Attachment 6 MacDill AFB Habitat Restoration IDIQ Performance Plan.docx

MACDILL AFB

HABITAT RESTORATION

PERFORMANCE PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Subject Para

1. Overview 1

2. Description of Services 2

3. Goals 3

4. Contract Quality Requirements 4

5. Performance Assessment Approach 5

6. Performance Assessment Documentation 6

7. Duties and Responsibilities 7

8. Performance Objectives 8

1. OVERVIEW

1.1 Purpose. The purpose of this Performance Plan (PP) 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. This performance plan is a living document and shall be revised or modified by members of the multi-functional team as circumstances warrant, throughout the life of the contract, to ensure adequate oversight of contractor performance is maintained.

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 Executive Order 13112:

1.3.1. A Performance Plan. The performance plan is an evolving document whose development begins with acquisition planning, and is finalized as the acquisition progresses. 6 CES/CEV shall approve the performance plan. This plan identifies:

1.3.2. Objective(s) of having the service provided, i.e., what is the desired outcome from the contractor providing Habitat Restoration services to MacDill AFB.

1.3.3. Goals. 6 CES/CEV is striving to achieve through implementation of Habitat Restoration services at MacDill AFB, e.g., control of nuisance and invasive vegetation, improving the ecological value to habitat areas on base, improving base aesthetics and recreational opportunities, developing alternative treatment/restoration options, and also improving habitat restoration efficiency.

1.3.4. A strategy, methods, and tools 6 CES/CEV will use to assess the contractor’s performance against the performance metrics identified in the contract. Performance thresholds must be measurable in terms of quality and timeliness of performance.

1.3.5. A management approach, methods, and tools 6 CES/CEV will routinely use to validate the objectives and goals identified as part of the Performance Plan, i.e. benchmarking, etc.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES

2.1 Scope of Work. The contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, tools, materials, vehicles, supervision, and other items and services necessary to perform Habitat Restoration services at MacDill AFB, Florida. The contractor shall perform to the standards in the contract as well as all local, state, and federal regulations. The contractor is encouraged and expected to use innovative approaches to efficiently and effectively accomplish the PWS requirements in a timely and thorough manner, at reduced costs, and in a way, which fosters pride and ownership in the work performed.

2.2 Contract. The contract type is Firm Fixed-Price Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ).

3. GOALS

By virtue of this performance plan, 6 CES/CEV will manage this contract and strive to achieve improved ecosystems and habitat value, improved operational efficiency, innovative and more ecologically friendly habitat restoration techniques, and improved base aesthetics and recreational opportunities. Additional goals are as follows:

Maximize performance Encourage innovation Promote performance-based services

4. CONTRACT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

4.1 Quality Program. The Contractor shall develop, maintain, enforce, and document a Quality Control Plan (QCP). The QCP shall ensure the government receives the level of quality that is consistent with the requirements specified in the contract and each task order.

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 from Paragraph 8.0 of this Performance Plan dictate the minimum inspection requirements that Contracting Officer Representatives (COR) must accomplish on a periodic basis. This Performance Plan 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 control program, the assigned CORs will verify Contractor compliance with established Performance Objectives. As CORs gain confidence in the Contractor’s ability to provide satisfactory services and meet established Performance Objectives, they will adjust the level of Performance Assessment to a point that maintains confidence in the Contractor’s performance. This Performance Assessment approach is subject to change based on the Contractor’s performance.

5.3 Annual Review. The COR must review Performance Plan 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.

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

5.5.1 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:

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

5.5.1.2 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.

5.5.1.3 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.

5.5.1.4 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 para 6.1. 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.

5.6 Government Identified Discrepancies (GIDs). GIDs are generated as a result of COR’s inspection of contractor performance that identifies noncompliance with contractual requirements (Site Inspections). The Quality Assurance Person will record a GID on a Customer Complaint Record (CCR) and Corrective Action Report (CAR); see para 6.1. 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 contractors 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.

5.7 Site Inspections. Field inspections of the work sites where Habitat Restoration activities are being accomplished will be the primary method for determining Contractor performance. When site inspections are to be used as the method of performance assessment, the following must be accomplished:

a. The COR will traverse the entire work site so they can fully evaluate the contractor’s performance.

b. The COR shall describe in writing what deficiencies were noted during the field inspection, and when practicable estimate the quantity (above or below) the established restoration goal (e.g., only achieved 80% kill rate on treated species, regrowth from 20% of treated species was noted, or 10% of understory vegetation was not successfully cleared).

c. Photographic documentation of discrepancies shall be accomplished by the COR when practical. Photographs of representative discrepancy items shall be taken to help provide the Contractor with a clear idea of what the discrepancy is and how to correct it.

5.8 Performance Feedback. Documentation is required to record, evaluate, and report contractor’s performance. On a monthly basis, the COR will complete a narrative summary of contractor performance that includes the following assessment elements. The monthly performance summaries shall be maintained in the performance assessment folder. The COR will also keep the Functional Commander informed of all performance assessments. This information is strictly a tool to document the Contractor’s performance and, if needed, to support the need for corrective actions.

Performance Element Description

5.8.1 Performance Ratings. Contractor ratings and criteria are described below:

Performance Rating Criteria

6. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTATION

6.1 Corrective Action Report (CAR) Used by COR to document contract requirement findings and subsequent corrective actions to be taken.

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.

6.1.3 The Functional Commander/Director (FC/D) will elevate any CARs that cannot be resolved with the contractor to the Contracting Officer for resolution.

6.1.4 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. Major/Minor Findings are defined as follows:

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

a. Failure to meet a Performance Threshold.

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

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

6.1.4.2 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.

6.2 Performance Assessment Report. COR must document performance assessment as it is accomplished. The Performance Assessment Report is an official government record of inspections of the performance objectives and other inspection items contained in this PP.

6.2.1 Completed Performance Assessment Reports will be maintained in the COR performance assessment folder until monthly submission to the contracting officer requires them to be stored in the contract performance assessment file. At the completion of the contract, the FC/D will contact the CO for disposition instructions of the performance assessment reports. These reports can be maintained in hard-copy form as long as there is ample backup to preclude loss of data.

7. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBLILITIES:

7.1.1 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

COR Inputs to the FC/D. The COR is required to report detailed results of Performance Objective verifications to the FC/D on a monthly basis. The FC/D will compile COR inputs in a Letter of Acceptance (LOA) that includes an overall performance rating (satisfactory or unsatisfactory), identified deficiencies (regardless of who identified the deficiency- see para 5.5 and 5.6) and COR comments.

7.1.2 FUNCTIONAL COMMANDER

Identifying mission essential services, to include developing the necessary documents in accordance with DoDI 3020.37, Continuation of Essential DoD Contractor Services During Crisis.

Assigning primary and alternate Quality Assurance (QA) personnel unless another Quality Assurance organization or method can satisfy performance assessment requirements (e.g., Program Management Office).

Reviewing contractor performance documentation, prepared by Quality Assurance personnel, 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.

7.1.3 CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE

Individuals designated to perform quality assessment functions, and manage performance in accordance with the Performance Plan. They serve as on-site technical managers assessing contractor performance against contract performance standards using the services summary. Evaluating and documenting contractor’s performance in accordance with the Performance Plan. Notify the Contracting Officer of any significant performance deficiencies, maintain surveillance documentation, and recommend improvements to the Performance Plan and Performance Work Statement throughout the life of the contract.

7.1.4 CONTRACTING OFFICER/CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR

Responsible for contract management. Implementation of the Performance Plan after contract award by 6 CONS integrates the goals and objectives identified by 6 CES/CEV, oversight and performance management, and performance measurement in accordance with the Performance Plan.

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 quality assurance personnel assigned to the contract.

7.1.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM COORDINATOR

Mission support group or AFMC/AFSPC Center-level individual, normally from the contracting activity, selected to coordinate and manage the Performance Management Assessment Program (Quality Assurance Program). Supports 6 CEV in the development of contract requirements specifically ensuring that requirements are clearly stated and enforceable. Trains CORs on the contracting requirements associated with the quality assurance program.

7.1.6 6 CES/CEV (ENVIRONMENTAL FLIGHT)

6 CES/CEV is the MacDill AFB organization which insures that base operations remain in compliance with established environmental regulations, guidelines, Air Force Instructions, Executive Orders and other legal mandates that serve to protect and improve the environment. Maintaining environmental compliance directly supports the military mission. 6 CES/CEV is also responsible for demonstrating excellent environmental stewardship by protecting and improving the natural resources which have been entrusted to the Air Force. Improving the bases natural resources also directly supports the military mission. Accomplishing the Habitat Restoration work described in the PWS for this contract will: open forest areas making them more accessible for training activities; reduce the potential for damaging wildfires which could degrade base infrastructure; reduce long-term maintenance costs; and improve recreational opportunities for base personnel.

8. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES

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 COR that is used to perform the verification. The Performance Objectives are arranged according to the functional area with which they are associated. 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 PP must still be documented in the Performance Assessment Log as described in paragraph 6.2.

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. Contractor monthly payments will be adjusted based upon the performance thresholds established in the Services Summary (SS) for any performance objective that the number of allowable defects is exceeded for a given month.

Monthly Usage Reporting: Contractor shall provide a monthly summary of all herbicide applications accomplished on the base. The summary shall include: 1) date each herbicide was applied; 2) trade name of herbicide applied; 3) EPA registration number for each herbicide; 4) percent concentration of the herbicide; 5) amount used in gallons; 6) name of active ingredient; 7) description of target pest and; 8) full name of the person who applied the herbicide.

1.1.3

No more than 1 deficiency per year

Prescribed Burn: The contractor is required to notify MacDill one (1) week prior to any proposed burn date.

9. PERFORMANCE METRICS. Used to track contractor progress towards meeting stated performance objectives. 6 CES in assessing contractor performance validates that the performance metrics align with the performance-based work statement and overall mission support objectives.