4. Attch 4 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Located at:

Perimeter Acquisition Radar Attack Characterization System (PARCS) Contract #FA2517-XX-C-8000

The following members of the Multifunctional Team (MFT) have approved implementation of this plan on behalf of the entire MFT:

_____________________Date_________

10 SWS/CC

Functional Commander

21 CONS/LGCZB

Contracting Officer

21 SW/PMD

Program Manager

21 SW/PMD

Quality Assurance Manager

Plan Effective Date: 1 Oct 17

CHANGE CONTROL SUMMARY.

Change: A change is administrative in nature and does not require the plan to be signed by the Multifunctional Team (MFT). Consolidate changes when possible, and identify this plan as Change 1, Change 2, etc. Include a summary of the changes. Ensure change bars have been inserted where format allows.

Revision: A revision contains more significant changes than administrative such as adding or removing a Performance Objective (PO) or an Assessment Item (AI) or changes to duties and responsibilities. A revision requires the plan to be signed by the MFT. Include a summary of the revisions. Ensure change bars have been inserted where format allows unless the plan has been significantly revised and requires a complete review.

Table of Contents

Attachments

1. Performance Objectives and Assessment Items

2. Performance Assessment Report Form and Instructions

3. Certificate of Service Template

1. OVERVIEW

1.1. Quality Assessment Surveillance Plan (QASP). The QASP provides the COR(s) an effective and systematic assessment method while defining the roles and responsibilities of the MFT using a team concept.

1.2. Contracted Services. The Contractor shall provide non-personal services to operate, maintain, and support (OM&S) the Perimeter Acquisition Radar Attack Characterization System (PARCS) at Cavalier Air Force Station (AFS), ND. Services encompass base support including management of radar and mission computer maintenance, civil engineering, environmental functions, security, logistics, sensitive and non-sensitive communications. The Contractor shall provide all necessary personnel, administrative, and managerial resources necessary on a continuous, 24-hours-a-day, 7-days-a-week (24/7) basis to meet Air Force Station operations and maintenance requirements as specified in this PWS. Support Radar Operational Time as specified in Chapter 2 of the PWS. Services shall include support for system upgrades and modifications, as well as provide day-to-day support services. The Contractor shall perform organizational level maintenance on system upgrades and modifications once they are accepted by the Government.

2. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES (Not limited to)

2.1. Multi-Functional Team (MFT). The goal of the MFT is to give all members/stakeholders the ability to maintain the highest quality services to our customers and propose/initiate improvements throughout the life of the contract. Continual contract assessment will ensure that the contract, as written, continues to meet the needs of the customer.

2.1.1. The MFT should strive to achieve efficiencies in contract performance and improve customer support. The team is composed of all acquisition stakeholders. The goal of the team is to define the requirements in performance based terms. The roles entail planning, programming, and budgeting adequate funds, ensure program execution within the approved funding, and ensure the contract supports mission requirements.

2.1.2. Responsible for effective contract assessment and management. Core MFT members for this contract are the Program Manager (PM), Contracting Officer (CO), Functional Commander (FC), Contracting Officer’s Representative(s) (COR (s)) and Quality Assurance Manager (QAM). The extended MFT consists of the contractor and Subject Matter Expert(s) (SME(s)) from various functional areas covering all program service requirements. It may also include Legal, Small Business, Labor Relations, management and leadership of various organizations or any other functional experts such as Mobile Contracting Officer’s Representative(s) (MCOR(s)), Senior Contracting Officer’s Representative (SCOR) as the MFT has a need. Member participation is contingent upon contract issues requiring a particular MFT member’s participation.

2.1.2.1. General Duties and Responsibilities:

2.1.2.1.1. Manages contract performance and assessments IAW this plan.

2.1.2.1.2. Develops and fosters partnership and effective communication for the common goal of continuous improvement and successful performance of the contract.

2.1.2.1.3. Identifies opportunities to improve performance throughout the life of the contract. This includes benchmarking against industry, identifying initiatives, assessing risk associated with these initiatives, using this plan for implementing initiatives and monitoring success of implementation.

2.1.2.1.4. Supports senior leadership by providing meaningful performance metrics, data reporting, briefings and early warning of significant variances in cost, schedule or performance.

2.1.2.1.5. Develops POs and AIs identifying mission critical or operationally vital Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements requiring periodic evaluation by the COR(s).

2.1.2.1.6. Develops, implements, and maintains the QASP. This plan is signed by the QAM, PM, CO, and the FC. The MFT conducts an annual review of this plan and implements changes to maintain effectiveness while meeting mission needs.

2.1.2.1.7. Reviews the PWS requirements on a periodic basis. Keeps abreast of customer requirements and how changes may affect PWS requirements. Prepares documentation and advocates for funding.

2.1.2.1.8. Ensures performance based contract requirements are clearly stated and enforceable.

2.2. Program Manager (PM).

2.2.1. Ensures performance management focuses on risk management while meeting cost, schedule and performance baselines. Develops and implements a risk management plan; plans, programs and advocates for adequate funding.

2.2.2. Co-Chairs the MFT, sharing leadership responsibility with the CO and prepares meeting minutes. Tasks requiring interface with the contractors are led by the CO, and tasks requiring interface with the Government are led by the PM. Coordinates with organizations to ensure MFT members are assigned or made available as needed.

2.2.3. Identifies mission essential services/level of services required in the event of a crisis declared by the President of the United States and/or the Secretary of Defense or if a national emergency has been declared by State or local Government offices. Along with the FC, develops necessary documents to include emergency contact information.

2.2.4. Leads the MFT in the resolution of issues involving the application of prescriptive directives.

2.2.5. Serves as the Assessing Official for Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS); collects inputs from the MFT and prepares the narrative.

2.3. Contracting Officer (CO).

2.3.1. Ensures requirements of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and its supplements are adhered to. Ensures compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interests of the Government to include cost and property control. Ensures contractors receive impartial, fair and equitable treatment.

2.3.2. The CO is the only person with authority to direct the contractor, make interpretations of and changes to the contract and resolve disputes or conflicts with the contractor.

2.3.3. Delegates authority for inspection and/or acceptance of service to the COR(s), MCOR(s), SCOR(s) and QAM in writing. The CO notifies the COR(s), MCOR(s), SCOR(s) and QAM in writing of termination of duties as needed.

2.3.4. Informs the contractor of the names, duties, and limitations of authority for all personnel assigned to the contract.

2.3.5. Conducts contract specific training for COR(s), MCOR(s), SCOR(s) and QAM.

2.3.6. Advises the MFT on QASP development.

2.3.7. Serves as the business advisor to the MFT. Reviews all PARs prior to issuance; serves as an issuing authority.

2.3.8. Co-Chairs the MFT meetings.

2.3.9. CO is responsible for the administrative reporting of COR(s) assessment performance.

2.3.10. CO assists the QAM with performance assessment audits.

2.4. Functional Commander (FC).

2.4.1. The FC is the commander having functional responsibility for the receipt, success and/or failure of contracted services. The FC shall ensure contracted services adequately support the organization’s mission.

2.4.2. Ensures each COR assesses/documents and reports the contractor’s performance IAW the QASP.

2.4.3. Advises PM and CO on all mission changes that could drive necessary contract modifications.

2.4.4. Review submitted monthly surveillance assessments for adverse performance trends. When applicable, coordinates with the PM/CO to address problems/trends in contractor performance.

2.4.5. Reviews PAR(s) with Findings to ensure they accurately reflect and document contractor performance. FC is an issuing authority for PAR(s) with Findings after CO concurrence.

2.4.6. Prepares and submits a draft monthly Certificate of Service (COS) to the CO and QAM No Later Than (NLT) the 15th calendar day of each month to cover the previous month’s reporting. The final COS is due NLT the 20th workday of the month. The format for the COS is contained in Attachment 3. FC may delegate this responsibility to the SCOR. If delegated, documentation of FC review of the final monthly COS is required.

2.5. Senior Contracting Officer Representative (SCOR)/Supervisor.

2.5.1. Nominates COR(s) using the COR Nomination Memorandum.

2.5.2. Receives COR management training from the 21SW Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC).

2.5.3. Ensures each assigned COR has received Defense Acquisition University (DAU), Local COR (LCOR) (as applicable) and contract specific training prior to assuming duties.

2.5.4. Ensures each COR is qualified to perform COR duties.

2.5.5. Evaluates COR performance and provides input for the CORs’ annual performance appraisal.

2.5.6. Provides all documentation to the FC by the 10th calendar day of the month with collected performance assessments data from the previous month to be included in the COS.

2.5.6.1. If delegated by the FC; prepares and submits a monthly draft COS to the FC, CO and QAS with collected performance data from COR(s) assessments from the previous month. COS will be reviewed by CO, PM and QAM in draft format prior to final submission. The draft COS is due NLT the 15th calendar day of the month with the final due NLT the 20th calendar day. The format for the COS is contained in Attachment 3.

2.5.7. Serves as the focal point for COR performance assessment activities, documentation and reporting.

2.5.8. Reviews PAR(s) with Findings to ensure they accurately reflect and document contractor performance and receives MFT concurrence.

2.5.8.1. If delegated by the FC as issuing authority, issues PAR(s) with Findings after CO concurrence.

2.5.9. Participates in MFT meetings.

2.5.10. Identifies new or changing requirements affecting the contract and recommends improvements.

2.5.11. Establish and/or maintain a COR Performance Assessment Folder. Upon termination of COR designation, all files shall be turned over to subsequent assigned COR personnel. All assessment documentation shall become part of the official contract file held by the CO.

2.6. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

2.6.1. The COR has the responsibility to monitor and document contractor performance IAW PWS requirements and this plan.

2.6.2. Provide information necessary to assess actual or potential conflicts of interests and immediately notify the CO if situations arise.

2.6.3. Establish and/or maintain a COR Performance Assessment Folder. Upon termination of COR designation, all files shall be turned over to subsequent assigned COR personnel. All assessment documentation shall become part of the official contract file held by the CO.

2.6.4. Remain abreast of changes in terms and conditions of the contract that result from contract modifications.

2.6.5. Perform those duties/responsibilities delegated by the CO in the CO’s Delegation Letter.

2.6.6. Assess, document and report contractor’s performance IAW this plan.

2.6.6.1. Develop, utilize and update checklists as needed to maintain assessment consistency and effectiveness. Document all assessments with enough detail to ensure others understand what was observed and how the contractor complied or did not comply with PWS requirements. Checklists are an ever evolving document supporting assessments to include all those areas identified in the PWS, and as such, a change to an individual checklist does not constitute in and of itself a revision to the PWS or this plan.

2.6.6.2. Prepare a PAR with Findings to accurately reflect and document contractor performance and provide to core MFT in a timely manner for review. The COR is not an issuing authority for a PAR(s) with Findings.

2.6.6.3. Analyze contractor response to PARs with Findings for adequacy of identifying the root cause, corrective actions and any actions taken to prevent recurrence. Perform follow up assessment as needed.

2.6.7. Participate in MFT meetings as needed and recommend updates to the PWS and this plan when needed. When required, initiates Document Change Requests (DCRs) to change contractual requirements in the PWS.

2.6.8. Provides all documentation performance assessment data to the SCOR to be included in the monthly COS. (The format for the COS is contained in Attachment 3.)

2.7. Mobile Contracting Officer’s Representative (MCOR).

2.7.1. Assess, document and report the contractor’s performance IAW the PWS and this plan.

2.7.1.1. MCOR(s) are not PAR issuing authorities and shall notify the QAM of any significant performance deficiencies.

2.7.1.2. If unaccompanied by a QAM during a visit the MCOR shall provide the QAM a report to include specific PWS paragraphs assessed, any findings, strengths or weaknesses identified, provide an overall rating and describe contractor performance.

2.7.2. Notifies MFT of new or changing requirements affecting the contract and assists with site technical issues.

2.7.3. Analyze contractor response to PARs with Findings for adequacy of identifying the root cause, corrective actions and any actions taken to prevent recurrence. Perform follow up assessment as needed.

2.8. Quality Assurance Manager (QAM).

2.8.1. Review the COR(s) assessment reports for completeness prior to final inclusion into the monthly COS.

2.8.2. Advises COR(s) on effective quality assurance practices, assists when needed in resolving issues associated with contractor assessments.

2.8.3. Assists MFT in identification of critical PO(s) from the PWS in development of the Services Summary (SS) items.

2.8.4. Assists MFT in identification of other critical PWS requirements needing periodic assessment. Assessment Items (AI(s)) are developed to ensure compliance in functional areas not covered as a PO.

2.8.5. Reviews PAR(s) with Findings prior to PAR(s) issuance to the contractor. Ensures PAR(s) with Finding is well stated, accurate and effective to convey the full scope of the nonconformity to the contractor.

2.8.6. Issuing authority for PAR(s) with Findings upon MFT review and CO concurrence.

2.8.7. Participates in CO contract specific training; providing COR(s) specific details of quality assessments.

2.8.8. Plans, leads and executes performance assessment audits utilizing MCOR(s) as part of the assessment team; develops and provides a written audit assessment to all members of the MFT.

2.8.9. Performs at an annual COR Staff Assistance Visit (SAV) when the CO is not available to travel and as funding permits; provides written results to the MFT.

2.8.10. Reviews the contractor’s quality program. Determines the comprehensiveness and adequacy of the program to ensure adherence to all aspects of contract requirements.

3. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

3.1. Strategy. The strategy is to rely to the maximum extent practicable on the Contractor’s Quality Program to ensure requirements are met within sufficient periodic validation by COR(s). This QASP identifies the strategy, methods and tools the MFT will use to ensure it receives services as specified in the PWS. COR(s) will assess the contractor’s performance in a manner necessary to validate delivery of services and gain confidence in the contractor’s quality program. The level of assessment is adjusted as needed to maintain confidence.

3.2. Assessment Methods.

3.2.1. One-Hundred Percent Inspection. The COR(s) assesses contractor performance each time the task is performed. The results of the contractor’s overall performance are then evaluated to determine acceptability of the service provided.

3.2.2. Random Sampling. The COR(s) select a random sample in such a way that every possible sample that could be selected has a probability of being selected.

3.2.3. Periodic Inspection. The COR(s) assess these items on a periodic basis.

3.2.4. Customer Feedback. Customer Feedback is used as a method of performance assessment. COR(s) establish customer feedback processes to enable customers to provide positive as well as negative feedback on the service being provided.

3.2.4.1. Negative Customer Feedback.

3.2.4.1.1. COR(s) will validate negative customer feedback against PWS requirements.

3.2.4.1.2. For invalid negative feedback received, COR(s) will inform the customer of the reason(s) why it is not valid.

3.2.4.1.3. For valid negative comments received, COR(s) will notify the contractor’s representative to allow opportunity for investigation. If warranted, COR(s) prepare a PAR(s) with Finding, have it reviewed by the MFT, and an issuing authority shall submit the PAR(s) to the contractor.

3.2.4.2. Positive Customer Feedback. Occurrences shall include dates of validated positive customer feedback and be reported in the COS.

3.2.5. Metrics. Metrics are to be used to track contractor progress when meeting POs and AIs. If contractor generated metrics are used, COR(s) must validate the accuracy of those metrics to a degree that establishes confidence in the metrics reported.

3.2.6. External Assessments. External assessments may include Environmental-Safety-Occupational Health Compliance Assessment Management Program, Air Force or Defense Contract Management Agency audits, and others as applicable. All reports produced by external assessment teams shall be review by the CORs to validate and document findings. Provide a copy of the report to the MFT.

3.2.7. Trending. COR(s), in conjunction with the QAM, analyze performance assessment data for performance trends. This trending data, whether positive or negative, may be used in reporting of contract performance.

3.3. Performance Assessment Tools

3.3.1. Performance Objectives (PO(s)) and Assessment Items (AI(s)). The PO(s) and AI(s) listed in Attachment 1 identify minimal mandatory periodic performance assessment requirements.

3.3.1.1. PO(s) mirror the Services Summary items identified in the PWS. Additionally, the MFT may develop AI(s) which are used to ensure compliance within functional areas not covered as a PO(s). Each PO or AI has a corresponding performance threshold which is the minimum acceptable performance level and it identifies the applicable PWS paragraph. Each PO and AI also contains a method of assessment for the COR(s) to use, the minimum frequency at which to accomplish the assessments and the COR(s) responsible to perform the assessment.

3.3.1.2. The Government maintains the right to assess all contract requirements at all times during the term of the contract. The Government shall perform assessments in a manner that will not unduly delay the contractor's workflow. Assessments of PO(s) or AI(s) must be documented in the monthly COS. When PWS requirements not identified as PO(s) or AI(s) are assessed, results must also be documented and reported.

3.3.2. Performance Assessment Report (PAR). The PAR (see Attachment 2) is used to document contractor assessments. PAR Section I shall be used to document assessment results. PAR Section II is used to document nonconformities (Findings) identified during the assessment documented in Section I and forwarded to the PM, CO, and QAM for concurrence. When a PAR section II is used to document nonconformity, it is known as a PAR with Finding.

3.3.3. Types of Nonconformities. There are two types of nonconformities, contractor identified or Government identified.

3.3.3.1. Contractor-Identified Nonconformities. The MFT and COR, will review contractor identified nonconformities to ensure corrective measures were successfully implemented with necessary actions identified to prevent recurrence. If documentation exists to substantiate the contractor has identified the deficiency and timely corrective action is being taken to correct the deficiency, the deficiency may be excused from a PAR with Finding. If the nonconformity has not yet been resolved but the contractor has established a timely estimated completion date (ECD) for correction and resolution, The CORs will monitor the contractor’s resolution efforts until the nonconformity has been corrected and validated.

3.3.3.1.1. A PAR with Finding for nonconformities when the contractor has already self-identified shall be considered if the deficiency is identified as a critical item (PO, AI), a repeat identification, the contractor fails to follow through with the proposed way-ahead and/or timeframes, contractor failed to follow his Quality Program, or the nonconformity involves safety, environmental, or security issues.

3.3.3.2. COR-Identified Nonconformities. Nonconformities shall be documented on a PAR with Finding using PAR section II as early as possible after discovery and MFT concurrence. It is then issued by the FC (SCOR if delegated by FC), CO or QAM to the contractor with instructions on when and how to reply. When the contractor’s reply is received and deemed to be acceptable by the applicable MFT members, the PAR is closed.

3.3.3.2.1. Notify the MFT of a suspected nonconformity.

3.3.3.2.2. Investigate to determine if the contractor has self-identified the nonconformity IAW their quality program procedures.

3.3.3.2.3. A PAR cannot be issued without MFT review. If agreement cannot be obtained by all MFT members, the CO has final authority as to whether a PAR with Finding will be issued (or rescinded).

3.3.4. Performance Assessment File. COR(s) establishes and maintains a Performance Assessment File. Multiple CORs may share common documents. CORs may use the PARCS SharePoint or other collaborative environment as an electronic Performance Assessment File. The Performance Assessment File must contain:

Section 1 - Contract Documents: Include the latest PWS.

Section 2 - Quality Documents: Include the Government PP and the Contractor’s Quality Program manual.

Section 3 - Activity Log (optional): A chronological record of action taken in the performance of COR duties providing a brief synopsis of contract inspection activities and meetings and all conversations held with the contractor regarding contract performance. Other than minutes that are recorded due to conversations held between the COR and the contractor, items contained in this log are at the discretion of the COR(s) Section 4 - Nomination and Designation Letters/Training Certificates: Contains CORs supervisor nomination letter, training certificates and CO delegation letter.

Section 5 - Records: Include assessments for contract requirements as well as any other pertinent records.

Section 6 - Other Items (Optional): Optional use for any other records or data pertinent to this contract.

3.4. Performance Assessment Phases. Performance Assessment is accomplished in multiple phases:

3.4.1. COR Assessment. Each COR shall document the PO(s) and AI(s) assessed as outlined in Attachment 1. COR(s) shall periodically assess and document at least three other requirements not formalized as a PO or an AI per month. COR(s) should assess all areas of the PWS to include those outside their functional area where there breadth of knowledge and lack of technical complexity of the requirement enables them to perform the assessment. Transfer PO and AI assessment results to the monthly COS. Other assessed items shall be included in the COS or as PAR(s) attachment to the COS.

3.4.2. Mobile COR(s) (MCOR(s)) Assessment. MCORs may be subject matter experts (SME) utilized to assess performance as part of the Geographical Support Unit (GSU) Teams or contract performance assessment team (CPAT). MCORs may also assess contractor performance independently upon MFT concurrence.

3.4.3. External Assessment. COR(s) review and report on external party/audit assessment reports to validate against PWS requirements. The MFT ensures performance deficiencies assessed against PWS requirements are corrected.

4. Performance Management

4.1. Performance Management Approach. Purpose is to manage the contract to ensure the contractor is meeting cost, schedule and performance requirements and to ensure each COR assesses the contractor IAW the PWS and this plan.

4.2. Performance Management Methods. The MFT utilizes performance management and assessment tools to ensure the contractor meets contract requirements.

4.3. Performance Management Tools.

4.3.1. MFT Meetings. The MFT meets to discuss performance, review on-going issues, special projects, and cost constraints. COR(s), SMEs, and the contractor participate as required. Minutes of meetings are recorded and distributed to members of the MFT by the PM, excluding the contractor for “Government only” meetings.

4.3.2. Market Research. SMEs are responsible to research and document current commercial technologies and industrial capabilities on an on-going basis and at time of option renewal. Results shall be considered for improved performance.

4.3.3. Certificate of Service (COS). COR(s) performance assessments result in the monthly COS. The COS is sent to the PM, CO and QAM for review. Performance data reported in the COS certifies a sampling snapshot of services provided were assessed by the Government. Performance data is used for the annual CPAR, budget execution reviews, and other reports required by senior leadership, and to provide performance feedback to the contractor.

4.3.4. Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR). The CPAR is an annual assessment of contractor performance based on performance assessments and management data. The CPAR serves as the contractor’s performance report card and is used by the Government for consideration in other acquisition efforts.

4.3.5. SharePoint. This website is used to collaborate with MFT members and share information such as contract modifications, assessment reports, and other information needed to manage contract performance. COR(s) may use a SharePoint as an electronic Performance Assessment File.

5. Disposition of Records. The quality assessment records will be maintained in the performance assessment folder or designated records locations, and the official contract file for the life of the contract or as specified by the records disposition schedule. The CO may require a periodic transfer of these records to the contracting office for contract file inclusion. COR(s) must contact the CO for the final disposition instructions upon contract completion.

Performance Objectives

Frequency:

Monthly Evaluator:

COR

PO#1: Radar Acc PWS Section 1, Chapter 2, Paragraph 2.2 Maintain an overall Radar Acc each calendar month of not less than 98% to meet mission operational Acc.

Performance Threshold:

Maintain Contractor-Controlled Availability (ACC) of not less than 98% percent per calendar month.

Assessment Method:

Verify contractor-provided metrics to determine that systems are operationally available and maintained IAW the PWS. Examine logs and observe actions associated with completing operational tasks. Review operations logs to validate that outages are being included in the monthly statistics and computing formulas.

Document assessment results on a PAR and file in the assessment folder

Frequency:

Monthly Evaluator:

COR

PO#2: Preventive Maintenance Scheduling.

PWS Section 1, Chapter 4, Paragraph 4.2.3 The Contractor shall schedule all preventive maintenance in the Integrated Maintenance Data System (IMDS) database by the 5th workday of the previous month.

Performance Threshold:

Maintenance data collection data shall be entered into IMDS with 95% initial accuracy, 98% accuracy within 72 hours and 100% accuracy within 5 days

Assessment Method:

21 OSS Maintenance Data System Analyst (MDSA) and 21 OSS site support will review IMDS Maintenance Action Review Reports daily for data accuracy.

Errors will be identified and emailed to site contractor for correction. Corrections must be made with 5 days. Job Data Documentation error reports will be sent out weekly and monthly containing the initial error rate and correction rate.

Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder

Frequency:

Monthly Evaluator:

COR

PO#3: Equipment Status Reporting (ESR).

PWS Section 1, Chapter 4, Paragraph 4.2.5 The Contractor shall report equipment status changes IAW AFI 21-103, AFSPC Sup 1, Paragraphs 6.1- through 6.3, 6.4.5 through 6.4.6, and 6.5 through 6.7, and local procedures on a real-time basis.

Performance Threshold:

Updates are made as they occur.

Assessment Method:

Review IMDS ESRs weekly to verify entries are input into IMDS as the status changes. If any ESR contains errors, the contractor and COR will determine fault.

Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder.

Evaluator:

COR

PO#4: Test, Measurement, and Diagnostic Equipment (TMDE).

PWS Section 1, Chapter 4, Paragraph 4.3 The Contractor shall manage, schedule, transport (or ship at the Government’s determination) TMDE IAW AFSPCI 21-108, Paragraphs 3.13.1 and 3.13.2, TO 33K-1-100 (series), and TO 00-20-14, Paragraphs 3.6 through 3.8. Perform organizational maintenance IAW TO 33-1-27 and TO 33-1-32.

Performance Threshold:

No failed TMDE inspections.

Assessment Method:

Review the Schedule Forecast Report provided by the PMEL lab and ensure all equipment due for calibration has been shipped to the lab.

Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder

Frequency: Monthly Evaluator:

COR

PO#5: Industrial/Information Security.

PWS Section 1, Chapter 8, Paragraph 8.2 The Contractor shall implement and perform all required industrial/information security functions and actions IAW the certified DD Form 254 and DoD 5220.22-M, to minimize infractions and to ensure zero security incidents resulting in violations at Cavalier AFS.

Performance Threshold:

Zero security incidents resulting in violations.

Assessment Method:

Verify the contractor complies with National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM). DoD 5220.00-M, NISPOMSUP and all applicable security directives established at the site.

a. Examine the contractor’s security policies and practices to ensure they are integrated with those of the installation.

b. Monitor contractor’s policies, procedures, and responsibilities governing access to and accountability of classified material, classified material storage, transmission of classified material, disposition of classified material (including destruction), security education, visit request/certification of security clearances, end-of-day security checks of work areas, emergency destruction and protection requirements, industrial and information security inspection, and investigation of security incidents.

c. Monitor the contractor to ensure that they provide escorts for contractor sponsored individuals.

d. Audit records to ensure the contractor conducts physical security indoctrination and annual refresher training.

e. Ensure the contractor appoints a security representative who is knowledgeable and capable of administering the Industrial Security Program.

Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder.

Assessment Items

Frequency:

Annual Evaluator:

COR

AI 1: ELEVATED PRIVILEGES.

PWS, Sec 1, Para 1.5.9 Have certifications IAW DoD 8570.1-M, figure C2.F1 and Table AP3.T1 and a security clearance IAW AFI 31-501, Sec 3.27 and Attachment 3 (Table A3.2) for Contractors with elevated privileges.

Performance Threshold:

Have all required certifications for Contractors with elevated privileges.

Assessment Method:

Verify contractor Review the Contractor’s certifications to ensure Contractors with elevated privileges have all the required privileges.

Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder.

Frequency:

Annual Evaluator:

QAM

AI 2: QUALITY PROGRAM – QMS AUDIT.

PWS, Sec 1, Para 1.5.12 The Contractor shall develop, implement, and maintain a quality program that ensures service delivery meets or exceeds performance requirements.

Performance Threshold:

No failures of the Contractor’s Quality System to affect Corrective and Preventative measures for identified deficiencies.

Assessment Method:

1. Interview Contractor QC personnel and review sufficient inspection records to ensure that the quality system encompasses all functions and requirements of the contract and satisfies the requirements in the Inspection of Services clause while keeping the Contractor’s management staff informed of all issues affecting quality.

2. Review inspection records for the number and type of observations made, causes of deficiencies, and corrective actions taken to prevent recurrence.

3. Review records of audits, inspections and tests supporting operation of the QA program.

4. Review deficiency responses for timely, effective actions and cause of deficiency.

5. Review Contractor audit, inspection, and test procedures and instructions to ensure contract requirements are met, that they prescribe activities in clear, complete and current instructions, include specific criteria for acceptance/ rejection of services and that on-site Government representatives are notified of changes to inspection instructions.

6. Analyze trends of GIDs for type, frequency, cause and functional area. Make determination utilizing all factors whether identified GIDs are attributable to a failing of the Quality system to detect, correct, and prevent recurrence of GIDs.

Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder

Frequency:

Monthly Evaluator:

COR

AI 3: MILSTAR

PWS, Sec 1, Para 4.4, and 4.4.1 Operate and maintain the MILSTAR terminal and facility.

Performance Threshold:

Operational Availability Contractor Controlled (Acc) of not less than 99%.

Assessment Method: Verify contractor provided metrics to determine that systems are operationally available and maintained IAW PWS.

Frequency:

Monthly Evaluator:

COR

AI 4: Management of Due-In From Maintenance (DIFM), Bench Stock, PWS Sec 1, Para’s 6.2.3, 6.2.5, 6.2.6, 6.2.7 The contractor shall maintain Equipment and Supply Point assets.

Performance Threshold:

100% compliance with required inventories

Assessment Method:

Monthly Bench Stock Quarterly DIFM reconciliation Semi-Annual Supply Points Annual R14/R15 or when custodian or commander changes. LRS will initiate current supply listings (D23, M04, S04, R14, R15, and Q13) and will forward to appropriate monitors/custodians to perform required inventories Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder

Frequency:

Monthly Evaluator:

COR

AI 5: CIVIL ENGINNERING – Power Restoration PWS, Sec 1, Para 7.6.1.3 Restore electrical power to main power distribution Buss within 15 minutes from start of commercial utilities outage, per incident.

Performance Threshold:

Electrical Power is restored/established to Buss within 15 minutes.

Assessment Method:

Review time of outage and restoration ensuring 15 minutes is not exceeded.

Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder

Frequency: Monthly Evaluator:

COR

AI 6: WORK REQUIREMENTS

PWS, Sec1, Para 7.7.1 and 7.7.2 The contractor shall respond to and repair all emergency work orders.

Performance Threshold:

All response times met (1 hr. during duty hours 3 hrs. non-duty).

Assessment Method:

Review monthly service call records or contractor provided metrics to determine contractor’s responsiveness. Perform work area inspections to verify that assigned tasks are completed. Additional Assessment Method: Visually assess during real world emergency.

Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder

Frequency:

Monthly Evaluator:

COR

AI 7: CIVIL ENGINNERING – OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE – RECURRING WORK PROGRAM (RWP) Operate, maintain and repair all mission essential PCCIE/RPIE systems.

PWS, Sec 1, Para 7.11.

Performance Threshold:

All preventive maintenance completed as scheduled.

Assessment Method: Review records to ensure that preventive maintenance is performed on schedule. Perform work area inspections to verify that assigned tasks on mission essential requirements are completed Review procedures prior to being submitted by the contractor.

Annual Evaluator:

MCOR

AI 8: (OSHA)(EPA)

PWS Section 1, Chapter 9, Paragraph 9.1 Comply with federal, state, and local Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations/standards.

Performance Threshold:

Zero violations of federal, state, and local Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations/standards.

Assessment Method:

No citations issued by regulatory agency for non-compliance.

Evaluator:

COR

AI 9: Electro-magnetic Field Radiation (EMFR).

PWS Section 1, Chapter 9, Paragraph 9.2.

Comply with AFI 48-109.

Performance Threshold:

Zero findings IAW AFI 48-109, paragraphs 2.13.4, 2.13.5, 2.13.6 (except 2.13.6.1), 2.13.7, 3.1, (except 3.1.4), 4.3, and 4.4.1

Assessment Method:

Examine on-site records, 21 AMDS/SGPB and 319 MDOS/SGPB records as applicable for proper coordination with Air Force for EMFR surveys and related training. Coordinate with 319 MDOS/SGPB, examine current photos or conduct on-site visit to ensure EMFR warning signs are present. No reports to 21 AMDS/SGPB or 319 MDOS/SGPB of personnel over-exposures to EMFR Document assessment results on a PAR and file in assessment folder

Frequency:

Monthly Evaluator:

COR

AI 10: Potable Water Program.

PWS Section 1, Chapter 9, Paragraph 9.3 Manage and comply with PRIMARY federal, state, and local drinking water quality regulations/standards. Maintain a detectable disinfectant residual level, or higher level if required by regulatory authority, in all parts of the installation drinking water distribution system.

Performance Threshold:

Zero violations of primary federal, state, and local drinking water Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations/standards

Assessment Method:

Assess via receiving monthly reports submitted by the contractor (via email to 21 AMDS/SGPB) in a timely manner and determine whether any maximum concentrations of drinking water contaminants have been exceeded. If contaminant level has been exceeded, review records at 21 AMDS/SGPB and 319 MDOS/SGPB for proper notification procedures. Examine drinking water sampling plan for timeliness and compliance (submitted via email to 21 AMDS/SGPB).

Frequency: Biennial Evaluator:

MCOR

AI 11: Environmental Management PWS Ch 10, Para 10.1.

The Contractor shall comply with federal, state, AFIs, and local Environmental Compliance, Pollution Prevention, and Conservation program to ensure zero deficiencies at the site.

Performance Threshold:

100% compliance with federal, state, local laws and AFIs.

Assessment Method:

Evaluate random protocols contained in current ESOHCAMP guides.

Document assessment results with QAM on site audit report.

Attachment 1, Performance Objectives/Assessment Items

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

For Check Blocks, enable and lock Forms Toolbar

Section I. Performance Assessment

|_| No Finding |_| Minor Nonconformity |_| Major Nonconformity

7. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT—DESCRIBE CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE

Section II. Nonconformities Identified

13. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FINDING (Include PWS reference narrative)

14. FINDING IMPACT

15. INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CONTRACTOR: If a suspense date is entered in block 12, respond with a corrective action plan. Detail the corrective action of the cited nonconformity, the root cause of the nonconformity, and actions taken to prevent recurrence. If date was not entered in Block 12, the Contractor is not required to provide a response.

16. COR ASSESSMENT TO CONTRACTOR’S ACTION PLAN

|_| Accepted |_| Rejected

Continuation Sheet

INSTRUCTIONS: The PAR is used to document contract performance assessments, to report nonconformities to the contractor and to request correction actions taken by the contractor to prevent recurrence. Instructions are included for blocks not self-explanatory.

SECTION I - PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT. Use to document assessments of contractor performance with PWS requirements. At a minimum, document assessments of Performance Objectives (PO) and Assessment Items (AI) from the QASP.

Block 4, Finding Category: Check one block only.

No Finding: Performance meets PWS requirements.

Major Finding: A conclusion identifies a condition has a significant adverse effect on the quality of the activity under review such as:

1. Failure to meet a Performance Threshold.

2. Significant mission degradation in any Contractor operated function.

3. A situation is likely to result in hazardous or unsafe conditions for individuals (or any other Government resource) coming into contact with the work.

4. Failure to provide adequate corrective action to prevent reoccurrence of Government identified findings.

5. Failure of the contractor to provide corrective action to self identified nonconformities within a reasonable time frame dependent on deficiency complexity.

6. Any failure to adhere to security regulations resulting in a security incident.

Minor Finding: A departure from established standards having little bearing on service provided. If the same Minor Finding is repeatedly identified, it may be an indication of problem with the Contractor’s quality system. This would indicate a trend in performance and action has not prevented recurrence. In this case, the Minor Finding may be elevated to the level of a Major Finding and a new PAR initiated.

Block 5, Contract Requirement: Identify contract requirement, i.e., Civil Engineering.

Block 7, Performance Assessment: Enter the particular details and results of the assessment. Detailed results of assessments are required to report and manage contract performance. When possible, avoid Pass/Fail descriptions of contract performance.

SECTION II - NONCONFORMITIES IDENTIFIED. Section II is used to document nonconformities identified during an assessment. Section II is used to notify the contractor of the finding and request corrective action.

Block 10, Control Number: Assigned by the issuing authority. Track all findings with a Control Number containing the first two letters of the name of the site - the last two digits of the fiscal year - and a three digit number starting with 001 and progressing upward through the fiscal year. For example, the 1st PAR finding for Peterson for FY10 is: PE-10-001. When the QAS issues a PAR with Findings, the QAS will use the same format and add a “Q” designator after the last two digits of the fiscal year. For example: PE-10Q-001.

Block 11, Issuing Authority Name/Grade: Enter the name and grade of the person issuing the PAR. The issuing authorities for a PAR with Finding are the FC, CO, QAS and COR (when delegated by the FC in writing). Prior to issuing a PAR with Finding Issuing Authority must get MFT Concurrence.

Block 12, Suspense Date: Enter the date the response is due from the contractor for the cited nonconformity. Normally, this is two calendar weeks unless extenuating circumstances exist. The response suspense date is for initial response from the contractor and not necessarily the complete corrective action plan.

Block 13, Brief Description of the Finding (Include PWS reference): Clearly and briefly, state the details of the finding including the PWS reference and quote. For example:

PWS para 3.4 reads: “The contractor shall maintain an MSDS in the work area for all hazardous materials used in the work center.” The contractor did not have the MSDS for “Simple Green” in the building 100 work area.

Block 14, Finding Impact: Enter the impact the finding has, or could reasonably have, on mission accomplishment.

Block 16, COR Assessment to Contractor’s Action Plan: Indicate if the contractor has corrected the nonconformity and if the preventive actions appear to be sufficient to prevent recurrence. In some cases, an action plan may need to be monitored for a period of time to determine its effectiveness. Include this information in this block.

PAR Continuation Sheet: The PAR continuation sheet may be used to expand upon information in Section I or II. The continuation sheet may also be used to document recurring assessments during the contract year. For example, if the QASP requires the COR to assess a certain PWS requirement every 30 days, a table of those checks could be developed and inserted into the continuation sheet. This allows the COR to have only one PAR per year generated for each recurring assessment requirement. If a deficiency is identified, complete a separate PAR for that particular finding.

For Example:

PWS Reference

Assessment Sample (with Findings) Items highlighted in yellow are samples and will change to fit your assessment

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

For Check Blocks, enable and lock Forms Toolbar

Section I. Performance Assessment

|_| Minor Nonconformity |X| Major Nonconformity

7. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT—DESCRIBE CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE

Reviewed 36 of 75 IMDS data entries from the period 1 Nov 12 thru 1 May XX. Of the 36 entries reviewed 35 were incomplete and reflect major errors. Performance of this PWS requirement is not acceptable.

Name, grade

15 May 2017

Section II. Nonconformities Identified

CAV-17-002

CAV=location

17=FY

002=Sequence # of PAR issued

13. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FINDING (Include PWS reference narrative)

(PWS 4.2.4.1) Contractor failed to enter MDC data into IMDS with 95% initial accuracy, 98% accuracy within 72 hours and 100% accuracy within 5 days

14. FINDING IMPACT

Failure to properly record maintenance actions in IMDS creates inaccurate record of system health, without accurate records the Government may realize unnecessary maintenance costs or fail to program system replacement.

15. INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CONTRACTOR: If a suspense date is entered in block 12, respond with a corrective action plan, Detail the corrective action of the cited nonconformity, the root cause of the nonconformity, and actions taken to prevent recurrence. If date was not entered in Block 12, the Contractor is not required to provide a response.

|_| Accepted

Assessment Sample (No Findings) Items highlighted in yellow are samples and will change to fit your assessment

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

For Check Blocks, enable and lock Forms Toolbar

Section I. Performance Assessment

|_| Minor Nonconformity |_| Major Nonconformity

7. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT—DESCRIBE CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE

Reviewed 36 of 75 IMDS data entries from the period 1 Nov 12 thru 1 May 13. Of the 36 entries reviewed 35 were complete with no errors, the error on the remaining entry was minor and corrected on the spot. Performance of this requirement is acceptable.

Name, grade 15 May 2017

Section II. Nonconformities Identified

13. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FINDING (Include PWS reference narrative)

14. FINDING IMPACT

15. INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CONTRACTOR: If a suspense date is entered in block 12, respond…