J-9 QASP Task Order 0001.pdf

02 AUG 2010

NET-CENTRIC INTERGRATED ENTERPRISE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

SOLUTIONS (NIEITS)

SOLICITATION HQ0034-10-R-0046

OPERATIONS TASK ORDER

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Team Members Coordination & Review:

Date:

Program Office

________________________________________ Date:

Contracting Officer Representative (COR)

Contracting Officer

Contractor (After Award)

The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is published separately and is not part of the contract. It is issued with the RFP for informational purposes only. The QASP procedures can be changed unilaterally by the Government at any time. What cannot be changed without formal contract modification by the contracting officer is the Performance-Based Matrix that contains the outcomes and associated standards to be surveilled. This QASP has been developed pursuant to the requirements of the RFP and Performance Work Statement (PWS)

HQ0034-10-R-0046.

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

CAUTION!

Contract authority is restricted to the contracting officer (KO). The Contractor will work with the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) on day-to-day activities. The KO has delegated certain authorities to the COR, which are contained in the COR’s “letter of appointment,” a copy of which will be provided to the Contractor upon award of the contract.

Remember: It is the Contractors responsibility to keep the KO informed of all significant contract activities.

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

This QASP specifically corresponds to the RFP Section C, Attachment C-1, Performance Work Statement (PWS) for the Operations Task Order.

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document to provide monitoring, inspection, and reporting of all contractor operations under the subject procurement. It provides systematic quality assurance methods to evaluate the services the contractor is required to furnish. The surveillance/evaluation methods identified in the QASP, in concert with the contractor’s Quality Control Procedures, will ensure that the contractor performs in accordance with the performance metrics and the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract.

The QASP focuses on the following areas:

a. Provides an overview of the Operations Task Order of the NIEITS contract vehicle

b. Identifies the services and products that will be measured

c. Describes the scope of the QASP

d. Establishes the responsibilities for assuring quality performance

e. Provides for feedback to the contractor regarding quality, quantity, and timeliness of the service outputs

f. Establishes timeframes for communicating performance improvements needed

1.2 Overview

1.2.1 The overall outcome that the Government is seeking by award of this contract is to acquire seamless, reliable, and responsive enterprise solutions for information technology (IT) services for Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Chief Information Officer (CIO) supported organizations, which improve existing services resulting in a stable and secure enterprise IT network, and which meets the functionality, speed, and capacity expectations of OSD end users while complying with Department of Defense (DoD) and Federal rules and regulations.

The specific objectives of this acquisition are to: (1) satisfy OSD customer needs for secure, accessible and stable IT support; (2) exceed established operational service level agreements;

(3) maintain the OSD CIO networks by capitalizing on industry best practices and innovation;

and (4) implement IT management best practices described in the Information Technology Infrastructure Library version 3 (ITIL v3), the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK), and the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI).

The general nature of the work is for the contractor to provide a full range of Enterprise IT services in support of the OSD. The general areas of contract performance are divided into eight (8) functional areas:

Table 1.2 General Areas of Contract Performance:

Functional Areas Program and Project Management Manage and Implement Change Operations and Maintenance Support (Service Operations) Configuration Management Support (Service Asset and Configuration Management) Integrated Logistics and Asset Management Support Security Operations Support Standardize Base Workstation Images OSD Continuity of Operations (COOP) and Continuity of Business (COB)

Table 1.2 Contractor Identification:

Prime Contractor Contract Number To Be Added

2. SCOPE

To fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the distinction in terminology between Quality Control Plan and the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan. The Contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth by the contract.

The Contractor develops and submits a Quality Control Plan (QCP) for Government approval in compliance with the contract. Once accepted, the Contractor then uses the QCP to guide and to rigorously document the implementation of the required management and quality control actions to achieve the specified results.

The QASP on the other hand, is put in place to provide Government surveillance oversight of the Contractor’s quality control efforts to assure that they are timely, effective and are delivering the results specified in the contract, FAR 52.246-4 Inspection of Services – Fixed- Price.

3. RESPONSIBIITIES OF THE QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE TEAM

3.2. Contracting Officer (KO). The KO has the overall responsibility for overseeing the contractor’s performance. The KO is responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in the areas of contract compliance, contract management, and the resolution of all issues relative to the language of the contract. Although the KO will have overall responsibility for overseeing the contractor’s performance, the KO may delegate to the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) the responsibility for the day-to-day monitoring of the contractor’s performance in the areas of contract compliance, contract administration, property control; and review of the Task Order Monitors (TOMs) and the customers’ assessments of the contractor’s performance. The KO has the sole authority to resolve all differences between the Government and the contractor arising out of the contract. The KO has sole authority to interpret contract language should a disagreement arise between the parties. The COR has no authority to interpret contract language. The KO is the SOLE Authority for:

• any decisions that produce an increase or decrease in the scope of the contract;

• any actions subject to the “Changes” clause;

• any decision rendered under the “Disputes” clause;

• negotiation modifications to the contract;

• for the approval of substitution or replacement of key personnel;

• to approve the Contractor’s invoices for payment;

• monitor and enforce Department of Labor promulgated labor requirements;

• to arrange and supervise quality assurance activities under this contract;

4.2. Contracting Officer Representative (COR). The COR verifies that the contractor fulfills the PWS requirements, ensures that nonconformances are identified and establishes the significance of a nonconformance when considering the acceptability of services that do not meet contract requirements. The COR is responsible for:

• Developing and applying efficient procedures for performing Government contract quality assurance actions under the contract in accordance with the written direction of the contracting officer;

• Performing all actions necessary to verify whether the services conform to contract quality requirements;

• Maintaining suitable records reflecting the nature of Government contract quality surveillance actions as part of the performance records of the contract. These records include: the number of observations made and the number and type of defects; and decisions regarding the acceptability of the products, the processes, and the requirements, as well as action to correct defects.

• Implementing any specific written instructions from the KO;

• Reporting to the KO any defects observed in design or technical requirements, including contract quality requirements; recommend any changes necessary to the contract, specifications, instructions, or other requirements that will provide more effective operations or eliminate unnecessary costs.

• Has primary responsibility for signing off on all invoices and documenting the inspection and evaluation of the contractor’s performance.

• Works closely with the TOMs, customers, and the contractor to ensure good communication and resolve any problems not requiring the KO’s authority.

3.3. Task Order Monitor (TOM). The OSD CIO assigns TOM for which the OSD CIO is the overall task lead. TOM must be delegated and receive COR training prior to assuming their duties as specified herein. Task Monitors (TOM) are responsible for:

• Observing contractor performance and provide current, accurate information and assessment.

• Preparing evaluation reports and providing the report to the COR and KO by the 10th business day of each month;

• Assist in the development of monthly surveillance reports.

• Collecting and documenting all contractor deficiencies, analyze them for recurring instances (trend analysis) and monitor all corrective actions.

• Monitoring assigned task orders to ensure they remain within cost and schedule, and reports to COR with discrepancies.

3.4 The Contractor. The Contractor is responsible for carrying out its obligations under the contract by controlling the quality of services; tendering to the Government for acceptance only those services that conform to contract requirements; ensuring that vendors or suppliers of raw materials, parts, components, subassemblies, etc., have an acceptable quality control system; maintaining substantiating evidence, as required by the contract, that the services conform to contract quality requirements, and furnishing such information to the Government as required. The contractor is responsible for providing and maintaining an inspection system or program for the control of quality that is acceptable to the Government. The control of quality by the contractor may relate to, but is not limited to:

• Testing and examination, to ensure that practices and equipment provide the means for optimum evaluation of the characteristics subject to inspection;

• Reliability and maintainability assessment (life, endurance, and continued readiness);

• Technical documentation, including drawings, specifications, handbooks, manuals, and other technical publications;

• Preservation, packaging, packing, and marking;

• Procedures and processes for services to ensure that services meet contract performance requirements.

The contractor is responsible for performing all inspections and tests required by the contract; complies fully with the terms and conditions of the contract; and participates as a member of the Quality Assurance team in the management of the contract. The contractor ensures that non-conforming contract services are identified and corrected and the inspection system is revised to prevent recurrence.

The contractor tenders to the Government for acceptance only those services that conform to contract requirements and recommends any changes to the contract that will provide more effective operations or eliminate unnecessary costs.

4. SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURES.

4.1. Performing Surveillance. Actual surveillance must be done as stated in this surveillance plan. Surveillance includes planning surveillance, observing, documenting, and resolving performance issues discovered through surveillance. The Government reserves the right to periodically inspect all services and deliverables prior to acceptance regardless if it is shown on the Performance-based Matrix.

4.2. The Contracting Officer Representative (COR) must inspect task performance by watching actual task performance, physically checking an attribute of the completed task, checking a management information report, or otherwise inspecting the task or its results to determine whether or not the performance meets the standards contained in the contract.

4.3. Task Order Monitors (TOMs) will evaluate the performance objectives through periodic inspections of the contractor’s performance during each service month. TOMs will also solicit customer input to evaluate the Contractor’s performance. TOMs should record both outstanding and unacceptable performance in the TOM Evaluation Report.

When performing duties as the TOM:

• The TOM s are not the contractor’s primary inspector. The contractor is responsible for assuring performance that meets the contract standards.

Unless a safety issue is involved, the TOMs do not direct contractor employees to do any rework. TOMs must always notify the contractor supervisor of the deficient performance. It is generally a good practice to conduct the inspection of the contractor’s work accompanied by the contractor supervisor. This joint inspection should be unannounced.

Maintain a detailed record of all quality assurance surveillance to include all communications with the contractor supervisor.

• Make sure that the promised inspections are actually performed, the results reported, any corrective action noted, any required follow up action indicated and subsequently taken, and that the company performs an audit of the system outside the supervisory organization. At your discretion, inspect the actual work to validate the accuracy of the inspection reports.

• All performance must be documented, whether acceptable or unacceptable.

When unacceptable performance is documented, the TOM will take the following actions: When Government actions or inactions caused the unacceptable performance, take steps to prevent it in the future. Otherwise if the unacceptable performance was not caused by the Government, inform the Contractor’s Quality Control representative of the unacceptable performance and the reasons why it is unacceptable. If the Contractor wants to dispute the results of the surveillance, refer the Contractor to the COR and the KO for resolution. Performance will be determined unacceptable only after all contributing factors have been considered.

• Monetary deductions are a remedy of last resort. If the contractor can redo or perform the work within the contract schedule they will be permitted to do so. This would then constitute acceptable work. If the work cannot be reperformed within the contract schedule, then provide the COR and the KO with a recommended deduction.

• TOMs will keep the COR and the KO over-informed. TOMs must provide sufficient documentation to the KO. Documentation is essential for both inadequate as well as exceptional performance.

4.4. Documenting Surveillance.

4.4.1. Documentation is required to record, evaluate, and report contractor’s performance using the attached Surveillance Report (SR). This documentation provides the Contracting Officer (KO) with contractor status as it applies to the performance criteria. Every effort should be made to make this report to the KO as accurate as possible. The COR is required to maintain accurate records of the contractor’s performance and keep the KO informed of all data pertaining to contractor status. Documenting surveillance is of major importance to the total process of surveillance. The KO cannot properly administer the contract without documentation of actual surveillance.

4.4.2. The TOM Evaluation Report will include: Contract or Task Order paragraph number referencing the requirement; short description of the requirement being surveilled;

date, time, and location of surveillance; result of surveillance; and signature of individual accomplishing the surveillance. TOMs should deliver TOM Evaluation Reports to the COR for record keeping.

4.4.3. All documentation resulting from surveillance must be made part of the contract file. The COR must retain any and all surveillance documentation in their COR files for the life of the contract. Should COR responsibilities be shifted to another individual, the new COR shall be responsible for the maintaining of the historical and current COR files. The COR shall submit a Surveillance Report and a Monthly Surveillance Summary Report (COR MSSR) documentation/reports to the KO by the 15th business day of the month.

5. SURVEILLANCE METHODS FOR SERVICES.

The COR will review documentation and /or observe accomplishment of single or multiple Performance Objective(s) to ensure that particular Performance Standard(s) are being met as specified in the Performance Standards Matrix. There are multiple methods to employ when accomplishing surveillance. The methods used for this contract shall be; 1) Periodic Surveillance, 2) Random Inspection, and 3) 100% Inspection. Regardless of the particular method employed, the TOM and the COR must document each surveillance as it is conducted.

5.1. Periodic Surveillance. COR and TOM personnel are to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating contractor personnel. Periodic surveillance can be accomplished on a weekly (i.e., twice per week), monthly, quarterly, daily basis, depending on the criticality, frequency, complexity, etc of the service being assessed. Whichever period is used, remember the goal of the Government is to conduct the minimal amount of surveillance that is necessary to ensure the Government receives the service it has contracted for.

5.2. Random Inspection. Random Inspection can be accomplished by performing surveillance of a(n) Performance Objective(s) on a non-predictable basis and/or random frequency. Again, the goal of the Government is to conduct the minimal amount of fair and objective surveillance that is necessary to ensure the Government receives the service it has contracted for. For tasks to be surveyed by random sampling procedures, random selection must be generated by a statistically valid computer program.

5.3. One Hundred Percent (100%) Inspection/Surveillance. One Hundred Percent Inspection is inspecting a Performance Objective every time it occurs

6. NONCONFORMING SUPPLIES OR SERVICES.

6.1. The TOM should make a recommendation to the COR and the KO to reject supplies or services not conforming in all respects to contract requirements. In those instances where deviation from this policy is found to be in the Government’s interest, such supplies or services may be accepted only as authorized in this section.

6.2. Before making a decision to accept, the COR must obtain the concurrence of the activity responsible for the technical requirements of the contract. If the nonconformance is minor, the COR may make the determination to accept or reject, except when the authority to reject is withheld by the CO. The COR must discourage the repeated tender of nonconforming supplies or services, including those with only minor nonconformances, by appropriate action, such as rejection and documenting the contractor’s performance record.

6.3. The KO ordinarily must give the contractor an opportunity to correct or replace nonconforming supplies or services when this can be accomplished within the required delivery schedule. Correction or replacement must without additional cost to the Government.

6.4. The KO ordinarily must reject supplies or services when the nonconformance is critical or major or the supplies or services are otherwise incomplete. However, there may be circumstances (e.g., reasons of economy or urgency) when the TOM recommends acceptance or conditional acceptance of supplies or services is in the best interest of the Government. TOM must make this determination based on:

• Advice of the technical activity that the item will perform its intended purpose;

• Information regarding the nature and extent of the nonconformance or otherwise incomplete supplies or services;

• A request from the contractor for acceptance of the nonconforming or otherwise incomplete supplies or services (if feasible);

• A recommendation for acceptance, conditional acceptance, or rejection, with supporting rationale; and

• The contract adjustment considered appropriate, including any adjustment offered by the contractor.

6.5. If supplies or services are accepted with critical or major nonconformances, the KO must modify the contract to provide for an equitable price reduction or other consideration.

In the case of conditional acceptance, amounts withheld from payments generally should be at least sufficient to cover the estimated cost and related profit to correct deficiencies and complete unfinished work.

6.6. The COR must document in the contract file the basis for the amounts withheld. For services, the COR can consider identifying the value of the individual work requirements or tasks (subdivisions) that may be subject to price or fee reduction. This value may be used to determine an equitable adjustment for nonconforming services. However, when supplies or services involving minor nonconformances are accepted, the contract need not be modified unless it appears that the savings to the contractor in fabricating the nonconforming supplies or performing the nonconforming services will exceed the cost to the Government of processing the modification.

6.7. Notices of rejection issued by the KO must include the reasons for rejection and be furnished promptly to the contractor. Promptness in giving this notice is essential because, if timely nature of rejection is not furnished, acceptance may in certain cases be implied as a matter of law. The notice of rejection must be in writing if the supplies or services have been rejected; The contractor persists in offering nonconforming supplies or services for acceptance; or delivery or performance was late without excusable cause.

7. Contract Performance Evaluation

7.1. FAR 42.15 – Contractor Performance Information establishes the Government responsibility for recording and maintaining contractor performance information. This requirement does not apply to procedures used in determining incentive awards or other incentive systems, although the two systems should be mutually supporting.

7.2. FAR 42.1501 states: “Past performance information is relevant information, for future source selection purposes, regarding a contractor's actions under previously awarded contracts. It includes, for example, the contractor's record of conforming to contract requirements and to standards of good workmanship; the contractor's record of forecasting and controlling costs; the contractor's adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance; the contractor's history of reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction; and generally, the contractor's business-like concern for the interest of the customer.”

7.3. The general procedures to be used are addressed in the following FAR section:

42.1503 Procedures.

(a) Agency procedures for the past performance evaluation system shall generally provide for input to the evaluations from the technical office, contracting office and, where appropriate, end users of the product or service.

(b) Agency evaluations of contractor performance prepared under this subpart shall be provided to the contractor as soon as practicable after completion of the evaluation. Contractors shall be given a minimum of 30 days to submit comments, rebutting statements, or additional information. Agencies shall provide for review at a level above the contracting officer to consider disagreements between the parties regarding the evaluation. The ultimate conclusion on the performance evaluation is a decision of the contracting agency. Copies of the evaluation, contractor response, and review comments, if any, shall be retained as part of the evaluation. These evaluations may be used to support future award decisions, and should therefore be marked “Source Selection Information.

8. UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE/REPERFORMANCE PROCEDURES.

8.1. The COR will document all findings of surveillance, both positive and negative.

Should the contractor fail in performing any objective, the COR will identify the issue on the spot with the appropriate contractor representative. The COR will complete the surveillance report for that particular task and allow the contractor to respond to the negative find in writing. The contractor will need to respond to the issue in writing by: 1) providing a reason for the failure, 2) provide immediate corrective actions the contractor shall employ to remedy the issue, and 3) identify long term corrective actions to prevent recurrence.

8.2. Deficiencies shall not exceed the performance thresholds cited in the Performance Standard Matrix for each performance objective. If any of the services do not conform to contract requirements, in Accordance With the FAR 52.212-4, “Contract Terms and Conditions—Commercial Items”, the Government may require the Contractor to perform the services again in conformity with contract requirements, at no increase in contract amount.

8.3. Should the contractor’s representative disagree with and dispute the COR’s findings, that opinion should be identified in writing in lieu of the 3 responses as identified in Paragraph 6.1 of QASP. The contractor shall identify in writing the reason for the non-concurrence with the COR’s observation(s) and report it to the KO for further action.

8.4. Documented unacceptable, as well as acceptable, performance information will be included when assessing the contractor’s overall performance which will be used to determine future contract actions with that company (i.e. exercising of options, determining contractor responsibility, past performance for future awards, etc.).

9. SERVICES SUMMARY/PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

The contractor shall meet all standards in the Performance-based Matrix as well as all other deliverable dates and other contractual requirements. For fixed price orders, the Government pays for results only. In this case, failure to meet a standard constitutes breach of contract. The Government is entitled to consideration from the Contractor for breach of contract for failure to meet contract requirements.

Failure to meet a standard is un-excusable unless the contractor can establish all of the following:

1. The non-performance or lateness is not the contractor’s fault;

2. The cause of the non-performance or lateness was not foreseeable;

3. It was beyond the contractor’s control to anticipate the cause of the non-performance or lateness by taking other actions such as arranging backup suppliers, departing earlier for the worksite, or having backup cleared employees on call.

All work shall be performed in accordance with the contract. The COR will not consider the services complete until all unacceptable performance has been corrected. The COR will determine whether the failure was a minor non-conformance or a major non-conformance.

(See paragraph 6 and Tab 5 for a decision matrix for Nonconforming Performance of fixed price contracts.)

Paragraph PWS 4.1 Program and Project Management Performance Standard Inspection

Method 4.1.6

Prepare Reports On Demand

Percentage of on-demand reports which are delivered in 1 business day >=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.1.6 Provide Supporting Raw Data for Review

Percentage of raw data requests which are delivered in 1 business day >=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.1.4

Access to SOPs in

SKMS

Percentage of SOPs in the authoritative, centralized location (the SKMS). At least each task and subtask from this contract requires an

SOP.

100%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.1.1

Updates to SOPs Percentage of SOPs that have been updated and coordinated in the last 12 months 100%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.1.3

Recurring Reports Percentage of recurring reports delivered within 10 business days of the end of the reporting period.

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.1.2

Newsletter articles Percentage of newsletter articles delivered within 5 business days of established deadline >=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

Paragraph PWS 4.2 Manage and Implement Change Performance Standard 4.2.1

Planning for Routine Changes

Percentage of approved changes which plans are completed within 10 business days >=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.2.1

Change Completion Percentage of changes that are completed on time >=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.2.9

Schedule of Changes (SOC) Updates

Percent of approved changes that are posted to the Schedule of Changes within 5 business days of approval date

>=98%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.2.9

Planned Outage Notifications

Percentage of planned outages with at least 5 business days notification to the customer prior to the event

100%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.2.9

Planned Outage Completions

Percentage of outages (per System Change Notification) that are completed within posted outage time

>= 98%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.2.6 Client Software

Upgrades for Enterprise Managed Software

Percentage of client software upgrades (for software identified on the Approved Software List (ASL) as Level A1 and B1) which is deployed within one year of version release or later as mutually agreed with Government

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.2.6 Client Software Deployment Completions

Percentage of client software deployments (for software identified on the Approved Software List (ASL) as Level A1 and B1) that are completed within 90 days of deployment start or later as mutually agreed with Government

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.2.6

Server Software Upgrades

Percentage of server software deployments, other than operating systems (OS), which is deployed within one year of version release or later as mutually agreed with Government

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.2.6 Server Software Deployment Completions

Percentage of server software deployments, other than OS, that are completed within 120 days of deployment start or later as mutually agreed with Government

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and

Paragraph PWS 4.3 Operations and Maintenance Support (Service

Operations) Performance Standard

PWS 4.3.1.8 System Administration: Event Management 4.3.1.8

Enterprise Service Availability

Percentage up-time for all enterprise services (reported separately), including email (SMTP, eVault, Exchange), file services, print services, blackberry enterprise service, VTC infrastructure services, web services, and database services per formulas provided or approved by Government.

>=99.9% by month and annual running average

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.1.8 Mission Application Availability

Percentage server and operating system up-time for hosted mission applications based on aggregated results

>=99.9% by month and annual running average

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

PWS 4.3.1.9 System Administration: Problem Management

4.3.1.9 Unplanned

Service Outage Reports

Percentage of incident reports for unplanned service outages delivered within 5 business days >=98%

100% Inspection

PWS 4.3.2 Service Operations Technical Management Capabilities

4.3.2.8

File Restore Percentage of successful file restores within 24 hours >=98%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.2.8 Tape Retrieval from Offsite Storage

Percentage of tapes retrieved from off-site storage within 1 business day of notification.

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.2.9 Investigative Search Request (ISR) Completion

Percentage of Investigative Search Requests (ISRs) completed within 30 days of initial request.

>=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

Paragraph PWS 4.3.3 Enterprise Service Desk

PWS

4.3.3.11 Enterprise Service Desk: Incident Management

4.3.3.11.1

Call Wait Percentage of calls answered by help desk technicians within 3 rings 100%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.1

Technician Wait Average hold time to speak to a help desk technician <= 1m

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.6 Response to

Routine Incidents and Requests

Percentage of routine help desk contacts (telephone, e-mail and voicemail) responded to within 3 normal working hours

>= 90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer

4.3.3.11.6 Response to Percentage of urgent (no work stoppage), critical >= 90% Periodic

Urgent, Critical, VIP, and Enterprise Incidents and Requests

(work stoppage for one user), VIP, and Enterprise (impacts more than 20 people) help desk contacts (telephone, e-mail and voicemail) responded to within 15 minutes

Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.6 Response to

Workstation

MAC

Requests

Percentage of Move/Add/Change (MAC) requests to move an office up to 25 workstations or workstation responded to within 1 business day or later as agreed to the Government

>= 90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.6

First Call Resolution

Percentage of help desk calls resolved during the first call >= 70%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.6 Resolution

of Routine Incidents and Requests

Percentage of routine help desk tickets resolved within 11 normal working hours >= 90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.6 Resolution

of Urgent Incidents and Requests

Percentage of urgent (no work stoppage) help desk tickets resolved within 6 hours >=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.6 Resolution

of Critical Incidents and Requests

Percentage of critical (work stoppage for one user) help desk tickets resolved within 3 hours >=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.6 Resolution

of VIP and Enterprise Incidents and Requests

Percentage of VIP and Enterprise (impacts more than 20 people) help desk tickets resolved within 3 hours

>=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.6 Resolution

of Workstation

MAC

Requests

Percentage of Move/Add/Change (MAC) requests to move an office up to 25 workstations or workstation resolved within 3 business days or later as agreed to the Government

>=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.14

Ticket Backlog

Percentage of unresolved help desk tickets that are less than 10 business days old >=85%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.11.15 Customer

Surveys

Percentage of customer responses to automated satisfaction surveys which are positive

>= 90% Periodic Surveillance and

PWS

4.3.3.12 Enterprise Service Desk: Request Fulfillment

4.3.3.12.1

Request Response

Percentage of hardware of software requests that are responded to within 3 normal working hours >=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.12.2

Equipment Delivery

Percentage of hardware/software in-stock delivered to customer within 11 normal working hours of request

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.12.2

Not In Stock Notification

Percentage of hardware/software out-of-stock and the customer is notified by e-mail within 11 normal working hours from the request

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.12.2 Request

Needs Approval Notification

Percentage of hardware/software requiring approval from the Configuration Control Board and the customer is notified by e-mail within 11 normal working hours from the request

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

PWS

4.3.3.13

Enterprise Service Desk: Account Based Access Management

4.3.3.13.4

Account Creation

On receipt of proper clearance and sign on token, percentage of account creation requests that are completed within 8 normal working hours for all networks

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.13.4

Account Modification

Percentage of account modification requests that are completed within 12 normal working hours >= 95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.3.3.13.4

Account Disabling

Percentage of requests to disable accounts that are completed within 4 normal working hours >= 95%

Periodic Surveillance and

Paragraph PWS 4.4 Configuration Management Support

(Service Asset and Configuration Management) Performance Standard

4.4.9

Hardware Inventory

Percentage of all hardware for which inventory is accurate and current (IAW DoDI 5000.64)

>= 98% NIPRNet and

100% SIPRNet and higher classified networks

Random Inspection and/or Periodic Surveillance

4.4.5

Software Inventory

Percentage of installed software licenses that is accurate and current >= 98%

Random Inspection and/or Periodic Surveillance

4.4.4

Definitive Media Library

Completeness of the Definitive Media Library compared to the Approved Software List (ASL) and software license inventory

>= 99%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.4.10 Software

Maintenance Renewals

Percentage of purchase requests prepared and submitted for review between 150 and 120 days before expiration of software maintenance renewals

>=99%

100% inspection

PWS 4.5 Integrated Logistics and Asset Management Support

Performance

4.5.2.1

Equipment Delivery

Percentage of hardware/software in-stock delivered to customer within 11 normal working hours of request.

>=95%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.5.1.4

Equipment Excess

Percentage of excess items picked up within 3 business days of request >=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.5.5 Hardware

Maintenance Renewals

Percentage of purchase requests prepared and submitted for review between 150 and 120 days before expiration of hardware maintenance renewals

>=99%

100% inspection

4.5.6

Repair Request Response

Percentage of hardware repair requests that are responded to within 11 normal working hours >=90%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.5.6

Repair Request Resolution

Percentage of hardware with in-stock parts which is repaired within 3 business days >=95%

Periodic Surveillance and

PWS 4.6 Security Operations Support Performance

4.6.1

VMS Inventory Accuracy of Vulnerability Management System (VMS) reports status compared to network security scans

100%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.6.1 Timely

VMS/IAVM

Updates

Percentage of VMS Alerts for IAVM (Alert, Bulletin or Technical) acknowledged within two business days of the IAVM release

>=99%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.6.2

Timely Mitigation of IAVAs

Percentage of IAVAs resolved before required fix or POAM mitigation date

>= 90% at 5 business days prior to due date

>= 99% at 3 business days prior to due date

>=99.9% at 1 business day prior to due date

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.6.2

Monthly Maintenance

Percentage of servers which receive available IAVA patches and rebooted to apply configuration changes on the first Friday of each month

>=99%

Periodic Surveillance and Customer Input

4.6.5 Reapply Missed Patches and Misconfigurations

Percentage of missed patches or misconfigurations that are corrected within 5 business days after notification.

>=99%

Periodic Surveillance and

Tab 1: Nonconforming Deliverables –FFP NONCONFORMING DELIVERABLES Fixed Price

MINOR NONCONFORMANCE

If Then Consideration Consideration would be less than the cost of modifying the contract

Accept as is (once)

None

Consideration would be greater than the cost of modifying the contract

Accept as is (once)

Consideration comparable to the value of the loss sustained by the Government

MAJOR NONCONFORMANCE

If Then Consideration The contractor agrees to correct the deliverable (or reperform the service) within the delivery schedule

Withhold acceptance until receipt of the corrected deliverable

Cost to reinspect or retest

The contractor agrees to correct the deliverable (or reperform the service) but needs an extension of the delivery date

Withhold acceptance until receipt of the corrected deliverable

Cost to reinspect or retest

Appropriate consideration for the delay Deduct QC hours

Repair can be accomplished through warranty provisions

Accept as is

None

Acceptance:

•Would not affect safety or performance, and •Is justified on the basis of economy or urgency

Accept as is

Consideration comparable to the value of the loss sustained by the Government

The contractor refuses to make repair or provide appropriate consideration.

Either:

•Correct the product or service through other means (contract or in-house), or •Terminate for default and reprocure.

Contractor to pay all costs for the correction or reprocurement.

Tab 2: FAR Clauses

46.407 Nonconforming supplies or services.

(a) The contracting officer should reject supplies or services not conforming in all respects to contract requirements (see 46.102). In those instances where deviation from this policy is found to be in the Government’s interest, such supplies or services may be accepted only as authorized in this section.

(b) The contracting officer ordinarily must give the contractor an opportunity to correct or replace nonconforming supplies or services when this can be accomplished within the required delivery schedule. Unless the contract specifies otherwise (as may be the case in some cost-reimbursement contracts), correction or replacement must without additional cost to the Government. Paragraph (e)(2) of the clause at 52.246-2, Inspection of Supplies—Fixed-Price, reserves to the Government the right to charge the contractor the cost of Government reinspection and retests because of prior rejection.

(d) If the nonconformance is minor, the cognizant contract administration office may make the determination to accept or reject, except where this authority is withheld by the contracting office of the contracting activity. To assist in making this determination, the contract administration office may establish a joint contractor-contract administrative office review group. Acceptance of supplies and services with critical or major nonconformances is outside the scope of the review group.

(e) The contracting officer must discourage the repeated tender of nonconforming supplies or services, including those with only minor nonconformances, by appropriate action, such as rejection and documenting the contractor’s performance record.

(f) When supplies or services are accepted with critical or major nonconformances as authorized in paragraph (c) of this section, the contracting officer must modify the contract to provide for an equitable price reduction or other consideration. In the case of conditional acceptance, amounts withheld from payments generally should be at least sufficient to cover the estimated cost and related profit to correct deficiencies and complete unfinished work. The contracting officer must document in the contract file the basis for the amounts withheld. For services, the contracting officer can consider identifying the value of the individual work requirements or tasks (subdivisions) that may be subject to price or fee reduction. This value may be used to determine an equitable adjustment for nonconforming services. However, when supplies or services involving minor nonconformances are accepted, the contract need not be modified unless it appears that the savings to the contractor in fabricating the nonconforming supplies or performing the nonconforming services will exceed the cost to the Government of processing the modification.

(g) Notices of rejection must include the reasons for rejection and be furnished promptly to the contractor. Promptness in giving this notice is essential because, if timely nature of rejection is not furnished, acceptance may in certain cases be implied as a matter of law. The notice must be in writing if—

(1) The supplies or services have been rejected at a place other than the contractor’s plant;

(2) The contractor persists in offering nonconforming supplies or services for acceptance; or

(3) Delivery or performance was late without excusable cause.