LG_Analysis_AAS_QASP_20190520.pdf

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Landing Gear Engineering Analysis A&AS Engineering Services

1. Vision

The purpose of this effort is to provide A&AS engineering support for the Landing Gear Engineering Analysis Engineering Mission.

Landing gear is one of many USAF aircraft subsystems now flying beyond original design service life (in terms of flight hours and/or years of service).

Moreover, mission changes, structural repairs, and system modifications (upgrades and repairs) have changed the structural behavior in ways not envisioned by the original designers and not captured in original technical data.

Because of these, the engineering and analysis activities surrounding landing gear structural sustainment have moved beyond the routine and are now heavily dependent upon specialized expertise and tools oriented much more toward research and development. Structural damage found in the field and during depot maintenance often falls outside the bounds of routine analysis and related repairs as outlined in the Technical Orders, requiring engineering disposition.

Furthermore, economical sustainment requires moving away from a “find and fix” mentality to one of “anticipate and manage”.

2. Scope

The Contractor shall support the following organizations with the tasks described in this PWS: 417 SCMS/GUEA Landing Gear Engineering.

3. Purpose

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan is a government-developed document used to determine if the contractor’s performance meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The QASP establishes procedures on how this assessment/inspection process will be conducted. It provides the detailed process for a continuous oversight process:

What will be monitored

How monitoring will take place

Who will conduct the monitoring

How monitoring efforts and results will be documented

The contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance that meets contract standards using its Quality Control Plan. The QASP provides the structure for the government’s surveillance of the contractor’s performance to assure that it meets contract standards. It is the government’s responsibility to be objective, fair and consistent in evaluating contractor performance.

The QASP is not part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the contractor’s quality control plan. This QASP is a living document. Flexibility in the QASP is required to allow for an increase or decrease in the level of surveillance necessary based on contractor performance.

The government may provide a copy of the QASP to the contractor to facilitate open communication. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen or uncontrollable circumstances might occur that are outside the control of the contractor.

Bottom line, the QASP should ensure early identification and resolution of performance issues to minimize impact on mission performance.

4. Authority

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Part 46 of the Federal Acquisition

Regulation, Inspection of Services clauses, which provide for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the service called for in the contract or order. This acceptance is to be executed by the contracting officer or a duly authorized representative.

5. Roles and Responsibilities

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

Program/Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides primary program oversight, ensures the COR is trained before performing any COR duties, and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities. While the PM may serve as a direct conduit to provide Government guidance and feedback to the Contractor on technical matters, they are not empowered to make any contractual commitments or any contract changes on the government’s behalf.

Assigned PM: Andrew Clark

Organization or Agency: 417 SCMS/GUEA

Telephone: 801 775-6061

Email: andrew.clark.8@us.af.mil

Assigned Alternate PM: Jeff Naylor

Telephone: 801 777-5817

Email: jeff.naylor.1@us.af.mil

Contracting Officer (KO) – The KO shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The KO shall also ensure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract.

Determine the final assessment of the contractor’s performance.

mailto:andrew.clark.8@us.af.mil mailto:jeff.naylor.1@us.af.mil

Assigned KO: Christian Barwick

Organization or Agency: OL_H/PZAAB

Telephone: 801 775-4631

Email: christian.barwick@us.af.mil

Buyer: John (Kenny) Prather

Organization or Agency: OL_H/PZAAB

Telephone: 801-586-3463

Email: john.prather.3@us.af.mil

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) The COR is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance. The COR uses the QASP as a guide to the oversight/surveillance process. The COR shall keep a Quality

Assurance file in the Contracting Officer’s Online Tracking Tool (CORTT) that accurately documents the contractor’s actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the KO. The

COR is required to provide an annual performance assessment to the KO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the primary tool for documenting contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.

Assigned COR: Brian Fowers / Andrew Clark

Telephone: 801 777-6338

Email: brian.fowers@us.af.mil / andrew.clark.8@us.af.mil

Other Key Government Personnel This may include performance monitors, inspectors, technical experts, or others who provide information that helps the COR monitor contractor performance.

Squadron Subject Matter Experts (TBD)

Contractor Representatives

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s Program Manager and Task Manager for this contract.

Project Manager – TBD

Other Key Contract Personnel - TDB mailto:christian.barwick@us.af.mil mailto:john.prather.3@us.af.mil mailto:brian.fowers@us.af.mil mailto:andrew.clark.8@us.af.mil

6. Performance Requirements and Method of Surveillance

6.1. Contract Surveillance

The goal of the QASP is to ensure that contractor performance is effectively monitored and documented. The COR’s contribution is their professional, non-adversarial relationships with the KO, PM and the contractor, which enables positive, open and timely communications. The foundation of this relationship is built upon objective, fair, and consistent COR evaluations of contractor performance against contract requirements.

The COR uses the methods contained in this QASP to ensure the contractor is in compliance with contract requirements. The COR function is responsible for a wide range of surveillance requirements that effectively measure and evaluate the contractor’s performance. Additionally, this QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, not the government, is responsible for management and QC/QA actions to successfully meet the terms of the contract.

6.2. Combatting Trafficking in Persons

IAW DFARS PGI 222.17, the COR shall pursue, as appropriate, the following methods of monitoring the contractor’s performance regarding trafficking in persons such that non-compliances with FAR clause 52.222-50 are brought to the immediate attention of the Contracting Officer:

Keep the lines of communication open with the contractor. At the Post-

Award conference, remind the contractor of his contractual responsibilities to notify the government if the contractor receives notification of any alleged violations to this policy or if actions have been taken against the contractor employees, subcontractors or subcontractor employees pursuant to the clause.

When appropriate, encourage contractor to complete Human Trafficking

Awareness Training.

Encourage the contractor to take steps to investigate and eliminate slavery and human trafficking in their supply chains and to publish information for consumer awareness.

Periodically access the Department of State’s Trafficking in Person (TIP) website for updates and to view the latest reports.

http://www.state.gov/g/tip

6.3. Surveillance Matrix

The Surveillance Matrix (Appendix 1) is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance Standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance. The Government performs surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The Performance Work Statement (PWS) should be used to form the foundation of the COR’s inspection checklist.

6.4. Performance Rating Definitions

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used.

Performance

Rating

Criteria

Excellent /

Outstanding

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the government’s benefits. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with no problems and contractor actions were highly effective.

Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the government benefits. The contractual performance was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Good Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory.

Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

7. Performance Reporting

7.1. Corrective Action Report (CAR)

The CAR is the official report to describe the deficiency/ issue, impact and resolution.

The COR will forward KO for review. CARs shall be corrected IAW the timelines specified in the PWS and at the discretion of the KO. The COR will ask the status of the

CAR until the CAR has been closed. The COR will keep an electronic copy of the file in the Contracting Officer Representative Tracking Tool (CORTT) on a monthly basis. See

Appendix 2 for a template.

7.2. Performance Assessment Report

PARs will be used to report ALL minor discrepancies. PARs will be generated by the

COR. The COR will forward the PAR to the KO for corrective action. Contractors will be given 10 days to correct PARs unless they have requested an extension. If three minor discrepancies are found, combine them and process a CAR. See Appendix 3 for template.

7.3. Customer Complaint Form

The Customer Complaint Form is the official form to document complaints, validation and corrective action taken by contractor. The COR must furnish instructions to the customer receiving the contractor’s service. The customer must retain supporting evidence of complaint or feedback. After the COR validates feedback or complaint demonstrating contractor noncompliance, the COR processes a Performance Assessment

Report (PAR) or Corrective Action Report (CAR) to the KO. ALL Customer Complaint forms WILL be validated by the COR prior to notifying the contractor. Any Complaint forms received will be stored in the CORTT. See Appendix 4 for template.

7.4 Contract Performance Assessment Report (CPARS)

At the completion of each period of performance, a Contract Performance Assessment

Report (CPAR) will be submitted. A CPAR includes six evaluation areas to rate the contractor's performance. More detailed information can be located under the

“Guidance” tab on the CPARS log in page: CPARS

Quality: Assess the achieved product performance relative to performance parameters required by the contract/order.

Schedule: Assess the timeliness of the contractor against the completion of the contract, task orders, milestones, delivery schedules, and administrative requirements (e.g., efforts that contribute to or affect the schedule variance).

Cost Control: (Not required for Fixed Price type contracts/orders). Assess the contractor’s effectiveness in forecasting, managing, and controlling contract/order cost.

Management: Assess the integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract/order, specifically the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, proposal submittals, the https://www.cpars.gov/ contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior (to include timely identification of issues in controversy), customer satisfaction, timely award and management of subcontracts.

Utilization of Small Business: Assess compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order relating to Small Business participation (including FAR 52.219-

8, Utilization of Small Businesses and FAR 52.219-9, Small Business

Subcontracting Plan (when required).

Regulatory Compliance: Assess compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract/order relating to applicable regulations and codes.

Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix

*Note: Performance Objectives are tied to Service Summary items outlines in the ASSET Performance Work Statement.

PWS

Paragraph

Performance Objective /

Elements

Standards / AQL Inspection Calculation / Ratings

What How/ Method When/ Freq

1.2

Technical Reports are timely, complete, accurate, and organized. All engineering support will be fully documented in technical reports as defined by CDRL A006, Data Item Description

(DID) DI-MISC-80508B

No more than 1 report/month to the appropriate government contact may be later than the requested time period.

Inspection of Reports (M1)

COR/PM will review reports for government compliance and technical competency.

Contractor will provide a get well plan within five calendar days to ensure future reports are timely.

Monthly or As Needed

Contractor will receive an unsatisfactory rating if the PM/ COR does not receive a get well plan within 5 calendar days after reporting a problem with engineering documentation.

1.2 All engineering data

referenced and generated are owned and distribution controlled by the government.

Adhering to DoD distribution control statements.

Inspection of Reports (M1)

Contractor will report to COR/PM that distribution control requirements have been followed by certification at the end of an engineering project.

As Needed Contractor shall receive an unsatisfactory rating if reports do not certify that distribution control of engineering data has been maintained or distribution control is not updated within 5 calendar days after reporting problem.

1.2 Contractor shall provide

engineering material (documents, specs, data conveyance, additional software licensing)

As required Inspection of Reports (M1)

Government will accept material and contractor shall document conveyance

As Needed Contractor shall receive an unsatisfactory rating if required materials are not received within 5 calendar days after reporting a problem.

1.2.6 and 1.11- 1.11.3

The Contractor shall electronically provide the following CDRL A001, DI- MGMT 80227/T, Contractor’s Progress. Status, & Management Report

For each respective reporting period, not more than 5 errors per report. The MSR shall also be submitted within 2 business days of the due date. Upon notice of defect, Contractor shall correct within 2 business days

Inspection of Reports (M1)

COR and customers receiving services will inspect MSR for accuracy

Monthly Performance acceptable when performance objectives are met.

1.11- 1.11.3 The Contractor shall electronically provide the following: CDRL A002, DI- ADMIN 81373/T, Presentation Material to the appropriate gov’t POC (Accuracy)

The reports that the contractor submits shall be accurate. For each reporting period, the contractor is allowed up to 5 errors per report. Typically, errors should be minor/administrative

vs. gross inaccuracies in data analysis. If errors are identified by the government POC, the contractor shall have up to 1 business day to make corrections.

Customer Feedback (M2) Random Sample (M3)

COR will send MSR checklist to squadrons receiving services to obtain feedback.

In addition the COR will use a standard checklist to review no more than 5 random reports each month with the squadron director or representative.

Monthly Performance acceptable when performance objectives are met.

1.2.6 The Contractor shall

electronically provide the following: CDRL A001, DI- MGMT 80227/T, Contractor’s

Inspection of Reports (M1)

COR and customers receiving services will

Quarterly or As Needed

Performance acceptable when performance objectives are met.

Inspection Methodologies:

M1: Inspection of Reports. All reports shall be reviewed upon receipt. The reviewer will report any flaws in the document and categorize the flaws (Editorial, Format, and/or Substance).

M2: Customer Feedback. Although usually not a primary method, this is a valuable supplement to more systematic methods. For example, in a case where random sampling indicates unsatisfactory service, customer complaints can be used as substantiating evidence. In certain situations where customers can be relied upon to complain consistently when the quality of performance is poor, e.g., dining facilities, building services, customer surveys and customer complaints may be a primary surveillance method, and

Progress. Status, & Management Report to the

COR

(PMR)

inspect PMR for accuracy

1.11- 1.11.3 The Contractor shall electronically provide the following: CDRL A005, DI- MISC-81920, List of All Deliverables, Continuity Book(s) to appropriate gov't

POC

(Continuity Book)

The first initial submittal shall be delivered NLT 6 months after the start of the contract and changes shall be made NLT 30 calendar days after receipt of comments from the government. After that, books shall be updated and submitted to the government POC for review annually. Any changes shall be made NLT 30 calendar days after receipt of comments from the government.

Inspection of Reports (M1)

Government POCs will inspect report and provide feedback to the

COR

Periodically Performance acceptable when performance objectives are met.

customer satisfaction an appropriate performance standard. In all cases, complaints should be documented, preferably on a standard form.

M3: Random Sample. This is usually the most appropriate method for recurring tasks. With random sampling, services are sampled to determine if the level of performance is acceptable. Random sampling works best when the number of instances of the services being performed is very large and a statistically valid sample can be obtained. Computer programs may be available to assist in establishing sampling procedures.

M4: 100% Inspection. This is usually only the most appropriate method for infrequent tasks or tasks with stringent performance requirements, e.g., where safety or health is a concern. With this method, performance is inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. One hundred percent inspection is too expensive to be used in most cases.

M5: Periodic Inspection. These services are monitored weekly, monthly, quarterly, semiannually, annually, etc. Periodic types of activities are perfect for periodic inspection because not only are they infrequent, but there is normally a predetermined, specified time frame within which the tasks must be accomplished. Therefore, you know exactly when to conduct the evaluations. Periodic inspections automatically become 100 percent evaluations or "100 percent checks." Inspections should be divided and scheduled by frequency: annual, semiannual, quarterly, monthly, weekly and as required. Sometimes services are required for which the time or frequency cannot be predicted, such as accident investigations, one-time special tasking by higher headquarters, etc. These would be labeled "as required inspections." Others are known and predictable such as the quarterly status report or the monthly travel report currently included in some service contracts.

M6: Email. There are certain instances when an email will be required from a contractor to notify the COR that there is an issue affecting one of the deliverables. Emails will be saved and counted at the end of the time period. Two things will factor into the grade: timeliness of the email (how soon was the COR notified after outage is discovered) and frequency.

M7: Technical Inspection. Surveillance/inspection is the type of surveillance that will be performed as specified on the project schedule by actually looking at the work being done.

Appendix 2- Corrective Action Report, Performance Assessment Report, Customer

Complaint Form

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. FUNCTIONAL AREA

5. SUSPENSE DATE

6. CONTROL NUMBER

7. DEFICIENCY MAJOR MINOR

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

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 (COR)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

11. COR DETERMINATION

ACCEPTED REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACT/TASK ORDER NUMBER 2. CONTRACTOR 3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE

5. COR PHONE 6. SUSPENSE DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY)

NEW

REPEAT

NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM REVIEWED

9. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEFICIENCY (IF DEFICIENCY BOX WAS

CHECKED)

10. DETAILED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

II. CONTRACTOR VALIDATION

11. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CONCUR NON-CONCUR

12. CORRECTIVE ACTION ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE

13. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTION OF RECURRENCE OR REASON FOR NON-CONCURRENCE OF

COR CITED DEFICIENCY

III. ACTION CORRECTED

14. CONCUR NON-CONCUR COR SIGNATURE AND DATE

15. COR REMARKS (REQUIRED)

6. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NUMBER

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY