QASP_DCAT_3_May_17.pdf

Ver: June 2015

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Defense Human Resources Activity (DHRA)

Defense Manpower Data Center

Direct Connect Military Leading Act (MLA)

3 MAY 17

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

1.0. REQUIREMENT: Defense Human Resources Activity (DHRA) and Defense Data Manpower

Center (DMDC) is offering “Direct Connect” to allow major financial institutions to receive real-time DoD MLA covered borrower data. This service is being offered support of “Interpretive Rule” of August 2016 32 C.F.R Part § 232.5(b)(2). Direct Connect will allow for large volume queries to be processed by DMDC through a system-to-system connection. Contractors will not be subject to any payment from the government in support of this initiative.

1.1 This QASP applies to:

Contract Number: _________________

Contractor Name (Hereafter referred to as “Contractor”): ______________________________

2.0. PURPOSE.

2.1. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. This QASP explains the following:

2.1.1. What will be monitored.

2.1.2. How monitoring will take place.

2.1.3. Who will conduct the monitoring.

2.1.4. How monitoring efforts and results will be documented.

2.2. This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur.

2.3. This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. However, the Government will coordinate changes with the contractor. Updates will ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions will be retained the contract file.

3.0 GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

3.1 The following personnel will oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

3.1.1 Contracting Officer (CO) - The CO will ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and will safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The CO will also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

3.1.2 Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – Cynthia Hurl, will serve at the COR. The COR is responsible for the technical administration of the contract, assuring proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance and keeping a quality assurance file. At the conclusion of the contract or when requested by the CO, the COR will provide documentation to the CO. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The contractor shall refer any changes they deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the CO for action.

3.1.3 Technical Representative(s) (TRs) include: Janine Groth and Kenneth Doolittle

3.1.4 Other Key Government Personnel include: Crissan Bonanfant

4.0 CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES:

An employee of the contractor shall serve as the contractor’s Manager for this contract.

5.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet these standards. The table below identifies the Critical Performance Elements and the respective Performance Standards and Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs) which the Government will use to determine contractor performance.

Performance Requirements Summary

Performance Objective

PWS

Paragraph

Performance Standard/Acceptable Quality

Level

Method of Surveillance

Consume quarterly maintenance releases

4.1.1 No more than one instance per

year where the contractor failed to consume maintenance release.

Periodic Surveillance

Maintain Encryption of all devices and networks used to obtain and transmit data

4.3.1 Zero instances where the

contractor failed to notify the government within 1 hour of their knowledge of security failure.

Periodic Surveillance Customer Complaint

Provide schedule and volume expectation to the government on the 20th of each month

4.5 No more than two instances in

a year that the contractor failed to submit a schedule and volume.

Periodic Surveillance, Customer Complaint

Provide financial well-being of covered borrowers and contractors credit clientele as a whole on the 20th

4.5.1 No more than two instances in

a year that the contractor failed to submit a schedule and volume.

Periodic Surveillance, Customer Complaint of each month

6.0. METHODS OF SURVEILLANCE

6.1. The Government reserves the right to perform inspections and surveillance to evaluate the Contractor’s compliance to the contract terms and performance of the requirements in the PWS.

The Government will make every effort to ensure that the surveillance methods described below are conducted in an objective, fair, and consistent manner.

6.1.1. Periodic Surveillance. This action occurs when the COR or other Government official observes a deficiency. Examples include evidence from accidents, incidents, or delays.

Regardless of where in the line-of-duty the COR observes contractual procedures not being followed, he/she has an obligation to document and report the deficiency to the Contracting Officer.

6.1.2. Customer Complaint Surveillance. This action is instituted when the COR receives a complaint from a stakeholder (stakeholder organizations include: DHRA/DMDC regarding contractor service. The COR will obtain the complaint in writing and then conduct an investigation to determine its validity. If the complaint is deemed valid, the COR will immediately notify the contracting Officer for action. The COR will notify both the Contract Manager and the complainant of the Government’s response to their complaint.

6.2. Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR will always contact the contractor's manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR, with assistance from the TRs and Other Key Government Personnel, will be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific performance standard/AQL.

6.3. Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions (to include termination of contract) against the contractor. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause in the Contract becomes the basis for the CO’s actions.

7.0. RATINGS.

Use the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) metric tools to measure the quality and timely reporting of past performance information.

7.1 Contractor performance will be rated using the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) in accordance with FAR 42.1503. Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. Use the rating scale in the ratings table below to determine a positive, neutral, or negative outcome. Use the notes to properly complete CPARS rating documentation.

Ratings Table

Evaluation Ratings Definition

Rating Definition Notes

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective..

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

Satisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

Marginal

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

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

Unsatisfactory

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

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating An Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

8.0. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.

8.1. Acceptable Performance. The Government will document positive performance. The most common format used for this action will be via CPARs. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for fixed fee payments, award fee payments, or other actions.

8.2 Unacceptable Performance. When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR will inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COR will document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

8.2.1. When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR will prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), and present it to the contractor's manager or on-site representative. A CDR template is attached to this QASP.

8.2.2. The contractor shall be required to acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CDR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the COR.

The Government will review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

8.2.3 Any CDR will become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, award fee nonpayment when applicable. The Government will use any completed CDR as part of an overall evaluation of Contractor performance when determining present or future contractual actions.

9.0 FREQUENCY OF MEASUREMENT.

9.1. During contract/order performance, the COR will take periodic measurements and analyze whether the negotiated frequency of measurement is appropriate for the work being performed.

9.2. The COR will interact with the contractor at least monthly and meet annually to assess performance and will provide a written assessment.

CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT (CDR)

1. Contract Number: <insert number>

2. TO: <insert name> (Contractor’s Manager/on-site representative)

3. FROM: Cynthia Hurl Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

4. Date and time discrepancy/problem observed: <insert information>

5. Description of Discrepancy/Problem:

<Describe in detail. Identify any attachments.>

5. Written Corrective Action Plan.

___ is not required.

___ is required and shall be submitted to the COR not later than _#_ days of CDR receipt. This Plan shall:

Fully respond to the issue(s) identified at item 5 above. Explain how the issue(s) will be corrected;

what actions will be taken to preclude any reoccurrence and how you will ensure that the services/ deliverables are received by the Government in accordance with the terms of the contract.

[At minimum, the plan should include the above information. Add additional information as needed. If any of the issues are impacting the terms of the contract – notify Contracting Officer immediately.]

COR Signature:

Date:

Contractor Acknowledgement of CDR Receipt

Contractor’s Manager/ Representative Signature:

Date:

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

SURVEILLANCE CHECKLIST

CONTRACT NUMBER:

MONTH/YEAR :

Description Referenc e

Surveillanc e Method/ Measure

Date Planned

(or Date of Customer

Complaint)

Date Complete d (or Date Customer Complain t Closed)

Exceeds (E), Met

(M) or

Below (B) Standard

Results /Remarks

Consume quarterly maintenance releases

4.1.1 Periodic

Surveillance

Maintain Encryption of all devices and networks used to obtain and transmit data

4.3.1 Periodic

Surveillance Customer Complaint

Provide schedule and volume expectation to the government on the 20th of each month

4.5 Periodic

Surveillance, Customer Complaint

Provide financial well-being of covered borrowers and contractors credit clientele as a whole on the 20th of each month

4.5.1 Periodic

Surveillance, Customer Complaint

COR Monthly Report to the Contracting Officer

1. CONTRACT NO / SERVICE:

2. MONTH AND YEAR OF REPORT:

3. CONTRACTOR:

4. METHOD(S) OF SURVEILLANCE:

5. This document is in accordance with the Inspection of Services Clause FAR 52.246-4 or FAR

52.212-4(a) Inspections (for commercial contracts) and the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan requirements.

6. Complete each of the following and provide detailed explanation. Attach additional documents if explanation is long or requires supporting evidence.

a. Quality of Work: ( ) Exceptional ( ) Very Good ( ) Satisfactory ( ) Marginal ( )

Unsatisfactory

b. Was the contractor’s performance timely: ( ) YES ( ) NO

c. Are there any significant issues that should be brought to the contracting officer’s attention?

( ) YES ( ) NO

d. Action being taken by contractor to correct discrepancies:

( ) YES ( ) NO Discrepancies this month

7. CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS:

a. Number of customer complaints:

b. Number of VALID customer complaints:

8. ADDITIONAL COR COMMENTS:

9. I hereby certify that services have been received and accepted.

COR SIGNATURE / DATE