ID04170103_QASP_final.docx

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1. Contract Title:

UNITED STATES CENTRAL COMMAND (CENTCOM) DATA MINING TRAINING

2. Purpose:

This 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. 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.

3. Roles and Responsibilities:

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – The COR is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process. The COR shall keep a Quality Assurance file that accurately documents the contractor’s actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the KO. The COR is required to provide an annual performance assessment to the KO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the primary tool for documenting contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.

Functional Commander/Director (FC/FD) – The Functional has overall responsibility for developing the PWS and the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan and ensuring they satisfy mission requirements, are performance-based, foster innovation, and define metrics. The FC/FD will assign, as a minimum, a Primary and an Alternate COR and notify the CO/KO of any changes to this designation. Review contractor performance documentation, prepared by the COR on a regular basis to ensure performance is compatible with contract and mission objectives. The FC/FD is also responsible for identifying mission essential services and developing the necessary documents.

Program/Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides program oversight and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities.

Contracting Officer (KO) – The KO 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 KO shall also ensure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. Determine the final assessment of the contractor’s performance.

4. Primary Method of Surveillance: Direct observation and random sampling.

Acceptable surveillance methods include:

· 100 Percent Inspection. This is usually only the most appropriate method for infrequent tasks or tasks with stringent performance requirements, e.g., where safety or health is a concern. With this method, performance is inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. One hundred percent inspection is too expensive to be used in most cases.

· Random Sampling. This is usually the most appropriate method for recurring tasks. With random sampling, services are sampled to determine if the level of performance is acceptable. Random sampling works best when the number of instances of the services being performed is very large and a statistically valid sample can be obtained. Computer programs may be available to assist in establishing sampling procedures.

· Periodic Inspection: These services are monitored weekly, monthly, quarterly, semiannually, annually, etc. Periodic types of activities are perfect for periodic inspection because not only are they infrequent, but there is normally a predetermined, specified time frame within which the tasks must be accomplished. Therefore, you know exactly when to conduct the evaluations. Periodic inspections automatically become 100 percent evaluations or "100 percent checks." Inspections should be divided and scheduled by frequency: annual, semiannual, quarterly, monthly, weekly and as required. Sometimes services are required for which the time or frequency cannot be predicted, such as accident investigations, one-time special tasking by higher headquarters, etc. These would be labeled "as required inspections." Others are known and predictable such as the quarterly status report or the monthly travel report currently included in some DISA service contracts.

· Customer Input. Although usually not a primary method, this is a valuable supplement to more systematic methods. For example, in a case where random sampling indicates unsatisfactory service, customer complaints can be used as substantiating evidence. In certain situations where customers can be relied upon to complain consistently when the quality of performance is poor, e.g., dining facilities, building services, customer surveys and customer complaints may be a primary surveillance method, and customer satisfaction an appropriate performance standard. In all cases, complaints should be documented, preferably on a standard form.

Surveillance Matrix

The Surveillance Matrix (Appendix 1) is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance Standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance. The Government performance surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element standards.

5. Performance Assessment Approach:

Purpose. This section details the method(s) used to verify Contractor compliance with PWS requirements. The key elements of this process are the Contractor's quality program and Government identified Performance Objectives. The Performance Objectives of this Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) dictate the minimum inspection requirements Contracting Officer’s Representatives (CORs) must accomplish on a periodic basis. This QASP provides the procedures on how to conduct the evaluations for Performance Objectives and how to document them in a correct and effective manner.

Initial Performance Review. The initial evaluation of contractor performance shall take place within 30 days after the contractor assumes full performance responsibilities (i.e. after completion of transition/mobilization) to ensure the contractor has successfully started performance, completed transition, is fully operational, and is within the estimated cost, schedule, and performance parameters of the contract.

Performance Assessment Approach. To facilitate the Performance assessment of the Contractor's quality program, Contracting Officer’s Representative, consisting of Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will verify Contractor compliance with designated Performance Objectives. The intent of the Performance assessment approach is to gain confidence in the Contractor’s ability to provide satisfactory services and then adjusting the level of Performance assessment to a point that maintains confidence. This Performance assessment approach is subject to change based on the Contractor’s performance.

Annual Review. The COR must review Surveillance Plan Performance Objectives, assess their applicability and recommend the addition or subtraction of Performance Objectives as conditions warrant. This review must be accomplished annually as a minimum.

Special Audits. The COR must be alert to conditions that would warrant a special quality audit. Any time the COR observes that a functional area is out of acceptable tolerance or that the technical expertise is not available, a request for a functional area quality audit should be addressed to the Contracting Officer.

Performance Assessment Folders. A performance assessment folder (inspection file) must be developed and maintained by the primary COR. This folder is typically contained in hard copy, but may be maintained in a computer database provided there is adequate back up of the data to preclude accidental loss. The contract administrator will review the COR’s surveillance no less than semi-annually to ensure surveillance is properly conducted and documented, and contractor performance is within acceptable levels. This review will be documented and acknowledged by the CO and FC. The Performance assessment folder must contain the following information, but may contain other sections or information that the COR finds necessary.

Section 1. COR Appointment Letter, (Primary and Alternate), Letter to Contractor.

Section 2. COR Baseline, Contract-Specific, and Refresher Training (Training Certificates).

Section 3. Miscellaneous Documentation Section 4. Copy of Performance Work Statement (PWS) Section 5. Copy of memos for record Section 6. Performance Assessment Reports Section 7. Customer Complaint Record Section 8. Corrective Action Reports Section 9. Copies of receipt and acceptance documents processed Section 10. Copy of Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Section 11. Copy of Contractor’s Quality Control Plan Section 12. Copy of all Requisitions (AF Form 9s) Section 13. Copy of surveillance activity checklist or COR schedule Section 14. Copy of Contract, to include all attachments and modifications.

6. Documenting Performance:

Acceptable Performance.

The Government shall document all positive performance. A Performance Assessment Report (PAR) template is attached (Appendix 2). Any report may become part of the supporting documentation for fixed price payments, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) entries, or other actions. Government acceptance of services permits the contractor to invoice for the service fee.

Unacceptable performance.

Unacceptable contractor performance can be identified by customer complaints (Appendix 3) or upon schedule surveillance evaluations. When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. The COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file and provide a copy to the KO.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Corrective Action Report (CAR). The CAR is forwarded to the KO for dissemination to the contractor. A CAR template is attached to this QASP (Appendix 4).

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CAR in writing. The CAR 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 CAR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the KO and COR. The Government may withhold payment for services until corrective action is taken. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability. Upon Government acceptance of the corrected services the contractor will be permitted to invoice for the service fee.

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

7. Performance Rating

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used (same as CPAR ratings).

Performance Rating Criteria

Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. |_| DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT APPLY)

|_| NEW

|_| REPEAT

|_| NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM REVIEWED

II. CONTRACTOR VALIDATION

11. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE |_| CONCUR |_| NON-CONCUR

12. CORRECTIVE ACTION ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE

13. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTION OF RECURRENCE OR REASON FOR NON-CONCURRENCE OF COR CITED DEFICIENCY

III. ACTION CORRECTED

14. |_| CONCUR |_| NON-CONCUR COR SIGNATURE AND DATE

15. COR REMARKS (REQUIRED)

6. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS

Appendix 2 – Performance Assessment Report

Appendix 3 – Customer Complaint Record

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING NUMBER

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY

Appendix 4 – Corrective Action Report

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. FUNCTIONAL AREA

5. SUSPENSE DATE

6. CONTROL NUMBER

7. DEFICIENCY |_| MAJOR |_| MINOR

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

Please respond with a written corrective action plan that details the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 5. If date was not entered in Block 5, the contractor is not required to provide a response.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

11. COR DETERMINATION

|_| ACCEPTED |_| REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

Enclosure 6, Page 1 of 9 Pages 17Jul2013/Version 2