Exh3_QASP_for_TARS_3_Apr42022.pdf

RFP 70B02C22R00000064

Exhibit 3

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

(QASP)

Tethered Aerostat Radar

Systems

TARS 3

June 2, 2022 ii

1.1. 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 The Contracting Officer’s Representative

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 Forms

6 ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 Determining Performance

6.2 Reporting

6.3 Reviews and Resolution

ATTACHMENT 1: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

ATTACHMENT 2:

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK INVESTIGATION FORM

ATTACHMENT 3: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1. INTRODUCTION

This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled Tethered Aerostat Radar (TARS) Systems. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines the TARS PMO and COR will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the Contractor.

1.2. Purpose

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. 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 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.

1.3. Performance Management Approach

The TARS Program Manager’s highest priority is providing quality air surveillance data to our customers and stakeholders. Radar performance and all the supporting tasks that ensure proper radar performance is a priority.

The TARS PWS provides the tasks required to achieve the goal of providing quality radar data to customers.

This QASP will define the performance management approach taken by the TARS PMO and COR to monitor and manage the Contractor’s performance to ensure the expected outcomes or performance objectives are achieved.

TARS management approach to ensure quality performance by the contractor is based on the following

• Providing the contractor clear guidance in the contract and supporting documents such as the PWS

• Monitoring the contractor’s performance

• Completing evaluations on the contractor’s work

• Providing feedback to the contractor on the program manager’s assessment

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 as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

1.4. 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 control (QC) program. 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.

The TARS PMO will monitor performance and review deliverables to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determination regarding incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

2. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

1.5. 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 contracting officer's representative (COR) and the contractor. The CO will designate one full-time 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

1.6. The Contracting Officer’s Representative

The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) is designated 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. Government surveillance may occur under the inspection of services clause for any service relating to the contract. The COR will provide an interim assessment for each performance area on a monthly basis.

1.7. Technical/Performance Monitors

The COR may appoint Technical and/or Performance monitors on an as needed basis to ensure the Contractor is meeting Performance requirements of the contract. These monitors may be Government support contractors.

3. REQUIRED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS/PERFORMANCE THRESHOLDS

The required performance standards and/or quality levels are contained in the PWS of the contract. If the Contractor meets the required quality standard it will be eligible to receive Performance Based Fee payments in accordance with the contract. Failure to meet the required service or performance level may result in a reduction in payments in accordance with the contract.

4. METHODOLOGIES TO MONITOR PERFORMANCE

1.8. 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 :

Review of the contractor’s documents and data

Random monitoring, which shall be performed by the COR designated inspector.

100% Inspection – Each month, the COR, shall review the Contractor generated documentation and enter summary results into the Surveillance Activity Checklist.

Periodic Inspection – COR and Government Technical Monitors typically performs the periodic inspection.

1.9. Surveillance Techniques radar performance

The Government will evaluate radar performance in two phases. Phase one evaluation consists of a weekly review of recorded radar data processed by the 84th radar evaluation squadron (84th RADES). 84th RADES is a technical monitor for the TARS PMO. The 84th RADES weekly TARS report is a quality measure. The air channel search blip scan ratio is the primary metric used to evaluate radar performance. Along with SBSR, the Government will also assess additional recorded radar data, local environmental conditions and electromagnetic interference (EMI). Phase one focus is to review factors impacting SBSR and eliminate any anomalies. The Government considers SBSR the critical indicator for radar performance.

Phase two evaluation consists of weekly radar performance reviews with the contractor. The contractor is responsible to inform the Government when the radar is not performing or providing an acceptable SBSR on a weekly basis. If there is a disagreement on radar performance, the contractor shall provide additional information to the Government demonstrating why the radar was performing as required.

The TARS PMO will evaluate results of both phases to determine if each radar performed at an acceptable level.

Two business days after the conclusion of phase two, the Government will publish the number of hours each radar performed as required. The Government will determine final qualifying radar performance at each of the seven TARS sites.

1.10. 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 feedback.

Performance management requirements drive the Contractor to be customer focused. Contractor is expected to address customer complaints and investigate the issues and/or problems. However, the customer always has the option to communicate any feedback or complaints to the CO or COR, 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 and investigate them using the Customer Feedback Investigation Form, identified in Attachment 2.

Customer feedback may also be obtained either from the results of customer satisfaction surveys as identified in Attachment 3 or from direct customer input or complaints to the COR.

1.11. Acceptable Quality Levels/Performance Thresholds

Acceptable quality levels (AQLs)/ Performance Thresholds for contractor performance are structured to allow the Contractor to manage how the work is performed while providing negative incentives for performance shortfalls.

5. QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENTATION

1.12. 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 listed in section 4

1.13. Monitoring Forms

The PM or COR will use the monitoring forms in Attachments 1 and 2. The forms, when completed, will document the government’s assessment of the Contractor’s performance under the contract to ensure that the required results service or quality levels are being achieved.

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

6. ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

1.14. Determining Performance

Government shall use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance standards/service levels/AQLs have been met. If the Contractor has not met the minimum requirements, it may 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.

1.15. Reporting

At the end of each month, the COR will report to the PM summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the Contractor’s performance. This written report, which includes the Contractor’s submitted monthly report and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Attachment 1), will become part of the QA documentation. It will enable the government to demonstrate whether the Contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including cost/technical/scheduling objectives.

1.16. Reviews and Resolution

1.1.1. The COR may require the Contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the PM, CO and other government IPT personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The PM 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, PM and/or CO as often as required or per the Contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

1.1.1.1. Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis

1.1.1.2. Issues and concerns of both parties

1.1.1.3. Projected outlook for upcoming months and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis

1.1.1.4. Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

1.1.1.5. Issues arising from the performance monitoring processes

1.1.2. The QAR must coordinate and communicate with the Contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

1.1.3. The COR or PM 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 incorporated as a contract modification at the convenience of the CO.

ATTACHMENT 1: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

CONTRACT SERVICE or STANDARD:

1.1. SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

1.17. LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

1.18. 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

1.19. Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: DATE:

ATTACHMENT 2:

1.1. CUSTOMER FEEDBACK INVESTIGATION FORM

1.20. CONTRACT SERVICE or STANDARD:

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK/ COMPLAINT :

1.21. COR ANALYSIS:

Service Provider’s Performance (Check): Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

1.22. Narrative of Performance During Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: DATE:

ATTACHMENT 3: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

How are we doing?

<Insert Contractor Name> is committed to providing you with the best operational support possible. Please help us identify areas where we are both doing well and those areas that need improvement. We request that you complete the following Customer Satisfaction Survey based on your experience with TARS during the evaluation period from <date> through <date> , and return it to <insert PMO point of contract>. Thank you for your time.

1. Operational Support

1.1. Rate your overall Satisfaction with the utility of the TARS air surveillance information provided to the users (operators)

□ Very satisfied

□ Somewhat satisfied

□ Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

□ Somewhat dissatisfied

□ Very dissatisfied

1.23. Comment:

Rate your Satisfaction with the diligence and responsiveness of the TARS contractor personnel regarding operational matters (airspace, maintenance, systems adjustments, etc. or other matters affecting daily operations of the system requiring coordination with the AMOC):

□ Very satisfied

□ Somewhat satisfied

□ Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

Comment:

Rate your overall Satisfaction with the utility of the TARS surface (ground and maritime) surveillance information provided to the users:

□ Very satisfied

□ Somewhat satisfied

□ Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

C us to m er S at is fa ct io n

Su rv ey

Rate your overall Satisfaction with the availability of the TARS surveillance information from across the network:

□ Very satisfied

□ Somewhat satisfied

□ Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

For any question answered Somewhat Dissatisfied or Very Dissatisfied please provide the reasoning for your rating.

C us to m er S at is fa ct io n

Su rv ey

2. Additional Comments:

Customer Information

1.24. Your feedback is valued and very much appreciated.

Thank you for your participation!

Name/Title Address Phone Email