Attachment_B_QASP.docx

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

NCES DATA LICENSING AND INSPECTION SUPPORT

ED-IES-13-R-0004

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

1. Purpose This performance-based Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) sets forth procedures and guidelines that the Department of Education (“the Department”) will use in evaluating the technical performance of the Contractor. A copy of this plan will be furnished to the Contractor so that the Contractor will be aware of the methods that the Government will employ in evaluating performance on this contract and address any concerns that the Contractor may have prior to initiating work.

2. Scope The QASP is intended to accomplish the following:

1. Define the roles and responsibilities of participating Government officials.

2. Describe the rating elements and standards of performance against which the Contractor’s performance will be assessed.

3. Describe the process of quality assurance assessment.

4. Provide copies of the annual quality assurance monitoring forms that will be used by the Government in documenting and evaluating the Contractor’s performance.

Each of these purposes is discussed in detail below.

Roles and Responsibilities of Participating Government Officials The following Government Officials will participate in assessing the quality of the Contractor’s performance. Their roles and responsibilities are described as follows:

Task Leader (TL): The project Task Leader will be responsible for monitoring, assessing, recording and reporting on the technical performance of the contractor on each task. The project Task Leader will be responsible for notifying the COR of the contractor’s performance related to the successful completion of the specific tasks and the on-time submission of deliverables.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR): The COR will serve as backup to the project Task Leader in monitoring and reporting on the day-to-day technical performance. It is essential that the project Task Leader, along with the COR as backup, establish and maintain a team-oriented line of communication with the contractor’s project director on each task to ensure that the task is accomplished in an efficient and proper manner. Phone and email contact should be held on a regular basis in order to clarify expectations, confront difficulties, and avoid serious problems. The project Task Leader shall enlist the assistance of the COR in reviewing and evaluating the contractor’s overall performance for each individual task.

Contract Specialist (CS): The CS will be responsible for the day-to-day monitoring of the Contractor’s performance in the areas of contract compliance, contract administration, cost control and property control; reviewing the COR’s assessment of the Contractor’s performance; and resolving all differences between the COR’s version of events and the Contractor’s version of events. The CS may call upon the expertise of other Government individuals as required.

Contracting Officer (CO): The CO ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract, and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the CO that assures the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under the contract. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor’s performance. The CO’s procurement authorities include the following:

· SOLE authority for any decisions which produce an increase or decrease in the scope of the contract/task order;

· SOLE authority for any actions subject to the Changes clause;

· SOLE authority for any decision to be rendered under the Disputes clause;

· SOLE authority to approve the substitution or replacement of the Project Director and other key personnel;

· SOLE authority to approve the contractor’s invoices for payment, subject to the Limitation of Funds clause;

· SOLE authority to monitor and enforce Department of Labor promulgated labor requirements;

· Authority to arrange for and supervise Quality Assurance activities under this contract;

· SOLE authority to approve the contractor’s Quality Control Program;

· To approve all contractor purchases of equipment, supplies, and materials exceeding $2,500 are encouraged even though not required by FAR 13.106; and

· Signatory authority for the issuance of all modifications to the contract.

3) Deliverables to be Assessed The Government will review all deliverables and monitor all tasks required under the contract for adherence to NCES Standards, government regulations in addition to ensuring that the deliverables and tasks meet all requirements specified in the contract.

4) Rating Elements and Standards of Performance The work will be evaluated in terms of how well the requirements are satisfied and the extent to which the work performed follows the approach found in the Contractor’s technical proposal. The COR will evaluate the contractor’s performance by using the following categories: Quality of the work and deliverables based on the assessment of conformance to contract requirements, specifications, and NCES/IES standards; Schedule to determine the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements; Business Relations to determine if the contractor exhibits effective management to perform the work and produce deliverables as specified; Management of Key Personnel to assess the contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting, and replacing, when necessary, key personnel.

The COR will rate the contractor’s performance in each category as defined below. All products produced by or activities performed by the Contractor shall, at a minimum, meet the level of “Satisfactory.”

· Unsatisfactory. Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective. Score: 0

· Marginal. Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The Contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. Score: 1

· Satisfactory. Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory. Score: 2

· Very Good. Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective. Score: 3

· Exceptional. Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were highly effective. Score: 4

5) QASP Evaluation Form

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

1. CONTRACTOR NAME AND ADDRESS (identify Division)

1. Task Number

2. Name of the Task

3. Value of task

4. Period of Performance

7. DESCRIPTION OF Key Deliverables/Tasks

8. RATINGS – Summarize contractor performance and check the box corresponding to the performance rating for each category. See Attachment for rating descriptions.

(a)

QUALITY

(b)

SCHEDULE

(c)

BUSINESS RELATIONS

(d)

MANAGEMENT OF KEY PERSONNEL

*Supporting comments are required for Unsatisfactory and Excellent performance Ratings. Additional sheets may be added

7. TOTAL

EVALUATOR - Project Task Leader DATE

COR Review DATE

Rating Guidelines

Quality of Product or Service

· Compliance with contract requirements

· Accuracy of reports

· Appropriateness of personnel

· Technical excellence

Schedule

· Meets interim milestones

· Reliable

· Stays on schedule despite problems

· Responsive to technical direction

· Completes work on time, including wrap-up and contract administration

· No liquidated damages assessed

Business Relations

· Effective management

· Use of performance-based management techniques

· Business-like concern for the customer’s interest

· Effective management and selection of subcontractors

· Effective small/small disadvantaged business subcontracting program

· Reasonable/cooperative behavior

· Effective use of technology in management and communication

· Flexible

· Minimal staff turnover

· Maintains high employee morale

· Resolves disagreements without being unnecessarily litigious

Management of Key Personnel

· Qualification of the key position

· Support key personnel so they are able to work effectively

· Action taken when key person does not perform well

· When a replacement of a key person is necessary, does the replacement meet or exceed the qualifications of the position

Rating Points

Quality or Product or Service 0 Unsatisfactory Nonconformance jeopardizes the achievement of contract goals; default.

1 Marginal Nonconformance requires major agency intervention to ensure achievement of contract goals; show cause or cure notices.

2 Satisfactory Quality meets specifications in most cases, however, some agency intervention required to ensure achievement of contract requirements 3 Very Good Quality meets specifications in all cases.

4 Exceptional Quality exceeds specifications in some cases.

Schedule 0 Unsatisfactory Delays jeopardize the achievement of contract goals.

1 Marginal Significant delays.

2 Satisfactory Minor delays.

3 Very Good All deliverables on time.

4 Exceptional All deliverables on time with some ahead of schedule; or stays on schedule despite unforeseen circumstances.

Business Relations 0 Unsatisfactory Unethical or illegal business practices.

1 Marginal Business practices are not attuned to customer support.

2 Satisfactory Business practices are somewhat attuned to customer support.

3 Very Good Business practices focus on customer support.

4 Exceptional Highly effective, proactive business practices focused on customer support.

Management of Key Personnel 0 Unsatisfactory Ineffective management of key personnel jeopardize contract goals.

1 Marginal Significant agency intervention required to resolve management of key personnel problems jeopardizing contract goals.

2 Satisfactory Some agency intervention required to resolve management of key personnel problems jeopardizing contract goals.

3 Very Good Effective management of key personnel.

4 Exceptional Excellent management of key personnel.

image1.png