Sec_J _Attachment_11_-_QASP_3_May_12.pdf

FA8629-12-R-2400

Section J, Attachment 11

3 May 2012

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR

COMBAT RESCUE HELICOPTER (CRH)

Contract Number: TBD

Approved By: //signed// Date: 1 Jun 2012______ Contracting Officer

MULTI-FUNCTIONAL TEAM MEMBERSHIP SIGNATURE PAGE

Contracting Officer Rep: //signed// Date: 29 May 2012

Alternate Contracting Officer Rep: //signed// Date: 29 May 2012

Program Manager: //signed// Date: 2 May 2012

Contracting Officer: //signed// Date: 1 Jun 2012

Contract Negotiator: //signed// Date: 31 May 2012

QAPC: //signed// Date: 29 May 2012

Financial Management: //signed// Date: 30 May 2012

Contractor*: _____TBD____ Date: _____TBD_____

* Contractor will have limited authority in the Multi-Functional Team, so as to not be involved in any inherently governmental responsibilities.

QUALITY ASSURANCE

SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Part 1

PERFORMANCE

MANAGEMENT

INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) has been developed to implement Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 46.401. It is designed to assess and document contractor performance in accordance with the requirements set forth in the Statement of Work (SOW). This plan will provide the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) an effective and systematic surveillance method for each listed service. In addition, this QASP implements the Multi-Functional Team (MFT) concept.

The signatures, on the attached charter signature page, indicate membership in the MFT.

1. OBJECTIVE

The Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) Sustainment Support services shall provide quality Interim Supply Support (ISS) and Field Service Representatives (FSRs) at each Main Operating Base (MOB) and an IOT&E location. Interim Contractor Support (ICS) shall be provided for Training System Activities. Additionally, the contractor shall provide quality Type 1 training to aircrew and maintenance personnel.

The QASP will provide oversight capability to ensure contractor personnel are delivering services that conform to the contract requirements. It will also identify the methods used for evaluation and surveillance of the contractors.

2. GOALS OF THE MULTI-FUNCTIONAL TEAM

The goal of the MFT is to give all members/stakeholders the ability to maintain the highest quality representative service to our customers and propose/initiate improvements throughout the life of the contract. Under this concept, continual contract assessment will be focused on ensuring that the contract, as written, continues to meet the needs of the customer. The MFT should strive to achieve efficiencies in the contract performance and improved customer support. The team is composed of stakeholders in the acquisition process and is responsible for the acquisition throughout the life of the requirement. The goal of the team is to define the requirement in performance based terms, ensure contractor compliance with contract requirements and ensure that the contract as written continues to meet the needs of the functional organization. In addition, another goal is implementation and execution of the acquisition strategy to ensure support of the mission. The role entails planning, programming, and budgeting for adequate funds, ensuring program execution within the approved funding, developing the milestones and managing execution to ensure the contract supports mission requirements within the approved scheduled baseline, ensuring the program maintains accountability, and planning and managing of this service.

3. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.1. Contracting Officer (CO)

3.1.1. Ensures acquisition processes (i.e. market research, gathering past performance information, source selection, issuing solicitations, evaluating proposals and awarding the contract) are aggressively performed.

3.1.2. Ensures compliance with FAR, FAR Supplements, and this Performance Plan.

3.1.3. Appoints a Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC).

3.1.4. Participates in MFT meetings.

3.1.5. Delegates authority for inspection and/or acceptance to the COR in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract. Informs the contractor of the names, duties, and limitations of authority for all CORs assigned to the contract.

3.1.6. Advises the MFT.

3.1.7. Manages CORs assigned to the contract.

3.2. Contracting Officer Representative (COR) Supervisor

3.2.1. Nominates primary and alternate CORs unless another Quality Assurance (QA) organization or method is used to satisfy surveillance requirements (e.g. centralized performance management office).

3.2.1.1. Ensures nomination package specifies nominee’s qualifications.

3.2.2. Ensures COR is afforded the necessary resources (i.e. time, supplies, equipment, and opportunity) to perform the designated functions.

3.2.3. Reviews the contractor performance documentation prepared by COR on a regular basis to ensure performance is compatible with contract and mission objectives.

3.2.4. Evaluates COR on performance of their COR duties as part of their performance assessment throughout the period of the contract.

3.3. Quality Assurance Program Coordinator (QAPC):

3.3.1. Coordinates all aspects of the QA program.

3.3.2. Supports the MFT and attends MFT meetings, as requested.

3.3.3. Provides training to COR Management including COR Supervisor.

3.3.4. Facilitates Phase I training for CORs.

3.3.5. Maintains records of QA appointments and documents all COR and COR Management training.

3.4. Contracting Officer Representative (COR):

3.4.1. Participates in MFT meetings.

3.4.2. Performs inspections to evaluate and document the contractor’s performance; notifies the CO of any significant performance deficiencies; submits monthly inspections records to the CO.

3.4.3. Maintains QA documentation, and recommends changes/improvements to the contract, SOW, QASP, or other requirements throughout the life of the contract to provide more effective operations or eliminate unnecessary costs.

3.5. Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) (i.e. Legal, Finance, Small Business, and Engineering

POCs: Other Points of Contacts (POCs) shall coordinate, review and provide input as needed by the multifunctional team.

3.6. Contractor:

3.6.1. Complies fully with the terms and conditions of the contract.

3.6.2. Participates as a member of the MFT in the post-award management phase.

3.6.3. Ensures that non-conforming contract services are identified and corrected.

3.6.4. Tenders to the Government for acceptance of only those services that conform to contract requirements.

3.6.5. Recommends any changes to the contract that will provide more effective operations or eliminate unnecessary costs.

3.6.6 Maintains and implements a Quality Control Plan (QCP) that compliments the QASP if requested.

3.8. Multi-Functional Team (MFT):

This is a customer-focused team composed of stakeholders in the acquisition process. The team promotes good business decisions to meet customer requirements, fosters partnerships with industry to ensure exchanges of information with the contractor and other business experts. The team is responsible for managing contract performance in accordance with the QASP, assessing and documenting contractor performance in accordance with the QASP, identifying opportunities to improve performance throughout the life of the contract, completing and reporting annual performance reviews in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) as required. All members of the MFT are responsible for determining if the contract continues to support the needs of the organization and notifying the CO if it does not. In this context, members of the MFT should consider whether there are tasks covered by the contract which are no longer required, whether there are needs related to the contract’s purpose which are not covered by the contract but could or should be, and whether they have received any customer complaints regarding contract scope. After contract award, the contractor may become a member of the MFT.

4.0 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT (CONTRACT ASSESSMENT):

4.1. Metrics:

4.1.1. Market research will be used as a tool throughout the life of the contract to ensure the most current, efficient, and effective assessment methods and techniques of the commercial marketplace are applied to the performance of services under the contract. At a minimum market research (including an informal survey of customers) will be conducted annually prior to exercising the option for an additional performance period. The results of the market research/survey of customers will be utilized in making the decision as to whether it is appropriate and in the government’s best interests to exercise the option. These results will be documented in the CO’s Determination and Findings (D&F) supporting option exercise if that course of action is selected.

4.1.2. MFT meetings will be scheduled throughout the life of the contract. Attendees at specific team meetings will vary based on the circumstances or issues to be covered at each meeting.

Continual contract assessment will be focused on ensuring that the contract, as written, continues to meet the needs of the customer. Team members will consider whether the contract includes tasks which are no longer required; whether there are needs related to the contract’s purpose which are not covered by the contract; and whether any customer complaints regarding contract scope have been received. The success of the contract is dependent upon a combined effort of all members of the MFT.

4.1.3. All performance assessment data will be reviewed. If performance improvement is necessary, the Corrective Action (CA) will be requested from the contractor via the CO.

4.1.4. There will be no positive incentive and any negative incentive will be accomplished via the Inspection of Services clause or entry of reports in CPARS.

4.1.5. The procedures included within this QASP will be used to measure the contractor’s performance on this acquisition. Procedures for reductions in payment when services do not meet contract requirements will be accomplished via the Government’s rights under the Inspection of Services Clause.

5.0 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

5.1. This QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, not the Government, is responsible for the management and quality control actions needed to meet the standards of the contract.

5.2. The following is the approach the team will use to assess the contractor’s performance against the performance thresholds/metrics identified in the contract.

5.2.1. The Services Summary (SS) matrix contained in this document will summarize the performance objectives and performance thresholds required by the Government in the contractor’s performance. These performance objectives will directly relate to mission essential items. The performance thresholds briefly describe the minimum acceptable levels of service required for each objective, and are critical to mission success. The contractor shall be aware that the absence of any contract requirement from the SS does not detract from its enforceability nor limit the rights or remedies of the Government under any other provision of the contract.

5.2.2. The COR will perform QA procedures following the surveillance procedures contained herein.

5.3. Initial Performance Review:

5.3.1. The initial evaluation of contractor performance shall take place within 30 days after the contractor assumes full performance responsibilities to ensure the contractor has successfully started performance, completed transition, is fully operational, and is within the estimated schedule and performance parameters of the contract.

5.3.2. Initial Performance Review Criteria:

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

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

5.3.2.3. Management/Performance: Assess the integration and coordination of all activity needed to execute the contract, specifically the completeness and quality of problem identification, CA plans, the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, customer satisfaction and management of subcontracts including progress on small business subcontracting goals.

5.3.2.4. Staffing: Assess the contractor’s performance in selecting, retaining, supporting and replacing when necessary, personnel.

5.3.2.5. Special Interest Items (SII): Assess any significant modification to the contract made since contract award.

5.3.2.6. Assessment Values:

5.3.2.6.1. Green—No issues.

5.3.2.6.2. Yellow—Issue(s) but contractor has an adequate mitigation or CA plan in place.

5.3.2.6.3. Red—Issue(s) with inadequate or no contractor mitigation or CA plan.

Any “red” assessment should include the government proposed actions with respect to contractor noncompliance.

5.4 CPARS:

5.4.1. CPARS will be updated documenting contractor performance. The COR provides input to the Assessing Official Representative (AOR) for the CPARS; and the reviewing official will be the COR Supervisor. The contractor also has input prior to finalization.

5.4.2. The website for the CPARs toolkit is: http://www.cpars.csd.disa.mil/cparsmain.htm

6.0 REVISIONS

Revisions are the responsibility of the MFT. The COR reviews the SOW and QASP periodically and shall provide any proposed changes to the MFT for review. Revisions to the QASP are the responsibility of the MFT and are only accomplished with the approval of and by the CO.

http://www.cpars.csd.disa.mil/cparsmain.htm

QUALITY ASSURANCE

SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Part 2

ASSESSMENT

MANAGEMENT

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

PROCEDURES

CONTRACTOR’S NAME: TBD

CONTRACT NUMBER: TBD

PROJECT/SERVICE: CRH PRODUCT SUPPORT SERVICES

APPROVED BY:

//SIGNED// Date: 1 Jun 2012 Contracting Officer

QASP PROCEDURES

1. INTRODUCTION: These surveillance procedures have been developed to implement FAR

46.401. They are designed to provide the COR instructions explaining how to perform surveillance and document findings on tasks issued under this contract for CRH Product Support Services.

1.1. The COR may inspect any aspect of contractor performance at any time during the contract, whether or not it is included in the SS. A format for documenting these inspections can be found on page 33 of this plan.

1.2. Any nonconformance with contract requirements is a “defect”. The term “defective” is used to reference a service output in the SS that does not meet the outputs associated with the standard.

1.3. This QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for the management and quality control actions required to meet the terms of the contract. The Performance Thresholds recognize that the contractor is not a perfect manager and that unforeseen and uncontrollable problems do occur. CORs are to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating contractor performance against the standards.

1.4 The following is the approach the team will use to assess the contractor’s performance against the performance thresholds/metrics identified in the contract.

1.4.1. The SS will summarize the performance objectives and performance thresholds required by the Government in the contractor’s performance. The performance thresholds briefly describe the minimum acceptable levels of services required for each objective, and are critical to mission success.

1.4.2. The COR will perform QA procedures contained herein.

Performance Requirements Services Summary Matrix

Performance

Objective SOW Para Performance Threshold Method of

Surveillance Remedy

SS-1. Provide Type 1 training for Government aircrew and maintenance personnel.

1.5.2.1, 1.5.2.1.1, 1.5.2.1.2, 1.5.2.1.3, 1.5.2.1.4, and 1.5.2.1.5.

Contractor Type 1 training must produce 100% qualified CRH aircrew and maintenance personnel per training event.

- 100% review of government qualification

- Customer feedback

- Supervisor Follow-up Survey

- Re-performance

- CPARS

documentation

SS-2. Provide ICS for the CRH Training System Activities.

1.5.2.5, 1.5.2.5.1, 1.5.2.5.2, 1.5.2.5.3, 1.5.2.5.4, 1.5.2.5.5 1.5.2.5.6, 1.5.2.5.7, 1.5.2.5.8.

No more than 2 CARs or COR-validated major complaints per month.

- 100% review of monthly ICS Activity report

- Periodic surveillance

- Customer feedback

- Re-performance

- CPARS

documentation

- Provide CA plan within 5 working days

SS-3. Satisfy Non- Mission Capable Supply (NMCS) rate

1.9.5.3.1, 1.9.5.3.1.1.

NMCS rate shall not exceed 5% per month at any MOB or IOT&E location.

- 100% review of monthly ISS activity report -Periodic surveillance

- CPARS

documentation

- Provide CA plan within 5 working days

SS-4. Maintain base level Stockage Effectiveness rate

1.9.5.3.1, and 1.9.5.3.1.1.

Stockage Effectiveness rate shall not fall below 75% per month at any MOB or IOT&E location.

- 100% review of monthly ISS activity report -Periodic surveillance

- CPARS

documentation

- Provide CA plan within 5 working days

SS-5. Meet average Mean Logistics Down Time (MLDT) per NMCS event

1.9.5.3.1, and 1.9.5.3.1.1.

Monthly average MLDT per NMCS event shall not exceed 48 hours at any MOB or IOT&E location.

- 100% review of monthly ISS activity report -Periodic surveillance

- CPARS

documentation

- Provide CA plan within 5 working days

SS-6. Take immediate action for any identified Mission Capable Awaiting Parts (MICAP)/Aircraft on Ground (AOG) situation.

1.9.5.3.2. Immediate action to

resolve MICAP/AOG shall not exceed 2 hours.

- 100% surveillance

- Customer feedback

- CPARS

documentation

- Provide CA plan within 24 hours of notification.

SS-7. Provide FSR support at each MOB and an IOT&E location for one 8-hour shift per 24-hour day, 5 days per week on-site and on-call after duty hours.

1.9.5.4.1. No more than 2 CARs or

COR-validated major complaints per month.

- 100% review of monthly FSR Performance Activity Report

- Periodic surveillance

- Customer feedback

- Re-performance

- CPARS

documentation

- Provide CA plan within 5 working days

2. PERFORM SURVEILLANCE: Three common methods of surveillance are explained below as follows:

2.1. Customer Complaint/Feedback: When the customer discovers unacceptable performance or a defect in service (or training), he/she will prepare a Customer Complaint Record (CCR) identifying the discrepancy. The CCR template is included on page 28 of this document. The customer will keep one copy and forward a copy to the COR either manually or electronically.

The COR will review the item and determine if the complaint is contractually valid. If valid it is forwarded to the contractor for CA. If a customer notifies the COR either verbally or in writing (including email) of a complaint, but does not submit a CCR, the COR will generate a CCR to document the complaint. The CCR will then be submitted to the contractor for CA. When the contractor documents the CA proposed to correct observed defects (if possible) and prevent future defects, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CCRs to the COR and the contractor for their records.

2.1.1. In addition, the COR or individual customers may from time to time wish to submit positive feedback about the contractor’s performance under the contract. This positive feedback may be submitted on the Customer Feedback Record (CFR), found on page 29 of this plan.

2.1.2. In the event that the COR wants feedback from every customer/service location each month, those customers with no complaints should submit their feedback on a

CFR.

2.1.3. Supervisor Follow-up Survey will be completed at the student’s unit 15 working days after each training event to ensure that the students are receiving relevant training.

Surveys will be handled with the same procedures as customer complaints outlined in Para. 2.1., above.

2.1.4. Major complaints are defined as those complaints that do not meet the threshold and/or reasonably indicate a deficiency in the service received, that would require retraining, recertification, or re-accomplishment of the identified task.

2.2 Periodic Surveillance: When periodic surveillance is used, inspections shall be performed at the frequency identified for each SS item, and is on other than a 100% or statistically random basis. The frequency of inspection is established (i.e. daily, weekly, monthly, or quarterly) but the specific time of occurrence need not be specified. When the COR discovers unacceptable performance or a defect in service, he/she will generate a Corrective Action Report (CAR) identifying the discrepancy. The CAR will then be submitted to the contractor for CA. When the contractor documents the CA proposed to correct observed defects (if possible) and prevent future defects, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CARs to the COR and the contractor for their records.

2.3. 100% Surveillance: In this surveillance method, the COR inspects 100% of the work.

When the COR discovers unacceptable performance or a defect in service, he/she will generate a CAR identifying the discrepancy. The CAR will then be submitted to the contractor for CA.

When the contractor documents the CA proposed to correct observed defects (if possible) and prevent future defects, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CARs to the COR and the contractor for their records.

3. INFORM CONTRACTOR’S CONTRACT MANAGER: The COR must always contact the contractor’s manager and inform him/her of any deficiency that was observed. This may be accomplished in person or electronically, but any verbal communication must be supplemented by submission of a CCR or CAR. The contractor will annotate on the report provided by the COR the CA he/she will take to correct the defect and prevent its recurrence, and will return the completed report to the COR.

4. EVALUATE CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION: After the contractor documents the proposed CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record, annotated with the results of COR evaluation, to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will determine if further actions need to be taken against the contractor, such as reductions in invoiced payments in accordance with the Inspection of Services clause. The proposed CA along with the CO’s disposition of the CA will be annotated on the record, and copies will be returned to the COR and the contractor.

5. REMEDIES FOR UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE:

5.1. In accordance with FAR 52.246-04, Inspection of Services - Fixed Price, and FAR 52.246- 05, Inspection of Services – Cost-Reimbursement, if any of the services do not conform to contract requirements; the Government may require the contractor to perform the services again in conformity with contract requirements, at no increase in contract amount. This includes but is not limited to termination of contractor personnel and recruitment of substitute personnel that are equally qualified within established timeframes. When the defects in services cannot be corrected by re-performance, the Government may:

5.1.1. Require the contractor to take necessary action to ensure that future performance conforms to contract requirements; and

5.1.2. Reduce the contract price to reflect the reduced value of the services performed.

This may include a reduction in the number of paid hours to reflect the total non-performance period.

5.1.3. If the contractor fails to promptly perform the services again or to take the necessary action to ensure future performance is in conformity with contract requirements, the Government may:

5.1.3.1. By contract or otherwise, perform the services and charge to the contractor any cost incurred by the Government that is directly related to the performance of such service; or

5.1.3.1.1. Decrease the invoice amount in relation to performance

5.1.3.1.2. Cure Notice

5.1.3.1.3. Show Cause Notice

5.1.4. The CO will determine the action to be taken against the contractor, such as reductions in fee/price in accordance with the Inspection of Services clause. The CO’s disposition of the deficiency will be annotated on the form and the COR and contractor will be notified of action.

6. COR MONTHLY INSPECTION REPORT: The CORs shall submit an assessment report and attach all CARs, Performance Assessment Reports, and validated customer complaints to the CO no later than 5 working days following the month in which the actual surveillance occurred. The report shall be signed and dated by the COR and provided to the CO. Validated customer complaints and all documentation will be used to support contractor ratings in the CPARS.

7. WIDE AREA WORKFLOW:

7.1. The COR will certify receipt of contractor services via the Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) website. Certification of services shall be accomplished on the first workday following the completion of the contract payment period, to avoid payment of interest penalties.

7.2. The CORs are responsible for obtaining, scheduling, and completing WAWF training from the Base Accounting and Finance Office.

8. REVISION TO THE QASP. Revisions to the QASP are the responsibility of the MFT. This is a living document and may be changed at any time by the CO.

SS- 1 – Type 1 Training

SOW Paragraphs 1.5.2.1, 1.5.2.1.1, 1.5.2.1.2, 1.5.2.1.3, 1.5.2.1.4, and 1.5.2.1.5.

1. METHOD OF SURVEILLANCE:

1.) 100% review of government qualification 2.) Customer feedback 3.) Supervisor follow-up survey

2. FREQUENCY:

1.) As required following a Type 1 Training Event.

2.) As required 3.) As required following a Type 1 Training Event.

3. PERFORMANCE THRESHOLD:

Performance is acceptable when the training provided produces 100% government qualified CRH aircrew/maintenance personnel per training event. Performance is unacceptable if any aircrew/maintenance personnel do not meet government qualification criteria per training event.

4. INSPECTION PROCEDURES:

1.) 100% Review of Government Qualification.

a. Following completion of the Type 1 Training event the COR will review the government qualification list.

b. If the COR validates performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

c. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR(s) to the COR and the contractor for their records.

d. If correction of the deficiency requires re-performance of the service, the COR shall perform re-inspections to determine if the contractor adequately re-performed and service is acceptable.

e. When a dispositioned CCR has been received, one copy of the completed CCR will be retained in the quality assurance file maintained by the COR.

2.) Customer Feedback

a. If the complaint is not received on a CCR, the COR will complete a CCR. If needed, the COR will contact the complainant to determine the validity of the complaint using the applicable SOW requirement. If any Government action or lack thereof was cause for the unacceptable performance, the deficiency will not be counted as a defect.

b. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the complaint (deficiency) will be submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CCR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

c. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CCR(s) to the COR and the contractor for their records.

d. When a dispositioned CCR has been received, one copy of the completed CCR will

3.) Supervisor Follow-up Survey the COR will contact the complainant to determine the validity of the complaint using the applicable SOW requirement. If any Government action or lack thereof was cause for the unacceptable performance, the deficiency will not be counted as a defect.

b. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the complaint (deficiency) will be submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CCR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

c. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CCR(s) to the COR and the contractor for their records.

SS- 2 – ICS to Support Training Activities

SOW paragraphs 1.5.2.5, 1.5.2.5.1, 1.5.2.5.2, 1.5.2.5.3, 1.5.2.5.4, 1.5.2.5.5, 1.5.2.5.6, 1.5.2.5.7, and

1.5.2.5.8.

1. METHOD OF SURVEILLANCE:

1.) 100% review of monthly ICS Activity Report 2.) Periodic surveillance 3.) Customer feedback

1.) Monthly 2.) Periodic 3.) As required

Performance is acceptable when no more than two CARs or COR-validated major complaints are received per month. Performance is unacceptable when more than two CARs or COR-validated major complaints are received per month.

1.) 100% Review of Monthly ICS Activity Report

a. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

b. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR to the COR and the contractor for their records.

c. When a dispositioned CAR has been received, one copy of the completed CAR will

2.) Periodic Surveillance

a. At his/her discretion, the COR may periodically survey POS activities. This could be while in performance of other surveillance activities or specifically observing the POS activities.

b. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

c. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR to the COR and the contractor for their records.

d. When a dispositioned CAR has been received, one copy of the completed CAR will

e. If correction of the deficiency requires re-performance of the service, the COR shall

3.) Customer Feedback the COR will contact the complainant to determine the validity of the complaint using the applicable SOW requirement. If any Government action or lack thereof was cause for the unacceptable performance, the deficiency will not be counted as a defect.

b. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the complaint (deficiency) will be submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CCR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

c. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CCR(s) to the COR and the contractor for their records.

d. When a dispositioned CCR has been received, one copy of the completed CCR will be retained in the quality assurance file maintained by the COR.

e. If correction of the complaint (deficiency) requires re-performance of the service, the COR shall perform re-inspections to determine if the contractor adequately re-performed and service is acceptable.

f. Major complaints are defined as those complaints that do not meet the threshold

f. Major complaints are defined as those complaints that do not meet the threshold

SS- 3 – NMCS Rate

SOW paragraph 1.9.5.3.1 and 1.9.5.3.1.1.

1.) 100% review of monthly ISS Activity Report

Performance is acceptable when 5% or less of possessed time at each MOB and an IOT&E location per month is reported as NMCS. Performance is unacceptable when NMCS is greater than 5% at any MOB or an IOT&E location per month.

1.) 100% Review of Monthly ISS Activity Report

a. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

b. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR to the COR and the contractor for their records.

while in performance of other surveillance activities or specifically observing the POS activities.

b. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

c. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR to the COR and the contractor for their records.

e. If correction of the deficiency requires re-performance of the service, the COR shall

SS- 4 – Stockage Effectiveness Rate

Performance is acceptable when the Stockage Effectiveness rate at each MOB and an IOT&E location per month is reported as ≥ 75%. Performance is unacceptable when the Stockage Effectiveness rate is less than 75% at any MOB or an IOT&E location per month.

a. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

b. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR to the COR and the contractor for their records.

while in performance of other surveillance activities or specifically observing the POS activities.

b. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

c. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR to the COR and the contractor for their records.

SS- 5 – MLDT per NMCS Event

Performance is acceptable when the monthly MLDT per NMCS event at each MOB and an IOT&E location does not exceed 48 hours. Performance is unacceptable when the monthly MLDT per NMCS event at any MOB or an IOT&E location exceeds 48 hours.

a. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

b. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR to the COR and the contractor for their records.

while in performance of other surveillance activities or specifically observing the POS activities.

b. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

c. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, if satisfactory, will forward the record to the CO for final dispensation. The CO will, in turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR to the COR and the contractor for their records.

SS- 6 – MICAP/AOG

SOW paragraph 1.9.5.3.2.

1.) 100% Surveillance 2.) Customer Feedback

2. FREQUENCY:

1.) As required 2.) As required

Performance is acceptable when immediate action is taken for any identified MICAP/AOG situation to issue/ship required part(s) worldwide. Performance is unacceptable when immediate action to issue/ship MICAP/AOG parts is not taken within 2 hours or less of notification.

1.) 100% Surveillance

a. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will be requested to sign and date the CAR and state what CA will be taken to correct the deficiency and preclude reoccurrence.

b. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, 2.) Customer Feedback the COR will contact the complainant to determine the validity of the complaint using the applicable SOW requirement. If any Government action or lack thereof was cause for the unacceptable performance, the deficiency will not be counted as a defect.

c. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and, turn, send copies of dispositioned CCR(s) to the COR and the contractor for their

SS- 7 – FSR Support

SOW paragraph 1.9.5.4.1.

1.) 100% review of monthly FSR Performance Activity Report

3.) Customer feedback

3.) As required

A. Performance is acceptable when no more than two CARs or COR-validated major complaints are received per month. Performance is unacceptable when more than two CARs or COR-validated major complaints are received per month.

B. CARs shall be considered on a case-by-case basis as to the affectivity of the overall monthly performance rating.

1.) 100% Review of Monthly FSR Performance Activity Report

a. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will

b. When the contractor documents the CA, the COR will evaluate the proposed CA and,

d. If correction of the deficiency requires re-performance of the service, the COR shall

a. At his/her discretion, the COR may periodically survey FSR support activities. This could be while in performance of other surveillance activities or specifically observing the FSR support process.

b. If the COR validates that performance was unacceptable, the deficiency will be documented on a CAR and submitted to the contractor’s representative. Contractor will turn, send copies of dispositioned CAR to the COR and the contractor for their records.

d. When a dispositioned CAR has been received, one copy of the completed CAR will be retained in the quality assurance file maintained by the COR.

e. If correction of the deficiency requires re-performance of the service, the COR shall

3.) Customer Feedback the COR will contact the complainant to determine the validity of the complaint using the applicable SOW requirement. If any Government action or lack thereof was cause for the unacceptable performance, the deficiency will not be counted as a defect.

turn, send copies of dispositioned CCR(s) to the COR and the contractor for their

e. If correction of the complaint (deficiency) requires re-performance of the service, the COR shall perform re-inspections to determine if the contractor adequately re-performed and service is acceptable.

f. Major complaints are defined as those complaints that do not meet the threshold

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD (CCR)

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

Customer Complaint Record Template, Feb 05 (SAF/AQCP) One copy each for Complainant, COR, Contractor, and Contracting Officer

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK RECORD (CFR)

DATE/TIME OF EVENT

DETAILS OF EVENT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NUMBER

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMMENT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF OBSERVATION

OTHER COMMENTS OR NOTES

RECEIVED BY (NAME & DATE)

Feedback Record Template, OCT 10 (ASC/PK)…………….One copy each for Commentator, COR, Contractor, and Contracting Officer

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. Contracting Officer Representative (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

Corrective Action Report (CAR) Template, Feb 05 (SAF/AQCP)

Corrective Action Report (CAR) Template, Feb 05 (SAF/AQCP)

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

Continuation Sheet

(Number to correspond with applicable Item Number on reverse)

Corrective Action Report (CAR) Instructions

Block 1. Enter Contractor Name.

Block 2. Enter Contract Number.

Block 3. Enter Contract Name or Type of Services.

Block 4. Enter Functional Area of the Contract.

Block 5. Enter the assigned suspense date given the contractor to provide a response to the CAR. A date must be entered for a Major CAR. A date is optional at the discretion of the COR initiating the CAR if the finding is Minor.

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

Block 7.

1. Check the block that indicates whether the identified deficiency is assigned as a Major or Minor finding. Major complaints are defined in paragraph 2.1.4 of the QASP.

2. Finding: Clearly state the details of the finding followed by a reference to the stated contractual requirement.

The reference must state the portion of the contract, part, section, paragraph and subparagraph and must make a complete brief quotation of the contract reference.

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

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

Blocks 8 and 9. Contract COR(s) initiating a CAR must sign in Block 8 and the Issuing Authority signs in Block 9.

Each annotates the date at the time of signature.

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

Block 11. The COR selects Accept or Reject after reviewing the contractor’s response.

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

Continuation Sheet. The Continuation Sheet is to be used to expand on any information that will not fit in the applicable numbered block.

CONTRACT DEFICIENCY REPORT (CDR)

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

1. CONTRACT NUIMBER

2. DATE

3. TO: (Contractor’s and Manager’s names)

4. FROM: (Name of COR)

5. DISCREPANCY OR PROBLEM: (Describe in detail. Include reference to PWS requirement(s). If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number.)

6. SIGNATURE OF COR

7. TO: (COR)

8. FROM: (Contractor)

9. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE AS TO CAUSE, CORRECTIVE ACTION, AND ACTIONS TO PREVENT RECURRENCE (Use reverse if needed.)

10. SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE DATE

11. COR EVALUATION (Acceptance, partial acceptance, rejection. Continue on reverse if needed.)

12. TO: (Contracting Officer)

13. FROM: (COR)

14. GOVERNMENT ACTIONS (Reduced payment, cure notice, show cause, other.)

15. CONTRACTING OFFICER NAME: (TYPED OR PRINTED)

16. CONTRACTING OFFICER SIGNATURE AND DATE

Contract Deficiency Report (CDR) Template, May 06 Copy of completed form will be provided to COR and Contractor

Contract Deficiency Report (CDR) Template, May 06 Copy of completed form will be provided to COR and Contractor

CONTRACT DEFICIENCY REPORT (CDR)

Continuation Sheet

(Number to correspond with a QASP Item Number on reverse)

NON-SS Inspection Form

THIS FORM ADDRESSES REQUIREMENTS IN THE CONTRACT THAT SHOULD BE

PERIODICALLY INSPECTED, BUT ARE NOT ADDRESSED IN THE SS. THE COR CAN

USE THIS FORM AS IS OR CHANGE THE FREQUENCY AND/OR NUMBER OF ITEMS

TO BE INSPECTED. ANY DEFICIENCIES NOTED SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE

CONTRACTOR USING A CONTRACT DEFICIENCY REPORT (CDR).

Date

Non-SS Items Checked (Description and SOW Paragraph number)

Acceptable Unacceptable COR Initials

COR Surveillance Checklist

A = Acceptable

METHOD OF ASSESSMENT-

U =Unacceptable

N/A= Not applicable

CONTRACTOR'S NAME:

CONTRACT NUMBER:

LOCATION: Building #

A U N/A DATE TIME COR SIGNATURE

SS- #

Paragraph #

DATE:

COR Supervisor Date

See Corrective Action Report (CAR) for write-ups

CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST LOG

CONTRACTOR:

CONTRACT NUMBER:

CAR

Number

CAR

Level

Date Issued

Due Date

Date Response Received

Date of Follow-

Up

Date Closed

Description of Deficiency

ACRONYMS

AFMC Air Force Materiel Command AOG Aircraft on Ground AOR Assessing Official Representative ASC Aeronautical System Center ATD Aircrew Training Device CA Corrective Action CAR Corrective Action Report CCR Customer Complaint Record CDR Contract Deficiency Report CFR Customer Feedback Record CRH Combat Rescue Helicopter CO Contracting Officer COCO Chief of the Contracting Office COR Contracting Officer Representative CPARS Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System D&F Determination and Findings DT&E Developmental Test and Evaluation DODI Department of Defense Instruction FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation FSR Field Service Representative ISS Interim Supply Support LSR Logistics Support Representative MAJCOM Major Command MFT Multi-Functional Teams MICAP Mission Capable Awaiting Parts MLDT Mean Logistics Down Time MOB Main Operating Base MTD Maintenance Training Device NMCS Not Mission Capable Supply POC Point of Contact QA Quality Assurance QAP Quality Assurance Plan QAPC Quality Assurance Program Coordinator QASP Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan QCP Quality Control Plan SE/TMDE Support Equipment/Test Measurement Diagnostic Equipment

SII Special Interest Item SME Subject Matter Expert SOW Statement of Work SS Services Summary TD Training Device USAF United States Air Force WAWF Wide Area Workflow WPAFB Wright Patterson Air Force Base