J-2_EPSE_III_TO1_QASP_attachment.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 12 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Enterprise Product Support Engineering III Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- ID05170030
- Issued by
- GSA Federal Acquisition Service
About this file
J-2 QASP Attachment
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| EPSE_III_RFP_-_Amendment_3.docx | DOCX document | |
| Questions_and_Answers_June_5.docx | DOCX document | |
| Questions_and_Answers_June_4_-_updated.docx | DOCX document | |
| EPSE_III_RFP_-_Amendment_2.docx | DOCX document | |
| Questions_and_Answers_June_4.docx | DOCX document | |
| EPSE_III_RFP_-_Amendment_1.docx | DOCX document | |
| Questions_and_Answers_-_May_23.docx | DOCX document | |
| J-4_EPSE_III_TO2_QASP_attachment_-_Objective,_Measures_and_Expectations.docx | DOCX document | |
| EPSE_III_RFP.docx | DOCX document | |
| J-3_EPSE_III_TO2_PWS_(PMB_and_Lasers).docx | DOCX document | |
| J-2_EPSE_III_TO1_QASP_attachment_-_Objective,_Measures_and_Expectations.docx | DOCX document | |
| J-4_EPSE_III_TO2_QASP_attachment_(PMB_and_Lasers).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| J-2_EPSE_III_TO1_QASP.docx | DOCX document | |
| J-1_EPSE_III_TO1_PWS.docx | DOCX document | |
| J-4_EPSE_III_TO2_QASP.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 15
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| ID0517003 / Task Order 001 - Performance Evaluation Report / Surveillance Checklist | |||||
| Performance Requirement / Objective | PWS Ref. | Performance Standard | Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) | Surveillance Method | Record of Observation. Satisfactory performance IAW the established AQL shall be documented by entering a rating: (1) Does not meet, (2) Meets, or (3) Exceeds Acceptable Performance. Provide a short narrative explaining a rating of 1 or 3. N/A indicates that services were not required for the period. The initials of the individual completing the checklist and the date the checklist was completed shall be identified for each inspection period. |
Status Reports ■ 100% complete.
■ 100% accurate.
■ Monthly report submitted NLT 25th calendar day of the month following the reporting period and concurrent with the Funds and Man Hour Expenditure Report. No violations per month.
A violation is an error, omission, or delayed delivery.
Each violation may be reflected as such within the CPARS assessment. Monthly Checklist & Customer Input Funds and Man-Hour Expenditure Reports ■ 100% complete.
■ 100% accurate.
■ Monthly report submitted NLT 25th calendar day of the month following the reporting period and concurrent with the monthly Status Report. No violations per month.
Each violation may be reflected as such within the CPARS assessment. Monthly Checklist & Customer Input Contract Funds Status Reports (CFSR) ■ 100% complete.
■ 100% accurate.
■ Quarterly report submitted NLT 25th calendar day of the month following the reporting period. No violations per month.
Each violation may be reflected as such within the CPARS assessment. Monthly Checklist & Customer Input Program Plan & Approach with Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) Section 3 Program plans/schedules
■ 100% complete.
■ 100% accurate.
■ The plans contain all details/components and intended/desired outcomes necessary for both advocacy and implementation of the technologies evaluated.
■ The plans leverage best practices and already existing use(s) of the technologies.
■ The plans/schedule include all details, timelines for evaluation and implementation; identify areas of potential risk, and recommendations.
■ On time submission, as stated in Section 4. No violations per month.
Each violation may be reflected as such within the CPARS assessment. Monthly Checklist & Customer Input Scientific and Technical Reports Section 3 Reports/Documentation
■ 100% complete.
■ 100% accurate.
■ The plans contain all details/components and intended/desired outcomes necessary for both advocacy and implementation of the technologies evaluated.
■ The plans leverage best practices and already existing use(s) of the technologies.
■ The plans include all details, timelines for evaluation and implementation; identify areas of potential risk, and recommendations.
■ Plans are communicated and coordinated with appropriate stakeholders.
■ The plan identify and prioritize key technology solutions and gaps.
■ Any required testing/tools and the methodology/approach are identified.
■ Include unrestricted electronic data, test results, and coding compatible with current Air Force databases (raw and summarized)
■ On time submission, as stated in Section 4. No violations per month.
Each violation may be reflected as such within the CPARS assessment. Monthly Checklist & Customer Input KC-135 CBM+ Program Implementation Plan Section 3, 4 Reports/Documentation
■ 100% complete.
■ 100% accurate.
■ The plans contain all details/components and intended/desired outcomes necessary for both advocacy and implementation of the technologies evaluated.
■ The plans leverage best practices and already existing use(s) of the technologies.
■ The plans include all details, timelines for evaluation and implementation; identify areas of potential risk, and recommendations.
■ Plans are communicated and coordinated with appropriate stakeholders.
■ The plan identify and prioritize key technology solutions and gaps.
■ Any required testing/tools and the methodology/approach are identified.
■ Include unrestricted electronic data, test results, and coding compatible with current Air Force databases (raw and summarized)
■ The CBM+ solutions are impelented and integrated with the weapon system and the Air Force CBM+ monitoring software tools.
■ On time submission, as stated in Section 4. No violations per month.
Each violation may be reflected as such within the CPARS assessment. Monthly Checklist & Customer Input AWB-1015 Documentation Section 3, 4 Reports/Documentation
■ 100% complete.
■ 100% accurate.
■ The plans contain all details/components and intended/desired outcomes necessary for both advocacy and implementation of the technologies evaluated.
■ The plans leverage best practices and already existing use(s) of the technologies.
■ The plans include all details, timelines for evaluation and implementation; identify areas of potential risk, and recommendations.
■ Plans are communicated and coordinated with appropriate stakeholders.
■ The plan identify and prioritize key technology solutions and gaps.
■ Any required testing/tools and the methodology/approach are identified.
■ Include unrestricted electronic data, test results, and coding compatible with current Air Force databases (raw and summarized)
■ On time submission, as stated in Section 4. No violations per month.
Each violation may be reflected as such within the CPARS assessment. Monthly Checklist & Customer Input Final Scientific and Technical Reports Leveraging and Building Upon Previous USAF CBM+ Efforts Section 3, 4 Final Reports
■ 100% complete.
■ 100% accurate.
■ The documents contain all details/components necessary for both advocacy and implementation of the technology evaluated.
■ The plans include all details, timelines for implementation; identify areas of potential risk, and recommendations.
■ Plans are communicated and coordinated with appropriate stakeholders.
■ Include unrestricted electronic data, test results, and coding compatible with current Air Force databases (raw and summarized).
■ Draft Final Report submitted NLT 45 days prior to contract completion. Final submitted NLT 5 days prior to contract completion.
No violations per month.
Each violation may be reflected as such within the CPARS assessment. Monthly Checklist & Customer Input Invoices Section 3, 4 ■ 100% complete.
■ 100% accurate.
■ Submitted to ITSS 25 days following the monthly financial report. No violations per month.
Each violation may be reflected as such within the CPARS assessment. Monthly Checklist & Customer Input
| Date Checklist Completed |
| Initials of Individual Completing Checklist |
File details come from the government source that posted it.