Attachment_B_-_QASP.doc

Attachment B

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System

Web-based Data Collection

2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 A. Introduction B. General Purpose of QASP

C. Roles and Responsibilities of Participating Government Officials

D. Contractor Task Performance Standards

E. QASP Evaluation Form

A. Introduction This Performance – based Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) sets forth procedures and guidelines that the Department of Education will use in evaluating the technical performance and overall performance of the contractor in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Contract. 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. The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan shall be contractually binding.

The QASP describes the mechanism for documenting noteworthy accomplishments or discrepancies for work performed by the Contractor.

The QASP can be changed/updated, etc. It is intended to be a “living” document that should be revised or modified as circumstances warrant. Either the Contractor or the Government may initiate changes to the QASP. Bilateral changes may be made to the plan at any time during task order performance. Such changes may not entitle the Contractor to equitable adjustments or to any other compensation for performance in a prior period.

B. General Purpose of the QASP The QASP is intended to accomplish the following:

Define the roles and responsibilities of participating Government officials and outside experts;

Describe the key deliverables and rating elements and standards of performance against which the contractor’s performance will be assessed for each deliverable;

Describe the process for conducting quality assurance assessments;

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

Provide basis for determining incentive involving additional work or award terms earned for the Contractor

C. Roles and Responsibilities of Participating Government Officials The QASP is a guide to be used by Department officials to conduct surveillance activities of the Contractor after Contract award. The COR will review technical documents and deliverables generated by the Contractor. ED contract managers (e.g., Contracting Officers (CO) and Contract Specialists) will also conduct review of contract specific Reports or Deliverables such as invoices, monthly status reports, and work plans. The COR and the CO will use the QASP as a tool to evaluate if the Contractor-provided service meets the performance standards in the contract.

The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is responsible for technical administration. It is essential that the COR, 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 COR shall review and evaluate the contractor’s overall performance.

The Program Manager (PM) will be responsible for monitoring, assessing, recording and reporting on the technical performance of the contractor on each task. The Program Manager will be responsible for completing the QASP monitoring forms which are used to document the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s performance related to completing the specific tasks and submission of deliverables (initial and final drafts).

The COR or Program Manager 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 price, terms, or conditions shall be referred to the Contracting Officer for action.

The Contracting Officer (CO) or his/her representative will have overall responsibility for overseeing the contractor’s performance. The Contract Specialist (CS) will also be responsible for the day-to-day monitoring of the contractor’s performance in the areas of contract compliance, contract administration, recording of deliveries, cost control and property control; reviewing the COR’s assessment of the contractor’s performance; and resolving differences between the COR’s version and contractor’s response to assessment. The CO may call upon the expertise of other government individuals as required.

The Contracting Officer’s (CO) procurement authorities include the following:

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

SOLE authority for any actions subject to the Changes clause;

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

SOLE authority for negotiation of the contract;

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

SOLE authority to approve the contractor’s invoices for payment;

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; and

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

QASP Reporting

On an annual basis, the COR will use a quality assurance monitoring form to document and evaluate the Contractor’s performance under each subtask. This form will serve to document and evaluate the contractor’s overall performance. The form will be completed by the COR and Program Manager.

The annual contract evaluation will be based on five rating area elements, which include: (a) Quality of Product or Services; (b) Schedule; (c) Cost Control; (d) Business Relations (e) Management of Key Personnel (f) Utilization of Small Business. A rating from 0 to 4 that most closely matches the COR’s evaluation of the contractor’s performance will be awarded for each area element, for a maximum total score of 24. The COR will substantiate all scores in narrative form.

D. Contractor Task Work Performance Standards 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 Program Manager and COR will evaluate the contractor’s performance by using the following categories: Quality of the work and deliverables to determine accuracy, if they meet NCES statistical standards, and present information in a way that is useful for the intended audience; Schedule to determine the contractor’s responsiveness to technical direction, if the work was performed and deliverables received as specified in the PWS; Cost Control to determine if the work and deliverables were within budget; Business Relations to determine if the contractor exhibits effective management to perform the work and produce deliverables as specified; Management of Key Personnel to support overall management of the contract making certain experienced individuals are identified to perform the task work; Utilization of Small Business where appropriate to assist with performing contract work as identified in the work statement

The COR and Program Manager will rate the contractor’s performance in each category as defined below.

Unsatisfactory. Level of performance which is not acceptable and which fails to meet the minimum standards of performance; jeopardizes the achievement of contract goals. Score: 0

Marginal. Nonconformance requires major agency intervention to ensure achievement of contract goals. Score: 1

Satisfactory. Some agency intervention required to ensure achievement of contract requirements. Score: 2

Very Good. Level of performance, which meets the minimum standards of performance. Score: 3

Exceptional. Level of performance, which exceeds the minimum standards of performance. Score: 4 E.

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)

COST

CONTROL

(d)

BUSINESS RELATIONS

COMMENTS

(e)

MANAGEMENT OF

KEY PERSONNEL

(f)

UTLIZATION OF

SMALL BUSINESS

*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

Cost Control

· Within budget

· Current, accurate and complete billings

· Costs properly allocated

· Unallowable costs not billed

· Relationship of negotiated costs to actual

· Cost efficiencies

Business Relations

· Effective management

· Use of performance-based management techniques

· Business-like concern for the customer’s interest

· Effective management and selection of subcontractors

· 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

· Anticipates and avoids or mitigates problems

· Satisfactorily overcomes or resolves problems

· Prompt notification of problems

· Pro-active

· Effective contractor-recommended solutions

Utilization of Small Business

· Effective small/small disadvantaged business subcontracting program