Performance Plan

Performance Plan For PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT FOR PACKING, CONTAINERIZATION AND LOCAL DRAYAGE OF DIRECT PROCUREMENT METHOD (DPM) PERSONAL PROPERTY SHIPMENTS FOR TRAVIS AFB COUNTIES (Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Mono, Napa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Yolo Counties)” Travis AFB, CA Date:

May 2008

1. OVERVIEW. This performance plan details how the Packing, Containerization, and Local Drayage of Direct Procurement Method (DPM) Personal Property Shipments service contract for Travis AFB counties will be managed by the multi-functional team throughout its life cycle. This plan will focus on the level of performance required by the Performance Work Statement (PWS), not the methodology or process.

2. OBJECTIVE. The objective of the contract is to provide personal property shipments (moves) for DoD personnel at Travis AFB counties listed in the PWS. Services performed under this PWS shall be in accordance with mandatory DoD instructions and regulations prescribed in Appendix 2, and all applicable federal, state, and local regulations. The contractor is encouraged and expected to use innovative approaches to efficiently accomplish PWS requirements in a timely manner and in a way that fosters pride and ownership of the work being performed.

3. GOALS. Through proper use of this plan and a cooperative relationship with the contractor, the multi-functional team anticipates cost savings and performance efficiencies as a result of the shift from oversight to insight, as conditions and quality assurance requirements evolve over the life of the contract. Additional goals are as follows:

Maximize performance

Encourage innovation

Promote performance-based services

Increase awareness that performance-based services require participation from all team members

4. MULTI-FUNCTIONAL TEAM MEMBERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

(Reference AFI 63-124, Chapter 2. for responsibilities)

Contracting Officer

(CO)

Contract Administrator (CA)

Quality Assurance Personnel Coordinator (QAPC)

Functional Commander (FC) Quality Assurance Personnel (QAP)

4.1. Methods and Tools to Assess Contractor performance. Quality assurance will be based on the Government’s evaluation of results, not the frequency or method of performance. However, the government may use100%, Periodic observations, Customer feedback and third party audits. Performance must meet the prescribed performance objectives stated in the Service Delivery Summary to be acceptable.

5. NON-SDS ITEMS

For required tasks not shown on the SDS, including all other tasks in the SOW and reference documents, the Government still retains the right to inspect any item included in the contract in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 46, Inspection of Services clauses. Inspection of these services will be performed in the same general manner as periodic surveillance items mentioned above. The results of these inspections are documented and, if necessary, are provided to the CO for action. Should a discrepancy be observed, the CO will handle each documented discrepancy on a case-by-case basis.

5.1. When unacceptable services are observed, the QAE must determine whether unacceptable performance was within the contractor’s control. If unacceptable performance is determined to be attributable to the Contractor, the QAE will initiate a CDR.

5.2. When performance is determined to be unacceptable, the QAE must inform the contractor's on-site representative that performance is unacceptable and why, and request his/her initials and date on the CDR. By initialing and dating the form, the contractor's on-site representative is acknowledging that they have been informed of the unacceptable performance. This is not intended to constitute agreement that unacceptable performance has occurred. If the contractor wishes to dispute the results of the assessment, the QAE may refer the matter to the CO for resolution.

5.3. Completion Instructions of the CDR on DD Form 2772:

5.3.1. The QAE fills in Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a, and 6. The report number in Block 2 will be made up of the first two letters of the contractors name, the last two digits of the calendar year and a three digit number starting with 001 and progressing upward throughout the calendar year. The QAE will insert the Contractor response due date in Block 9 by stating “Please Respond by (date)”. This due date is normally ten working days from the date entered in Block 5a. The QAE then presents the DD 2772 to the Contractor.

5.3.2. The Contractor completes Blocks 9 and 10 with their response to the discrepancy by the due date entered in Block 9 and return it to the QAE.

5.3.3. Upon receipt from the Contractor, the QAE reviews the Contractor's response and determines if any further action is necessary for correction and prevention of recurrence.

5.3.4. If the QAE determines no future action is necessary the QAE responds “yes” in Block 5c and completes Block 11. The QAE sends a copy to the Contractor and files the CDR for future reference.

5.3.5. If the QAE determines the Contractor's input in Block 9 does not satisfy requirements, the QAE responds “No” in block 5c and complete Block 11. The QAE inputs "JPPSO-COS" in Block 8a. The QAE inputs the Contractor's name in block 8b and forwards the CDR and all supporting data to:

JPPSO-COS, DPM Manager

121 S. Tejon St., Suite 800 Colorado Springs, CO 80903

5.3.6. JPPSO’s DPM Manager reviews the CDR and all supporting data, gathers QAE and/or Contractor inputs as necessary and determines necessary action needed. The DPM Manager advises the FC of the determination made. Upon concurrence, the FC fills in the action taken in Block 12 and signs Block 7 for the Contracting Officer. The FC informs both the QAE and the Contractor of what action has been decided upon. The FC should consult the Contracting Officer whenever there is a question of the appropriate course of action to be taken.

5.3.7. A courtesy copy of each CDR will be provided to the contract assigned QAS when first initiated and presented to the contractor(s). A courtesy copy of each finalized CDR will also be provided to the QAS. This provides the QAS the opportunity to assist or advise QAEs, if needed, as well as tracking trends associated with performance of the contractor(s).

6. Performance Assessment Folders. Developed and maintained by QAPs. Folders may be maintained in hard copy, electronic format (preferred method), or any combination thereof provided there is adequate backup of all soft data to prevent loss. In the case of multiple QAP working on one contract, folders may be combined to avoid duplicate documentation. DD Form 2861, Cross Reference Sheet, or a locally developed form should be used to identify the location of shared or electronic files. Directory paths and file names should be clearly identified.

6.1. Performance Assessment Folder Sections. Folders must contain the following six sections and may contain other items that the folder owner finds necessary:

Section 1: SOW.

Section 2: This performance plan and the contractor’s quality control plan.

Section 3: Activity Log A. Chronological log of actions taken in the performance of QAP duties. The purpose of this log is to provide a brief synopsis of contract inspection activities, meetings, and conversations with the contractor regarding PWS performance. Documentation that supports activity log entries should be maintained in the records section of the Performance Assessment Folder.

Section 4: Assignment Letter/Inspection Authority Letter/Training Certificates. This section must include the folder owner’s inspection authority letter from the CO and the assignment letter from the FC as well as Phase 1 and 2 training certification.

Section 5: Records. Contains documentation associated with performance management and assessment such as forms DD 2772 and 2773, correspondence, letters of interpretation from the CO/CS, documents that support the Activity Log, etc… Section 6: Other Items. Any other items deemed necessary such as access letters, publications, or other information that needs to be readily available.

6.2. Performance Assessment Phases. Performance Assessment is accomplished in three phases:

6.2.1. Phase 1: QAP Assessment. Assessments are conducted and documented on DD2772 and DD2773 forms IAW this plan.

6.2.2. Phase 2: Contractor Assessment. The contractor assesses their own performance. This information may be reviewed at any time by QAP.

6.2.3. Phase 3: Quality Audit. The QAS performs audits of the contractor’s quality program upon request.

6.2.4. Performance Plan Maintenance. QAPs should remain aware of this plans effectiveness and recommend changes to maintain that effectiveness. This plan will also undergo a formal annual review to assess and maintain currency and continued effectiveness. The process for recommending improvements to this plan consists of the following: MFT Meetings and written communications such as e-mail, etc. to the MFT and QAS. The QAS will adjust the plan based on MFT inputs.

6.6. QAE Staff Assistance Visit (SAV). SAVs will be conducted upon request to determine that assessment and documentation is being accomplished IAW this plan. Written SAV results will be provided to the FC, CO and the QAD. The QAS, QAD or the QAPC may conduct SAVs.

6.7. Special Audits. Special Audits may be requested of the QAD by the FC.

7. Performance Reporting.

7.1. QAE Inputs to the FC. The QAEs are required to report detailed results of Performance Objective verifications to the FC on a monthly basis by submitting a summary of the results of the DD Form 2773s accomplished and any other inspection data that was gathered during the course of the month. A copy of all CDRs will also be provided to the FC.

7.2. Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR). The CPAR is an annual assessment of contractor performance and is based on objective facts supported by performance assessment and management data. The reports are used to provide past performance information to acquisition professionals for use in future acquisitions.

7.3. Management and Oversight of Acquisition Services Processes (MOASP) The Air Forces defined approach to the management of the procurement of services to include management structure, responsibilities of the designated official (DO), review thresholds and advance approval of non-performance based contracts. The MOASP applies to service acquisitions over the simplified acquisition threshold. The MFT prepares and submits the MOASP annually IAW reporting instructions from higher headquarters.

TABLE G-2 SERVICE DELIVERY SUMMARY

8. General. The Service Delivery Summary (SDS) is a listing of significant performance objectives (services required) with associated performance thresholds (specific standards) derived from the SOW. It is very important to note that all PWS requirements need to be complied with. Items that are found to be out of compliance with PWS requirements will be identified when found and the Contractor's Quality Checks should still focus on ensuring all requirements are met. The significant PWS performance objectives are determined by any of the following criteria:

9. Quality Control Program: The contractor shall utilize its own internal Quality Control processes in the performance of this contract. The quality control plan and supporting documentation shall be made available to the Government for review upon request, should there be repeated unsatisfactory performance. In order to supplement the contractor’s quality control program, government personnel will verify contractor compliance with mission essential performance requirements. The Quality Assurance Personnel (QAP) will verify the key performance objectives. It is the responsibility of the Functional Commander (FC) and QAP to review these key objectives to assess their applicability and recommend the addition or subtraction as conditions warrant.

10. Customer Complaint Program.

11. Any personnel and receivers of the contractor’s performance that observe unacceptable services, either incomplete or not performed, for any contracted services, should immediately contact the QAP by telephone, email, letter, or fax, who in turn will notify the contractor. The recipient of the complaint shall immediately provide a copy to applicable parties. The QAP will document and validate the customer complaints. The contractor shall review and take immediate corrective action for all complaints.

12. If the QAP identifies recurring instances of unsatisfactory performance, they may request to review the contractor’s internal quality control processes to ensure that they are sufficient.

13. All valid customer complaints shall be re-performed if applicable, as soon as possible after notification, but prior to the next service period. If the contractor challenges the validity of the complaint and the QAP and contractor cannot come to agreement, the customer complaint will be forwarded to the Contracting Officer (CO) for resolution. Customer complaints will be tracked and if the performance threshold is exceeded, action will be taken by the CO in accordance with the applicable Inspection/Acceptance clause.

14. The contractor is required to develop and maintain a customer complaint program with a log/schedule for each area covered in the SOW. This log/schedule should identify each valid customer complaint with the corrective action taken annotating response time, to include validation of the complaint. The contractor shall submit a report to the QAP identifying the above information at the end of each month.

15. Performance Management. This section identifies the use of performance measurement information to effective positive change in organizational culture, systems, and processes, by helping to set agreed upon performance goals, allocating and prioritizing resources, informing managers to either confirm or change current policy or program directions to meet those goals, and sharing results of performance in pursuing those goals.

16. Market Research: On-going market research is conducted to ensure the contract requirements remain current with commercial standards, practices and industry performance evaluation methods.

17. QAP Records Review: The contract administrator will review the QAP’s surveillance files no less than semi-annually to ensure surveillance is properly conducted and documented, and contractor performance is within acceptable levels. This review will be documented and acknowledged by the CO and FC.

a. Surveillance Files: An inspection file must be developed and maintained by the primary QAP. This folder is typically contained in hard copy, but may be maintained in a computer database provided there is adequate back up of the data to preclude accidental loss. The surveillance folder must contain the following sections, but may contain any other sections or information that the QAP finds useful.

(1) Section 1: Performance Plan

(2) Section 2: Contractor’s Quality Control Plan (QCP) (if required)

(3) Section 3: Surveillance Documents – The type of information that may be included are details of inspections or data gathering, conversations or meetings with the contractor, notes and comments that may be of value at some later date.

(4) Section 4: Contract – The portions of the contract that apply to the functional area(s) of the surveillance folder, e.g., PWS chapters, directive documents, references, pertinent terms defined by the contract, equipment listings, etc.

(5) Section 5: Appointment Letters/Certificates of Training – QAP appointment letters and training certificates and Letter of Delegation to the assigned Functional Commander.

(6) Section 6: Records – A section used for filing all documentation associated with contract quality assurance, e.g., correspondence, CO inputs, and customer complaints.

18. Performance Feedback: Documentation is required to record, evaluate, and report contractor’s performance. On a monthly basis, the QAP will complete an evaluation of contractor performance and forward it to the CO that includes the following assessment elements.

19. Performance Ratings:

Performance

Rating Criteria

20. 60 CONS Management and Oversight of Acquisition of Services Process (MOASP) 37-1.

20.1. 30-day Assumption of Workload Review: All services acquisitions with a value in excess of $100,000 will be reviewed by the appropriate designated official within 30 days of the contractor’s full assumption of contract workload (for example, end of transition, phase-in, or similar event). The purpose of the review is to determine if the contractor successfully completed transition, is fully operational, and is within other performance parameters required by the contract. The QAP will conduct the initial 30-day post award review utilizing the monthly QAP report form and submit the report to the designated official. The designated office will determine if the contractor has or has not successfully completed transition, is fully operational, and is within other performance parameters required by the contract. In the event that the 30-day post award review indicates negative performance, the designated official will identify the specific categories of non compliance (i.e., negative variation in cost, schedule, and/or other significant performance metrics, etc.), and provide an explanation of the causes for the variance and an assessment of the contractor’s corrective action plan. Negative performance reports shall be forwarded to HQ AMC/A7K.

20.2. Annual Performance Review: All services acquisitions with a value in excess of $100,000 will be reviewed annually. This review is to be conducted not later than 30 days prior to issuing the notification of the Government’s intent to fund the follow-on year. The contract specialist will include a paragraph addressing the annual review in the CO’s determination to exercise the option. The statement shall be written to address contractor performance. The designated official will sign the CO’s determination.

Any negative variations in cost, schedule and/or other significant performance measures required by the contract will be reported to HQ AMC/A7K.

20.3. Any significant changes in anticipated cost/price, schedule, or performance expectations are subject to a special review at the direction of the AFPEO/CM, HQ AMC/A7K, or other designated official.

SIGNATURE PAGE

Doug Engberson, Lt Col, USAF

60th Aerial Port Squadron Commander

Quality Assurance Personnel (Primary)

Quality Assurance Personnel (Alternate)

Ms. Michele Agee Long (QAPC) Quality Assurance Program Coordinator

Contracting Officer

PAGE