Attachment_2_-_QASP.pdf

Encl 4, QASP

23Jun2017/v3

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1. Contract or Task Order Title: Bldg. 5160 Ground Maintenance

2. Purpose:

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

What will be monitored?

Task 1 –6.1 Ground Maintenance and Sprinkler Preventative Maintenance

6.1.1.1 Weed and feed

6.1.1.2 Flower beds

6.1.1.3 Bios –wale area

6.1.1.4 Sprinkler system Maintenance

6.1.2 Fall and Spring Leaf removal

Task 2 – Unscheduled Ground Maintenance (Firm Fixed Price)

Task 3 – Snow Removal (Labor Hour)

The clean and care of the 6 flowers beds and grounds are outline in the PWS under section 6 plus snow re-moval service.

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.

Program/Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides program oversight and supports the COR’s performance as-sessment 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.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – The COR Ralph Mullins is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The COR shall keep a Quality Assurance file that accurately documents the contractor’s actual perfor-mance. 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 con-tractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.

Other Key Government Personnel- ALT COR: Frank Farmer This may include performance monitors, inspectors, technical experts, workforce service division and center directorate level security personnel, requirements office, or others (i.e. users) who provide information that helps the COR monitor contractor performance.

4. Primary Method of Surveillance:

Random sampling is scheduled for all task list above in section 2. There will be 100% inspection of all snow re-moval services.

Acceptable surveillance methods include:

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, per-formance is inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. One hundred percent inspection is too expensive to be used in most cases.

Random Sampling. This is usually the most appropriate method for recurring tasks. With random sam-pling, 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 proce-dures.

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 fre-quency: 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 task-ing 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.

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 perfor-mance 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 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 COR’s inspection checklist.

5. Performance Standards:

Performance Standard Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) Method of Surveillance

6.1.1.1 Weed and feed

Vendor shall apply weed and feed three time a year

Walk around inspection by Facility Man-agement team

6.1.1.2 Flower beds There shall be no sign of weeds, trash, leaves or any other type of de-bris in the flowerbeds. Dying Plants and mulch shall be replaced as needed.

Weekly walk around inspection by Facil-ity Management team

6.1.1.3 Bios –wale area Grass shall be maintained between

15” to 18” tall along parking lot and no higher than 24” in center. Grass clippings shall be raked out of the area the same day they are cut.

Weekly walk around inspection by Facil-ity Management team

6.1.1.4 Sprinkler system

Maintenance

Must be 100% operational 95% of the time. Any damaged part(s) must be replace within 72hour after funding approval is given to get it back to 100% Operational status.

Weekly walk around inspection by Facil-ity Management team

6.1.2 Fall and Spring Leaf

removal

Removal of leaves shall occur as needed to maintain a neat and clean appearance of grounds around the north and east side of facility.

Weekly walk around inspection by Facil-ity Management team in the fall and spring

Task 2 – Unscheduled

Ground Maintenance (Firm

Fixed Price)

Did contractor provide cost esti-mate with 48 hours as outline in section 6.2.1 of the PWS

Did Facility team receive cost estimate on time (Yes / No)

Task 3 – Snow Removal (La-bor Hour)

Parking lot, entrances to parking lots, handicapped parking spots, sidewalks, exterior stairs and all en-tryways shall be cleared. The ven-dor shall salt all parking lots and sidewalks around Bldg. 5160 to help keep snow and ice build up to a minimum as directed by GOC

POC

Walk around inspection by Facility Man-agement team after snow removal has been done

6. Documenting Performance:

Acceptable Performance.

Unacceptable performance.

. When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. The COR shall document the discussion and place it in the

COR file and provide a copy to the KO.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Corrective Action

Report (CAR). The CAR is forwarded to the KO for dissemination 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 ac-tion plan to the KO and COR. The Government may withhold payment for services until corrective action is taken.

The Government shall 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, fixed fee deduc-tions, award fee nonpayment, CPARS or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.

7. Mandatory or regulatory compliance items:

The contractor will provide initial proof of compliance with regulatory and compliance items contained in the con-tract. The Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and the Contracting Officer (KO) will evaluate the initial submission and will conduct ad hoc reviews of the contractor's compliance throughout the remainder of the contract.

The contractor will monitor compliance as required by FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons, and re-port any issues to the KO.

8. Acceptable Quality Level (AQL):

The AQL for this project is 95% for the summer part and 100% on the winter.

9. Evaluation Method:

Visual inspection by the GOV DISA Global Facility Manager team

10. Performance Rating

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

CPAR ratings).

Performance

Rating Criteria

Exceptional

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

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.

Satisfactory

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

Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual perfor-mance reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified cor-rective 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.

Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix

Standards

Acceptable

Quality

Levels

Methods of

Calculation Surveillance Results/Ratings

Information

Technology

(IT) Service

Integration and Delivery

Management

High level of

(xyz) satisfac-tion with Con-tractor deliv-ery manage-ment of IT

Services (in-cludes the

Service Desk services and the SITEC).

Target Criteria:

90% of all survey respondents are

Satisfied, More

Than Satisfied, or very Satisfied

Minimum Ac-ceptable:

> 85% of all sur-vey respondents are Satisfied, More Than Satis-fied, or Very Sat-isfied with Con-tractor delivery management of all SITEC IT

Services

Calculation:

The number of us-ers who were Sat-isfied, More Than

Satisfied, or Very

Satisfied divided by the total num-ber of completed surveys returned.

At least XX(insert number) Govern-ment personnel must complete and return surveys for the results to have at least a

90% confidence factor with a 5% error rate.

Measurement Interval –

The Measurement Interval is three (3) months for the first year and then every six (6) months thereafter.

Measurement Period –

The Measurement Period begins at 00:01 on the first day of the month and ends at 24:00on the last day of the month.

Source of Measurement

Data – Data will be col-lected from management surveys containing satis-faction criteria specified by

(xyz) that are either devel-oped internally by (xyz) personnel or by a (xyz) se-lected impartial 3rd party.

Method of Surveillance –

Customer feedback. The

Government will issue cus-tomer satisfaction surveys to designated Government

SITEC management repre-sentatives from (xyz)

(Contractors cannot partic-ipate), , and survey re-sponses will be tabulated

(Exceptional

Very Good

Satisfactory

Marginal

Unsatisfactory)

(A rollup of assess-ment of the Surveil-lance Inspection Re-sults to develop an overall rating for this objective) to determine overall satis-faction with Contractor de-livery management of IT

Services using a five (5) category scale. The scale is: Dissatisfied, Less than

Satisfied, Satisfied, More than Satisfied, Very Satis-fied.

Timing of Measurement

Measurements are taken within five (5) days of the end of the Measurement

Period.

Reporting Frequency: -

Reporting to commence upon Contract Award and continue throughout the

Period of Performance.

Monthly reporting of Ser-vice Level Agreement

(SLA) and / or QASP at-tainment to periods survey.

Quarterly survey reporting from (xyz) during the first year, semi-annual thereaf-ter.

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 NUM-

BER

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 defi-ciency, 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