Attachment_3_QASP.pdf

Attachment 3 – Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Reference Number: Solicitation FA2860-18-R-0010

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Scott A. Grundahl, Col, USAF Date Functional Commander

Ms. Donna C. Heinz Date Procuring Contracting Officer

Mr. Craig L. McClain Date Administrative Contacting Officer

Mr. Kenneth Grimsley Date Quality Assurance Program Coordinator

Mr. Steven Caylor Date Contracting Officer’s Representative

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1 – Purpose

Section 2 – Authority

Section 3 – Roles and Responsibilities

Section 4 – Contractor’ Quality Control Plan

Section 5 – Contract Management

Section 6 – Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance

Section 7 – Performance Reporting

Section 8 – Unacceptable Performance

Section 9 – Certification/Acceptance of Services

Appendix A – Corrective Action Report

Appendix B – Customer Complaint Record

Appendix C – Performance Assessment Report

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

1. Purpose

1.1 This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. This QASP explains the following:

• What will be monitored?

• How monitoring will take place?

• Who will conduct the monitoring?

• How monitoring efforts and results will be documented?

This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur.

This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the contractor. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

1.2 This is a world-class aircraft maintenance service requirement supported by the contractor, who shall provide all personnel, equipment, tools, vehicles and materials except for those items or services specifically stated in section C-3 of PWS as Government furnished, to support the missions of the 11th Wing (WG) and their customers. The contractor shall provide all personnel necessary to perform aircraft maintenance and over and above services in support of aircraft assigned to the 11 WG their respective customers. The scope of maintenance includes support of the UH-1N helicopter flying hour program. The contractor shall provide all organizational and limited intermediate aircraft maintenance and all servicing IAW AF approved aircraft technical data listed in TE-6 on all 11 WG assigned aircraft. The contractor shall establish a partnership/teamwork approach with the Contracting Officer (CO), 811 OG Functional Commander (FC), Contracting Officers Representative (COR), operations personnel and other applicable contractors.

1.3 Success for this contract is defined as fulfilling the requirements in the Performance Work Statement and delivered according to the program schedule and the completion of Section 6, of this document titled, “Performance Requirements and Method of Assessment.”

2. Authority

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under PGI 237.172 of the Defense 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.

3. Roles and Responsibilities

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

Program/Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides primary program oversight, nominates the 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: Lt Col Gary Lavers Organization or Agency: 811 OG Telephone: 240-612-5805 Email: gary.c.lavers.mil@mail.mil

Contracting Officer (CO) – The CO shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship.

The CO shall also ensure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. Determine the final assessment of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned CO: Ms. Donna C. Heinz Organization or Agency: 11 CONS Telephone: 240-612-5622 Email: donna.c.heinz.civ@mail.mil

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality mailto:gary.c.lavers.mil@mail.mil assurance file. At the conclusion of the contract or when requested by the CO, the COR shall provide documentation to the CO. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The contractor shall refer any changes they deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the CO for action.

Assigned COR: Mr. Steven Caylor Organization or Agency: 811 OG Telephone: 301-981-6822 Email: steven.r.caylor.civ@mail.mil

4. Contractor’s Quality Control Plan

4.1 The contractor shall establish and maintain a Quality Control Plan (QCP) to ensure the requirements of the contract are provided as specified. The contractor shall provide a QCP describing the inspection system for the services required in the PWS. The contractor shall develop and implement procedures to identify, prevent and ensure non-recurrence of unacceptable services. The contractor shall update the plan as changes occur and changes shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the Contracting Officer. The contractor’s quality control plan shall contain, as a minimum, the following items:

4.2 Three specific sections should be addressed to demonstrate and validate that the services or deliverables to be provided under the contract are completed with a level of quality that meets the minimum Performance Threshold (PT) established in the Service Delivery Summary (SDS) items found in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The three sections are:

4.3 Quality Management Approach: The overall approach for managing contract quality is described in this section of the Quality Control Plan (QCP). Discuss your overall quality philosophy and describe how your employees are integrated into the quality management process.

4.4 Quality Assurance: Quality assurance activities focus on the processes being used to manage and deliver the services or deliverables. Organizational charts, communication lines, decision making authorities, criteria to be employed when determining if and when to elevate a performance issue are among the areas that should be thoroughly described in the QCP.

4.5 Quality Control and Quality Standards: Quality control activities should be performed continually throughout a contract to verify that management, services rendered or deliverables are of high quality. The PWS contains SDS items that establish PTs or quality standards. The service provider’s performance will be evaluated against the SDS criteria before the performance is accepted. The QCP should describe how the service provider will determine when services or mailto:steven.r.caylor.civ@mail.mil deliverables specified in the SDS are complete and correct. The service provider may also discuss and describe areas in the PWS felt to be of particular importance in the successful performance of this contract. As a minimum each SDS item should be discussed. Topics to be covered in this section of the QCP include:

4.6 Identify each performance area and the level of importance to the overall contract.

4.7 Identify the specific quality tools or tracking method(s) to be utilized for each performance area.

4.8 Identify service provider metrics or report areas and frequencies.

4.9 Identify the methods to be used to identify a performance weakness and describe resolution approaches whether discovered by your quality control processes or identified by the Government.

4.10 A description of the inspection system to cover all services. Description shall include specifics as to the areas to be inspected on a scheduled and unscheduled basis, frequency of inspections, and the title and organizational placement of the inspector(s).

4.11 A description of the methods to be used for identifying and preventing defects in the quality of service performed.

4.12 A description of how the records will be kept. Records must document all inspections and corrective or preventive actions taken.

4.13 Contractor Inspection Records. Records of inspections shall be kept and made available to the Government throughout the contract performance period and for the period after contract completion until final settlement of any claims under this contract.

5. Contract Management

5.1 The multi-functional team shall utilize the following approaches, methods, and tools to manage the contract upon award:

5.2 COR shall conduct, document, track, and analyze contractor performance via regularly scheduled assessments. The assessment results shall be maintained as Past Performance Information and utilized to prepare and support annual Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) reporting.

Assessment results and the contractor’s submittals will be used to develop metrics to track Contractor’s overall compliance with contract terms and conditions.

5.3 COR File. A contract file must be established and maintained by the COR assigned to the contract. The file is typically contained in hard-copy, but may be maintained in a computer data base provided there is adequate back up of the data to preclude accidental loss. Any computer maintained documents must be readily available for inspection by the contracting office and possible audits. All contract documents must be maintained for the life of the contract and turned in to the contracting office upon contract expiration, including all computer maintained documents. The contract file must contain as a minimum, the following documents and be set up utilizing an index:

a. Appointments. COR assignment letters by the FC, the CO’s Letter of Delegation to the COR, CO notification to the contactor of COR assignment.

b. Contract Documents. The contract with all modifications (modifications to be posted to the contract), directive document references, maps, pertinent terms defined by the contract, equipment listings, and QASP.

c. Surveillance Documentation. All surveillance inspections performed must be documented by the COR and maintained in this section. Any customer complaint training and all customer complaints and resolution thereof will be maintained in this section. Other information that may be included are details of inspections or data gathering, conversations or meetings with the contractor, notes and comments that support the inspection paperwork.

d. Meeting Minutes: Copies of all MFT minutes (minimum annual) and Periodic Progress Meeting minutes (frequency to be determined at contract start and may be adjusted accordingly).

e. Unacceptable Performance. Documentation. A section used for filing all documentation associated with contract quality assurance correspondence, the COs inputs/determinations, Cure notices, Show Cause with all supporting documentation.

f. Acceptance and Funding Issues. A copy of the Service Contractor Monthly Satisfaction Survey will be maintained in this section. This is also the location to maintain AF Form 9s, delivery orders, funding issues etc.

g. Reports/Submittals. Contractor reports/submittals as directed by the PWS.

h. Correspondence. Any other documentation that does not fall into sections listed above.

i. Lessons Learned. Document here any areas that you determine need to be changed/amended in future contracts. I.e. accountability issues, better description of work hours, cost and performance constraints.

5.4 The contractor shall maintain and implement a quality control plan to ensure the contract services conform to the requirements of the performance work statement. COR shall monitor contractor’s performance against the contractor’s quality control plan.

5.5 Periodic Progress Meetings (PPM): The multi-functional team shall conduct periodic progress meetings, not less than Semi Annually, to review the contractor’s performance. At these meetings the Contracting Officer will apprise the contractor of how the Government views the contractor’s performance and the contractor will apprise the Government of problems, if any, being experienced. The contractor will also notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, of any work being performed, if any, that the contractor considers over and above the requirements of the contract. Appropriate action shall be taken to resolve any outstanding issues.

5.6 Contract Administrator Responsibilities: These responsibilities shall be in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 42.201—Contract Administration Responsibilities.

6. Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance

6.1 Contract Surveillance

The goal of the QASP is to ensure that contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. The COR’s contribution is their professional, non-adversarial relationships with the CO, PM and the contractor, which enables positive, open and timely communications. The foundation of this relationship is 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 QC/QA actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract.

6.2 Service Delivery Summary

The Service Delivery Summary is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the contractor. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

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.

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use any of the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

a. DIRECT OBSERVATION. (Can be performed periodically or through 100% surveillance.)

b. MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (MIS). (Evaluates outputs through the use of management information reports. Best used for general surveillance and may need to be supplemented by periodic inspections.)

c. PERIODIC INSPECTION. (Uses a comprehensive evaluation of selected outputs. Inspections may be scheduled [Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or annually] or unscheduled, as required.)

d. USER SURVEY. (Combines elements of validated user complaints and random sampling. Random survey is conducted to solicit user satisfaction.

Appropriate for high quantity activities that have historically been satisfactory. May also generate periodic and 100% inspections.)

e. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. (Relies on the user of the service to identify deficiencies. Complaints are then investigated and validated. Highly applicable to services provided in quantity and where quality is highly subjective.)

f. 100% INSPECTION. (Evaluates all outputs. Most applicable to small quantity, but highly important services. May be used where there are written deliverables and stringent requirements such as tasks required by law, safety, or security.)

g. PERIODIC SAMPLING. (Variation of random sampling. However, sample is only taken when a deficiency is suspected. Good follow-up to MIS analysis. Sample results are applicable only for the specific work inspected. Since sample is not entirely random, it cannot be applied to total activity performance.)

h. RANDOM SAMPLING. (Designed to evaluate the outputs of the award requirement by randomly selecting and inspecting a statistically significant sample. Highly recommended for large quantity repetitive activities with objective and measurable quality attributes.)

Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the contractor's task manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific performance standard.

Note: All inspection items are “as required”; TE-3 defines performance standards and TE-5 further defines individual performance objectives and Performance Thresholds.

Table 1. Primary Services

Primary Service

Performance Objective

PWS

Para.

Performance Threshold

Method of Surveillance

M-1 Aircrew Debriefing 4.9 Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Periodic Inspection

M-2 Inspections 4.28 4.34

Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Periodic Inspection

M-3 Repairable Cycle Asset Management

4.38 Zero major

discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Periodic Inspection

M-4 Maintenance Scheduling

4.10 4.28

Adhere to acceptable quality levels outlined in TE- Zero major discrepancies allowed

Periodic Inspection

M-5 Sortie Generation

Mission Requirements

4.19 4.20

4.2.2 4.20 4.21.1

Meet performance criteria in TE-3.

When notified, generate 16 MC aircraft.

Initiate launch operations for up to 8 alert aircraft within 60

Periodic

Launch

4.1 4.19 4.20 4.21 4.22 4.23 seconds of klaxon notification on a 24/7 basis.

Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits.

M-6 Foreign Object Damage (FOD) and Dropped object Prevention Program (DOPP) Execution

2.17 4.19.11

Zero major discrepancies allowed; see PT’s in TE-5 (Primary Services) for minor discrepancies allowed

Periodic Inspection

M-7 Maintenance Analysis 4.12 Adhere to acceptable quality levels outlined in TE- Zero major discrepancies allowed

Periodic Inspection

M-8 Composite Tool Kits

(CTK)

4.15 4.16 4.17 4.18

Zero major discrepancies allowed; see PT’s in

TE-5

Periodic Inspection

M-11 Aircraft Appearance Standards

4.6 4.36

100% Compliance with TE-11

Periodic Inspection

M-12 Maintenance Documentation

4.12 4.28 4.29 4.30 4.31 4.32 4.33 4.34

100% documentation of accurate workload data in CAMS

Periodic Inspection

M-13 Recovery 4.9 4.19

Periodic Inspection

M-15 FCF Operations 5.1 5.2

Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE- 3 for MC rate & 5 for PT limits

Periodic Inspection

M-16 Aircrew Training Management/Scheduli ng

6.1 6.2 6.3

Zero major discrepancies allowed

6.4 6.5 6.6

C-1 Correspondence, records and files

2.12 Adhere to acceptable

quality levels outlined in TE-5 Zero major discrepancies allowed

Periodic Inspection

C-2 Reports 2.12.4.

2.12.6 4.10

Adhere to acceptable quality levels outlined in TE-5 Zero major discrepancies allowed

Periodic Inspection

C-3 Technical data 2.12.7 Technical data used/current/complet e Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Periodic Inspection

C-4 Automated Data Processing

2.13 11.7

Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Managemen t Information System

C-5 OSHA/ECAMP 2.7

2.18 2.19 2.20 11.12

Zero major discrepancies allowed, reference

TE-5

Periodic

C-6 Directives

2.2 2.2.1

A. All Directives including technical data adhered to B. Maintain all current directives Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Periodic Inspection

C-7 Air show/Special Support

4.14 Zero major

discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Periodic Inspection

C-8 Off-Station Aircraft Support

3.1.3 4.19.1

Zero major discrepancies

11.11 11.11.2 11.11.3 11.11.4 allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

C-9 Exercises and Real World Contingency Support/Emergency Services

2.22 3.1 11.11

Zero discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Periodic Inspection

C-11 Quality Assurance Programs

4.7 4.24

Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 (Primary Services) specifically C-11 & C- 14 for allowable minor discrepancies

Periodic

C-12 Air Force Assets

11.1 11.1.1

Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Periodic

C-13 Training Management

2.3.16.

2.3.16.

2.3.16.

2.3.16.

Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 for PT limits

Periodic Inspection

C-14 Quality Assurance 2.6 Zero major discrepancies allowed; see TE-5 (Primary Services) specifically C-11 & C- 14 for allowable minor discrepancies

6.3 Aircraft Major/Minor Discrepancies

6.3.1 Major Discrepancy: A discrepancy that is likely to result in a hazardous or unsafe condition or is likely to result in failure or reduce materially the usability of the aircraft or equipment to include any major part thereof. As a minimum, discovery of any of the following conditions will be categorized as a major discrepancy: improper or untimely documentation of Red X discrepancies on aircraft or equipment Air Force Technical Order (AFTO) forms; Test Measurement Diagnostic Equipment (TMDE) overdue calibration or when calibration status cannot be verified; violation of environmental protection policies and directives; overdue time change and inspection items; unauthorized over fly of engines; any long-term inspections not loaded; any errors in due time or improperly loaded time change items; technical order violations of mandatory directives as supplemented; not complying with all military and or commercial derived technical order warnings, cautions, or notes; improper use of tools; any outdated technical data and fuel spills over 5 gallons. While all discrepancies /findings can’t be listed, the Chief COR /FC will determine category (Major/Minor) of such not listed in this paragraph. The contractor shall respond using the Andrews AFB Contract Monitoring and Surveillance Report within 5 business days with corrective actions of all form’s that are routed to the QA manager. If a grounding discrepancy(s) is discovered during the Key Task Listing (KTL) inspection that is likely to result in a hazardous or unsafe condition, the evaluator shall not sign off the inspection and will annotate the discrepancy in the aircraft forms IAW 00-20-1. Once the discrepancy(s) are corrected the KTL inspection will be reevaluated.

6.3.2 Minor Discrepancy: A discrepancy that is not likely to reduce the usability of aircraft or equipment or is a departure from established requirements having little impact. All minor discrepancies shall be documented using the AAFB Contract Monitoring and Surveillance Report and presented to the applicable contract branch manager/section supervisor. See TE-5 for minimum allowable Performance Threshold’s.

6.3.3 QA personnel shall assess associated launch processes for DV missions as determined by the FC to ensure compliance with the PWS and applicable aircraft maintenance directives and Air Force Instructions.

6.3.4 QA shall contact COR prior to performing evaluations on aircraft and/or equipment to afford government representatives the opportunity to inspect, evaluate and assess any service(s) rendered on the spot.

6.3.5 The contractors QA shall participate in MAJCOM or HQ directed inspections and will support required inspections and requests for data from inspection team members. The Government preferred method of any surveillance/assessment is on the contractor’s quality assurance personnel. The intent is to ensure contractor QA is employing effective oversight on varying processes across all contract functions to achieve the highest quality of performance from a program or personnel task evaluation perspective. CORs will not perform task evaluations on contractor employees, such type of evaluations will be inherently left to the contractors QA function.

6.4 Plans, Scheduling, and Documentation Major/Minor Discrepancies

6.4.1 Major Discrepancy: A discrepancy that is likely to degrade aircraft mission capability or mission readiness. As a minimum, discovery of any of the following conditions will be categorized as a major discrepancy: any required inspections not scheduled; any errors in due time or improperly loaded time change and inspection items; any time compliance technical order or commercial bulletin not loaded within 5 days from receipt; any missions not reflected on the daily flying schedule; aircraft status not reported accurately; technical orders or commercial manuals not up-to-date; security clearance violations; noncompliance with AFI 21-101 required programs.

6.4.2. Minor Discrepancy: A discrepancy that is not likely to degrade aircraft mission capability, having little impact. A minor finding is defines as an unsatisfactory condition that requires repair or correction but does not endanger personnel, affect safety of flight, jeopardize equipment reliability or warrant discontinuing a process or equipment operation.

6.5 Facilities Major/Minor Discrepancies

6.5.1 Major Discrepancy: A discrepancy that is likely to cause a safety or health hazard to personnel.

6.5.2. Minor Discrepancy: A discrepancy that does not pose a safety or health risk to personnel.

6.6 Certification/Training Major/Minor Discrepancies

6.6.1 Major Discrepancy: A discrepancy that involves personnel who do not possess the proper certification to perform a task.

6.6.2 Minor Discrepancy: A discrepancy in the actual recording of certification when the requisite training and certification can be sustained through alternative means.

6.7 Documentation Major/Minor Discrepancies

6.7.1 Major Discrepancy: A discrepancy that involves aircraft and/or equipment that is being utilized (or on a ready line) that is unserviceable or in an unknown condition.

6.7.2 Minor Discrepancy: A discrepancy in recordation that has little impact.

6.8 Discrepancy Reporting

6.8.1 All discrepancies shall be documented on an Andrews AFB Contract Monitoring and Surveillance Report form and presented to the contract manager.

The contract manager will provide a written response with corrective action and/or mitigating circumstance within five (5) business days.

6.8.2 If the same minor discrepancy occurs after the contractor proposes corrective action, the discrepancy shall be coded as a “repeat.” If a “repeat” discrepancy occurs within 90 days after the contractor proposes corrective action, the discrepancy shall be coded as “recurring” and will result in an automatic major discrepancy.

6.8.3 CORs shall conduct assessments on primary services and critical tasks listed in Part 2, Section 5, Service Delivery Summary and applicable appendixes.

All assessments shall be IAW guidance contained in AFI 21-101. All customer feedbacks shall be substantiated by the COR when possible.

6.9 As Observed

6.9.1 Where warranted the Government may elect to document an event as an “AO”. The AO may be positive/negative in nature or merely a means of documenting situations/conditions discovered where the contractor can’t/could not comply with contract requirements due to interference from other base (Host/Tennant) organizations. All AO’s will be rated as “None” and carry no weight. The AO may also be used to document situations/conditions where non-compliance with contract requirements are known yet no official Government assessment/surveillance was actually being performed. The Government reserves the right to use the “AO” or revert to using one of the required services listed in Part 2, Section 5, Service Delivery Summary, if non-compliance of requirements can be validated regardless.

6.10 CORs shall conduct assessments on primary services and critical tasks listed in Part 2, Section 5, Service Delivery Summary and applicable appendixes.

All assessments shall be IAW guidance contained in AFI 21-101. The CORs will use each quality assessment to compute the overall performance threshold for each period. All customer feedbacks shall be substantiated by the COR as above or below standards listed in the PWS prior to including it into any metric for statistical analysis purposes. Contractor’s overall PT shall be determined by dividing total number of successful assessments divided by the sum of all assessments for the period.

6.11 Performance Rating Definitions

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used.

Table 2. Performance Rating Definitions

Performance Rating

Criteria

Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was effective.

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.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated 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.

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.

7. Performance Reporting

7.1 Assessment Schedule

7.1.1. All performance assessments will be accomplished on a random and on an “as required” basis. As required is defined as surveillances and/or assessments conducted on completed work, work in progress, personnel evaluations and any aircraft maintenance. CORs will not direct contractor personnel in any way to prevent situations involving unofficial authorizations to occur as well as not to hamper contractor’s daily production efforts.

7.1.2. COR shall notify the FC and CO immediately upon discovering a condition that requires use of an over and above work request. CO shall review/approve work request proposals subject to restrictions.

7.1.3. Performance of a service will be evaluated to determine whether or not it meets the performance requirements of the contract. When the contractor performance is below standard, the COR will document the problem on an Andrews AFB Contract Monitoring and Surveillance Report (CMSR), which will be issued to the contractor for initialing and signature. Signing/initialing the form serves as acknowledgement of the finding(s); it does not mean contractor agrees with the rating. The contractor has 5 business days to return the CMSR/form to the Chief COR with a reply/response that effectively addresses the root cause of the finding and depicts action(s) taken to prevent reoccurrence. Equally, the contractor has 5 business days to respond to the CO in writing for all complaints.

If a Contract Deficiency Report is issued as the result of other methods of surveillance, the Contracting Officer shall take appropriate measures according to the clause entitled "Inspection of Services."

7.1.4. When evaluating the services and/or deliverables, the COR will consider the quality and timeliness of the work. During the course of the contract, the COR must maintain all the inspection files for the life of the contract. The COR must turn over the original files to the Contracting Officer at the conclusion of the contract, or at any time upon the request of the Contracting Officer, for inclusion in the official contract files. The COR can accomplish assessments on all services provided under this contract, however, the COR should primarily focus on those services identified in Table 1, Primary Services (PS) and the critical tasks listed in attached spreadsheet. Surveillances can be accomplished on individual primary services. The FC/Chief COR will determine the type and minimum number of monthly assessments required and place increased attention in those areas where difficulties or substandard performance has been an issue; in addition special attention will be given to those items/areas considered to be of high interest to the Government.

7.2 Assessment of SDS Items

7.2.1 It is essential that the COR conduct assessments in accordance with projected assessment schedule for an effective quality assurance program.

Mission requirements may require deviations from the assessment schedule.

Assessment should be performed as close to the schedule as is practicable.

COR shall document assessment as it is conducted.

7.2.2 The COR shall conduct assessment of the contractor’s performance by determining whether or not the performance meets the standards contained in the contract, the PWS and the SDS items.

7.2.3 Assessment Documentation shall include as a minimum, the date, time, and location the assessment was conducted, results of the assessment (acceptable or unacceptable), PWS paragraph number referencing the requirement, a short description of the requirement being surveyed, applicable remarks, signature of COR conducting the assessment. When COR determine that contractor performance is unacceptable, the specific reason for the unacceptable performance shall be recorded on the COR’s assessment documentation.

7.3 Assessment of non-SDS Items

The Government has the right to inspect all services called for by the contract, to the extent practicable at all times and places during the term of the contract.

Therefore, COR have the right to conduct assessment for SDS items and non- SDS items as well. When the COR identifies unacceptable performance on non- SDS items, the COR shall follow the procedures in section 8 of this performance plan, entitled Unacceptable Performance.

7.4 Customer Critiques/Feedback

7.4.1 CORs will utilize as required surveillances/assessments or customer feedback to survey the contractor’s performance. However, When customer feedbacks are used to rate a particular service; the customer’s concern must be validated and contract requirements reviewed to determine if services were accomplished IAW the contract and/or PWS. Claims of unsatisfactory performance which cannot be substantiated and/or validated by COR will not be held against the contractor. Regardless, the total of all feedbacks (services met/not met) will be captured and included in a power point slide presentation for statistical trend/analysis purposes and as a matter of record. The presentation will address as a minimum the following questions/categories; a) Did the contractor provide services needed? b) Were the services provided in a timely manner? c) Was the aircraft properly configured? and d) Did the aircraft/equipment status meet mission requirements? In developing the critique/feedback form, the contractor may pose different questions providing they meet the concerns of the Government.

7.4.2 Contractor will manage the customer feedback/critique program (see PWS). Contractor will pull all feedbacks/critiques submitted upon aircraft mission return/debrief session as well as any submitted other than debrief. Provide the FC/COR Chief a legible copy NLT next business day and a response/reply back to the customer NLT 5 business days (see PWS).

7.4.3. Upon receipt Government will scan critique/feedback in COR database and track 5 business day suspense timeline. Unique circumstances may require an expedited response which will be determined by the FC and/or Chief COR.

7.4.4. Customer Feedback’s will not carry a point value; they will be compiled merely for trend analysis (# met/not met) purposes and provided to 11 Wing leadership to assist in assessing contractor effectiveness in addressing/correcting concerns identified on the customer critique/feedback.

7.5 COR Monthly Report

COR shall submit a monthly summary assessment report to the CO and FC no later than the first week (5 business days) of the month following the assessed month. The report shall identify the number of assessments scheduled and conducted, the number of unacceptable performances observed, the number of Corrective Action Reports issued, number of valid complaints, any significant contractor performance discrepancies, and a rating of the Contractor’s overall performance. The report shall be signed and dated by the COR and FC and uploaded into CORT Tool. The CO on the 6th business day will verify the monthly report is in CORT Tool.

7.6 Performance Ratings

The COR will rate each one of the assessment elements using a pass/fail rating in their narrative summary.

8. Unacceptable Performance

8.1 Unacceptable Performance

8.1.1 When the contractor’s performance is deemed unacceptable, COR will determine the cause of the unacceptable performance. If any Government action, or lack of action, caused or contributed to the unacceptable performance, the unacceptable performance will not be counted against the contractor. The COR will take action to ensure Government action, or lack of action, does not interfere with the Contractor’s performance in the future. The COR will completely document the circumstance.

8.1.2 When the unacceptable performance is not the result of Government action, or lack of action, COR shall promptly notify the contractor and issue a Corrective Action Report (CAR) to the contractor to assure corrective action is taken. By initialing and dating the CAR, the contractor is acknowledging that s/he has been informed of the unacceptable performance and is not agreeing with the performance assessment. COR shall direct the contractor to re-perform the service, if possible, without additional cost to the Government. If the contractor challenges the validity of the COR’s unacceptable assessment finding, and the COR and contractor cannot come to an agreement, the matter shall be referred to the Contracting Officer for resolution. The contractor shall be required to return all completed CARs to the COR no later than the suspense date indicated on the CAR.

8.1.3 Unacceptable performance re-performed by the Contractor shall still count as unacceptable performance.

8.1.4 The COR shall maintain a CAR log of all CARs issued to the Contractor (a locally devised form may be used). The CAR log shall contain the CAR number, date issued, contractor, description of unacceptable performance, suspense date, and closeout date. All CARs and CAR logs shall be maintained by the COR for the life of the contract.

8.2 Contracting Officer Notification

8.2.1 Major Finding. If at any time COR identify a condition as having a significant adverse effect on the quality of the activity, such as those stated below, COR shall document their findings and notify the Contracting Officer immediately in writing. Email is acceptable.

8.2.2 Contractor failure to meet a Performance Threshold.

8.2.3 Failure to provide adequate corrective action to preclude reoccurrence of Government identified findings.

8.2.4 Failure to provide corrective action to deficiencies identified by the contractor within a prescribed suspense period.

8.2.5 Any failure to adhere to security regulations that results in a security incident.

8.2.6 Minor Finding. A departure from established standards having little bearing on the service provided. When COR identify a minor finding, the COR shall document the findings, but is not required to notify the Contracting Officer.

However, if the same minor finding is identified two months in a row, it may be an indication that a major finding is occurring or has occurred because the Contractor has not taken proper steps to prevent recurrence. In this case, the COR shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing.

8.3 Remedies for Unacceptable Performance

8.3.1 In accordance with the contract Inspection of Services clause, if any of the services do not conform to contract requirements; the Government may require the Contractor to perform the services again in conformity with contract requirements, at no increase in contract amount. This includes but is not limited to termination of Contractor personnel and recruitment of substitute personnel that are equally qualified within established timeframes. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-performance, the Government may:

8.3.2 Require the Contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements; and

8.3.3 Reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed. This may include a reduction in the number of paid hours to reflect the total non-performance period.

8.3.4 If the Contractor fails to promptly perform the services again or to take the necessary action to ensure future performance in conformity with contract requirements, the Government may:

8.3.5 By contract or otherwise, perform the services and charge to the Contractor any cost incurred by the Government that is directly related to the performance of such service; or

8.3.6 Decrement invoice as stated in the PWS related to performance; or

8.3.7 Terminate the contract.

9. Certification/Acceptance of Services

9.1 COR will coordinate with the resource advisor (RA) to certify receipt of acceptable contractor services each month. The COR will certify that acceptable services were received, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract. The RA will certify receipt of contractor services via the Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) website. Certification of services shall be accomplished on the first workday following the completion of the contract payment period, to avoid payment of interest penalties.

APPENDIX A

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. FUNCTIONAL AREA

5. SUSPENSE DATE

6. CONTROL NUMBER

7. DEFICIENCY MAJOR MINOR

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

Please respond with a written corrective action plan that details the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 5. If date was not entered in Block 5, the contractor is not required to provide a response.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

11. COR DETERMINATION

ACCEPTED REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

APPENDIX B

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NUMBER

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR) APPENDIX C

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACT/TASK ORDER NUMBER 2. CONTRACTOR 3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE

5. COR PHONE 6. SUSPENSE DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY)

NEW

REPEAT

NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM REVIEWED

9. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEFICIENCY (IF DEFICIENCY BOX WAS

CHECKED)

10. DETAILED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

II. CONTRACTOR VALIDATION

11. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CONCUR NON-CONCUR

12. CORRECTIVE ACTION ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE

13. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTION OF RECURRENCE OR REASON FOR NON-

CONCURRENCE OF COR CITED DEFICIENCY

III. ACTION CORRECTED

14. CONCUR NON-CONCUR COR SIGNATURE AND DATE

15. COR REMARKS (REQUIRED)

16. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS