ITW_AA_QASP.docx

INTEGRATED TACTICAL WARNING/ATTACK ASSESSMENT (ITW/AA) SIMULATION SUPPORT

Contract # TBD Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

_______________________________ Date: ______________ Contracting Officer Representative

_______________________________ Date: ______________ Contract Administrator

______________________________ Date: ______________ Contracting Officer

______________________________ Date: ______________ Contractor

Table of Contents

Attachments

1. OVERVIEW

1.1. Purpose. The purpose of this Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is to identify the methods and procedures the Government will use to insure it receives the services under contract as identified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). This plan will focus on the level of performance required by the PWS, not the methodology or process. The QASP is an evolving document whose development begins with acquisition planning, and finalized as the acquisition progresses. The QASP will be signed by the Contracting Officer Representative (COR), Contract Administrator, Contracting Officer and the Contractor.

1.2. Intent. The intent of this plan is to rely on the Contractor’s quality control, thus changing the Government’s role from “oversight” to “insight”. Performance Objectives (PO) will be periodically monitored and the quality program evaluated but the Contractor is left as free as possible to develop the most efficient methodology to meet and exceed the required thresholds of service.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

2.1. Scope of Work. The contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, tools, materials, supervision, and other items and services necessary to provide services as defined in the PWS, except as specified in Section 5, Government Furnished Material. The contractor shall perform to the standards in this contract. The estimated quantities of work are listed in the PWS paragraph 4, Requirement – Specific Task Description.

2.2. Contract. This contract is a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) type contract and FAR 52.246-4, Inspection of Services- Fixed Price will apply.

3. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE.

Due to specific requirements of this contract, the COR shall be responsible for monitoring compliance with the standards required per the PWS. The COR must notify the Contracting Officer in a timely manner, orally and in writing, if the contractor is not performing well, i.e., if contractor performance deviates from the PWS. It is the responsibility of the Contracting Officer — and only the Contracting Officer — to give verbal or written directions to the contractor.

4. CONTRACT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS.

The Contractor’s Performance Objectives and Standards requirements are defined in paragraph 9, Service Summary of the PWS. The contractor shall implement a Quality Control Plan (QCP) to ensure the government receives the level of quality that is consistent with the requirements specified in the contract.

5. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT APPROACH

5.1. Purpose. This section details the method(s) used to verify Contractor compliance with PWS requirements. The key elements of this process are the Contractor's quality program and government identified performance objectives. The performance objectives identified in paragraph 8, Performance Objectives of this document dictate the minimum performance threshold requirements. The COR must accomplish inspections on a periodic basis to ensure compliance. This QASP provides the procedures on how to conduct the evaluations for Performance Objectives and how to document them in a correct and effective manner.

5.2. Performance Assessment Approach. To facilitate the Performance assessment of the Contractor's quality program, the COR will verify Contractor compliance with designated Performance Objectives. The intent of the Performance assessment approach is to gain confidence in the Contractor’s ability to provide satisfactory services and then adjusting the level of Performance assessment to a point that maintains confidence. This Performance assessment approach is subject to change based on the Contractor’s performance.

5.3. Annual Review. The COR must review the QASP Performance objectives, assess their applicability and recommend the addition or subtraction of Performance Objectives as conditions warrant. This review must be accomplished annually as a minimum.

5.4. Special Audits. The COR must be alert to conditions that would warrant a special quality audit. Any time the COR observes that a functional area is out of acceptable tolerance or that the technical expertise is not available, a request for a functional area quality audit should be addressed to the Contracting Officer.

5.5. Contracting Officer Representative Tracking (CORT) Tool. IAW the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement Procedures, Guidance and Information (DFARS PGI) 201.602-2, all DoD agencies are to use the CORT Tool for all contracts for which a COR has been designated. The COR shall maintain an electronic file in the CORT Tool for each contract assigned. This file must include, at a minimum:

5.5.1. COR nominations, appointments, terminations, and training certifications for service contracts along with a copy of the contracting officer's letter of designation and other documentation describing the COR's duties and responsibilities.

5.5.2. An approved (signed) copy of this document (QASP).

5.5.3. Performance Assessment Reports (PAR): A chronological log of actions taken in the accomplishment of Quality Assurance assigned Performance Requirements. The purpose of this log is to provide a brief synopsis of an inspection of Contractor provided services or a meeting/ conversation with the contractor regarding PWS performance in a given functional area.

5.5.4 A copy of the contract. The portion of the contract that applies to the functional area(s) of the Performance assessment folder (e.g., PWS chapters, directive document references, pertinent terms defined by the contract, etc). If the COR has access to Electronic Document Access (EDA) a copy of the contract is available via the EDA website.

5.5.5. Contracting officers, as well as the requiring activities (or the COR’s supervisor), shall, as a minimum, annually review the COR’s files for accuracy and completeness. The results of the contracting officer’s review shall be documented in the CORT Tool.

5.5.6. Prior to contract closeout, the COR will deliver the COR files for the assigned contract to the contracting officer for incorporation into the contract file.

5.6 Deficiency Identification. Effective contract Performance assessment relies on identification of unacceptable performance – Contractor Identified Discrepancies (CIDs) and Government Identified Discrepancies (GIDs).

5.6.1. Contractor Identified Discrepancies (CIDs). CIDs are generated when contract employees detect discrepancies during performance of routine daily services or through the contractor’s Quality Control Program. When CIDs are reviewed by the applicable COR, that person will take the following actions:

5.6.1.1. Review corrective actions taken by the contractor to resolve a discrepancy.

5.6.1.2. Determine whether the discrepancy has been corrected. If the discrepancy has been resolved, review the corrective action taken and any applicable procedures the contractor has established to preclude recurrence of the problem.

5.6.1.3. If a CID has not been resolved and the Contractor has established an Estimated Completion Date (ECD) for resolution of the discrepancy, the COR will monitor the Contractor’s efforts in resolving the discrepancy. If the COR determines the estimated completion date for resolution of the discrepancy is excessive based on the nature of the discrepancy, the CO will be notified. The CO can then evaluate the recommendation to determine the appropriate course of action.

5.7. Government Identified Discrepancies (GIDs). GIDs are generated as a result of COR’s inspection of contractor performance that identifies noncompliance with contractual requirements. The Contracting Officer Representative (COR) will record a GID on a Corrective Action Report (CAR) (Atch 1 & Para 6). Before a CAR is generated, the Contractor will be given the opportunity to show whether the discrepancy has already been identified. If documentation exists which substantiates that the contractors quality program has identified the discrepancy and timely corrective action is being taken to address the discrepancy, a CAR will not be initiated.

5.8 Customer Complaints. All customer complaints will be submitted electronically utilizing the form at Atch 2 and uploaded to the CORT Tool. When customer complaints are to be used as the method of Performance Assessment, the following must be accomplished:

5.8.1. The COR will educate customers of the service being provided by the contractor.

5.8.2. The customer feedback form shall include clear and simple instructions to the customer on recording their comments. The form should allow for both positive and negative comments.

5.8.3. If immediate response to a complaint is needed, the COR will provide the customer with instructions on how to proceed.

5.8.4. The COR will gather all completed customer feedback forms.

5.8.5. The COR will conduct an investigation to determine the validity of any negative comments received.

5.8.6. If the COR determines that the negative comment is not valid, the customer will be informed of the reason(s) why and carry on further correspondence if necessary. For validated negative comments, coordinated with the Contracting Officer, the COR will notify the Contractor to allow the opportunity for investigation and comment. The COR will refer to the procedure in paragraph 6 to determine whether it is necessary to initiate a CAR.

5.8.7. The COR will also notify the customer of the corrective action taken by the contractor, if applicable.

5.8.8. The COR, with assistance from the Contracting Officer (CO), will conduct trend analysis of validated negative comments.

6. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION

6.1. Corrective Action Report (CAR). The CAR is used by COR to document contract requirement findings and subsequent corrective actions to be taken. A computer-generated CAR may be used to provide the information on the CAR remains the same. See attachment 1 for example and instructions for completing.

6.1.1. The COR identifying the discrepancy is responsible for completing the CAR utilizing the instructions attached. If there are other questions as to how the CAR is completed, that individual should consult the CO.

6.1.2. Consult the assigned Contract Administrator to give them the opportunity to assist and advise how the CAR is to be worded. Forward a copy of the initiated CAR to the Contracting Officer.

6.2. Categories of Findings. A finding is any Government-identified noncompliance with contract requirements that specifies that an activity or action did not take place or was not performed to the quality or timeliness standard required by the contract. A finding can be categorized as either Major or Minor. Findings will be documented on a CAR and must also be tracked in the activity log (example at Atch 3). Major/Minor Findings are defined as follows:

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

6.2.1.1. Failure to meet a Performance Threshold.

6.2.1.2. Significant mission degradation in any Contractor operated function.

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

6.2.1.4. Failure to provide adequate corrective action to preclude reoccurrence of government identified findings.

6.2.1.5. Failure to provide corrective action to deficiencies identified by the Contractor within a prescribed suspense period

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

6.2.2. Minor Finding. A departure from established standards having little bearing on service provided. However, if the same minor finding is repeatedly identified, it may be an indication that Major Finding (d) above is occurring or has occurred because the contractor quality system has not acted to prevent recurrence. In this case, the Minor Finding should be elevated to the level of a Major Finding and a new CAR initiated.

6.3. Performance Assessment Report. COR must document Performance assessment as it is accomplished. The Performance Assessment Report (PAR) is an official government record of inspections of the performance objectives and other inspection items and uploaded to the CORT Tool for record purposes. The COR shall complete a PAR (example at Atch 4) as required but as a minimum on an annual basis.

7. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:

7.1. Contracting Officer Representatives (COR)

7.1.1. Individuals designated to perform quality assessment functions, and manage performance in accordance with the QASP. They serve as on-site technical managers assessing contractor performance against performance thresholds indicated in the service summary.

Evaluating and documenting contractor’s performance in accordance with the QASP.

7.1.2. Notify the Contracting Officer of any significant performance deficiencies.

7.1.3. Maintain surveillance documentation.

7.1.4. Recommend improvements to the QASP and PWS throughout the life of the contract.

7.2. Contracting Officer/Contract Administrator

7.2.1. Responsible for contract management. Implementation of the Performance Plan after contract award by the multi-functional team. Integrates the goals and objectives identified by the multi-functional team, oversight and performance management, and performance measurement in accordance with the QASP.

7.2.2. Delegates authority for inspection and/or acceptance in accordance with terms of the contract and informs the contractor of the names, duties, and limitations of authority for all CORs assigned to the contract.

7.3. MULTI-FUNCTIONAL TEAM

7.3.1. The MFT is a customer-focused team instituted under the authority of senior leadership and responsible for assessing contractor performance and managing the requirement over the life of the contract. The emphasis is on teamwork, trust, common sense and agility. Membership may include as few members as the contracting officer, program manager, quality assurance/COR, and functional/technical representative(s). Upon contract award, the contractor(s) is included in the MFT.

7.3.2. Senior Leadership. Senior leaders are responsible for developing, implementing and executing service acquisitions. This responsibility includes the RAD, acquisition strategy, source selection, and performance/contract management of the service throughout the life of the acquisition. Duties are delegable and include:

7.3.2.1. Developing, implementing and executing a performance management assessment program that satisfies mission requirements, fosters innovation, and includes defined metrics. To be effective, metrics must provide meaningful objective measurements of contractor progress aimed at attaining desired outcomes.

7.3.2.2. Ensuring performance management focuses on risk management, cost, schedule and performance baselines. A dedicated program/project management officer is a proven method for managing all assigned service acquisitions.

7.3.2.3. Appointing a MFT of key stakeholders possessing the necessary set of skills to ensure that all service acquisitions integrate the needs of the mission with the requirement to procure performance-based services. Fostering the environment needed to successfully operate, convey business objectives, monitor progress, and correct/elevate delays or problems not resolvable by the MFT. Ensuring personnel on the MFT receive the appropriate training, tailored to meet local needs.

The duties and responsibilities of the MFT include but are not limited to:

7.3.2.3.1. Fostering partnerships with industry to ensure exchanges of information among the service industry and other business experts occur. Ensuring the key stakeholders participate in developing, implementing and executing the acquisition strategy.

7.3.2.3.2. Providing support to senior leadership as required (i.e., performance metrics, data, briefings). Making sure that correspondence and presentations are accurate, timely and of high quality. Also, provides reports that provide early warnings of significant variances in cost, schedule or performance to senior leadership. Completing and reporting annual performance reviews in accordance with the Management of Oversight of the Acquisition of Services Process (MOASP).

7.3.2.3.3. Researching the commercial market to ensure the multi-functional team is using the most efficient and effective assessment methods, techniques, and best commercial practices in performance of the contract.

7.3.2.3.4. Developing, implementing and executing a performance-based acquisition strategy, to include performance metrics, that supports a higher level of contractor performance, fosters synergistic partnerships, accommodates changing or unforeseen mission needs and leverages commercial best practices. Ensuring the acquisition strategy aligns mission performance needs with performance-based work statements and acquisition approaches designed to deliver the desired mission support results.

7.3.2.3.5. Planning, programming, and budgeting adequate funds to ensure the execution is within approved funding baseline.

7.3.2.3.6. Completing and reporting annual performance reviews in accordance with the Management of Oversight of the Acquisition of Services Process (MOASP).

7.3.2.3.7. Assessing and managing contractor performance data, to include submitting Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) reports. (Web Based CPARS Training https:\\www.cpars.gov )

7.3.2.3.8. Developing, implementing, and executing performance measurement and management in accordance with the QASP and recommending changes when necessary.

8. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES

8.1. Performance Objectives. The following is a list of the contractual Performance Objectives to be validated by COR. Each Performance Objective includes a government-determined Performance Threshold and the method of performance assessment. The Performance Objectives are arranged according to the functional area they are associated with. Functional areas not listed were omitted because they did not have Performance Objectives identified as critical. The performance objectives in this paragraph represent the minimum items that must have Performance assessment accomplished on a periodic basis. Any Performance assessment of PWS requirements not required by the QASP must still be documented in the Performance Assessment Report as described in paragraph 6.4.

8.2. The contractor service requirements are summarized into performance objectives that relate directly to mission essential items. The performance threshold briefly describes the minimum acceptable levels of service required for each requirement. These thresholds are critical to mission success and will be monitored by the COR through direct observation.

PERFORMANCE

OBJECTIVE

PWS

REFERENCE

9. PERFORMANCE METRICS.

Used to track contractor progress towards meeting stated performance objectives. The multi-functional team in assessing contractor performance validates that the performance metrics align with the performance-based work statement and overall mission support objectives. (See Attachments)

4 Attachments:

1. Corrective Action Report (CAR)

2. Customer Complaint Record

3. Activity Log example

4. Performance Assessment Report

Attachment 1 Corrective Action Report (CAR)

Attachment 2 Customer Complaint Record

Attachment 3 Activity Log Example

Attachment 4 Performance Assessment Report

Page | 12

Page | 11 image1.jpg image2.jpg image3.jpg image4.emf image5.jpg image6.jpg image7.jpg