Section_J _Attachment_1 _Quality_Assurance_Surveillance_Plan_(QASP).docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

Joint Navigation Warfare Center III (JNWC III)

Multi-Functional Team (MFT) Members:

Date:

Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

Date:

Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC)

Date:

Contracting Officer (CO)

Date:

Contractor Acknowledgement

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2. Description of Services 3

3. Performance Assessment Approach 3

4. Performance Assessment Documentation 6

5. Duties and Responsibilities 7

6. Performance Assessment 8

7. Performance Metrics 9

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.

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.

1.3 Compliance with DFARS 237.172, AFFARS MP 5301.602-2(d), and AFI 63-138. The QASP is an evolving document for which development begins with acquisition planning, and finalized as the acquisition progresses. The members of the multi-functional team (MFT) sign the QASP. This plan identifies:

a. Objective(s) in having the service provided;

b. Results the multi-functional team is striving to achieve in managing the acquisition;

c. A distribution of the roles and responsibilities among the multi-functional team members;

d. A strategy, methods and tools the multi-functional team will use to assess the Contractor’s performance against the performance thresholds, measurements, metrics, and incentives identified in the contract. Performance thresholds must be measurable in terms of quality and timeliness of performance (see paragraph 4); and

e. A management approach, methods and tools the multi-functional team will routinely use to validate the objectives and goals identified as part of the QASP, i.e. benchmarking, etc. (see paragraph 4).

2. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

2.1 Scope of Work. To assist in the accomplishment of the JNWC mission and operations, the contractor shall provide support in the following areas: administrative, security, engineering, operations research and analysis, modeling and simulation, warfighter operations, training, exercises, wargames, intelligence analysis, data management, information technology, logistics, and equipment and facilities management.

3. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT APPROACH

3.1 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 from Paragraph 7 of this QASP dictate the minimum assessment requirements Contracting Officer Representatives (COR) must accomplish on a periodic basis. 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.

3.2 Performance Assessment Approach. To facilitate the performance assessment of the Contractor’s quality program, Contracting Officer Representative (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.

3.3 Annual Review. The COR must review the Performance Objectives, assess their applicability, and recommend the addition or subtraction of Performance Objectives as conditions warrant. This review must be accomplished annually at a minimum and documentation shall be provided to the CO.

b. Documentation of actions taken in accordance with the delegation of authority (such as Performance Assessment Reports (PARs), Corrective Action Reports (CARs), and Customer Complaint Reports (CCRs)); and

c. Approved QASP signed by members of the Multi-Functional Team (see paragraph 6.5).

3.5.1 Performance Assessment Reports (PAR): The purpose of this report 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.

3.5.2 COR Online File: A section of the CORT Tool record which is used for filing all documentation associated with QA (e.g., PARs, CCRs (both active and resolved), CARs, correspondence, and contractual letters of interpretation from the CO). QA documentation should be uploaded into this section of the CORT Tool record.

3.6 Deficiency Identification. Effective contract Performance Assessment relies on two methods for identification of unacceptable performance: Contractor Identified Discrepancies (CIDs) and Government Identified Discrepancies (GIDs).

b. 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.

c. 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.

d. If a CID has not been resolved and the COR determines that the Contractor has not established an ECD for resolution of the discrepancy or has failed to perform a follow-up action for resolution of a discrepancy, the COR will issue a Corrective Action Report (CAR) (see attachment). The Contractor will be given a suspense date to provide corrective action to the Government’s findings and describe the Contractor’s plan to preclude repeat deficiencies.

3.6.2 GIDs: GIDs are generated as a result of COR’s inspection of Contractor performance that identifies noncompliance with contractual requirements (Customer Complaint). The COR will record a GID on a Customer Complaint Record (CCR) and Corrective Action Report (CAR) (see attachments). Before a CCR and CAR are generated, the Contractor will be given the opportunity to show whether the discrepancy has already been identified. If documentation exists which substantiates that the Contractor’s quality program has identified the discrepancy and timely corrective action is being taken to address the discrepancy, a CCR and CAR will not be initiated.

b. 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.

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

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

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

f. 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.

g. For validated negative comments coordinated with the CO, the COR will notify the Contractor to allow the opportunity for investigation and comment. The COR will refer to the procedure in QASP Section 6 to determine whether it is necessary to initiate a CAR.

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

i. The COR, with assistance from the CO, will conduct trend analysis of validated negative comments.

4. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION

4.1 Corrective Action Report (CAR). CARs are used by the COR to document contractual requirement findings and subsequent corrective actions to be taken. A computer-generated CAR may be used to provide the information (see attached CAR and instructions).

4.1.1 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.

4.1.2 Consult the assigned Contract Administrator (CA) 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 CO.

4.1.3 The COR will elevate any CARs that cannot be resolved with the Contractor to the CO for resolution.

4.1.4 Categories of Findings: A finding is any Government-identified noncompliance with contractual requirements that specifies 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 a PAR (see paragraph 4.2). Major/Minor Findings are defined as follows:

b. Significant mission degradation in any Contractor operated function.

c. 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.

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

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

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

4.1.4.2 A Minor Finding is 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.

4.2 Performance Assessment Report (PAR). The COR must document performance assessment as it is accomplished. The PAR is an official Government record of inspection of the performance objectives and other inspection items contained in this QASP (see attached PAR and instructions). On a quarterly basis the COR shall prepare a PAR and upload the report in the COR Online File within the CORT Tool (see paragraph 3.5). The CO will then review the PAR and either approve or disapprove the PAR, providing explanation for a disapproved PAR.

5. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBLILITIES

b. Assigns Primary and Alternate CORs.

c. Reviews Contractor performance documentation, prepared by the COR, on a regular basis to ensure performance is compatible with contract and mission objectives while supporting a higher level of Contractor performance, and fostering synergistic partnerships.

b. Evaluates and documents Contractor’s performance in accordance with the QASP.

c. Notifies the CO of any significant performance deficiencies.

d. Maintains surveillance documentation.

e. Recommends improvements to the QASP and PWS throughout the life of the contract.

f. Monitor the Contractor’s performance with regard to trafficking in persons such that non-compliance with FAR Clause 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons, is brought to the immediate attention of the CO. Examples of awareness programs can be found at http://www.state.gov/g/tip.

b. 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 contracting officer representatives assigned to the contract.

5.4 QAPC. Mission support group or Command-level individual, normally from the contracting activity, selected to coordinate and manage the Performance Management Assessment Program (Quality Assurance Program).

5.5 MFT. 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 CO, CORs, and functional/technical representative(s). Upon contract award, the Contractor is included in the MFT.

5.5.1 Senior Leadership: Senior leaders are responsible for developing, implementing and executing service acquisitions. This responsibility includes the Requirement Approval Document (RAD), acquisition strategy, source selection, and performance/contract management of the service throughout the life of the acquisition. (For more information concerning RADs please refer to AFI 63-138.) Duties are delegable and include:

a. 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.

b. Ensuring performance management focuses on risk management, cost, schedule and performance baselines. A dedicated PM Officer is a proven method for managing all assigned service acquisitions.

c. Appointing an MFT of key stakeholders possessing the necessary set of skills to ensure that all task orders integrate the needs of the mission with the requirement to procure performance-based services.

d. Fostering the environment needed to successfully operate, convey business objectives, monitor progress, and correct/elevate delays or problems not resolvable by the MFT.

e. Ensuring personnel on the MFT receive the appropriate training, tailored to meet local needs.

6. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

6.1 POs. The following is a list of the contractual POs to be validated by the CORs. Each PO includes a government-determined Performance Threshold. The POs are arranged according to the functional area with which they are associated. Functional areas not listed were omitted because they did not have POs identified as critical. The POs 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 PAR as set forth in paragraph 4.2.

PERFORMANCE

OBJECTIVE

PWS

PARAGRAPH

REFERENCE

PERFORMANCE

THRESHOLD

Delivered by date specified in CDRLs 100% of the time unless a government extension is granted

6.2 Method of Performance Assessment/Surveillance Techniques. In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the Government to evaluate Contractor performance when appropriate. The CORs may use a combination of the following methods of surveillance:

a. Random Sampling: Designed to evaluate the outputs of the award requirement by randomly selecting and inspecting a statistically significant sample. This is highly recommended for large quantity repetitive activities with objective and measurable quality attributes.

b. 100% Inspection: Evaluates all outputs. This is most applicable to small quantity but highly important services and may be used when there are written deliverables and stringent requirements such as tasks required by law, safety, or security.

c. Periodic Inspection: Uses a comprehensive evaluation of selected outputs. Inspections may be scheduled daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, or annually, OR unscheduled.

d. Customer Complaint: Relies on the user of the service to identify deficiencies. Complaints are then investigated and validated by the COR against the PWS.

e. Direct Observation: COR can perform this periodically or through 100% surveillance.

7. PERFORMANCE METRICS

7.1 Purpose. Performance metrics tracks Contractor progress towards meeting stated performance objectives. The MFT in assessing Contractor performance validates that the performance metrics align with the PWS and overall mission support objectives.

7.2 Documenting Progress. The COR will keep notes to track Contractor progress and provide feedback in the PAR as necessary (see paragraph 4.2).

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP) ACRONYMNS

Corrective Action Report

Please wait...

If this message is not eventually replaced by the proper contents of the document, your PDF viewer may not be able to display this type of document.

You can upgrade to the latest version of Adobe Reader for Windows®, Mac, or Linux® by visiting http://www.adobe.com/go/reader_download.

For more assistance with Adobe Reader visit http://www.adobe.com/go/acrreader.

Windows is either a registered trademark or a trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Mac is a trademark of Apple Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. Linux is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other countries.

Corrective Action Report (CAR)

Page of

7. Deficiency:

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 (QAP) / Contracting Officer Representative (COR):

9. Issuing Authority:

11. QAP/COR Determination:

Corrective Action Report (CAR) Instructions

Block 1. Enter Contractor Name.

Block 2. Enter Contract Number.

Block 3. Enter Contract Name or Type of Services.

Block 4. Enter Functional Area of the Contract.

Block 5. Enter the assigned suspense date given the contractor to provide a response to the CAR. A date must be entered for a Major CAR. A date is optional at the discretion of the Quality Assurance Personnel (QAP) or / Contracting Officer Representative (COR) initiating the CAR if the finding is Minor.

Block 6. All CARs will be tracked with a Control Number. The functional commander/functional director is the Issuing Authority for his/her contract QAPs or CORs generating CARs. By providing the control number to the QAP/COR originating the CAR, the Issuing Authority demonstrates concurrence with the finding. The control number will be made up of the first two letters of the name of the site or contract, the last two digits of the calendar year, and a three digit number starting with 001 and progressing upward throughout the calendar year (e.g., WP04-001).

Block 7.

1. Check the block that indicates whether the identified deficiency is assigned as a Major or Minor finding. See Performance Plan (PP), paragraph 6.1.4, for the definitions of Major and Minor findings and associated explanations.

2. Finding: Clearly state the details of the finding followed by a reference to the stated contractual requirement. The reference must state the portion of the contract, part, section, paragraph and subparagraph and must make a complete brief quotation of the contract reference.

3. State the impact that the finding has or could have on the accomplishment of the mission that the contract provides.

4. When determining how long to give the contractor to respond to the identified finding, the normal is 10 working days. The suspense date should reflect this unless the finding requires a greater amount of time to come to solution. Major findings require a contractor response. Minor findings may require a contractor response at the discretion of the QAP/COR initiating the CAR and/or the Issuing Authority.

Blocks 8 and 9. Contract QAPs/CORs initiating a CAR must sign in Block 8 and the Issuing Authority signs in Block 9. Each annotates the date at the time of signature.

Block 10. Upon review of the contractor's reply, the originator of the CAR will enter comments regarding acceptance or rejection of the contractor's response. This block may also contain any comments regarding follow-on inspections conducted or needed at a later date to validate that the finding has not reoccurred.

Block 11. The QAP/COR selects Accept or Reject after reviewing the contractor's response.

Block 12. The QAP/COR enters a close date after advising the Issuing Authority that the contractor's response is acceptable and the Issuing Authority concurs. The Issuing Authority will then forward the closed CAR to the contractor and report accordingly in the monthly Certificate Of Service (COS) or other applicable contracting officer services report. This routing remains the same if the contractor response is unacceptable and the CAR remains open until an acceptable response is received except that the Issuing Authority forwards the open CAR back to the contractor for additional information.

9.0.0.2.20120627.2.874785

CurrentPage:

PageCount:

Contractor:

ContractNumber:

ServiceType:

Functional:

SuspenseDate: [click and select]

ControlNumber:

CheckBox1: 0

CheckBox1: 0

TextField1:

Date: [click and select]

Date: [click and select]

Name:

Signature:

TextField2:

Accepted: 0

Rejected: 0

DateTimeField1: [click and select] image2.emf

Customer Complaint Record viewer may not be able to display this type of document.

You can upgrade to the latest version of Adobe Reader for Windows®, Mac, or Linux® by visiting http://www.adobe.com/go/reader_download.

For more assistance with Adobe Reader visit http://www.adobe.com/go/acrreader.

Windows is either a registered trademark or a trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Mac is a trademark of Apple Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. Linux is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other

Customer Complaint Record

Contract Reference:

Nature of Complaint ( Complainant )

Validation ( Quality Assurance Evaluator (QAE) / Contracting Officer Representative (COR) )

Action Taken (Contractor )

Received and Validated (Contract Administrator )

9.0.0.2.20120627.2.874785

Ratification Action

CurrentPage:

PageCount:

TextField1:

Part-I--Statement-of-Facts:

Date:

Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol, Phone Number ] [ Email Address ]

Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol, Phone Number ] [ Email Address ]

Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol, Phone Number ] [ Email Address ]

Name: [ Name ] [ Office Symbol, Phone Number ] [ Email Address ]

Signature:

image3.emf

Performance Assessment Report viewer may not be able to display this type of document.

You can upgrade to the latest version of Adobe Reader for Windows®, Mac, or Linux® by visiting http://www.adobe.com/go/reader_download.

For more assistance with Adobe Reader visit http://www.adobe.com/go/acrreader.

Windows is either a registered trademark or a trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Mac is a trademark of Apple Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. Linux is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other

Performance Assessment Report (PAR)

Section A: General Information

4. Quality Assurance Personnel (QAP) / Contracting Officer Representative (COR):

Section B: Performance

5. Finding Documentation

7. Services Summary or SOW Paragraph Item Reviewed

Row #

Performance Objective

PWS Para.

Performance Threshold

Method of Surveillance

8. COR Observations

Row #

Observation

Section C: Contractor Validation

10. Contractor Representative

Section D: Deficiency Resolution

13. Action Corrected:

Performance Assessment Report (PAR) Instructions

Section A: General Information

Block 1. Quality Assurance Personnel (QAP) or Contracting Officer Representative (COR) enters contractor name.

Block 2. QAP/COR enters contract or task order number.

Block 3. QAP/COR enters type of services.

Block 4. QAP/COR signs, dates and enters contact information.

Section B: Performance

Block 5. QAP/COR checks all boxes that apply to the assessment findings.

Block 6. QAP/COR assigns suspense date for Contractor Representative validation if a deficiency box was checked in Block 5.

Block 7. QAP/COR enters Services Summary or Statement of Work (SOW) paragraph item reviewed.

Block 8. QAP/COR enters brief description of deficiency and tracking number if the deficiency box was checked in Block 5. Detailed description will be on Corrective Action Report (CAR).

Block 9. QAP/COR enters a detailed performance assessment if the deficiency box in Block 5 was not checked.

Parts II and III will be used only if a deficiency was documented in Part I.

Section C: Contractor Validation

Block 10. Contractor Representative checks one box in response to QAP/COR cited deficiency. If Concurrence is indicated, Contractor Representative continues to Block 11. If Non-Concurrence is indicated, continue to Block 12 and state reason(s) for Non-Concurrence with QAP/COR cited deficiency and return PAR to QAP/COR.

Block 11. Contractor Representative enters Estimated Completion Date of Corrective Action and continues to Block 12.

Block 12. Contractor Representative details Corrective Action and the Action Taken to Prevent Recurrence or Reason for Non-Concurrence of QAP/COR cited deficiency.

Section D: Deficiency Resolution

Block 13. QAP/COR checks appropriate block, signs, and dates.

Block 14. (Required Entry) QAP/COR remarks regarding the Corrective Action and the Action Taken to Prevent Recurrence. If Non-Concur was checked, this block should be very detailed to explain why.

Block 15. Contractor Representative enters remarks if further discussion is needed about QAP/COR concurrence with Contractor's Corrective Action and Action Taken to Prevent Recurrence.

9.0.0.2.20120627.2.874785

CurrentPage:

PageCount:

Item-1:

Item-2:

Item-3:

Date: [click and select]

Date: [ click and select ]

Name:

Signature:

Email:

Phone:

New-Deficiency: 0

Repeat-Deficiency: 0

No-Deficiency: 0

Item-6: [ click and select ]

Row-Number:

Performance-Obj:

PWS-Para:

Perf-Thresh:

Method:

AddRow-7:

DeleteRow-7:

Observation:

AddRow-8:

DeleteRow-8:

Item-9:

Concur: 0

Concur: 0

Non-Concur: 0

Non-Concur: 0

Item-11: [ click and select ]

Item-12:

Item-14:

Item-15:

image1.emf