II_-_QASP_Final_6_20_16.doc

Attachment II - QASP

PAGE

Department of Homeland Security

Federal Emergency Management Agency

National Cross Docking Contract

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Version – June 2016

1. Background:

a. For: National Cross Docking Contract

b. Contract Number: TBD

c. Contract Description:

FEMA is seeking service providers who possess the ability to develop technical guidance from key FEMA personnel, a network of transportation and emergency cross dock/freight forwarding service operation centers throughout the Continental United States. As national emergency situations occur, the need for transportation and providing logistics services to the “affected area” are most critical. An efficient, reliable and highly flexible operation is needed to provide FEMA, as well as regional, state, and local governments, the life sustaining supplies needed to present relief to citizens in the affected area. The service providers must possess an adequately owned and/or directly leased controlled infrastructure, transportation resource fleet, personnel, material handling equipment (MHE), as well as information technology capability to efficiently transload, transport, manage, track, communicate and process various levels of supplies into the “affected area”.

The National Cross Docking QASP will be applied for ensuring quality standards and performance for the National Cross Docking Contracts. Monitoring and reporting will be from the inception of the task order issuance until the demobilization of the cross docking requirement and subsequent dismissal of the shuttle services requirement. This quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP) is pursuant to the requirements listed in the performance work statement (PWS) entitled National Cross Docking Concept. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines Logistics Management Directorate (LMD)/ Distribution Management Directorate (DMD)/ Transportation Management Branch (TMB) will use in ensuring the required performance standards or services levels are achieved by the contractor.

2. Purpose of the QASP:

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (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. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the contractor. 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.

The following FAR clauses may apply depending on contract type:

52.246-4 Inspection of Services – Fixed-Price, or 52.246-5 Inspection of Services – Cost-Reimbursement

3. Performance Management Approach Performance management rests on developing a capability to review and analyze information generated through performance assessment. The ability to make decisions based on the analysis of performance data is the cornerstone of performance management; this analysis yields information that indicates whether expected outcomes for the project are being achieved by the contractor.

Performance management represents a significant shift from the more traditional quality assurance (QA) concepts in several ways. Performance management focuses on assessing whether outcomes are being achieved and to what extent. This approach migrates away from scrutiny of compliance with the processes and practices used to achieve the outcome. A performance-based approach enables the contractor to play a large role in how the work is performed, as long as the proposed processes are within the stated constraints. The only exceptions to process reviews are those required by law (federal, state, and local) and compelling business situations, such as safety and health. A “results” focus provides the contractor flexibility to continuously improve and innovate over the course of the contract as long as the critical outcomes expected are being achieved and/or the desired performance levels are being met.

4. Performance Management Strategy The contractor is responsible for the quality of all work performed. The contractor measures that quality through the contractor’s own quality control (QC) program. QC is work output, not workers, and therefore includes all work performed under this contract regardless of whether the work is performed by contractor employees or by subcontractors. The contractor’s QCP will set forth the staffing and procedures for self-inspecting the quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction, and other performance requirements in the PWS. The contractor will develop and implement a performance management system with processes to assess and report its performance to the designated government representative. This QASP enables the government to take advantage of the contractor’s QC program.

The government representative(s) will monitor performance and review performance reports furnished by the contractor to determine how the contractor is performing against communicated performance objectives. The government will make determination regarding incentives based on performance measurement metric data and notify the contractor of those decisions. The contractor will be responsible for making required changes in processes and practices to ensure performance is managed effectively.

5. Government Roles and Responsibilities.

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

A.. Contracting Officer (CO) - The CO 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 CO shall also assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The CO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned CO: LaShawn Smith Organization or Agency: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Telephone: 202-646-4306 Email: lashawn.smith@fema.dhs.gov B. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. At the conclusion of the contract or when requested by the CO, the COR shall provide documentation to the CO. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The contractor shall refer any changes they deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the CO for action.

Primary COR: Williford Thomas Email: Williford.Thomas@fema.dhs.gov C. Other Key Government Personnel –

Alternate COR: TBD Email: TBD

6. Contractor Representatives:

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s representatives for the QASP and the contract.

Program Manager - TBD Telephone: TBD Email: TBD Alternate contractor point of contact for QASP and contract.

Title: TBD Telephone: TBD Email: TBD

* Contractor points of contact shall be empowered and have the contractual authority to provide input regarding the QASP.

7. Performance Standards.

Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet these standards.

The Key Performance Parameters are listed in the Performance Work Statement. The Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

8. INCENTIVES.

The Government shall use NON-MONETARY measures as incentives. Incentives shall be based on exceeding, meeting, or not meeting performance standards.

A. Positive Incentives: Annual CPARS B. Negative Incentives: Annual CPARS, Since this is FFP, contract the payment will be made upon Inspection and Acceptance, and the complete compliance with the “Key Performance Parameters/Standards.”

9. PRIMARY Methods of Quality Assurance Surveillance TO BE USED A. Surveillance Techniques In an effort to minimize the performance management burden, simplified surveillance methods shall be used by the government to evaluate contractor performance when appropriate. The primary methods of surveillance that will be used are:

a.1 Random Sampling, which shall be performed by the COR upon the issuance of a task order. RANDOM SAMPLING. (Description - Designed to evaluate the outputs of the award requirement by randomly selecting and inspecting a statistically significant sample. Highly recommended for large quantity repetitive activities with objective and measurable quality attributes.)

a.2 100% Inspection –The COR, shall inspect and evaluate performance each time a task is performed. 100% INSPECTION. (Description - Evaluates all outputs. Most applicable to small quantity, but highly important services. May be used where there are written deliverables and stringent requirements such as tasks required by law, safety, or security.) Inspection items include, but are not limited to, the following:

· Reports

· Work Orders or Task Orders

· Property Transfer Reports (PTR)

· Actual receipt of repairs

· Call Logs

· Contractor Maintenance/Deactivation logs and/or phone a.3 Customer Feedback/Complaints

VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. (Description - Relies on the user of the service to identify deficiencies. Complaints are then investigated and validated. Highly applicable to services provided in quantity and where quality is highly subjective.)

The contractor is expected to establish and maintain professional communication between its employees and customers. The primary objective of this communication is customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the most significant external indicator of the success and effectiveness of all services provided and can be measured through customer complaints.

Performance management drives the contractor to be customer focused through initially and internally addressing customer complaints and investigating the issues and/or problems but the customer always has the option to communicate complaints to the CO, as opposed to the contractor.

Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing, the detailed nature of the complaint, which must be signed, and forwarded to the CO/COR. The COR/COR will accept those customer complaints and investigate using the Quality Assurance Monitoring Form – Customer Complaint Investigation, identified in Appendix B. Various methods exist to monitor performance.

Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the contractor's task manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR, with assistance from the CO, if needed, shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific performance standard/AQL.

Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions (to include payment deductions) against the contractor. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause in the Contract becomes the basis for the CO’s actions.

10. Acceptable/UNACCEPTABLE LevelS of Service

A. ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE. The minimum Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) for contractor performance (included in the Key Performance Parameters Table in Appendix A) is structured to allow the contractor to manage how the work is performed and will be subject to negative performance evaluation for performance shortfalls. For certain critical activities such as those involving obtaining a cross docking facility and acquiring the Fully Operational Capacity (FOC) levels of resources, the desired performance level is established at 100 percent. Other levels of performance are keyed to the relative importance of the task to the overall mission performance at FEMA.

B. Unacceptable performance. When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) found in Appendix C, and present it to the contractor's program manager or on-site representative.

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 to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CDR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the COR. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

Any CDRs may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, award fee nonpayment, or other contractual actions deemed necessary by the CO.

11. ANALYSIS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSMENT

A. Determining Performance

The Government shall use the monitoring methods cited to determine whether the performance objectives/service levels have been met. If the contractor has not met the minimum requirements, the contractor will be asked to develop a corrective action plan to show how and by what date it intends to bring performance up to the required levels. Additionally, failure to meet the performance objectives/service levels will result in the contractor’s dismissal from the task order award process.

B. Ratings Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. A rating scale shall be used to determine a positive, neutral, or negative outcome. These ratings may be reflected when using Appendix B: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE

MONITORING FORM.

C. Frequency of Measurement

During contract/order performance, the COR will periodically analyze whether the negotiated frequency of surveillance is appropriate for the work being performed.

D. Frequency of Performance Assessment Meetings.

The COR shall meet with the contractor as often as deemed necessary but at least weekly during a Task Order - to assess performance and shall provide a written assessment.

12. quality assurance documentation A. The Performance Management Feedback Loop

The performance management feedback loop begins with the communication of expected outcomes. Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) are expressed in the PWS and are assessed using the performance monitoring techniques shown in the KPP Table. The COR will retain a copy of all completed QA surveillance forms.

C. Reviews and Resolution

The COR may require the contractor’s project manager, or a designated alternate, to meet with the CO and other government personnel as deemed necessary to discuss performance evaluation. The CO or COR will define a frequency of in-depth reviews with the contractor, including appropriate self-assessments by the contractor; however, if the need arises, the contractor will meet with the COR as often as required or per the contractor’s request. The agenda of the reviews may include:

· Monthly performance assessment data and trend analysis

· Issues and concerns of both parties

· Projected outlook for upcoming task orders and progress against expected trends, including a corrective action plan analysis

· Recommendations for improved efficiency and/or effectiveness

The CO must coordinate and communicate with the contractor to resolve issues and concerns regarding marginal or unacceptable performance.

The COR and contractor should jointly formulate tactical and long-term courses of action. Decisions regarding changes to metrics, thresholds, or service levels should be clearly documented. Changes to service levels, procedures, and metrics will be approved by the CO and incorporated as a contract modification.

C. Quality Assurance Reporting

At the conclusion of each task order execution, the COR in conjunction with the TM, will prepare written reports summarizing the overall results of the quality assurance surveillance of the contractor’s performance. These written reports will include the contractor’s submitted report and the completed quality assurance monitoring forms (Appendix B and Appendix C), which will become part of the QA documentation. These reports enable the government to demonstrate whether the contractor is meeting the stated objectives and/or performance standards, including scope/cost/scheduling objectives.

COR Signature Approving QASP

Contracting Officer’s Representative

Date

APPENDICES:

Appendix A: Key Performance Parameters

Appendix B: SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE MONITORING FORM

Appendix C: CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT (CDR)

Appendix A

KEY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS

Activation: Key Performance Parameters

Performance Objective

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Compliance with requirement

Compliance with requirement

Compliance with requirement

Physical Requirements: Key Performance Parameters

Performance Objective

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Personnel and Equipment: Key Performance Parameters:

Performance Objective

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Compliance with requirement

Compliance with requirement

Cross Docking Operations: Key Performance Parameters

Performance Objective

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Compliance with requirement

Compliance with requirement

Trailers: Key Performance Parameters

Performance Objective

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Compliance with requirement

Compliance with requirement

Shuttle Service and Drivers: Key Performance Parameters

Performance Objective

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Compliance with requirement

Compliance with requirement

Cross Docking Deactivation: Key Performance Parameters

Performance Objective

Standard Acceptable Quality Level

Compliance with requirement

Appendix B

SAMPLE QUALITY ASSURANCE

MONITORING FORM

SERVICE or STANDARD: PRS #1, PRS #2, ETC

SURVEY PERIOD:

SURVEILLANCE METHOD (Check):

Random Sampling 100% Inspection Periodic Inspection Customer Complaint

LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE (Check):

Monthly Quarterly As needed

PERCENTAGE OF ITEMS SAMPLED DURING SURVEY PERIOD:

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS:

Observed Service Provider Performance Measurement Rate: ______%

Service Provider’s Performance (Check):

Exceeds Standards

Meets Standards

Does Not Meet Standards

Narrative of Performance during Survey Period:

PREPARED BY: ___________________________________

DATE: _________________

APPENDIX C

CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT (CDR)

1. Contract Number:

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

3. FROM: (Name of COR)

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 24 hours days after receipt of this CDR.

Prepared by: CO/COR

Signature – Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) or

Signature – Contracting Officer Technical Representative (COR)

Received by:

Signature - Contractor Task Manager or on-site representative

< The COR may initiate a CDR at any time, including whenever the number of recorded defects for a performance standard exceeds the allowable number of defects; anytime unacceptable performance is determined critical in nature and requires formal corrective action; and whenever an unfavorable trend is detected in contractor performance.>

PAGE

ii