QASP 832468978 JITC UPS.docx
DOCX document 50 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Power Systems Maintenance and Repair Contract Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- HC102824R0073
- Issued by
- Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
This document is a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for a federal contract opportunity to provide UPS and DC Power Plant Maintenance and Battery Replacement services.
The QASP outlines the purpose, roles and responsibilities, surveillance methods, performance standards, and documentation processes for monitoring the contractor's performance. The performance standards include conducting scheduled preventative maintenance, providing critical event maintenance services with a 4-hour response time, performing unscheduled maintenance, and replacing batteries/capacitors within specified timeframes. The Acceptable Quality Level is 100% due to the critical nature of the power systems. The COR will use 100% inspection and routine inspections to validate the contractor's compliance with the performance standards. The document also covers procedures for addressing unacceptable performance, including corrective action plans and potential payment withholding. The related federal contract opportunity is a solicitation for a Power Systems Maintenance and Repair Contract, with a site visit scheduled for August 29.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| CLIN Pricing Worksheet AMD02 832468978.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| CLIN Pricing Worksheet AMD01 832468978.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| PWS Table 3 832468978.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFP AMD01 HC102824R0073.pdf | ||
| Eaton Battery Screenshot Sep 2024.png | PNG image | |
| PWS Table 2 832468978.docx | DOCX document | |
| PWS Table 1 832468978.docx | DOCX document | |
| Screenshot 2024-09-09 125119 Eaton Battery.png | PNG image | |
| Site Visit Instructions.doc | DOC document | |
| JITC UPS pricing sheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| HC102824R0073 solicitation.pdf |
Show all 11
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
CUI
QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)
1. Contract or Task Order Title UPS and DC Power Plant Maintenance and Battery Replacement
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 assessment 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 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 performance. 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 contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.
Other Key Government Personnel- Brian Foyt-JITC Facilities Manager, George Hargon- JITC Facilities Operations Manager 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: There will be 100 Percent Inspection for all Items as well as Periodic Inspection for Preventive Maintenance.
Example: Random sampling is scheduled for Items 2, 3, 5 and 6. There will be 100% inspection for Items 1 and 4.
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, performance 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 sampling, 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 procedures.
· 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 COR will use to validate and inspect these performance 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 |
| Task 1. Perform Scheduled Preventative Maintenance. |
| Performance occurs with no required re-performance or re-works at least 95% of the time. Problems that occur are minor and are resolved in a satisfactory manner. |
| Routine inspection of deliverable products and services. |
| Task 2. Critical Event Maintenance Services |
| Performance occurs with no required re-performance or re-works at least 95% of the time. Problems that occur are minor and are resolved in a satisfactory manner |
| Routine inspection of deliverable products and services. |
| Task 2. Critical Event Maintenance Service Response Time |
| Respond to unscheduled Maintenance within 4 hours (on-site) from time of notification. 100% of the time |
| Routine inspection of deliverable products and services |
| Task 3. Perform Unscheduled Maintenance, Service, and Repairs |
| Performance occurs with no required re-performance or re-works at least 95% of the time. Problems that occur are minor and are resolved in a satisfactory manner. |
| Routine inspection of deliverable products and services. |
| Task 4: Battery/Capacitor Replacement |
| Respond with quote(s) and materials list(s) within specified timeframe 95% of the time. |
| Routine inspection of deliverable products and services |
| Task 4: Battery/Capacitor Replacement Installation |
| Components are installed and tested within two working days of notification of receipt of materials at JITC Fort Huachuca 95% of the time. |
| Routine inspection of deliverable products and services |
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, 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 surveillance evaluations. 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 action 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 deductions, award fee nonpayment, CPARS or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.
7. Mandatory or regulatory compliance items: Monitoring of statutory or regulatory compliance items that are part of the contract such as combating trafficking in persons, EEO, wage determinations, intellectual property, subcontracting plan compliance, etc. (see the COR handbook). The COR must notify the Contracting Officer if there are any potential or actual noncompliance issues with federal statues, laws, or regulations, since the KO is the only person that can resolve these noncompliance issues related to law or regulations. The COR will utilize the Combating Trafficking in Persons Checklist, (see the DISA COR handbook) throughout the period of performance of this task order.
The contractor will provide initial proof of compliance with regulatory and compliance items contained in the contract. 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 report any issues to the KO.
8. Acceptable Quality Level (AQL):
The AQL for this project is 100% due to the critical support provided by Critical Power System operations.
9. Evaluation Method:
The COR will document the time of verbal notification to the contractor. The COR will document the official time and date of notification on the Maintenance Call Record. The COR will review self-diagnostic systems logs, conduct a comparison with actual maintenance performance and otherwise verify and validate contractor performance. The contractor shall enter in the record the official time the system is restored to full operational status. The COR will confirm the date and time of problem resolution in the record.
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. 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). |
Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix
Performance Standards Acceptable Quality Levels Methods of Calculation
| Surveillance |
| Results/Ratings |
Task 1. Perform Scheduled Preventative Maintenance.
Task 2. Critical Event Maintenance Services
Task 2. Critical Event Maintenance Service Response Time
Task 3. Perform Unscheduled Maintenance, Service, and Repairs
Task 4: Battery/Capacitor Replacement
Task 4: Battery/Capacitor Replacement Installation Performance occurs with no required re-performance or re-works at least 95% of the time.
Problems that occur are minor and are resolved in a satisfactory manner.
Performance occurs with no required re-performance or re-works at least 95% of the time.
Problems that occur are minor and are resolved in a satisfactory manner
Respond to unscheduled Maintenance within 4 hours (on-site) from time of notification. 100% of the time
Performance occurs with no required re-performance or re-works at least 95% of the time. Problems that occur are minor and are resolved in a satisfactory manner.
Respond with quote(s) and materials list(s) within specified timeframe 95% of the time.
Components are installed and tested within two working days of notification of receipt of materials at JITC Fort Huachuca 95% of the time.
100 Percent plus Routine inspection of deliverable products and services.
100 Percent plus Routine inspection of deliverable products and services.
100 Percent plus Routine inspection of deliverable products and services
100 percent plus Routine inspection of deliverable products and services.
100 percent plus Routine inspection of deliverable products and services
100 percent plus Routine inspection of deliverable products and services
Measurement Interval – The Measurement Interval is during all occurrences
Measurement Period – The Measurement Interval is each occurrence for entirety of contract.
Source of Measurement Data – COR/Technical Manager
Method of Surveillance – 100 Percent as well as Routine Inspections
Timing of Measurement – Each Occurrence
Reporting Frequency: - Reporting to commence upon Contract Award and continue throughout the Period of Performance.
Monthly reporting of Service Level Agreement (SLA) and / or QASP attainment to periods survey. Quarterly survey reporting from (xyz) during the first year, semi-annual thereafter.
(Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory)
(A rollup of assessment of the Surveillance Inspection Results 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 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
Controlled By: Joint Interoperability Test Command Controlled By: JT3D CUI Category: Procure Distribution/Dissemination Control: DITCO, DISA,JITC POC: Chris Wintermute, 520-538-5063
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .