Attch_2_LFS_QASP_dtd_4_Sep_15.docx

FA4620-15-Q-A024

Attachment 2

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR

LOOP FILTRATION SYSTEM INSTALL

4 September 2015 Fairchild AFB, WA

1. Overview. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) details how the Loop Filtration Systems (LFS) install contract will be managed from award throughout its lifecycle. This plan will focus on the level of performance required by the Performance-based Work Statement (PWS), and not the methodology or process used by the contractor.

2. Objective. The objective of this contract is to provide Fairchild Air Force Base (FAFB), WA with LFS install services. The contractor shall perform all required services in accordance with best commercial practices, through innovation, technology, manufacturer’s recommendation or any other means necessary to provide the Government with its desired outcome.

3. Goals. By virtue of this QASP, a multi-functional team will be formed to manage the contract and strive to achieve efficiencies, improved customer service, contractor performance, and cost savings as permitted. The following are additional goals:

· 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. The following is a list of recommended MFT members (in accordance with MP 5346.103 and MP 5301.602-2 (d)).

Contracting Officer

Contract Specialist

Quality Assurance Program Coordinator

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

Management

Contractor

5. Performance Assessment. This section identifies the processes that measure success towards achieving identified performance objectives within the performance thresholds in the Services Summary and achieving the objectives/goals developed in the PWS and this QASP.

5.1. Surveillance Approach. The intent of this plan is to primarily rely on the contractor’s internal quality control processes, changing the Government’s role from “oversight” to “insight”. The contractor’s original surveillance approach may not stay the same throughout the duration of the contract, therefore the Government should be prepared to periodically update the surveillance approach when necessary. The goal of our surveillance approach is to gain confidence in the contractor’s way of doing business and then adjust the level of insight to a point that maintains that confidence.

5.2. Quality Assurance. Quality assurance shall be based on the Government’s evaluation of results, not the frequency or method of performance. All key performance objectives must meet the prescribed standards and thresholds identified in the Services Summary to be regarded as acceptable.

5.3. Quality Control. The contractor shall utilize its own internal quality control processes to ensure services are performed in accordance with commonly accepted commercial practices and the PWS. If there be instances of recurring unsatisfactory performance, the contractor’s quality control plan and supporting documentation shall be made available to the government upon request. The COR will verify the key performance objectives and subsequent thresholds in addition to other contract requirements are being performed in accordance with the applicable standards.

5.4. The following is a list of the key performance objectives that will be verified as contractually compliant by Government personnel, however inspection of any contract requirements is authorized.

SERVICES SUMMARY

5.5. In accordance with the CONTRACTOR MANPOWER REPORTING criteria requirements at http://www.ecmra.mil and the Performance-based Work Statement (PWS), CORs shall follow the directions in the user manual for ensuring contractor compliance.

5.6. Periodic Inspection. Utilizing periodic inspection of selected areas of work, the COR will ensure that all aspects of contract performance have been validated in order to ensure contract requirements are being met. In addition to areas identified in the Services Summary/PWS, the COR will monitor any areas of interest such as Human Trafficking, Environmental, and other contract requirements. Those areas found to be unsatisfactorily shall be documented through the customer complaint program through the COR.

6. Contract Management. The following identifies areas where measurement information is documented and tracked to encourage positive change in system and processes, helping to ensure completion of agreed upon 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 between the contractor and the MFT.

6.1. Contracting Officer Representative Tracking (CORT) Tool. The CORT website is a DoD electronic depository listing all of the CORs, COR Management, and contracting officials’ information to include the invoicing and payment information associated with each contract. It is located on the Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) website at https://wawf.eb.mil/. The COR will initiate action to be assigned to a contract by self-nominating as a COR or in response to a request for COR Support Memorandum, by completing required training and issuing a nomination memorandum to their supervisor for approval. The COR shall initiate a DD2875, System Authorization Access Request (SAAR) for both the CORT and WAWF systems . The actual COR nomination process includes attaching training certificates required per “Type of Contract” designation made by the CO and any applicable refresher training as required.

6.2. Wide Area Workflow. Upon receipt of an approved DD 2875, the COR can perform certification of services via the Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF) system. CORs are required to take the online course and schedule any additional required training with 92 CPTS/FMA. Certificates of training shall be downloaded into the CORT Tool. A declining balance worksheet shall be utilized to track funding on all service contracts. In addition to ensuring the contract has sufficient funding to pay for the contracted services, the COR shall coordinate with their local Resource Advisor to ensure any and all excess funding remaining at the end of each option period is de-obligated.

6.3. Performance Feedback. Documentation is required to record, evaluate, and report contractor’s performance. On a quarterly basis, the COR will complete a narrative summary of contractor performance and forward it to the contractor, COR Management, and CO that includes the following assessment elements. This information is a tool to provide the contractor and the Government a snapshot view of their performance.

6.4 Performance Ratings. Contractor ratings and criteria are described below.

Exceptional (Green) Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many of the government’s benefits. 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 were highly effective.

Very Good (Green) Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some of the government benefits. The contractual performance element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Satisfactory (Green) 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 (Yellow) 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 (Red) 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 serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

7. Changes. Any proposed changes to this QASP shall be submitted in writing through the Contracting Officer.

Attachment Contractor Performance Assessment Checklist

CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST

Contracting Officer Representative:

Date:

Period of Assessment:

Contractor:

Contract Number:

1. Areas of Assessment.

Quality of Service. Assess the contractor’s conformance to contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship (e.g., commonly accepted technical, professional, environmental, or safety health standards).

Schedule. Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, tasks, milestones, delivery schedule, and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or effect performance).

Business Relations. Assess the integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, and customer satisfaction.

Management of Key Personnel. Assess the contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting, and replacing key personnel, when necessary.

2. Performance Ratings.

Exceptional (Green) – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the governments benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good (Green) - Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the governments benefit. The contractual performance being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Satisfactory (Green) - Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal (Yellow) – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions.

Unsatisfactory (Red) – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner.

*Check all applicable blocks.

Quality of Service

Schedule

Business Relations

Management of Key Personnel

3. Remarks

Note. Upon receipt of completed form, scan and file in Contracting Officer Representative Tracking (CORT) tool.