FAST QASP.doc

Attachment 2 - QASP

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Flight Attendant Simulator Training and Rodeo Support Table of Contents

1. Vision

2. Mission

3. Purpose

4. Authority

5. Roles and Responsibilities

6. Performance Requirements and Methods of Surveillance

7. Assessment Procedures

8. Acceptance of Services

9. Contract Management Appendices:

1. Service Summary

2. Corrective Action Report

3. Customer Complaint Record

4. Performance Assessment Report

1. Vision The United States Air Force (USAF) Air Mobility Command (AMC)/A3T, in coordination with other major commands (MAJCOMs), approves mission qualification training for aircrews, continuation training and locally taught upgrade courses. The overall vision of the aircrew training program is to develop and maintain a high state of mission readiness for immediate and effective employment in exercises, peacekeeping operations, contingencies, and war.

2. Mission In order to maintain a high state of mission readiness, AMC/A3T seeks to provide high quality training for flight attendants. Specifically, this requirement shall ensure flight attendants for the C-20B, C-20H, C-37A , C-37B, C-32, E-4, and VC-25 are provided professional aircraft egress simulator training which will encompass normal and emergency procedures, emergency equipment, in-flight illness training, and aircraft simulator training.

3. Purpose This QASP is a government-developed document used to determine if the contractor’s performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The QASP establishes procedures on how this assessment/inspection process will be conducted. It provides the detailed process for a continuous oversight process:

· What will be monitored?

· How will monitoring take place?

· Who will conduct monitoring?

· How will monitoring efforts and results be documented?

The contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards using its Quality Control Plan (QCP). The QASP provides the structure for the government’s surveillance of the contractor’s performance to assure that it meets contract standards. It is the government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating contractor performance.

The QASP is not part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the contractor’s quality control plan. This QASP is a living document. Flexibility in the QASP is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on contractor performance.

The government may provide a copy of the QASP to the contractor to facilitate open communication. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen or uncontrollable circumstances might occur that are outside the control of the contractor.

Bottom line, the QASP should ensure early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance.

4. Authority Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under FAR 37.604, 46.4, and the clause at 52.212-4 (Contract Terms and Conditions – Commercial Items), 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 (CO) or a duly authorized representative.

5. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE MULTI-FUNCTIONAL TEAM

The following personnel comprise the Multi-Functional Team (MFT) and shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities:

COR Supervisor – The COR Supervisor nominates the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), ensures the COR is trained before performing any COR duties and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities.

COR Supervisor: Maj Jason Kuhns Organization or Agency: HQ AMC A3T/A3TA Telephone: (618) 229-3604 Email: jason.kuhns@us.af.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. The CO shall also determine the final assessment of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned CO: Ms. Mary Andich Organization or Agency: HQ AMC/A7KQB Telephone: (618) 256-9942 Email: Mary.Andich@us.af.mil Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The COR shall keep a Quality Assurance (QA) file that accurately documents the contractor’s actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the CO. The COR is required to provide an annual performance assessment to the CO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the primary tool for documenting contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the government’s behalf.

Assigned COR: MSgt Shawn Chada Organization or Agency: HQ AMC A3/A3TA Telephone: (618) 229-8560 Email: shawn.chada@us.af.mil Alternate COR: Mr. Louis Santiago Organization or Agency: HQ AMC/AM3TA Telephone: (618) 229-8559 Email: Louis.Santiago@us.af.mil Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC) The QAPC is responsible for developing, managing, and implementing the Quality Assurance Program. The QAPC also provides refresher training as needed.

Assigned QAPC: Mr. Michael Hoh

Organization or Agency: HQ AMC/A7KQE Telephone: (618) 256-4393

Email: michael.hoh.1@us.af.mil

Contractor Representatives

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s Program Manager and Task Manager for this contract. (To be completed after contract award)

Program Manager -

Telephone:

Email:

Task Manager - Telephone:

Email:

Other Key Contract Personnel -

Title:

Telephone:

Email:

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 Quality Control (QC)/QA actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract.

6.2. Surveillance Matrix

The Surveillance Matrix and Services Summaries (Appendices 1 and 2) are the lists of performance objectives and thresholds that must be performed by the contractor. These matrices detail the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance Thresholds define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The government performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element thresholds.

Methods. Course Critiques and Periodic Surveillance or Random Sampling will be the standard contract performance review and analysis processes used in evaluating the contractor’s performance. The PWS should be used to form the foundation of the COR’s inspection checklist. Definition of surveillance methods:

AMC Form 246, Student Course Critiques. Upon completion of training, the contractor shall provide each student with a copy of AMC Form 246, Student Course Critique. Each student shall complete the form and return it to the contractor. The form queries the students with regard to quality of training materials, instruction, facilities and overall satisfaction with the course.

Periodic Surveillance or Random Sampling. The results of the random inspection will determine the government’s next course of action. For example, if performance is marginal or unsatisfactory, the COR needs to document that inspection finding and begin corrective action. If performance is acceptable, the COR needs to document this finding as well and may reduce the sample size or sampling frequency.

6.3.

Performance Rating Definitions (only for CPARS-applicable contracts) The contractor’s performance will be rated on a quarterly basis in addition to the annual Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). In the case of unsatisfactory performance, the remedies afforded to the government include: less than satisfactory ratings on CPARS, reducing or withholding payment, not exercising option periods, and terminating the contract. In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings shall be used:

Exceptional – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was 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 assessed 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 assessed 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 Corrective Action Report (CAR) (Appendix 3)

Corrective Action reporting is designed for reporting two types of discrepancies: minor and major.

Minor discrepancies consist of instances of non-routine contract noncompliance, which are usually immediately correctable by the contractor. Some examples would be data deliverables with minor grammatical or spelling errors, insufficient copies of documents, and late deliveries of plans and reports. Minor discrepancies will be reported verbally by the COR to the designated contractor representatives. Uncorrected minor discrepancies will be reported in writing by the CO addressed to the contractor’s senior manager. This could be in the form of a Letter of Concern, Letter of Forbearance, Show Cause or Cure Notices: The type of correspondence is at the discretion of the CO.

Major discrepancies consist of multiple minor discrepancies or instances of non-routine contract noncompliance which are of such a magnitude that formal documentation by the COR and coordination with the CO are deemed necessary. Two examples would be late delivery of architectures, and untimely responses to customer complaints or issues. Major discrepancies will be reported in writing by the COR to the designated contractor representative. Copies of written correspondence will be coordinated with the CO prior to issuance to the contractor representative. Uncorrected major discrepancies will be reported in writing by the CO addressed to the contractor’s senior manager. This could be in the form of a Letter of Concern, Letter of Forbearance, Show Cause or Cure Notices: The type of correspondence is at the discretion of the CO.

7.2 AMC Form 246, Student Course Critique (Appendix 4)

The results of the student course critiques will determine the government’s next course of action. For example, if more than one valid student complaint concerning quality of instruction is received during a training session quarter, the COR needs to document that finding. The COR shall receive, document, and validate or invalidate all complaints. If the complaint is invalid, the COR shall contact the complainant and explain why the complaint was invalid. If the complaint is valid, the COR needs to document this finding as well, and begin corrective action.

7.3 Performance Assessment Report (Appendix 5)

All evaluations will be at the Task Order level.

8. Contract Management The contractor will immediately notify the CO or COR 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 (i.e. CAR reports, customer complaints/incident reports, etc.)

9. Appendices

Appendix 1 – Flight Attendant Simulator Surveillance Matrix and Services Summary

Appendix 2 – Rodeo Support Surveillance Matrix and Services Summary

Appendix 3 - Corrective Action Report (CAR)

Appendix 4 – AMC form 246, Student Course Critique Appendix 5 – Performance Assessment Report

APPENDIX 1

FLIGHT ATTENDANT SIMULATOR

SURVEILLANCE MATRIX AND SERVICES SUMMARY

Para.

Provide mock drills on simulator equipment

APPENDIX 2

RODEO SUPPORT

SURVEILLANCE MATRIX AND SERVICES SUMMARY

Para.

Provide mock scenarios on simulator equipment

APPENDIX 3

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

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 FORMCHECKBOX

MAJOR FORMCHECKBOX

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

FORMCHECKBOX

ACCEPTED FORMCHECKBOX

REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

APPENDIX 4

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

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

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. FORMCHECKBOX

DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY)

FORMCHECKBOX

NEW

FORMCHECKBOX

REPEAT

FORMCHECKBOX

NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM REVIEWED

II. CONTRACTOR VALIDATION

11. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE FORMCHECKBOX

CONCUR FORMCHECKBOX

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. FORMCHECKBOX

CONCUR FORMCHECKBOX

NON-CONCUR COR SIGNATURE AND DATE

15. COR REMARKS (REQUIRED)

6. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS