Attachment_3_QASP.pdf

ATTACHMENT 3

RFP: HTC711-14-R-D006

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

FOR UNITED STATES TRANSPORTATION COMMAND

MILITARY SURFACE DEPLOYMENT AND DISTRIBUTION

COMMAND (SDDC)

DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF (DCS) FOR INFORMATION

MANAGEMENT (G6)

INTEGRATED COMPUTERIZED DEPLOYMENT SYSTEM

VERSION 7

JULY 2014

APRROVED:

ANTHONY R. ARMSTRONG BELFIELD COLLYMORE

Contracting Officer’s Representative Contracting Officer

SDDC/G6 USTRANSCOM/TCAQ

Attachment 3 RFP# HTC711-14-R-D006

1. INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) was developed in accordance with AFI 63-

124, Performance-Based Services Acquisitions (PBSA), for work performed to provide technical and administrative support services for the United States Transportation Command, Military

Surface and Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC) Deputy Chief of Staff for

Information Management (G6) at Scott AFB IL. This QASP sets forth the procedures and guidelines to be used by the Government to ensure that the contractor achieves the required performance standards as specified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The PWS contains a Service Delivery Summary (SDS) that summarizes performance objectives (service required) and performance thresholds (specific standard) contained within the body of the PWS.

The SDS does not identify every service required, but only those services considered most critical for mission accomplishment. This QASP is based on the premise that the contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control (QC) actions to meet the terms of the contract. The SDS recognizes that the contractor is not a perfect manager and that unforeseen and uncontrollable problems do occur. Good management and use of an adequate quality control plan will allow the contractor to meet or exceed the performance standards specified in the PWS.

2. PURPOSE

This QASP is designed to accomplish the following:

a. Provide a systematic method to survey and evaluate contractor services to determine conformity with the technical requirements of the contract.

b. Define the roles and responsibilities of participating Government officials.

c. Describe the evaluation methods that will be employed by the Government in assessing the contractor’s performance.

d. Describe the process of performance documentation.

e. Provide copies of the Quality Assurance (QA) monitoring forms that will be used by the

Government in documenting and evaluating contractor’s performance.

3. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The Government monitors contractor performance on a continuing basis through the services of a surveillance team. The surveillance team consists of the following members: Contracting

Officer (CO) and Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

3.1 CO

The CO has overall responsibility for contract administration. The CO is responsible for monitoring contract compliance and resolving any and all disagreements regarding interpretation of contract terms and conditions. The primary function of the CO with regard to the surveillance activity is to authorize changes to the contract. The CO is the only Government official authorized to revise the contract. Additionally, the CO is responsible for approving the QASP.

3.2 COR

The COR serves as a functional expert and is responsible for monitoring, assessing, recording and reporting the technical performance of the Contractor on a continuous basis. The COR schedules surveillance activities; evaluates and documents performance by the contractor;

initiates requests for and evaluates adequacy of the corrective action and reports contractor performance of contractor requirements. CORs are sufficiently trained to perform the required duties and to ensure their knowledge of the terms and conditions of the contract.

3.2.1 The COR is to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating contractor performance against standards.

3.2.2 The COR will notify the CO immediately when an evaluation shows that performance does not meet the standards identified in this QASP.

3.2.3 The COR is required to ensure changes in work are not initiated before a written authorization or modification is issued by the CO.

3.2.4 The COR is required to accept delivery of services. The COR must ensure that all services have been performed before entering the quantity received and digitally signing the receiving report/invoice in Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF) or approving the invoice within the

Transportation Financial Management System (TFMS). The COR has a maximum of seven days after the contractor’s submission of a properly documented receiving report/invoice to accept the quantity and digitally sign the document in WAWF or TFMS. Prompt processing of receiving reports/invoices in WAWF or TFMS increases the Government’s ability to take discounts offered and decreases the likelihood of the Government incurring interest expense for late payment. After digital signature, the signed receiving report/invoice will be routed to Defense

Finance and Accounting Service for scheduling of payment.

3.2.5 The COR is required to provide an assessment of contractor performance to the

Contracting Officer for input into Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System.

4. METHODS OF SURVEILLANCE

4.1 SDS

The SDS summarizes the expected service objectives (outcomes) and identifies the metrics that will be tracked to determine whether the outcomes are being achieved at the appropriate levels of performance. The Government, through the COR, will monitor contractor performance using the surveillance method(s) described below. In determining the evaluation criteria, the Government has considered what the contract specifically calls for, how performance can be surveyed, and if the proposed method of surveillance is adequate to assure the required level of performance has been achieved. Additionally, contractor performance will be a factor affecting application of the plan, i.e., surveillance frequency may be increased or decreased based on contractor demonstrated and documented performance. One or a combination of the following surveillance methods will be used to produce a well-rounded indication of contractor conformance:

a. Sampling (Spot, Periodic and Random Sampling)

b. Third Party Audit

c. Inspection/Review (verification of specific tasks, weekly, monthly, quarterly, biannual, annual)

d. Customer/Government Input

4.1.1 Sampling

This is the most appropriate method for frequently recurring tasks. Random sampling is done to determine whether to accept or reject the contractor’s performance of the total lot of a particular task for a given period of time, using the premise that the statistically selected sample is representative of the entire lot. Sampling may be spot, periodic or random.

4.1.2 Third Party Audits

Third Party Audits will be conducted by an authorized agent of the Government, federal, state, and local agencies (i.e. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Department of Motor

Vehicles, Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Management, etc.). For this contract, periodic third party audits may be conducted by the team that manages the SDDC

Common Computing Environment (CCE) or by the SDDC Information Assurance (IA) team.

The CCE team may perform a periodic review of the deliverables as they monitor activities within the production and disaster recovery environments. The SDDC IA team will review/audit the Fortify Reports required for every software release.

4.1.3 Inspection/Review

This surveillance type is preferred for those tasks that occur infrequently. It is also used frequently for those tasks having very stringent performance requirements. When this type of surveillance is used, COR must inspect and evaluate the contractor’s performance each time it is performed to determine acceptability.

This type of surveillance consists of the evaluation of samples selected on other than a 100 percent or statistically random basis. The results of periodic surveillance inspections may be used as the basis for actions against the contractor. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause becomes the basis for the CO’s actions. This will be done more frequently at the beginning of the contract, and is expected to decrease as standards are consistently met, but may increase if performance falls below standard.

4.1.4 Customer/Government Inputs

The COR may use customer input to document discrepancies in contractor performance. The CO may use validated customer complaints as the basis for actions against the contractor. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause becomes the basis for the CO’s actions. Under the new philosophy of PBSA, we expect the customer to file complaints directly with the Program

Management staff or with the SDDC help desk. Copies of validated complaints must be provided to the COR. This allows COR oversight of the contractor’s progress in answering complaints, resolving problems and updating the QC program, while the contractor is responsible to the customer. When used, customer complaints must follow a formalized procedure:

a. Most complaints for automated information systems tend to be reported directly to the

Program Management Office or to the system’s help desk. Complaints regarding system functionality or availability must be reported to the Program Manager and to the COR. In addition, these complaints will be forwarded to the contractor staff to address. The severity of the defect to mission capability, the frequency of the customer complaints, and the contractor’s timely or untimely response to the issue will all impact the COR’s response to the complaint(s).

b. The COR is the primary point of contact for and must receive copies of all customer complaints. AF Form 714, Customer Complaint Record, or a locally devised form may be used, but all complaints and any resulting resolution must be documented with the information required on AF Form 714. Calls to the help desk are documented in the help desk system, and can be retrieved from that database. Customer complaint forms become a permanent part of the

COR surveillance records.

c. The COR will check customer complaints to ensure resolution of the deficiency and revision of QC program to prevent recurrence.

4.1.5 Management Review

Methods of surveillance can change after contract award based on acceptance of a contractor’s proposed QC program or agreement that establishes the metrics to be used. When metrics are used as a method of surveillance through the partnering process, they may be developed after contract award, but prior to the performance start date.

4.1.6 Non-SDS Items

For required tasks not shown on the SDS, including all other tasks in the PWS and any referenced documents, the Government still retains the right to inspect any item included in the contract in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 46, Inspection of

Services clauses. Inspection of these services will be performed in the same general manner as periodic surveillance items mentioned above. The results of these inspections are documented and, if necessary, are provided to the CO for action. Should a discrepancy be observed, the CO will handle each documented discrepancy on a case-by-case basis.

5. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

This QASP comprehensively guides the surveillance team’s activities and has been developed in a format to ensure ease of understanding and implementation. For each performance objective

(service required) in the SDS, the specific method(s) of surveillance, performance thresholds

(standards), sampling procedures, inspection procedures, and detailed objective task descriptors are shown in the QASP Summary in Attachment 1. The methodology described in the chart shall be used as the basis for performing surveillance of the respective performance objectives.

5.1 Established Procedures.

Each contractor assessment shall follow an established procedure for surveillance, recording, reporting and follow-up, outlined as follows:

a. The frequency of surveillance will be in accordance with the COR schedule.

b. Surveillance will be performed in accordance with Attachment 1 and results/comments recorded.

c. Performance/non-performance for a particular task will be entered chronologically by the COR on a historical log of surveyed performance. If no deficiency exists in contractor performance for this element, no further action is required.

d. If contractor performance is deficient, the course of action is dependent on the severity/impact/frequency of the non-performance. Re-performance is the first action to resolve deficiencies. When the COR determines a deficiency is not Government caused, an AF Form

802, Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) is initiated. The COR completes blocks 1 through 6 of the form and sends it to the CO. The CO must evaluate the CDR and, if appropriate, sign and send it to the contractor. The contractor must complete blocks 9 and 10 according to the requirements of the contract and return it to the CO within 5 calendar days of receipt. Upon receipt of the contractor’s response, the CO, in consultation with the COR, must evaluate the contractor’s response and take the appropriate action. The CO must document the evaluation (in block 11) and action taken (in block 12) on the CDR.

e. When corrective action is reported by the contractor, the COR will follow up with additional surveillance to verify implementation.

5.2 Conversation Record

Conversation Record, DOD Optional Form 271, may be used throughout this process to effectively document program issues and concerns addressed with the contractor and

Government points of contact. This provides a method to keep QA personnel informed of the status of issues and concerns.

6. DOCUMENTATION

All surveillance activities must be documented to provide the required audit trail to justify

Government acceptance and payment. The documented audit trail of the surveillance (DAS) activities is required by FAR 46.104(c), Contract Administration Office Responsibilities, which states, “Maintain, as part of the performance records of the contract, suitable records reflecting,

(1) The nature of Government contract QA actions, including, when appropriate, the number of observations made and the number and type of defects; and (2) Decisions regarding the acceptability of the products, the processes, and the requirements, as well as action to correct defects.” All documentation resulting from surveillance is made a permanent part of the contract file. The COR must keep the documentation files during the term of the contract and either monthly or at the conclusion of the contract (as directed by the CO); transfer the files to the CO for inclusion in the official contract file. It is the responsibility of the COR to establish and maintain this information in a DAS Folder. The surveillance folder(s) should include as a minimum:

a. Contract including Modifications

b. Task Orders including Modifications

c. QASP

d. COR Letter of designation

e. Invoices

f. Surveillance Records

1) Written report of all inspections and timelines of deliverables

2) Written report of any deficiency

3) Any other written documentation relating to contract performance

g. General Correspondence

ATTACHMENT 1 – QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE SUMMARY

The following items will be utilized for evaluation of performance during the duration of this contract.

Performance Objective PWS Para Performance Threshold Surveillance Method

Quality Status Report (QSR) 1.3.1.1 96% of the time the QSR is timely, complete, and accurate, with achievable milestones and milestone target dates.

Inspection/Review

Prototype Software 1.3.2.2 85% of the time, all applications and services are functioning properly, are available to PMO for installation and evaluation.

Customer/Government

Review

Operational/Working

Software, Application

Functionality

1.3.3, 1.3.4

98% of the time, all applications and services are functioning properly, are available to users and data is current (integrated

NLT 24 hours after interface feed is provided).

Customer/Government

Review

Code Installation Guides 1.3.3.1.2, 1.3.5.4

90% of the time, Guides must be timely, complete, and accurate.

Periodic Third Party

Audit by CCE team

Software Installs 1.3.3.2.1 99% of the time, software is installed/configured at the

Disaster Recovery site one day after installing and/or configuring on the Production site.

Inspection/Review

Software Change Releases 1.3.4.1 Software change releases must meet scheduled release dates and shall not exceed scheduled release date by more than 10 business days, unless the

Government Approves the delay in writing.

Inspection/Review

Software Change Releases 1.3.5.4 Software released to production environment shall have zero major defects.

Inspection/Review

Base-lined Source Code 1.3.5.4 Source code is delivered and stored within SDDC repository within established timelines

100% of the time.

Periodic Sampling

Fortify Report 1.3.6.9.1 98% of the time, report is timely, complete and accurate

Third Party Audit by

IA team

ATTACHMENT 2 – DISCREPANCY STATUS REPORT (example)

DISCREPANCY STATUS REPORT

MEMORANDUM FOR: USTRANSCOM/TCAQ

ATTN: _______________Contracting Officer

FROM: SDDC/G6

East Losey Street

Scott AFB, IL 62225

SUBJECT: - (Month)

1. Period Covered: (First to last day of the reporting period, i.e. 1-31 October 2012)

2. Area Covered: (Performance Objective, PWS paragraph, Task Descriptor, i.e. Support

Desk, 1.2.1.1.)

3. Overview of Performance:

a. Summary - (Summary of what was done by the COR to assure contract compliance, i.e. audits, data review, and surveillance)

b. Contract Discrepancy Reports (CDRs) - List all CDRs documented during the reporting period. Provide status of all open CDRs. Attach copies of CDRs to the monthly report.)

c. Corrective Action Follow Up - (Report any follow-up actions performed during the reporting period.)

4. Performance Analysis: (State your analysis of the contractor's performance.) Include positive and negative areas.

5. Areas of Concern: (Identify in narrative form ANY problem(s) or potential problem areas which may impact contract performance to SOW requirements or any aspect of the program.)

6. Contracting Office Representative Operation and Maintenance Status: (Indicate current

COR listing and their O&M status - Phases I and II; and any information regarding COR changes planned - new personnel requiring training, etc.)

JOHN Q. PUBLIC

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR)

Attachment:

CDRs