HC101925R0007 QASP.pdf

CUI

Controlled By: DISA Controlled By: PC41 CUI Category: PROCURE Distribution/Dissemination Control: FEDCON POC: Terri Hanaoka, terri.m.hanaoka.civ@mail.mil, Template updated August 2024

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1. Contract Title: DNC PAC Video Wall Tech Refresh

2. Purpose:

This QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. This QASP explains the following:

What will be monitored?

How monitoring will take place.

Who will conduct the monitoring?

How monitoring efforts and results will be documented.

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.

This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

3. Roles and Responsibilities:

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

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.

Mission Partner Point of Contact (MP POC) – The MP POC is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance. The MP POC uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The MP POC is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the KO. The QASP is the primary tool for documenting contractor performance. The MP POC is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.

4. Primary Method of Surveillance:

There will be 100% inspection once Task 1 is complete. There will be routine/periodic inspections of the Task 1 Subtasks prior to video wall completion and Task 2. Customer input to be considered.

100 Percent 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.

Routine/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 DISA service contracts.

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

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 MP POC will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the contracting 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 performance surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The AQL performance Standard Table should be used to form the foundation of the Government’s inspection checklist.

5. Performance Standards:

Performance Standard Acceptable Quality Level (AQL)

6.1 Task 1 – DNC PAC Video Wall Tech

Refresh

Performance occurs with no required re-performance or re-work at least 80% of the time. Problems that occur are minor and are resolved in a satisfactory manner.

6.1 Task 1 – DNC PAC Video Wall Tech

Refresh (upon completion of all Subtaks)

All video wall components function 100% in the system.

6.2 Task 2 – Installation Warranty 8x5 telephone support provided between 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. HST and on-site support with proper replacement parts within 8 business hours is provided at least 95% of the time.

6. Documenting Performance:

Acceptable Performance.

The Government shall document positive performance. A Performance Assessment Report (PAR) template is attached (Appendix 2). Any report may become part of the supporting documentation for fixed price payments, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) entries, or other actions. Government acceptance permits the contractor to invoice.

Unacceptable performance.

Unacceptable contractor performance can be identified by customer complaints (Appendix 3 or in writing via e-mail to the KO) or upon schedule surveillance evaluations. When unacceptable performance occurs, the MP POC shall inform the KO who will inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication and may be through the PAR template (Appendix 2). The MP POC and the KO shall document the discussion and place it in the contract file.

When the KO determines formal written communication is required, the KO or MP POC shall prepare a Corrective Action Report (CAR). The CAR is disseminated by the KO to the contractor. A CAR template is attached to this QASP (Appendix 4).

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CAR in writing. The CAR 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 CAR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the KO and MP POC. The Government may withhold payment until corrective action is taken. The Government will review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability. Upon Government acceptance of the corrected services the contractor will be permitted to invoice for the service fee.

Any CAR may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, CPARS or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.

7. Mandatory or regulatory compliance items: N/A

8. Acceptable Quality Level (AQL):

The AQL for Task 1 is 100% upon completion of all subtasks.

The AQL for Task 2 is 95% for 8x5 telephone support provided between 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. HST and on-site support with proper replacement parts within 8 business hours

9. Evaluation Method:

For Task 1, the MP POC will test the new equipment and cabling and document any discrepancies found between the installation design plan, actual installation, functionality, and interoperability of the system. The contractor shall fix/correct all discrepancies within a reasonable amount of time. Upon completion, the MP POC will re-test the new equipment and cabling to verify corrective actions completed.

For Task 2, the MP POC will ensure telephone and on-site support is provide within times specified and the products are repaired in accordance with the Task 2 warranty.

10. Performance Rating

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used (same as CPAR ratings).

Rating Definition Note

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.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a

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.

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).

Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix

Performance Standard Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) Methods of Calculation

6.1 Task 1 – DNC PAC

Video Wall Tech Refresh

Performance occurs with no required re-performance or re-work at least 80% of the time. Problems that occur are minor and are resolved in a satisfactory manner.

Routine/periodic inspection.

6.1 Task 1 – DNC PAC

Video Wall Tech Refresh

All video wall components function 100% in the system.

100% inspection of all delivered products/equipment and testing upon completion of Task 1.

6.2 Task 2 – Installation

Warranty

8x5 telephone support provided between 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.

HST and on-site support with proper replacement parts within 8 business hours is provided at least 95% of the time.

Routine/periodic inspection.

Appendix 2 – Performance Assessment Report

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

Appendix 3 – Customer Complaint Record

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

Appendix 4 – Corrective Action Report

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