encl 4_final qasp - SAT Raised Floor Upgrade.pdf

Encl 4, QASP

23Jun2017/v3

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1. Contract or Task Order Title: Raised Floor Upgrade – DISA Data Center San Antonio

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.

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 is responsible for providing continuous technical over-sight 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 performance. The pur-pose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is respon-sible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the KO. The COR is required to provide an an-nual performance assessment to the KO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the pri-mary tool for documenting contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commit-ments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.

Other Key Government Personnel – This may include performance monitors, inspectors, technical experts, work-force 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:

All tasks shall be evaluated with 100% inspection as the surveillance method.

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.

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 – Task 1: Project schedule. Pre-pared and submit detailed project scheduled, investigate existing con-ditions, conduct weekly project sta-tus meetings, and prepare and submit shop drawings/product data

Detailed schedule with phasing plan showing no planned data center opera-tional interruptions.

Minimum Acceptable:

100% compliance with requirements.

100% review and approval of schedule, meeting minutes and submittals. All submittals and information shall be complete, accurate and approved by

Government.

6.2 – Task 2: Raised Access Floor

Upgrade. Replace Access Flooring.

Clean underfloor area and repair ex-isting concrete slab.

Installed materials meet technical require-ments 95% of the time with any deficient work corrected in a manner that does not impact safety of Site personnel. All defi-ciencies shall be completed prior to con-tract completion.

Compliance with requirements of “09 69

13 – Rigid Grid Access Flooring”.

100% inspection of work. All installed materials and systems shall be complete, usable and operational, and approved by

Government.

6.3 – Task 3: Signal Reference Grid

(SRG) Testing. Conduct grounding certification test of existing SRG un-der raised access floor.

Installed materials meet technical require-ments. Deficient work is corrected in a manner that does not impact safety of Site personnel. All deficiencies shall be com-pleted prior to contract completion.

Minimum Acceptable: Compliance with

“Signal Reference Grid for Grounding” with continuity test of completed SRG shall ensure resistance does not exceed 1 ohm.

100% inspection of work. All installed materials and systems shall be complete, usable and operational, and approved by

Government.

6.4.5 - Operations & Maintenance

(O&M) Binder

Material submissions, As-built drawings, Operation & Maintenance Manuals, re-quire only minor modifications to comply with technical requirements. Revisions that occur are minor and resolved to meet contract requirements.

Submittal requires only minor modifica-tions. Required revisions are resolved in a satisfactory manner.

100% inspection of work. All submitted documents shall be complete, usable and techni-cally compliant for approval by Government.

6. Documenting Performance:

Acceptable Performance.

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

Unacceptable performance.

Unacceptable contractor performance can be identified by customer complaints (Appendix 3) or upon schedule sur-veillance evaluations. When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will nor-mally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. The COR shall document the discus-sion 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 100% due to the raised floor computer room environment this project supports.

9. Evaluation Method:

There will be a 100% review of the submittals by the COR, as defined by PWS. Once the package has been ap-proved of and all comments have been addressed, the contractor can proceed onto the installation phase.

At the close-out of the project a walkthrough will be to verify that the installation was properly done and that there are no deficiencies. Any existing deficiencies shall be added to a punch list and will be addressed in a timely man-ner.

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

Performance

Standards

Acceptable

Quality Levels

Methods of

Calulation Surveillance Results/Ratings

Performance is based on timely delivery of all tasks as speci-fied in PWS

Section 6.

High level of government satisfaction with the Con-tractor’s work includes the successful deliv-ery of all tech-nical tasks on schedule as specified in

PWS Section 6.

Target Criteria:

Equipment and installation work meets technical requirements

95% of the time, as specified in

PWS Section 6.

Minimum

Acceptable:

Deficient work is corrected in a timely manner.

Calculation:

The number of re-quired equipment items, 100% of the total, are satisfac-torily installed correctly and on schedule.

The Government technical person-nel (site Facility

Manager) must inspect the com-pleted work for correct equipment installation for the results to have at least a 100% com-pleteness rate.

Measurement Interval:

The Measurement Interval is at completion of each speci-fied task in the PWS Section

6.

Measurement Period:

The Measurement Period be-gins at issuance of Notice to

Proceed (NTP) and ends at fi-nal acceptance of technical compliance of the contract.

Source of Measurement Data:

Data will be collected from site Facility Manager inspec-tion of the completed work for timely and correct equip-ment installation.

Method of Surveillance:

Facility Manager on-site

100% inspection of the com-pleted work.

Timing of Measurement:

Measurements are based on inspection of completed work when notified by the Contrac-tor that task is complete.

Reporting Frequency: Re-porting to commence upon

Contract NTP and continue throughout the Period of Per-formance on a monthly schedule or as needed when

Contractor completes tasks.

Exceptional - All work completed without corrections.

Delivered ahead of schedule.

Very Good - All work completed with minor corrections.

Delivered on Sched-ule

Satisfactory - Work completed within

PWS technical re-quirements. Close monitoring by Govt required. Formally identified deficien-cies corrected within 1 week. De-livered on Schedule.

Marginal -

Project delivered in compliance but out-side the POP.

Unsatisfactory-

Contractor unable to fulfill PWS require-ments

(A rollup of assess-ment of the Surveil-lance Inspection Re-sults to develop an overall rating for this objective)

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