Atch_13_-_QASP.pdf

ATTACHMENT 13

FA4626-17-R-0007

Dated 25 July 2016

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR

PACKING, CONTAINERIZATION AND LOCAL DRAYAGE

OF

DIRECT PROCUREMENT METHOD (DPM)

PERSONAL PROPERTY SHIPMENTS

MYRA D. HALES, CIV, DAF

Contracting Officer Contracting Officer’s Representative

JPPSO-NC

WENDY D. EGBON, CIV, DAF

Quality Assurance Personnel Coordinator Functional Commander/COR Supervisor

JPPSO-NC

COR Supervisor Contracting Officer’s Representative

Dated 25 July 2016

Table of Contents

Subject

Cover Page

Table of Contents

1. PURPOSE

2. OBJECTIVE

3. MULTI-FUNCTIONAL TEAM ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1. Service Designated Official

3.2. The Contracting Squadron Commander/Director of Business Operations

3.3. Functional Commander/COR Supervisor

3.4. Contracting Officer (CO)

3.5. Contracting Officer’s Representative

3.6. Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC)

3.7. Contract Administrator

3.8. Contractor

3.9. Multi-Functional Team

4. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

4.1. Purpose

4.2. Strategy

4.3. Assessment Methods

4.4. Performance Objectives and Thresholds

4.4.1. Critical Operational Requirements

4.4.2. Contractor Identified Deficiencies (CID)

4.5. Performance Assessment Tools

4.5.1. Use of Metrics

4.5.2. Report of Contractor Services on DD Form 2773

4.5.3. Contract Discrepancy Report on DD Form 2772

4.5.4. DD Form 2772 Instructions

4.5.5. Customer Feedback

4.4.7. Trending

4.5. Performance Assessment Phases

4.6. Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Maintenance

4.7. COR Staff Assistance Visit (SAV)

4.8 . Special Audits

5. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

5.1. Purpose

5.2. Approach

5.3. Methods

5.4. Performance Management Tools

FA4626-16-R-0027

Dated 25 July 2016

5.4.1. Pre-Performance Conference

5.4.2. Progress Meetings

6. PERFORMANCE REPORTING

6.1. Management Approach

6.2. Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR)

6-3.

7. DISPOSITION OF RECORDS

7.1. Quality Assurance Records Disposition

8. COMBATTING TRAFICKING IN PERSONS.

8.1. CombattingTrafficking in Persons

Attachment 1 DTR Part IV Appendix P Guidelines for the Quality Control Inspector

Attachment 2 DD 2773 Report of Contractor Services

Attachment 3 DD 2772 Contract Discrepancy Report

Attachment 4 Quality Assurance Monthly Evaluation Report

Attachment 5 Evaluation Guide

Attachment 6 Link to User Manual for CPARS

Attachment 7 COR Performance Evaluation with Instructions

FA4626-16-R-0027

Dated 25 July 2016

1. PURPOSE. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) has been developed to assess contractor performance and manage the contract to obtain efficiencies and to improve performance and cost savings throughout the contract performance period. This QASP describes how the government will evaluate and assess contractor performance. It is intended to be a “living” document that will be revised or modified as circumstances warrant. This plan is based on the premise that the contractor, not the government, is responsible for managing and ensuring that quality controls meet the terms of the contract.

2. OBJECTIVE. The objective of this service is to provide AFB and the geographic area detailed in the Performance Work Statement with Packing, Containerization and Drayage of Personal Property

Shipments using the Direct Procurement Method (DPM). The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan has been developed to evaluate contractor actions while implementing the Performance-based Work

Statement (PWS). The plan provides a systematic method to evaluate the services and products the contractor is required to furnish for each listed objective on the Service Summary (SS). The intent of this plan is to rely on the contractor's quality control, changing the government's role from "oversight" to "insight." Instead of focusing on deducting when the contractor fails to meet the standard, the contractor is incentivized to not only meet but also exceed the performance standards. Through the continued efforts of the Multi-Functional Team (MFT), team members will strive to provide the

Government with the most efficient contract possible in terms of improved customer service, quality of workmanship, cost savings and timeliness.

3. MULTI-FUNCTIONAL TEAM ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The following government officials will participate in management and oversight of this contract through use of

COR surveillance, Quality Assurance Monthly Reports, the Annual Execution Review (AER), and the

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and the contractor. Their roles and responsibilities are described as follows:

3.1. Service Designated Official (SDO) is the individual designated to exercise responsibility for the management and oversight of the acquisition of contract services and for conducting and documenting the AER.

3.2. The Contracting Squadron Commander (CSC) and/or the Director of Business

Operations (DBO) serve as the Business Advisor to senior leadership; developing and implementing acquisition strategies for services acquisitions; providing oversight of the MFT in planning, assessing contractor performance, and managing the acquisition throughout the life of the requirement IAW the

FAR, DFARS and AFFARS. The CSC/DBO will regularly report on the health of services acquisitions to senior leadership and provide semi-annual reports on service acquisitions to HQ

AMC/A7.

3.3. The Functional Commander (FC)/Contracting Officer’s Representatives Supervisor

(CORS)-Joint Personal Property Service Office (JPPSO) has overall responsibility for developing the PWS and the QASP and ensuring these documents satisfy mission requirements, are performance-based, foster innovation and provide clear performance metrics. The FC/CORS-JPPSO shall

Dated 25 July 2016 nominate, at a minimum, a primary and an alternate COR and notify the CO of any changes to this designation. The FC/CORS-JPPSO shall also be responsible for ordering services; acceptance and approval of invoices; monitoring payments to the contractor and surveillance of the document requirements contained in the PWS. The FC/CORS shall review contractor performance documentation prepared by the COR-JPPSO on a monthly basis to ensure performance is compatible with contract and mission objectives. The FC/CORS-JPPSO shall be enrolled in the Contracting

Officer Representative Tracking Tool (CORT), approve COR nominations in CORT and conduct an annual review of the documentation uploaded by the COR(s).

3.3.1. The Contracting Officer’s Representatives Supervisor (CORS) is responsible to nominate competent and capable functional experts to the MFT who will be available as needed by the procurement cycle. The CORS shall nominate, at a minimum, a primary and an alternate COR and notify the CO of any changes to this designation. The CORS, with feedback from the COR-JPPSO and the CO, shall ensure that the COR’s performance is included in the employee/military performance evaluation. The CORS shall ensure that the COR has access to the resources needed to conduct proper surveillance on this contract (vehicle, camera, mobile telephone, office supplies, etc.).

3.4. The Contracting Officer (CO) has overall responsibility for overseeing the contractor’s performance and shall appoint the COR nominated by the FC/CORS. The CO is the only person with the authority to direct the contractor in the performance of their duties under the contract and to make interpretations of and changes to the contract. The CO shall also be responsible for:

3.4.1. The day-to-day monitoring of the contractor’s performance in the areas of contract compliance, contract administration, cost control and property control.

3.4.2. Reviewing the COR assessment of the contractor’s performance and resolving all differences between the COR and the contractor.

3.4.3. The CO will facilitate MFT meetings.

3.4.4. The CO shall determine that a COR is, or multiple or alternate CORs are required to assist in technical monitoring and administration of a contract and shall notify the requiring activity of the need for COR support.

3.4.5. The CO shall determine if a prospective COR is qualified. If the CO determines that a

COR nominee is unqualified or unacceptable, the CO shall identify specific deficiencies, notify the requiring activity, and request additional information or a new COR nomination.

3.4.6. The CO shall ensure contract-specific training (to include refresher training) is scheduled and provided to the prospective COR.

3.4.7. The CO shall appoint the COR via the COR Designation Memorandum, and forward a copy of the fully executed copy to the COR, the FC/CORS, the contractor and the QAPC.

Dated 25 July 2016

3.4.8. The CO shall review the COR’s surveillance reports for completeness and accuracy.

3.4.9. The CO shall conduct a periodic review of all of the COR’s files for accuracy and completeness. The results of the contracting officer’s review shall be documented in the

CORT Tool.

3.4.9. If requested, the CO shall provide an assessment on COR performance to the COR supervisor.

3.4.10. In the event COR reports and/or performance is inadequate, the CO shall provide a written assessment and discuss performance with the COR. If reports/performance continues to be inadequate, the CO shall provide a written assessment and discuss COR performance with the CORS. In cases where COR performance continues to be unacceptable, the CO may terminate the COR duties and request a COR replacement. The requiring activity must provide a COR replacement to ensure continuous contract monitoring by a qualified individual. Only the CO may terminate a COR Designation. In the event that the requiring activity requests termination of COR Designation, the CO shall terminate the COR

Designation in writing. The termination memorandum shall be executed by the CO and acknowledged by the COR and CORS. The CO shall forward a copy of the fully executed termination memorandum to the COR, FC/CORS, QAPC, and contractor.

3.4.11. The CO shall enroll in the Contracting Officer Representative Tracking Tool (CORT) and review and acknowledge the monthly reports submitted by the COR.

3.5. The Contracting Officer’s Representative is responsible for monitoring, assessing, recording and reporting on contractor compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract and notify the

Contracting Officer (CO) of any significant performance deficiencies. The COR is the technical expert on this contract and shall recommend improvements to the QASP and PWS to the FC/CORS and the

CO, throughout the life of the contract.

3.5.1. The COR shall provide information necessary to assess actual or potential personal conflicts of interest and immediately notify the CO if subsequent situations arise.

3.5.2. The COR shall complete required COR training/COR refresher training to ensure required training is completed prior to contract award in accordance with the requirements of the CO and QAPC.

3.5.3. The COR shall participate, as requested, in requirements definition/pre-award activities.

3.5.4. The COR shall establish and maintain a COR file in accordance with DFARS PGI

201.602-2(ii) and the AFFARS Mandatory Procedure at 5301.602(2)(d) and this QASP.

Dated 25 July 2016

3.5.5. The CORs shall be enrolled in the Contracting Officer Representative Tracking Tool

(CORT) and generate a monthly performance report for review by the CORS and the CO.

3.5.6. The COR shall keep current of changes to terms and conditions of the contract resulting from contract modifications.

3.5.7. The COR shall perform only those duties/responsibilities delegated by the CO in the

CO’s Designation Letter. CORs shall not appoint, delegate, or re-delegate COR duties/responsibilities to another individual. Only a CO may designate a COR and delegate duties/responsibilities to a COR.

3.5.8. The COR shall provide reports on contract performance to the CO. If advised by the

CO that reports are inadequate, the COR shall ensure follow-on reports address issues expected by CO.

3.5.9. When the COR is advised by the CO or COR management that COR designation will be terminated, ensure reports/records are made available to the CO, CORS and the successor

COR. If circumstances change and there is a reasonable expectation that the designated COR cannot perform effectively, (e.g., personal conflict of interest, change in assignment), the COR shall notify the CO/CORS and request the CO/CORS terminate the COR Designation and take action to designate a successor COR.

3.5.10. The COR JPPSO shall monitor the process in which services are ordered under this contract and the processing of all contract invoices including but not limited to receipt, acceptance, approval, transmission to DFAS and payment to the contractor. The COR shall ensure that all invoices are accepted, rejected and if appropriate, transmitted to the correct

DFAS processing center within three (3) business days after receipt. The COR shall continue to monitor invoices submitted to DFAS until the invoice has been scheduled to pay in

MyInvoice. In the event an invoice that has been approved and forwarded to DFAS has not been scheduled to pay within 10 business days the COR-JPPSO shall follow-up with DFAS, to determine the cause and the remedy, if any. In the event that DFAS does not respond and schedule payment, the COR-JPPSO shall elevate the complaint through the JPPSO chain of command to enforce payment.

3.5.11. The COR-JPPSO shall maintain an order log indicating the time and date services were ordered; the time and date that the contractor responded to the order; the time and date that the contractor completed the order with any relevant comments. The COR-JPPSO shall also prepare a report summarizing the date each invoice was submitted by the contractor, the amount of the invoice, the date the invoice was accepted and approved by JPPSO, the date the invoice and receiving report were forwarded to DFAS. In the event an invoice was rejected the report shall annotate the reason it was rejected and the date it was returned to the contractor for correction and re-submission. These reports shall be forwarded to the CA/CO

Dated 25 July 2016 by the 7th business day of each month. An order that is initiated in one month but is completed in the following month shall be reported in the following month.

3.5.12. The COR shall be responsible for conducting the physical and telephonic surveillance of services under this contract and the physical inspections of warehouse facilities, vehicles and

Government Furnished Containers used to perform this contract.

3.6. The Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC) develops, manages and implements the Grand Forks AFB Quality Assurance Program; supports the MFT in the development of contract requirements, ensuring requirements are clearly stated and enforceable; aids in development of the

PWS, SS and QASP and provides training to all COR, FC/CORS and others that interact with this contract as needed.

3.7. The Contract Administrator (CA) is the focal point for issues regarding the contract; prepares and processes modifications to the contract; assists the CO in ensuring contractor performance meets contract standards; records and transcribes minutes for meetings. The CA shall periodically perform an assessment of the COR oversight and documentation as determined by the CO. The CA will verify that the COR is accomplishing surveillance and documentation according to this QASP. A copy of the assessment documentation shall be forwarded to the CO, FC/CORS for review and signature. If deficiencies are discovered in the COR surveillance and documentation procedures, the CA shall include a remediation plan in the assessment report with a get-well date. The QAPC/CA may be required to provide additional training to the COR, as needed.

3.8. The Contractor is the service provider and is required to provide all services identified in the

PWS not just those identified in the SS. The contractor shall employ commercial quality program/procedures to identify, prevent and ensure non-recurrence of defective services. Through implementation of the contractor’s quality control program/procedures, the Government shall receive quality services meeting the requirements of the DPM Packing and Crating contract. The contractor, and not the government, is responsible for management and quality control actions meeting the terms of the contract. The role of the Government is to ensure quality services are provided at the level required by the contract.

3.9. The Multi-Functional Team (MFT) duties and responsibilities include fostering partnerships with industry to ensure exchanges of information among the service industry and other business experts occur. The MFT shall ensure the key stakeholders participate in developing, implementing and executing the acquisition strategy.

3.9.1. Leadership Support. Provide 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.

3.9.2. Market Research. Research the commercial market to ensure the multi-functional

Dated 25 July 2016 team is using the most efficient and effective assessment methods, techniques, and best commercial practices in performance of the contract.

3.9.3. Acquisition Strategy. Develop, implement and execute 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. Ensure the acquisition strategy aligns mission performance needs with performance-based work statements and acquisition approaches designed to deliver the desired mission support results.

3.9.4. Risk Management. Manage risk to ensure mission performance is within cost and schedule constraints.

3.9.5. Source Selection. Develop, implement and execute a source selection, if applicable, that provides an integrated assessment of the offeror’s proposal and ensures a best value source selection based on the requirements of the Request for Proposal.

3.9.6. Funding. Plan, program and budget adequate funds to ensure the execution is within approved funding baseline.

3.9.7. Solicitation Milestones. Develop, implement and manage milestones to ensure the acquisition supports mission requirements within the approved funding baseline.

3.9.8. Annual Health of Services Review (AHSR). Complete and submit AHSR for approval by SDO in accordance with the AFI63-138 Acquisition of Services.

3.9.9. Improvement Initiatives. Identify opportunities to improve performance throughout the life of the acquisition. This includes identifying initiatives, assessing the risk associated with these initiatives, using the QASP to implement initiatives, and monitor the success of implementation.

3.9.10. Contractor Performance Data. Assess and manage contractor performance data, to include submitting Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) reports.

3.9.11. Performance Measurement. Develop, implement and execute performance measurement and management in accordance with this QASP.

3.9.12. Changes. Approve changes to the QASP.

3.9.13. Initial Execution Review. The initial evaluation of contractor performance is a joint determination by the MFT that the contractor has successfully started performance, completed transition, is operational and is within the estimated cost, schedule and performance parameters of the contract. The CA shall initiate an email to members of the MFT polling the

Dated 25 July 2016 members of their respective determinations of the contractor’s assumption of duties under the contract. If there is a consensus by return email that the contractor is operational, within cost, schedule and performance parameters, the CA will document the contract file accordingly. In the event that the MFT cannot reach a consensus then the CA will convene a formal meeting of the MFT.

4. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

4.1. Purpose. To detail and outline how performance assessment will be accomplished based on

PWS requirements. The objective is to rely to the maximum extent on the Contractor’s Quality

System to ensure requirements are met with sufficient periodic validation by CORs. This plan identifies the strategy, methods and tools for effective assessment coverage, based on available resources and mission impact, the government will use to ensure that services are received IAW the

PWS.

4.2. Strategy. Assess the contractor in order to validate delivery of satisfactory services and gain confidence. Adjust the level of assessment as needed to maintain that confidence.

4.3. Assessment Methods

4.3.1. Performance Objectives (PO). The POs listed in Table 1 identify the minimum performance assessment requirements that must be accomplished.

3.3.1.1. Each PO in this plan has a corresponding performance threshold, which is the minimum acceptable performance level.

4.3.1.2. The Government has may inspect all PWS requirements with reasonable care taken not to unduly interfere with the Contractor’s performance. Assessment of POs must be conducted, documented and reported by COR IAW this plan. Any other PWS requirements assessed must also be documented and reported IAW this plan.

4.4. Performance Objectives and Thresholds. The performance objectives and thresholds are as stated in the Service Summary (SS) below:

Performance

Objective PWS Paragraph Performance Threshold

Inspector/Method of

Inspection

Proper Packing/Loading/ Containerization of Personal Property for Onward Movement

Part I, Paragraph A.4, Paragraph A.7

No more than three percent of total number of shipments are incorrectly packed/loaded/containerized per month.

COR

Periodic Inspection

Customer Feedback

Dated 25 July 2016

On-time Pickup/Delivery of Personal Property

Part I, Paragraph A.3 No more than five percent per month of the total number of shipments are validated customer complaints for untimely pickup/delivery.

COR

Periodic Inspection

Customer Feedback

Timely pickup/return, proper preparation of documentation

Part I, Paragraph A.2.i, A.8.a, A.8.c

98 percent on-time return of completed, accurate, legible documentation to PPSO per month. 96 percent on-time pickup of documentation from PPSO per month.

COR-JPPSO

Periodic Inspection

Customer Complaint

Accurate invoicing of charges

Part III, Paragraph 4 98 percent error-free invoice submission rate per month.

COR-JPPSO

100%Inspection

Maintain adequate facilities and serviceable equipment

Part 1, Paragraph A.11, Paragraph A.7.h

Less than three violations per quarter based on inadequate facilities or unserviceable equipment as outlined in the Defense Transportation Regulation, Part IV, Appendix E.

COR

Quarterly Inspections

Protection and Accountability of Government-Owned Containers (GOCs).

Part 1, Paragraph A.7.a, A.7.a.(1), A.7.e

No more than two percent of total number of GOCs improperly protected during this quarter. Less than two failures per month to re-coop GOCs within specified time frame

COR

Quarterly Inspections

4.4.1. Critical Operational Requirements. The “Critical Operation Requirements

Performance Objectives” that details the performance metric and refers to the method used to survey that performance metric. Each performance objectives includes a Government determined performance requirement and the resource that is used to perform the verification, i.e. periodic inspection, customer feedback, etc. (Note that the performance requirement is merely a reference point for Government personnel and does not relieve the contractor of any contractual requirements.) Surveillance results shall be documented as set out below.

4.4.1.1. Performance Objective: Preparation, Packing, Loading, Containerization of

Personal Property for onward movement. PWS reference Part 1 Paragraph A.4, A.7

Performance Threshold: No more than 3% of shipments are incorrectly packed, loaded, containerized per month.

Method of Surveillance: The methods of surveillance are periodic inspection and customer feedback The COR shall evaluate 50% or more of contractor shipments each month utilizing Form DD 2773. To determine 50% of a contractor’s shipment actions, multiply the total amount of shipments made by .5 and round up to the next whole number. The

COR may conduct the evaluation at the member residence while the Contractor is there or contact the member and conduct the evaluation over the phone. The COR shall conduct a physical inspection of a minimum of 25% of the contractor’s shipments each month. The

Dated 25 July 2016

COR shall document assessment results on DD 2773 and retain assessment record until disposition instructions are received from the CO. After the DD 2773 has been accomplished for each shipping action, the COR will determine by the results of this assessment whether the shipment was overall satisfactory. If the COR determines that there were too many items in error in the shipment to rate it satisfactory, the COR will initiate a DD 2772 Contract Discrepancy Report and count the shipment against the 3% number of this PO threshold.

4.4.1.2. Performance Objective: Pick-up/Delivery of Personal Property. Reference PWS

Part 1, Paragraph A.3.

Performance Threshold: no more than one valid complaint per event.

Method of Surveillance: The methods of surveillance are periodic inspection and customer complaint. The COR shall evaluate 50% or more of the Contractors shipments each month by utilizing Form DD 2773 and comparing pick-up/delivery times of DPM

Confirmation Letter. To determine 50% of a contractor’s shipment actions, multiply the total number of shipments made by .5 and round up to the next whole number. The COR may conduct the evaluation at the member residence while the Contractor is there or call the member to conduct the evaluation over the phone. Document assessment results on

DD 2773 and retain assessment record until disposition instructions are received from the

CO. After the DD 2773 has been accomplished by comparing required pick-up/delivery time to actual pick-up/delivery time for each shipping action, the COR will record the results of this assessment and at month’s end, divide the number of untimely pick-up/delivery by the total number of shipments assessed to arrive at the percentage of untimely pick-up/deliveries. The COR will report results to the SCOR for COS inclusion.

4.4.1.3. Performance Objective: Timely pick-up/return, and proper preparation of documentation Reference PWS Part 1,Paragraph A.2.i, A.8.a, A.8.c.

Performance Threshold: 98% on-time return of completed, accurate, legible documentation to JPPSO per month. 96% on-time pickup of documentation from JPPSO per month.

Method of Surveillance: The methods of surveillance are periodic inspection and customer complaint. If documentation is not correct or received, an electronic database alert will trigger a letter of warning (LOW) for the affected contractor from JPPSO-COS. If three or more Letters of Warning (LOW) are issued to the contractor over any 6-month period, the contractor will be evaluated unsatisfactory in this area.

4.4.1.4. Performance Objective: Accurate invoicing of charges. Reference PWS Part III, Paragraph 4.

Dated 25 July 2016

Performance Threshold: 98% error-free invoice submission rate per month.

Method of Surveillance: The COR-JPPSO shall also prepare a report summarizing the date each invoice was submitted by the contractor, the amount of the invoice, the date the invoice was accepted and approved by JPPSO, the date the invoice and receiving report were forwarded to DFAS. In the event an invoice was rejected the report shall be annotate indicating the reason it was rejected and the date it was returned to the contractor for correction and re-submission.

4.4.1.5. Performance Objective: Maintain adequate facilities and vehicles. Reference PWS paragraphs A.11, A.7.h.

Performance Threshold: No more than three discrepancies per quarterly inspection based on inadequate facilities or vehicles as detailed in DTR Part IV, Appendix D and E.

Method of Surveillance: The COR will conduct an initial inspection of the contractor’s facility for compliance with the PWS requirements using Appendix D and E of the DTR.

Upon approval of the facility after the initial inspection, the COR will conduct quarterly inspections of the Contractor's facility. The COR will notify the COR-JPPSO if the facility is found to be unsatisfactory. Document assessment results on DD 2773 and file in assessment folder.

4.4.1.6. Performance Objective: Protection and Accountability of Government-Owned

Containers (GOCs). Reference PWS Part 1, Paragraph A.7.a, A.7.a.(1), A.7.e

Performance Threshold: No more than two percent of total number of GOCs improperly protected during this quarter. Less than two failures per month to re-coop GOCs within specified time frame.

Method of Surveillance: The COR shall conduct a physical inspection the storage conditions of the GOC each quarter. The COR shall note any GOC that is not stored in accordance with the conditions set out in the PWS. The COR will closely monitor the condition of the GOCs and order the demolition of any GOC that has mold, mildew or other indicators of wear and tear making them unsuitable for further use.

4.4.2. Contractor Identified Deficiencies (CID)

4.4.2.1. CIDs are deficiencies detected and identified by the contractor. When CIDs are reviewed by COR, the COR will take the following actions:

4.4.2.2. Review corrective actions taken by the contractor to resolve the discrepancy.

4.4.2.3. 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

Dated 25 July 2016 established to prevent recurrence of the discrepancy.

4.4.2.4. 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 ECD is excessive based on the nature of the discrepancy, the FC/CORS will be notified. The FC/CORS will assist in the determination of whether the contractor’s course of action is acceptable or if a

Government Identified Discrepancy (GID) should be initiated.

4.4.2.4. Government Identified Discrepancy (GID) A GID is a government-identified contractual requirement discrepancy. A DD Form 2772 is used to document the discrepancy and request corrective action from the contractor. Before a DD 2772 is prepared, the contractor is given the opportunity to show whether the discrepancy has already been identified and is in the process of being corrected. If documentation exists which substantiates the contractor has identified the discrepancy and timely corrective action is being taken to correct the discrepancy, the discrepancy may be excused from finding identification pending concurrence of the FC/CORS.

4.5. Performance Assessment Tools

4.5.1. Use of Metrics. Metrics will be used to track contractor progress in meeting PWS requirements. Metrics may be contractor or government generated. When contractor generated metrics are used, the COR must validate the accuracy of those metrics to a degree that establishes confidence in the metrics reporting by the contractor. The thresholds of the

POs in the SS are expressed metrically. COR documentation of assessments will be expressed in terms of the metric values used in the thresholds.

4.5.2. Report of Contractor Services on DD Form 2773. The DD Form 2773 will be used by COR to document assessment data of the contract as it is accomplished. This form is an official government record of inspections of the PO contained in this plan and the PWS. COR will be responsible for maintaining and utilizing the DD Form 2773, Report of Contractor

Services. The DD Form 2773 will be filled out by COR during each assessment action.

4.5.2.1. Completed DD Form 2773's will be maintained in the assessment folder. At the completion of the contract, the FD or CORs will contact the CO for disposition instructions of the assessment records. These logs may be maintained in soft-copy form as long as there is ample backup to preclude loss of data.

4.5.3. Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) on DD Form 2772

4.5.3.1. The COR must determine whether unacceptable performance was within the contractor’s control. If unacceptable performance is determined to be attributable to the

Contractor, the COR will initiate a CDR on DD Form 2772.

Dated 25 July 2016

4.5.3.2. When performance is determined to be unacceptable, the COR 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 COR may refer the matter to the CO for resolution.

4.5.3.3. DD Form 2772 Instructions:

4.5.3.3.1. The COR 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 COR 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 COR then presents the DD 2772 to the Contractor.

4.5.3.3.2. 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 COR.

4.5.3.3.3. Upon receipt from the Contractor, the COR analyzes the Contractor's response and determines if any further action is necessary for correction and prevention of recurrence.

4.5.3.3.4. If the COR determines no future action is necessary the COR responds “yes” in

Block 5c and completes Block 11. The COR sends a copy to the Contractor and files the CDR for future reference.

4.5.3.3.5. If the COR determines the Contractor's input in Block 9 does not satisfy requirements, the COR responds "No" in block 5c and completes Block 11. The COR inputs

"JPPSO-COS" in Block 8a. The COR inputs the Contractor's name in block 8b and forwards the CDR and all supporting data to:

JPPSO-COS, DPM SCOR

121 S. Tejon St., Suite 800

Colorado Springs, CO 80903

4.5.3.3.6. JPPSO’s DPM SCOR reviews the CDR and all supporting data, and forwards the documentation along with a recommendation of an appropriate Government response to the

FC. The FC shall review, comment and make recommendations to the CO. The CO shall then take appropriate action in accordance with the Inspection Acceptance provisions of FAR

52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions, Commercial Items. The CO informs the FC, SCOR, COR and the Contractor of the final disposition of the CDR.

Dated 25 July 2016

4.5.4. Customer Feedback. Customer feedback will be used as a method of performance assessment. Customer feedback measures must be established to enable customers to provide positive as well as negative feedback. COR must take steps to ensure customers understand what service is being provided and how to provide feedback. The COR shall document any unwritten customer feedback.

4.5.4.1. Negative Customer Feedback. COR will validate in writing any negative customer feedback IAW with PWS requirements.

4.5.4.1.1. For invalid negative feedback received, COR will inform the customer of the reason(s) why the negative feedback was determined to be invalid.

4.5.4.1.2. For valid negative comments received, COR will notify the contractor’s representative to allow opportunity for investigation. If needed, COR should prepare a CDR on DD Form 2772. The COR will inform the customer who provided the negative feedback of the status.

4.5.4.2. Positive Customer Feedback. COR will retain all positive feedback received and attach to the Monthly COR report.

4.5.4.3. Customer Feedback Training. All customers shall be offered pre-move counseling.

All customers shall be provided with a current the COR’s office and mobile telephone number.

See DTR Part IV

4.5.5. Performance Assessment Folders. Developed and maintained by CORs. 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. Multiple CORs working on one contract should combine folders to avoid duplicate documentation and enable knowledge sharing. Cross reference sheets should be used to identify the location of shared or electronic files. Directory paths and file names should be clearly identified.

4.5.5.1. Performance Assessment Folder Sections Folders must contain the following six sections, be clearly marked as assessment folders and may contain other items the folder owner finds necessary:

Section 1: PWS and corresponding contract modifications if any.

Section 2: Quality Documents including this Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan and the

Contractor’s Quality Program Plan(s).

Section 3: Activity Log A chronological log of actions taken in the performance of COR duties. The purpose of this log is to provide a brief synopsis of contract inspection

Dated 25 July 2016 activities, meetings and conversations with the contractor regarding PWS performance.

Documentation supporting 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 COR inspection authority letter from the CO and the assignment letter from the FD as well as Phase I and II training certification. If this is a combined folder for all CORs, it will contain all these items for all CORs.

Section 5: Records Contains documentation associated with performance management and assessment such as DD Forms 2772 and 2773, correspondence, letters of interpretation from the CO/CS, documents supporting the Activity Log, COS, etc.

Section 6: Other Items Any other items deemed necessary by the CORs such as access letters, publications or other information needing to be readily available.

4.5.4.7 Trending The COR will analyze performance assessment data for performance trends.

This trending data, whether positive or negative, should be considered for use in subsequent reporting of contract performance.

4.6 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Maintenance. CORs must become and remain aware of this plan’s effectiveness and when the plan or parts of the plan are no longer useful or effective,. It is the CORs responsibility to recommend changes to the MFT. 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 FC/CORS. The FC/CORS will adjust the plan based on MFT inputs.

4.7 COR Staff Assistance Visit (SAV). COR SAVs will be conducted quarterly to determine that assessment and documentation is being accomplished IAW this plan. Written SAV results will be provided to the FC, CO and the QAPC. The FC/CORS, CA, CO or the QAPC may conduct SAVs.

4.8 Special Audits. Special Audits may be requested by the FD/CO for suspected functional areas deficient with PWS requirements or when technical expertise is not available at the site of contract performance.

5. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

5.1 Purpose. To manage the acquisition ensuring contract requirements are met IAW the PWS and that continuous improvement is achieved where possible.

5.2 Approach. Use of performance or any other applicable indicators to continually improve effectiveness of contract management.

Dated 25 July 2016

5.3 Methods. The MFT utilizes Performance Management and Assessment tools to ensure the acquisition meets contract requirements.

5.4 Performance Management Tools. The MFT shall utilize the Service Summary, which identifies the methods, and procedures the Government will use to assess contractor performance and to ensure it receives the services required as identified in the performance standards in the PWS.

4.4.1 Pre-performance Conference. Upon award, but prior to the contractor beginning performance, the MFT shall hold a post-award conference with the contractor to ensure a clear and mutual understanding is achieved concerning contract requirements, terms and conditions.

4.4.2 Progress Meetings. Once contractor performance begins, the MFT shall hold a quarterly performance meeting with the contractor to discuss any performance deficiencies not in compliance with the stated performance objectives listed in the PWS. Once the contractor demonstrates satisfactory performance, the meeting frequency will be scheduled and conducted no less than once each quarter.

6. PERFORMANCE REPORTING

6.1 Management Approach. The MFT will assess the contractor’s performance on a monthly and yearly basis. Information obtained from the monthly performance reports will be communicated to the contractor monthly as informational feedback. Additionally, the monthly assessment ratings will be the basis for the annual completion of the Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPARS) and all updates to JPPSO/Wing leadership on contractor performance.

6.2 Contractor Performance Assessment Report System(CPARS) The CPARS is an annual assessment of contractor performance and is based on objective facts supported by performance assessment and management data. The reports serve as the contractor’s performance report card and are used to provide past performance information for consideration in on-going acquisition efforts.

6.3. COR Monthly Report. The COR shall report results of performance assessments on a monthly basis via the COR Monthly Report (see attached). The COR shall insert the required information and provide a narrative summary of the contractor’s performance for the monthly reporting period using

CPARS guideline attached. All supporting documentation including DD 2773, DD2772, Customer

Complaints, Customer Feedback and other inspection reports shall accompany the COR Monthly

Report. The COR shall initiate the report and forward to the COR-JPPSO. The COR-JPPSO shall review and complete the report attaching the surveillance for documentation. The COR-JPPSO shall forward the Monthly Report together with all surveillance documentation to CORS-JPPSO for review and signature. The COR-JPPSO shall forward the Monthly Report with all surveillance documentation and forward to the CA by the 7th business day of each month. The CA will forward to the Monthly Report with all surveillance documentation to the contractor. The contractor has five business days to respond to the Monthly Report. Upon receipt of the Report from the contractor or

Dated 25 July 2016 the expiration of the five business days, the CA shall forward the report to the CO for final review comments and signature. Upon completion of the review and signature, the CO shall return to the CA for distribution of the final report to the CORs, CORSs, the Contractor and the QAPC.

7. DISPOSITION OF RECORDS.

7.1. Contract Quality Assurance Records Disposition: Contract quality assurance assessment records will be maintained for the life of the contract or as specified by the records disposition schedule. The CO may specify a transfer of these records to the contracting office at the end of the contract. COR should contact the CO for the final disposition instructions but at no time will any assessment records be disposed of by COR.

8. COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS.

8.1. Combatting Trafficking in Persons: The COR will verify and monitor that the Contractor has policies and procedures in place to prohibit any activities on the part of contractor employees that support or promote trafficking in persons as part of ongoing surveillance of performance of contract services. The Contractor or the COR shall immediately bring to the attention of the Contracting

Officer any non-compliance with contract clause FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons.

Additional information on DoD’s efforts to combat trafficking in persons can be found at the following website: http://www.dodig.mil/Inspections/IPO/combatinghuman.htm and the DFARS

Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI) 222.17.

9. PERFORMANCE/EXECUTION REVIEWS AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

9.1. Initial Contract Performance Review. The initial evaluation of contractor performance is a joint determination by the MFT that the contractor has successfully started performance, completed transition, is operational and is within the estimated cost, schedule and performance parameters of the contract.

9.2. Annual Execution Review: The MFT shall make a joint determination on an annual basis prior to the exercise of the option that, there have been no negative variations in cost, schedule and/or other significant performance measures required by the contract.

9.3. Annual Services Program Health Review: The determination accomplished in Paragraph 8.2 shall be summarized as the Annual Services Program Health Review and submitted for approval of the

SDO by the DBO/CSC. This information shall be available for review by the Single Manager for

Services as requested.

10. DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS. Documentation is required to record, evaluate and report contractor’s performance. This documentation provides the Contracting Officer with contractor status as it applies to the performance criteria and award term data. The CORs are required to maintain accurate records of the contractor’s performance and keep the FC/CORS and CO http://www.dodig.mil/Inspections/IPO/combatinghuman.htm

Dated 25 July 2016 informed of all data pertaining to contractor status.

11. COR FILE CONTENT. The COR file shall contain, as a minimum, the following documentation:

A copy of the contract to include all attachments, task orders and modifications

A copy of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

Appointment letters and COR Duties and Responsibilities letters

A copy of all COR training documents (i.e. Phase I and II training, refresher training, CPARS, CORTS, etc.)

A copy of all customer complaints with supporting documentation. A copy of all surveillance data including COR monthly reports, surveillance logs, complaints , COR

Quarterly Reviews and receiving reports, i.e. certification of services

A copy of all AF Form 9s for the contract

Funds log or declining balance sheet

A record of all customer complaint training conducted and associated documentation

A copy of all other correspondence related to this contract

11.1. COR Site Assistance Visit (SAV: The COR file shall be inspected by the CA quarterly. The

COR will correct any deficiencies noted within 10 days of the inspection. The COR shall submit the entire COR file to the contracting office at the end of the contract period to be included in the contract staging process.

12. CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE TRACKING TOOL (CORT)

12.1 Assessment of Contracting Officer’s Representatives Performance. MP 5301.602-2(d) and

OUSD (AT&L) Memorandum, March 29, 2010, “DoD Standard for Certification of Contracting

Officer’s Representatives (COR) for Service Acquisitions.” require the COR’s performance be included in the performance evaluation. Upon request of the COR/COR Supervisor or the COR, the CA/CO shall complete the COR Performance Evaluation for an annual feedback and the annual

COR’s performance evaluation. A copy of the COR Performance Evaluation is included

(Attachment 6).

Attachment 1: DTR Part IV Appendix P Guidelines for the Quality Control Inspector

Attachment 2: DD 2773 Report of Contractor Services

Attachment 3: DD2772 Contract Discrepancy Report

Attachment 4: Quality Assurance Monthly Evaluation Report

Attachment 5: Evaluation Guide

Attachment 6: Link to User Manual for CPARS

Attachment 7: COR Performance Evaluation with Instructions http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/USA005569-09-DPAP.pdf

Dated 25 July 2016

QASP Attachment 1

DTR IVAPPENDIX P

GUIDELINES FOR THE QUALITY CONTROL INSPECTOR

A. SKILLS NEEDED TO INSPECT

1. Communicate effectively in writing and orally. Every observation requires a record for later evaluation of the Transportation Service Provider (TSP) or contractor or as information for use by the member/employee or the Government. These reports must be clear, concise and accurate.

Inspectors, because of their direct contact with the member/employee and TSP, must be adept at personal property counseling.

2. Work effectively under stress. The inspector must arbitrate differences between TSP personnel and member/employee without being intimidated by either party. Decisions must often be made at the scene without coordination with higher authority. These decisions must be made based on broad working knowledge to avoid criticism and delays.

3. Prepare reports and other written technical material, including the task of evaluating procedures and suggestions for revision of regulations. Technical material must be clear, correct and concise. Be able to operate the Defense Personal Property System (DPS) to input, document, and retrieve inspection information and forms.

4. Work independently and effectively plan day-to-day activities.

B. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE INSPECTOR

1. Observe, document, and evaluate TSP or contractor performance in moving personal property of

Department of Defense personnel and ensure that TSPs or contractors comply with service tenders, tariffs, contract specifications, and Government regulations used in handling of personal property.

2. Resolve controversial procedural problems involving the rights of members/employees and the requirements of TSP and contractors performing requested services.

3. Advise members/employees on entitlements associated with shipping personal property when questions arise after initial counseling.

C. QUALIFICATIONS OF THE INSPECTOR

1. Experience. Experience in multiple facets of the Defense Personal…