23Q0002_ATTACH6_QASP_042623.docx

RFQ HE1254-23-Q-0002 - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS) for Social, Emotional, & Behavioral (SEB) Support & Services for Secondary Schools Serving Military-Connected Students

1. Purpose This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract by explaining (1) what is monitored, (2) how monitoring occurs, (3) who monitors, and (4) how monitoring efforts and results are documented.

2. Background

In 2016 the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) US Department of Agriculture (USDA) awarded a grant and DoDEA awarded a follow-on grant in 2019 to support research development on the emerging topic of harmful behaviors for military-connected students (e.g., sucide, problematic-sexual behavior in children and youth, etc.

In August 2019, DoDEA identified the need to develop an evidenced-based PK-5 framework in which the social, emotional, and behavioral (SEB) support and service needs of military-connected students and schools could be identified and intervened upon effectively.

Since the 2020-21 school year, DoDEA HQ’s Student Services Division has piloted a participatory coaching model for the implementation of a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) for SEB support/services in four elementary schools. The coaching and implementation have demonstrated positive initial results to include building trust, expanding knowledge, and increasing implementation capacity for a sustainable framework of practice. The pilot program has improved equity, access, and academic engagement for the students who received support/services.

The School Resources Website (https://schoolresources.militaryfamilies.psu.edu) has been hosting materials to support educators who work with military-connected students. Currently, the website is the home to hundreds of resources that can assist teachers and other school personnel with helping at-risk students. As a part of this work, the School Resources website will continue to expand and reflect the needs of secondary schools. Mini-modules, resource handouts, printable content, and links to vetted resources will be developed, expanded, and maintained during the project.

The MTSS Check Up Model (Hall & Moeller) is an evidence-informed, theory-driven framework that DoDEA created and that DoDEA is piloting under the current award using a community-based participatory research model/methodology.

Community-Based Participatory (CBPR) research is a methodological and epistemological approach to research that involves equal collaboration between researchers and members of a specific community. The aim of CBPR is to bring about social change by giving community members a voice in the research process and empowering them to address issues that are relevant to their lives. CBPR values community knowledge, expertise and experience and recognizes that communities have the right to shape the research that is conducted within their boundaries. This approach recognizes the importance of considering community perspectives, needs, and goals in the design, implementation, and dissemination of research results.

3. Objectives The proposed project expands the pilot elementary implementation to the secondary level, continues the development of online materials for military-connected schools, and builds DoDEA’s capacity to sustain the program after the contract expires. As part of the Penn State Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness on MTSS for SEB support and services at the secondary level (grades 6-12), DoDEA requires the following:

This QASP does not detail how the Contractor accomplishes the work but is based on the premise that the Contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. The Government is responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance. The QASP takes into account that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur. It is a living document, which the Government may review and revise on a regular basis to ensure it remains valid, useful, and enforceable. The Government will coordinate any changes with the Contractor. DoDEA will provide copies of the original QASP and revisions to the Contractor and Government officials implementing the surveillance activities.

4. Government Personnel Responsible to Oversee and Coordinate Surveillance Contracting Officer (KO) - Ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, compliance with the contract terms, and safeguarding the interests of the Government in the contractual relationship. Ensures the Contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. Is responsible for the final determination of Contractor performance.

Assigned KO: TBD DoDEA HQ – xxx-xxx-xxxx – Email address

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - Is responsible for technical administration of the contract, ensures proper Government surveillance of Contractor performance. Keeps a quality assurance file. Provides all corresponding documentation to the KO when the contract expires. Is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The Contractor shall refer any changes that may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the KO for action.

Assigned COR: TBD DoDEA-HQ – xxx-xxx-xxxx – Email address

5. Contractor Representatives The following Contractor employee serves as the Contractor’s Program Manager/Task Manager for this contract:

Program Manager: TBD Organization: xxx-xxx-xxxx – Email address

6. Performance Standards Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the Contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet contract standards. The Performance Requirements Summary Matrix below includes the performance standards. The Government will determine Contractor performance by comparing them to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

7. Incentives Exercise option and positive performance evaluation

8. Methods of QA Surveillance Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR will use the surveillance methods listed below. Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR will always contact the Contractor's task manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform him/her of the specifics. The COR is responsible to monitor Contractor performance in meeting a specific performance standard/AQL usually by one of the following methods:

· Direct Observation: Performed periodically or through 100% surveillance as needed.

· Periodic Inspection: Done as required.

· Validated User/Customer Complaints: Based on complaints from stakeholders.

· 100% Inspection

Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions (including payment deductions) against the Contractor. In such cases, the contract’s Inspection of Services clause becomes the basis for the KO’s actions.

9. Ratings Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. Unless otherwise specified, the following rating scale will be used:

· Exceptional: Performance significantly exceeds requirements to the Government’s benefit.

· Satisfactory: Performance meets contractual requirements.

· Unsatisfactory: Performance does not meet contractual requirements.

10. Documenting Performance

· Acceptable Performance: DoDEA will document acceptable performance. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation history. A report template is attached.

· Unacceptable Performance: When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR will inform the Contractor. Notification 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. When the COR determines formal written communication is required, s/he will prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) and present it to the Contractor's task manager or on-site representative. A CDR template is attached.

The Contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing. The CDR will specify if the Contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan, i.e., the Contractor’s plan to correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CDR will also state how long 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. A CDR may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions or other actions deemed to be necessary by the KO.

11. Measurement

· Frequency of Measurement: During contract/order performance, the COR will take periodic measurements, as specified in the AQL column of the Performance Requirements Summary Matrix and analyze whether the negotiated frequency of measurement is appropriate for the work being performed.

· Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings: The COR will meet with the Contractor at a minimum of once per year to assess performance and obtain a written assessment.

12. COR’s Quality Surveillance File The COR’s quality surveillance file shall contain the following documentation:

1) COR appointment letter, any changes to that letter, and any termination letters

2) COR training certificates

3) Contract and all contract modifications

4) Applicable quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP)

5) Names, titles, and contact information of key Government and Contractor personnel assigned to this contract

6) Surveillance schedules / checklists, if applicable

7) All correspondence (1) by authorized Contractor and Government personnel regarding performance of the contract and (2) customer feedback

8) Memoranda for record of minutes of any meeting, telephone conversations and discussions with the Contractor or others pertaining to the contract or contract performance

9) Documentation pertaining to acceptance of services, reports or data

Digital Signature: TBD

Performance Report < This template will be used to formally document surveillance. >

1. Contract number:

2. Prepared by:

3. Date and time of observation:

4. Observation:

<Examples of items to include in a report are:

· Method of surveillance.

· How frequently you conducted surveillance.

· Surveillance results.

· Number of observations.

Prepared by:

Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) < This template will be used to formally document discrepancies. >

1. Contract Number:

2. To: (Contractor Task Manager or on-site representative)

3. From: TBD

4. Date and time observed discrepancy:

5. Discrepancy or problem:

<Describe in detail. Identify any attachments.>

6. Corrective action plan:

A written corrective action plan < is / is not > required.

< If a written corrective action plan is required include the following. > The written Corrective Action Plan will be provided to the undersigned not later than < # days after receipt of this CDR. >

Prepared by:

Received by:

Contractor Task Manager or On-Site Representative Date

The COR may initiate a CDR at any time, including when (1) the number of monthly recorded defects for a performance standard exceeds the allowable number of defects, (2) unacceptable performance is determined critical in nature and requires formal corrective action, and (3) an unfavorable trend in Contractor performance is detected.

07 Sep 22 5