveraging common infrastructure and interfaces for telemetry, tracking, command, and mission support services. Support for different observatories and instruments will use familiar operator and support interfaces and use instances of the same or similar tools. It will also interface with partner agencies and commercial service providers to expand ground station and data processing capabilities.

3. Efficiency and Cost-Effectiveness

The Solution will balance efficiency and cost-effectiveness including long-term sustainment and maintenance costs without compromising on mission-critical services by optimizing the use of common services and reusable components and leveraging NOAA enterprise infrastructure.

4. Agile and Incremental Development

The Solution will be developed incrementally using Agile methodologies to ensure flexibility and rapid response to changing mission needs. Program Increments (PIs) will continuously deliver functional, tested capabilities aligned with the evolving space weather mission portfolio.

5. Enhanced Security and Resilience

The Solution will prioritize security, adhering to NOAA, federal, and NIST information security standards. It will be designed with a resilient architecture capable of maintaining operations even in the face of anomalies or cyber threats.

6. Future-Proofing and Innovation

The Solution is intended to evolve alongside advances in NOAA enterprise capabilities and mandates.

1.3 Purpose

This SWO-MOS Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan is a government-developed document used to determine if the Contractor’s performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The QASP establishes procedures on how this assessment/inspection process will be conducted. It provides the detailed process for continuous oversight:

● What will be monitored

● How monitoring will take place

● Who will conduct the monitoring

● How monitoring efforts and results will be documented

The Contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards using its Mission Assurance Implementation Plan. The QASP provides the structure for the Government’s surveillance of the Contractor’s performance and their Quality

Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) actions to assure they meet contract standards and requirements. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair and consistent in evaluating Contractor performance.

This QASP is a living document. Flexibility in the QASP is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on Contractor performance.

The Government will provide a copy of the QASP to the Contractor to facilitate open communication. In addition, the QASP recognizes that unforeseen or uncontrollable circumstances might occur that are outside the control of the Contractor. The QASP ensures early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance.

1.4 Authority

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Part 46 of the Federal Acquisition

Regulation, Inspection of Services clauses, which provides for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the service called for in the contract or order. This acceptance is to be executed by the Contracting Officer or a duly authorized representative.

2 RELATED DOCUMENTATION

Space Weather Observations Mission Operations Services (SWO-MOS) Applicable and

Reference (A&R) Documents List, SWGS-MS-LIST-0003, provides the list of applicable and reference documents for this QASP with their sources. In the event of any unresolved conflict, the Contractor must request conflict resolution by the Contracting Officer in advance of work performed.

The SWO Program Acronym and Glossary List, SWO-MGMT-LIST-0001, defines terminology as used in this document and throughout the SWOPD. In the event of conflict between terminology in this document and any other dictionary, the SWO terminology will take precedence. In the event of any unresolved conflict, the Contractor must request conflict resolution by the Contracting Officer.

3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1 Government Representatives

The following personnel will oversee and coordinate Government surveillance activities.

SWO-MOS Program Manager (PM) – The SWO-MOS PM provides primary program oversight, nominates the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), ensures the COR is trained before performing any COR duties and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities. While the PM may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, they are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or any contract changes on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned PM: Mr. Ousseini Lankoande

Organization or Agency: NOAA NESDIS SWO

Email: ousseini.lankoande@noaa.gov

Contracting Officer (CO) – The CO will ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The CO will also ensure that the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract.

Assigned CO: Ms. Maryann Orellana

Organization or Agency: NOAA Acquisition and Grants Office

Telephone: 301-327-0344

Email: maryann.orellana@noaa.gov

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – The COR is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the Contractor’s performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The COR will keep a Quality Assurance file that accurately documents the Contractor’s actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the

Contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the CO. The COR is required to provide an annual Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to the CO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the primary tool for surveillance of the Contractor’s quality program and helps the COR to document Contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned COR: Mr. Gustave Comeyne

Organization or Agency: NOAA NESDIS SWO

Email: gus.comeyne@noaa.gov

3.2 Contractor Representatives

The following employees of the Contractor serve as the Contractor’s leadership team for this contract. (Complete this section after the contract award)

Contractor Project Manager – TBD

Contractor Deputy Project Manager – TBD

Contractor Chief Systems Engineer – TBD

4 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS AND METHODS OF

SURVEILLANCE

4.1 Contract Surveillance

The goal of the QASP is to ensure that Contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. The COR’s role is to establish a professional, non-adversarial relationships with the CO, PM and the Contractor, which enables positive, open and timely communications.

These relationships are built upon objective, fair, and consistent COR evaluations of Contractor performance against contract requirements. The COR uses the methods contained in this QASP to ensure the Contractor is in compliance with contract requirements. The COR function is responsible for a wide range of surveillance requirements that effectively measure and evaluate the Contractor’s performance. Additionally, this QASP is based on the premise that the

Contractor, not the Government, is responsible for management and QA/QC actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract. The Government performs surveillance, using this

QASP, to determine the quality of the Contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element standards.

4.2 Surveillance Methodologies

The primary methods of surveillance include, but are not limited to, the following.

4.2.1 Participation in and Inspection of Contractor-Led Agile Activities

The Contractor will develop a Solution to the government’s mission requirements according to the timeliness requirements of project lifecycle milestones as directed in task orders. The

Government will participate in Agile events associated with the development of the Solution.

The Government and Contractor will use these events to communicate surveillance findings and any concerns. Examples include but are not limited to the following: During PI planning meetings, the Government will assess objective and subjective Agile metrics to evaluate the alignment of proposed capabilities features and stories with the Mission Operations Services

Requirements Document (MOSRD) and assess the feasibility of planned work against task order milestones as well as observe team dynamics. During PI demonstrations and Inspect and Adapt sessions, the Government will verify the completion of planned work for the increment and assess the quality and functionality of delivered capabilities. The Government will also inspect and evaluate other Agile PI and sprint artifacts as necessary to assess Contractor performance.

4.2.2 Inspection of Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) deliverables

CDRL deliverables are defined in the SWO-MOS CDRL (SWGS-MS-CDRL-0001). All CDRL deliverables will be reviewed upon receipt. The Government will report any comments and categorize the comments as Critical, Substantive, or Minor/Editorial.

4.2.3 Periodic Informal Reviews

The Government and Contractor will conduct periodic reviews such as status reviews, bi-weekly management coordination meetings, and other ad hoc meetings as needed. The Government will use these reviews to keep informed of the Contractor’s progress and planned activities. This allows for immediate feedback on any concerns and issues, and also establishes expectations against which the Contractor’s actual progress/activities can be measured. The Government and

Contractor can use these reviews to communicate surveillance findings and any concerns.

4.2.4 Formal Reviews

The Government will conduct formal reviews of Contractor plans, processes, designs, and readiness to meet key project milestones (e.g., design, factory and site testing, construction, operational readiness, and system acceptance). The Government and Contractor will use these reviews to communicate surveillance findings and any concerns.

4.2.5 Direct Observations

Observation and experience of delivered systems and services function and performance may be used to assess performance.

4.2.6 Validated User/Customer Complaints

Feedback from users of the systems and services may be used to assess performance.

4.3 Surveillance Matrix

The Surveillance Matrix (see Appendix A) is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the Contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance and frequency the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file. The matrix documents the standards that will be used to evaluate performance and Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs), as appropriate.

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance Standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance. The Government performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the Contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The

Surveillance Matrix will be used to form the foundation of the COR’s assessment.

5 PERFORMANCE REPORTING

5.1 Regular Performance Reporting

The COR and CO (or designee) will conduct ongoing and continuous surveillance of SWO-MOS performance via regularly scheduled tag-ups and project management status reviews. This level of surveillance will enable the Government to demonstrate whether the Contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/schedule objectives.

5.2 Notification of Unacceptable Quality

The COR will notify the CO, in writing, of unacceptable quality levels. The CO will provide written notification to the Contractor of discrepancies on a quarterly basis, or immediately if the situation significantly affects the well-being of the project.

The Contractor will provide a written response to the cause and the corrective action to prevent recurrence within 10 working days after receipt of CO’s notification. The Contractor should cite specific quality assurance program procedures or new procedures instituted to prevent recurrence.

If the Contractor has not met the minimum performance requirements, it may be asked to develop a formal Corrective Action Plan (CAP) demonstrating how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels.

5.3 Record Keeping

The COR will maintain contract surveillance files as directed by the CO. Surveillance files will include, in part, the following documentation for this contract and all Task Orders:

a. COR designation and appointment letters

b. All correspondence including CO notifications and the Contractor’s responses

c. Notifications of unacceptable quality and corrective action responses

d. Evidence of cost monitoring: invoices certified and tracked against any contract and/or order ceilings

e. Project Management Status Review (PMSR) data packages

5.4 Issues and Resolution

The COR must coordinate and communicate with the Contractor to resolve performance issues or concerns. The PM, COR and Contractor should jointly formulate and document long-term courses of action. Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be clearly documented and must be approved by the CO and incorporated into the contract via a modification.

If the Contractor disputes a surveillance determination or has concerns over the Government’s performance management of the contract in general, they must first attempt to resolve through the program office. If, in the Contractor’s opinion, resolution is not possible or there is clearly an impasse that is adversely affecting the contractual relationship and/or performance, they must report their concerns to the CO in a timely fashion. The CO will be responsible for determining or negotiating the resolution approach and timeframe.

6 INCENTIVES AND REMEDIES

6.1 Incentives:

Incentives to the Contractor may be applied for meeting or exceeding AQLs. These incentives include:

- Documentation of Contractor performance into CPARS

- Consideration of an option period for applicable task orders, if funding is available and the need exists

6.2 Remedies:

In the event that the Contractor fails to meet the outlined AQLs or delivery standards, such as missing key milestones, failure to deliver planned features, or non-compliance with configuration and security management processes, remedies may be applied. These remedies include:

- Corrective action plan to remedy a deficiency

- Documentation of issues into the CPARS

- Decrement/Reduction of payment/invoice due

SWO-MOS QASP SWGS-MOS-PLAN-0006, Revision -

APPENDIX A: SWO-MOS SURVEILLANCE MATRIX

Statements Standards/AQLs Methods

A. TECHNICAL AND SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE

A.1: Develop the Solution to meet task order requirements.

95% of PI epics completed as planned

98% of allocated release requirements verified prior to delivery of capability

100% of interface requirements verified by need date

Assess at Agile events, monthly reviews, and design, integration, test, and acceptance reviews

A.2: Support project lifecycle reviews for the SWO-MOS.

95% Solution compliance with lifecycle maturity standards including supporting materials and CDRLs in accordance with:

NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7123.1: NASA

Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements

GSFC-STD-1001A: Criteria for Flight and Flight

Support Reviews

Assess upon package delivery to project lifecycle reviews

A.3 Deliver a working Solution that meets mission needs.

95% success in meeting stakeholder satisfaction with

Solution Capability and Features

99.99% system availability for delivered system in operation

Assess at Site Acceptance

Reviews

Review of Stakeholder

Feedback

Review of System Monitoring artifacts

A.4: Achieve planned schedule milestones for key events defined in task orders

100% of site deliveries successfully complete

Integration, Test, and Checkout (ITCO) by deadlines

95% of planned features delivered per PI

Assess during periodic and ongoing schedule coordination activities.

Review of site ITCO artifacts and results.

A.5: Deliver CDRLs and Deliverable items 98% on-time delivery of CDRL data items

100% on-time delivery of Deliverable Items list

100% approval of CDRLs by the Government

Review of deliverables in accordance with criteria.

SWO-MOS QASP SWGS-MOS-PLAN-0006, Revision -

Statements Standards/AQLs Methods

B. BUSINESS MANAGEMENT

B.1 Complete contract administration including timely and accurate submission of report, invoices, and proposals; adherence to contract requirements; and cooperation with the Government in negotiating changes to the contract.

100% compliance with contract reporting requirements Assess during periodic and ongoing coordination activities.

B.2 Subcontract management, including subcontract cost and performance reporting and integration of major subcontractors into timely and accurate technical, management, and cost reporting.

Compliance with Contractor’s Government-approved

Project Management Plan (CDRL PM-01)

Assess during periodic and ongoing coordination activities.

B.3 Provision of appropriate level and skill mix of staff to execute the requirements of the contract, including timely addition of staff to maintain key project milestones and meet overall project objectives.

Compliance with Contractor’s Government-approved

Project Management Plan (CDRL PM-01)

B.4 Execution of risk management processes, including timely identification, prioritization, development of mitigation approach, and reporting.

Compliance with Contractor’s Government approved

Risk Management Plan (RM-01)

Assess during periodic and ongoing coordination activities.

B.5. Management of Government-owned and Contractor-acquired property.

100% compliance with contract, Agency, and Federal reporting and property management requirements.

Assess during periodic and ongoing coordination activities.

B.6 Compliance with Government security requirements. This includes physical and

Information Technology security.

Zero security breaches.

100% compliance with security audits, 100% compliance with contract, Agency, and Federal requirements.

Assess during periodic and ongoing coordination activities.

B.7 Provision of a safe work environment and compliance with Government safety requirements.

100% compliance with contract, Agency, and Federal requirements.

Statements Standards/AQLs Methods DRAFT

SWO-MOS QASP SWGS-MOS-PLAN-0006, Revision -

C. COST MANAGEMENT

C.1 Successful management and control of costs and financial resources, based on current, cumulative, and estimated-to-complete (ETC) costs, when compared to the contract value.

At Government WBS Level: CUM to date

Cost/Schedule variance thresholds of +/- 5% or +/-

$50,000, whichever is lower; Total Estimated Cost variance thresholds of +/- 5% or $50,000, whichever is lower.

Request for approval of in-period baseline change requests within 24 hours of Contractor approval.

Notification of out-of-period baseline change requests within 5 working days.

Review of Monthly financial reports.