Attach_2_Quality_Assurance_Surveillance_Plan_(VIPC_2.0)_16MAY19.doc

HQ0147-19-R-0006

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) Visual Information and Production Center (VIPC) 2.0 16 May 2019

Purpose This QASP is a guideline to ensure systematic quality assurance methods are used in evaluating contractor performance against contract number HQ0147-19-R-0006. The intent is to assure that the Government is receiving the products and services specified in the contract at the standards prescribed in the contract. The QASP guidelines allow the contractor (1) to understand Government expectations in advance of the annual Contract Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) and (2) to facilitate any corrective actions without impacting Agency operations. The QASP establishes procedures on how the assessment/inspection process will be conducted. It specifies the work requiring surveillance and possible methods of surveillance.

The contractor is responsible for implementing and delivering performance and products that meet contract standards using its Quality Control Plan (QCP). The QASP provides the structure for the Government's surveillance of the contractor's performance to assure that it meets contract standards. It is the Government's responsibility to be objective, fair and consistent in evaluating Contractor performance.

Authority

Authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under Part 46.4 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Government Contract Quality Assurance, which provides for inspection, acceptance and documentation of the products and services called for in the contract. This acceptance is to be executed by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) or a duly authorized representative. Nothing in this document shall limit the Government’s inspection authorities shown elsewhere in the contract.

Scope

To fully understand the roles and responsibilities of the parties, it is important to first define the distinction in terminology between the QCP and the QASP. The Contractor, through its QCP, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet the quality standards set forth by the contract. The QASP establishes Government surveillance of the Contractor’s efforts to assure that they are timely, effective, and are delivering products and services as specified in the contract.

Surveillance

The standard frequency for Contractor performance meetings (feedback sessions) will be on a quarterly basis. The Government’s intent is to minimize the level of Government involvement and allow the Contractor to meet or exceed the contract requirements. The frequency of feedback sessions may be reduced when there are indications that the Contractor’s performance is strong. Strong performance will be evaluated on positive Government surveillance results, valid Contractor self-assessment, and effective corrective action plans. If there are indications of poor performance (potential ratings less than satisfactory) or ineffective corrective action plans, the meeting frequency may increase. The Contractor or the Government may request an increase or decrease in the frequency of meetings. Any feedback sessions occurring other than quarterly (more or less frequent) will be at the Government’s discretion and managed by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) for this contract. The COR will notify the contractor of meeting frequency and scheduled dates and times for discussions on the results of Contractor performance assessments.

The Contractor will be required to submit a self-assessment of its performance during the assessment timeframe. Contractor inputs (self-assessments) will be required prior to the scheduled government feedback session IAW the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

Methodology Assessments will be based on both objective and subjective data and information, such as Government performance evaluations and feedback, customer comments, quality of products, and general technical interchange and engagement with other Government and Contractor personnel. Surveillance will range between 100% of contract deliverables and task surveillance to a random monitoring of specific tasks and will be determined by the Government prior to the review/feedback session.

Evaluation Criteria Quarterly performance evaluations will be used to provide interim CPAR considerations and the quarterly Contractor performance report will incorporate the CPARS format. The CPAR evaluation fields include Quality of Product or Service, Schedule, Cost Management - cost surveillance not applicable (FFP), Management, Utilization of Small Business, and Regulatory Compliance. Quarterly evaluations are progress reports; while they should be useful to the Contractor in understanding the Government’s view of the acceptability of the Contractor’s performance and what areas of performance the Government may wish to emphasize as more critical at a particular juncture, they depict a snapshot in time. The Contractor’s annual and final CPAR ratings will be determined by overall performance during the period being evaluated.

Performance Standards

The principal goal of the assessment process is to establish performance measures and a performance feedback process that support the execution of the CPARs. Evaluations will be IAW guidance for the CPARS. Five principal ratings have been established for assessment of all performance objectives - reference Enclosure 1.

Quality of Product or Service will assess how successfully the contractor meets program office expectations and contract requirements. General areas of focus may include the quality of support provided throughout all phases of contract execution, the integration of contractor personnel, and the knowledge base and professionalism of Contractor personnel. At Enclosure 1, Table A1-1 defines annual CPAR evaluation rating criteria and associated standards.

There are two Quality of Product or Service sub-factors:

· Technical accuracy

· Technical independence Schedule will assess the Contractor’s adherence to required delivery schedules by assessing the Contractor’s efforts that contribute to or affect schedule variance. The significance of scheduled events may impact evaluation ratings. At Enclosure 1, Table A1-1 defines annual CPAR evaluation rating criteria and associated standards.

There are two Schedule sub-factors:

· Timeliness: Meets schedules

· Completes actions within specified deadlines Cost Management - Cost surveillance will not be captured on CPARS due to contract type being Firm Fixed Price (FFP).

Management will assess the Contractor’s success with fulfilling contract requirements and efficiency of Contractor efforts to meet cost, performance, and schedule objectives, the methodology to coordinate with Government stakeholder(s) to ensure mutual understanding of requirements, and promptness to implement a workforce that maximizes resource utilization. General areas of focus subject to evaluation include the extent to which the Contractor demonstrates responsibility for integration and coordination of all activities needed to execute the contract, identifies and applies resources required to meet schedule requirements, assigns responsibility for tasks/actions required by contract, and communicates appropriate information to affected program elements and contracting officials in a timely manner. At Enclosure 2, Table A2-2 defines annual CPAR evaluation rating criteria and associated standards.

There are four management sub-factors:

· Efficiency in planning and management of contract requirements;

· Timelines, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, and proposal submittals;

· Ability to respond, plan, and implement staffing changes;

· Effective business relations.

Small Business Utilization will assess the Contractor’s compliance with all terms and conditions in the contract relating to Small Business participation. At Enclosure 3, Table A2-3 defines annual CPAR evaluation rating criteria and associated standards. The following factors will be considered:

· Compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business;

· Compliance with FAR 52.219-14, Limitation on Subcontracting.

Regulatory Compliance will assess the Contractor’s adherence to applicable laws and federal, DoD, or MDA regulations. In addition to the following, any applicable events cited in Section A3-31 of the CPARS Users Manual dated July 2018 are subject to evaluation. At Enclosure 4, Table A2-4 defines annual CPAR evaluation rating criteria and associated standards.

· Contractor’s enforcement of laws and regulations;

· Correction of deficiencies when out of compliance;

· Communication of laws and regulations to subcontractors.

NOTE: Specific consideration will be applied to the requirements of FAR.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons. The Contracting Officer's Representative shall inform the Contracting Officer immediately of- (i) Any action by the contractor employees that they may have personally observed that is in violation of the FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons; and (ii) Any credible information they receive from any source (including host country law enforcement) that alleges a Contractor employee, subcontractor, subcontractor employee, or their agent has engaged in conduct that violates the policy in paragraph (b) of the clause at FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons.

Enclosure 1

Table A1-1: Performance Rating Structure

Enclosure 2 Table A2-2: Management Rating Structure

Efficiency in planning and management of contract requirements

Responsiveness:

Timelines, completeness and quality of problem identification, corrective action plans, and proposal submittals

Staffing:

Ability to respond, plan, and implement staffing changes

Business Relations:

Reasonable and cooperative behavior and customer satisfaction

Exceptional: Exceeded expectations and performance/products provided in a manner that created greater efficiency to the Government and:

· Zero unresolved non-performance issues

· All requested corrective action plans and proposals delivered in a timely manner

· All staffing issues and staffing changes promptly and effectively resolved

· Zero complaints validated by the Contracting Officer Very Good: Performance/products provided at a manner higher than stipulated by the contract and expectations of the Government and:

· No more than one unresolved non-performance issues

· No more than one late corrective action plans and/or proposals

· No more than one staffing issue or staffing change promptly and effectively resolved

· No more than one complaint validated by the Contracting Officer Satisfactory: Performance/products fulfilled expectations, met standards and only minor problems were identified or major problems were identified, but the contractor recovered from those problems without impact to the contract.

Marginal: Performance/products did not meet the standard dictated by the contract, but were delivered and:

· Government approved corrective action plan(s) in place

· More than two unresolved non-performance issues

· More than two staffing issues or staffing changes that were not promptly and effectively resolved

· Three–four complaints validated by the Contracting Officer Unsatisfactory: Performance/products did not meet the standard dictated by the contract and/or was not delivered/ performed and:

· No documented progress in correcting any performance issue

· No Government-approved corrective action plan(s) in place or the corrective action plan(s) fails to provide improvement

· Five or more staffing issues or staffing changes that were not promptly and effectively resolved

· Five or more complaints validated by the Contracting Officer

Enclosure 3 Table A2-3: Small Business Utilization Rating Structure

Enclosure 4 Table A2-4: Regulatory Compliance Rating Structure

Contractor complies with laws and federal, DoD and MDA regulations

Deficiency Correction:

In the event a deficiency is realized, the Government is notified and correction is made

Personnel and Subcontractor Management Compliance:

Training and communications are implemented to ensure all involved parties are aware

Combating Trafficking in Persons - Notification of any action observed that is in violation of FAR 52.222-50

Exceptional: Exceeded expectations and there was:

· Zero legal or regulatory compliance issues

· Zero evidence of a lack of training for prime contractor personnel or lack of communication to subcontractors in regard to regulatory compliance Very Good: Exceeded expectations and:

· No more than one noted deficiency

· Any deficiency was quickly and effectively corrected

· Very minor evidence of a lack of training on legal and regulatory issues, but was documented and corrected in a timely manner Satisfactory: Met standards and only minor problems were identified or major problems were identified, but the contractor recovered from those problems without impact to the contract.

Marginal: The Contractor had repeated compliance issues and:

· Government approved corrective action plan(s) in place

· Any deficiency was quickly and effectively corrected by the implementation of the corrective action plan

· Three–four noted deficiencies

· Three–four instances of a lack of training or communication to a subcontractor Unsatisfactory: The Contractor had repeated compliance issues and:

· No documented progress in correcting noted deficiencies

· No Government-approved corrective action plan(s) in place or the corrective action plan(s) fails to provide improvement

· Five or more noted deficiencies

· Five or more instances of a lack of training or communication to a subcontractor