J -1503010-07 PAP.pdf

ATTACHMENT J-1503010-07

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT PLAN

PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT

PLAN

SOLICITATION# N40085-26-R-0012

REFINISHING OF GYMNASIUM FLOORS

MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE (MCBCL), NC

MARINE CORPS AIR STATION-NEW RIVER (MCAS-NR),

CAMP GEIGER, CAMP JOHNSON, RIFLE RANGE, AND COURT

HOUSE BAY, NORTH CAROLINA

PREPARED BY:

Kenyatta Hendley

FACILITIES SUPPORT CONTRACTS (FSC)

[1 Jun 2025]

Performance Assessment Plan Contents

1. Performance Assessment Plan

1.1 Introduction

1.2 Roles and Responsibilities

1.3 Training

1.4 Safety

1.5 Security

1.6 Submittals

1.6.1 Quality Managment Plan Submittal

1.6.2 Accident Prevention Plan Submittal

1.7 Meetings

1.8 Methods of Assessment (MOA)

1.9 Quality Management System (QMS)

1.10 Assessment Procedures

1.10.1 Post-Award Planning

1.10.2 Scheduling Assessments

1.10.3 Performance Assessment Process

1.10.4 Safety Assessment

1.11 Assessment Summary and Evaluation Procedures

1.11.1 Monthly Performance Assessment Summary (MPAS)

1.11.2 Invoice Validation and Withholdings

1.11.3 Performance Assessment Board (PAB)

1.12 Summary

Attachment A: Functional Assessment Plan (FAP) Attachment B: Performance Assessment Worksheet (PAW) Attachment C: QMS Pre-performance Checklist Attachment D: FSC Safety Assessment Checklist Attachment E: Customer Complaint Record Attachment F: QMS In-process Review Checklist Attachment G: Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR) Attachment H: MPAS Coversheet Attachment I: PAB Rating Summary

ATTACHMENT A

1. Performance Assessment Plan

1.1 Introduction

The Performance Assessment Plan (PAP) establishes Performance Assessment (PA) provisions for Contract refinishing of gymnasium floor services at various locations throughout the Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base, Marine Corps Air Station New River, Jacksonville, Camp Geiger, Camp Johnson, Rifle Range, and Court House Bay, North Carolina.

The PAP describes the methodology for assessing the Contractor’s performance that will be used to provide Contractor feedback, update Contractor Performance Assessment Rating System (CPARS), and, determine eligibility in earning incentives. The PAP includes the Functional Assessment Plan (FAP), Attachment A, and standard Performance Assessment Worksheets (PAW), Attachment B, to document and report Government observations and rate Contractor performance. The Government’s role is to assess Contractor’s work against measurable performance standards, and per the principles of Performance Based Services Acquisition (PBSA), the Contractor’s role is to ensure its quality through successful implementation of its Quality Management System (QMS). Per FAR Subpart 46.4, Government PA “shall be performed at such times and places as may be necessary to determine that the supplies or services conform to contract requirements” in order to ensure payments are made only for services that meet performance standards specified in the contract.

A positive relationship between the Government and the Contractor is essential in fulfilling a performance-based requirement. The Government’s relationship with the Contractor should be one that promotes a strong and positive business alliance to achieve mutually beneficial goals, such as timely delivery and acceptance of high-quality services through the use of efficient business practices. It is essential that the Government and the Contractor work together as a team to communicate expectations, agree on common goals, develop a common understanding of measurable standards, and identify and address problems early in the contract to achieve desirable outcomes.

1.2 Roles and Responsibilities

The Government’s key roles and responsibilities for performance assessment are as follows:

Performance Assessment Representative (PAR). The PAR is the on-site representative who assesses Contractor performance. The PAR periodically observes Contractor performance, reviews delivered services, reviews quality management corrective actions, keeps current records of performance issues and results, periodically assesses and documents Contractor performance on Performance Assessment Worksheets (PAWs) and the Monthly Performance Assessment Summary (MPAS), and communicates findings as necessary with the Contractor, Senior PAR (SPAR), Contracting Officer (KO), and Contracting Officer Representative (COR), as applicable.

Senior PAR (SPAR). The SPAR reviews PA schedules and PA documentation for sufficiency and consistency of oversight. The SPAR reviews PAWs and MPASs (and creates a consolidated MPAS if required) for completeness and accuracy before their presentation to the Performance Assessment Board (PAB). The SPAR is normally designated as the PAB chairperson.

ATTACHMENT A

Contract Specialist (CS). The ACO and/or PCO assigned to the contract.

Contracting Officer (KO). The KO has final responsibility for Contractor PA per FAR Part 42— Contract Administration and Audit Services, non-conformance modifications, and unilateral determination of incentives.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). The COR is responsible for a variety of contract administration duties that may include oversight of PA, reviewing invoices, and acceptance of work.

The COR should be assigned as a PAB member due to their broad technical background and knowledge of overall Contractor performance.

Performance Assessment Board (PAB). The PAB is comprised of key technical and administrative personnel appointed in writing by the KO. The PAB will convene on a regular basis to review Contractor performance documentation for the prior evaluation period, and prepare and forward a summary report of findings and recommendations to the KO. The PAB makes recommendations for CPARS and provides input for the determination of contract incentives, if applicable.

1.3 Training

To effectively implement the PA Program, individuals who monitor the Contractor’s performance should be experienced in the annex/sub-annex areas for which they are assigned and adequately trained. Mandatory training standards for all personnel performing PA of NAVFAC contracts are specified in BMS B-14.3, Performance Assessment. Additionally, safety training requirements are detailed in BMS B-14.18, FSC Safety and training for those assigned as CORs is promulgated by NFAS 1.602 and BMS B-18.3.6.

PARs and CORs assigned to provide oversight of this contract must meet the applicable training requirements and must be appointed in writing by the KO per BMS S.18.3.6.

1.4 Safety

Proper oversight of Contractor safety is an integral part of effective performance assessment. The PAR must ensure that the Contractor is in compliance with safety requirements specified in Spec Item 2.9 of the contract. The PAR should be present during any local Safety briefings. If the PAR observes a violation of any safety requirements by the Contractor, the PAR should:

• Report the safety hazard resulting from unsafe acts or conditions, defective tools, materials, or equipment used by the Contractor to the KO.

• When imminent danger is apparent (where, if the hazard is not immediately corrected, there is a high probability that a serious accident will occur, life will be in danger or there will be extensive property damage), immediately inform the Contractor and request immediate action be taken to correct the hazard. If the Contractor does not voluntarily

Further detail of safety assessment procedures is provided in paragraph 1.10.4 below.

ATTACHMENT A

1.5 Security

The PAR should become familiar with all security requirements specified in Spec Item 2.8 of the contract and report any observed violations to the KO.

1.6 Submittals

The PAR should review reports and other submittals identified in Section F to ensure they comply with applicable requirements and specifications.

1.6.1 Quality Management Plan Submittal

The Quality Management System Pre-Performance Review Checklist, Attachment C, should be used for the review of the Contractor’s QM Plan submittal and as a guideline for discussion of the Contractor’s QMS during the post-award kickoff/pre-performance conference. The PAR, SPAR, Contractor Quality Manager and Project Manager, and any applicable subcontractor quality representatives should sign off on the QMS review checklist.

1.6.2 Accident Prevention Plan Submittal

Per BMS B-14.18, FSC Safety, the FMFS Pre-Performance Safety Checklist should be used for the review of the Contractor’s Accident Prevention Plan submittal (including Activity Hazard Analyses (AHAs) and Occupational Risk and Compliance Plans and Programs) and as a guideline for discussion of the Contractor’s Safety Program during the post-award kickoff/pre-performance conference. The PAR should coordinate with the local command Safety Representative for assistance in review of Contractor’s APP. The PAR, SPAR, Contractor Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO) and Project Manager, and any applicable subcontractor safety representatives should sign off on the Safety review checklist. The Contractor must submit and have an approved APP before any work may begin on site. Additionally, new or revised AHAs must be submitted and reviewed at the beginning of each work phase, when new hazards are identified, or when a new work crew is brought on site.

1.7 Meetings

The PAR should attend and be prepared for required meetings, including partnering sessions. The PAR should be familiar with the Spec Items in Annex 2 titled “Required Conferences and Meetings” and “Partnering.” The FSC Partnering process is addressed in BMS B-14.16.

1.8 Methods of Assessment (MOA)

The PAR will periodically assess services for conformance to contract performance objectives and standards using the following MOAs:

• Periodic Sampling (PS) – requires a pre-determined plan for assessing a portion of the work, using sample size and frequency at the applicable assessment level.

ATTACHMENT A

• Validated Customer Complaints (VCC) – consists of customers observing defects in the services they have received and using a pre-determined procedure to report these defects to the PAR for validation.

• Unscheduled Visits (UV) – impromptu assessments of performance standards and objectives whenever practical.

• Customer’s Evaluation (CE) – consists of collected survey data of Contractor performance from the customer’s perspective through the use of a feedback form.

The MOAs used for assessment of each performance objective and standard are identified within the FAP included in Attachment A.

1.9 Quality Management System (QMS)

When the Government’s assessment of the Contractor’s performance reveals that the quality management efforts are not effective in ensuring performance objectives and standards are achieved, further action is required. The PAR will conduct a review of the Contractor’s QMS processes and quality inspection and surveillance records for the work item(s) where deficiencies are noted to validate the accuracy and effectiveness of the Contractor’s QMS.

For QMS to be considered acceptable, the Contractor must demonstrate to the Government through quality management and QC corrective and preventive actions that the risk of failure to meet performance standards has been satisfactorily mitigated.

Further detail of the QMS review process is provided in paragraph 1.10.3 below.

1.10 Assessment Procedures

1.10.1 Post-Award Planning

The PAR and SPAR should review and understand the final contract requirements, including any amendments made during the solicitation period, paying particular attention to performance objectives and standards and any changes in the scope of work. The PAR and SPAR should also review the Contractor’s technical proposal received in response to the solicitation and initial submittals, such as the QMS program (including Quality Management Plan), Accident Prevention Plan (including Activity Hazard Analyses (AHAs) and Occupational Risk and Compliance Plans and Programs), list of key personnel and employee listing.

The PAR and SPAR should also meet with customer representatives to review details of the contract and discuss the process for reporting and handling of customer complaints and review the contract requirements for partnering and the process described in BMS B-14.16, FSC Partnering, to be prepared for these meetings.

1.10.2 Scheduling Assessments

The PAR and SPAR should develop a planned assessment schedule based upon factors such as selected MOAs, Contractor’s recurring performance schedule, population of work, and local

ATTACHMENT A

priorities and conditions. Certain work requirements may necessitate normal assessment at AL2 or AL3 based on performance risk considerations, e.g., services that are mission critical or have life safety impacts. Risk is measured based on two things: the likelihood (or probability) and event will occur and the consequence (or impact) if the event does occur.

The FAP, Attachment A, along with the starting point for assessments based on risk determination should be compared against the Contractor’s work schedules as applicable to develop the initial assessment schedule. This schedule may be adjusted when required based on Contractor performance as detailed in paragraph 1.10.3 below.

1.10.3 Performance Assessment Process

The flowcharts and corresponding descriptions shown below detail the performance assessment process used by the PAR to observe, assess, document, and rate Contractor’s performance.

Figure 1. Performance Assessment Process for Assessment Level 1 (AL1)

The following descriptions are provided for the flowchart shown in Figure 1:

Step 1: Assess Performance at AL1 – This is the typical starting point of assessment. Assess the Contractor’s performance using the MOA, frequencies, and sample sizes indicated at AL1 of the FAP. The starting point may include additional PA at lower assessment levels for mission critical, Step 8:

Performance Assessment

Rating is Unsatisfactory

Step 5:

Defect(s) warrant evaluation of QMS?

Yes

No Yes

Yes

No

NoStep 4:

Rework if Necessary

Step 6:

Evaluate

QMS

Step 10:

Recommend withholding if necessary

Step 3:

Document and Notify Contractor

Step 2:

Defect(s) Found?

Yes No

Step 13:

Performance

Assessment Rating is Satisfactory or higher

Step 7:

Is QMS acceptable

Step 1:

Assess

Performance

@ AL1

Step 9:

Add a lower

Assessment Level for Spec Item and/or

Location deficiencies

Step 16:

Continue “Normal”

Sampling

Step 17:

Consider “Reduced”

Sampling

Step 15:

Positive Trend?

Step 12:

Document Assessment

Step 11:

Performance

Assessment Rating is Marginal or

Unsatisfactory

Step 14:

Performance

Assessment Rating is Marginal

ATTACHMENT A

safety, or environmental related services as determined based on the risk assessment performed during post-award planning. A Performance Assessment Worksheet (PAW) must be used for each assessment indicating this is an AL1 assessment. A PAW is the form used to document and report Government observations and rate Contractor performance.

Step 2: Defect(s) Found – The PAR should evaluate the Contractor’s performance of work looking for both failures to comply with performance objectives and standards as well as instances of value-added services or work that exceeds performance standards. Any observation of work that fails to meet any of the specified performance standards will be documented as a defect. Validated customer complaints (VCC) or instances of non-conforming work discovered during unscheduled visits (UV) should also be documented as defects. Where customer complaints are received, all alleged defects must be evaluated within a reasonable time to validate that the performance standards were not met. Documentation will be completed using the Customer Complaint Record, Attachment D. Documentation of UVs will be completed on a PAW. DECISION: If a defect is found, continue.

If not, jump to Step 12.

Step 3: Document and Notify Contractor – Document any observed negative performance that fails to meet contract performance standards with supporting narrative on the Performance Assessment Worksheet (PAW). If defects are found, the PAR will forward a copy of the PAW to the Contractor. The Contractor shall sign and return the PAW within the specified timeframe to acknowledge receipt of the document. The Contractor’s signature does not constitute agreement with the Government’s assessment, it merely acknowledges that the Contractor has been notified of a Government observed defect. Should the Contractor disagree with the Government’s observations, discussions should be conducted to reach a common understanding of performance objectives and standards.

Step 4: Rework if Necessary – In the case of unsatisfactory or non-performed work, the Government may, at its option, allow the Contractor an opportunity to correct by re-performance at no additional cost to the Government. Rework shall be completed within the timeframe specified in Section E, Consequences of Contractor’s Failure to Perform Required Services clause of the contract.

Step 5: Defect(s) Warrant Evaluation of QMS? – Defects warrant evaluation of QMS if: 1) they are “Significant”, 2) a “Trend” has been established, or 3) the work is not considered “Substantially Complete”. Significant defects include the Contractor’s failure to meet performance objectives and standards that result in damage to the Government, or incomplete major or critical work items.

Significant defects are subjective and should be discussed in initial partnering sessions with the Contractor. Trends are defects that may be considered minor but are recurring and have not been corrected through the Contractors QMS. Trends are typically defects found in the same or similar work requirements repeated consistently over several periods of the assessment frequency.

Substantially complete means that the performance standard is fully met except for minor or trivial non-conformances per FAR 46.407. A service will be judged to be fully conforming to the contract performance standards if the nonconformance is minor or trivial and there is no omission of essential work, and approximately 95% of the total work (population) assessed meets the performance standard. Substantial completion can be measured based on the total work requirement being assessed or based on any one element of work performance. DECISION: If QMS evaluation is warranted, continue. If not, jump to Step 14.

ATTACHMENT A

Step 6: Evaluate QMS – The PAR should evaluate the Contractor’s QMS to verify proper controls are in place to ensure the delivery of quality services. The PAR should follow the QMS In-Process Review Checklist, Attachment E, and document findings on this form. This review should begin with a focus on the Spec Items and/or location where defects have been found as opposed to a complete audit of the Contractor’s QMS (use Parts A & B of the checklist). The evaluation should identify corrective actions the Contractor is taking for specific discrepancies and identify any QMS changes the Contractor is implementing to preclude systemic problems, avoid repeat discrepancies, and regain Quality Control (QC). If the initial evaluation identifies deficiencies in the Contractor’s QMS with insufficient planned corrective actions or QMS changes, or, if corrective actions and QMS changes planned during previous QMS reviews have been ineffective, then broaden the evaluation to a more comprehensive review of the Contractor’s QMS program (use Parts C through F of the checklist).

Step 7: Is QMS Acceptable? – The Contractor must demonstrate to the Government that they have taken corrective actions and identified QMS changes to preclude systemic problems, avoid repeat discrepancies, and regain QC. QMS is considered “Acceptable” if the Contractor’s actions will satisfactorily reduce the risk of continued failure to meet performance standards. DECISION: If QMS is unacceptable, continue. If QMS is acceptable, jump to Step 10.

Step 8: Performance Assessment Rating is Unsatisfactory – If the Contractor’s QMS is unacceptable, then the PAR should document all findings, including a summary of the findings associated with the Contractor’s QMS, on the PAW. The PAR should rate the Contractor Unsatisfactory in accordance with the adjectival ratings included in the PARC. The PAR should also document recommendations for withholding of payment on the PAW for non-conforming services when defects cannot be corrected by re-performance.

Step 9: Add a lower Assessment Level for Spec Item and/or Location deficiencies – When the Contractor’s performance is Unsatisfactory at AL1 and QMS is Unacceptable, additional PA at Assessment Level 2 or 3 (AL2 or AL3) should be conducted for the Spec Item and/or location deficiencies as shown in Figure 3. [End of this assessment] Step 10: Recommend withholding if necessary – Even if the QMS is acceptable and the Contractor has implemented or planned appropriate corrective actions, withholdings may still be warranted. The PAR should document recommendations for withholding of payment on the PAW for non-conforming services when defects cannot be corrected by re-performance.

Step 11: Performance Assessment Rating is Marginal or Unsatisfactory – The PAR shall document all findings, including a summary of the findings associated with the Contractor’s QMS evaluation, on the PAW. The PAR should rate the Contractor Marginal or Unsatisfactory in accordance with the PARC adjectival descriptions. The PAR should continue sampling the size identified as “Normal” in the FAP at AL1. [End of this assessment] Step 12: Document Assessment – Document results of assessment particularly noting how it was validated that performance complied with contract requirements and detailing any instances of value-added services or work that exceeds contract performance standards, with supporting narrative on the PAW.

Step 13: Performance Assessment Rating is Satisfactory or Higher – If the Contractor has performed all work in accordance with the performance objectives and standards, then a

ATTACHMENT A

performance rating of Satisfactory or higher should be assigned. The PAR should rate the Contractor Satisfactory, Very Good, or Exceptional in accordance with the PARC adjectival descriptions. Jump to Step 15.

Step 14: Performance Assessment Rating is Marginal – The PAR shall document all findings, including details of the failures to comply with performance objectives and standards on the PAW.

The PAR should rate the Contractor Marginal in accordance with the PARC adjectival descriptions.

The PAR should continue sampling the size identified as “Normal” in the FAP at AL1. [End of this assessment] Step 15: Positive Trend Established? – If the Contractor has established a trend of Satisfactory, Very Good or Exceptional performance, repeated consistently over several periods of the assessment frequency, the PAR should consider sampling at the reduced level (Jump to Step 17). If a trend has not yet been established the PAR should continue normal sampling.

Step 16: Continue “Normal” Sampling – The PAR should continue sampling the size identified as “Normal” in the FAP at AL1. [End of this assessment] Step 17: Consider “Reduced” Sampling – The PAR should adjust sampling to the size identified as “Reduced” in the FAP at AL1. [End of this assessment]

Figure 2. Performance Assessment Process for Assessment Level 2 or 3 (AL2 or AL3)

The following descriptions are provided for the flowchart shown in Figure 2:

Yes

No Yes

Step 4:

Rework if Necessary

Step 3:

Document and Notify Contractor

Step 10:

Recommend withholding if necessary

NoStep2:

Defect(s) Found?

Step 7:

Is QMS acceptable

Yes

No

Step 6:

Re-evaluate

QMS

Step 8:

Recommend appropriate administrative action

Step 1:

Assess

Performance @ AL2 or AL3

Step 9:

Continue Current

Assessment Level or go to lower

Assessment Level if applicable

Step 11:

Performance

Assessment Rating is Unacceptable

Step 13:

Performance

Assessment Rating is Acceptable

Step 12:

Document

Assessment

Step 5:

Defect(s) warrant evaluation of QMS?

Yes No Step 16:

Continue Current Assessment Level

Step 17:

Return to Higher

Assessment Level

Step 15:

Positive Trend?

Step 14:

Performance

Assessment Rating is Unacceptable

ATTACHMENT A

Step 1: Assess Performance at AL2 or AL3 – Start additional assessment(s) at a lower level if the rating on PAW 1 was Unsatisfactory and QMS was unacceptable. Certain work requirements may necessitate normal assessment at AL2 or AL3 based on performance risk considerations, e.g., services that are mission critical or have life safety impacts. Assess the Contractor’s performance using the MOA, frequencies, and sample sizes indicated at the appropriate assessment level, e.g., AL2 or AL3 of the FAP.

Step 2: Defect(s) Found – If the Contractor has performed all work in accordance with the performance objectives and standards, then a performance rating of Acceptable should be assigned.

The PAR will document any instances of value-added services or work that exceeds performance standards with supporting narrative on the Performance Assessment Worksheet (PAW). When the assessed work fails to comply with performance objectives and standards, the PAR will document the defect on the PAW and notify the Contractor. Validated customer complaints (VCC) or instances of non-conforming work discovered during unscheduled visits (UV) should also be documented as defects. Where customer complaints are received, all alleged defects must be evaluated within a reasonable time to validate that the performance standards were not met.

Documentation will be completed using the Customer Complaint Record, Attachment D.

Documentation of UV will be completed on a PAW. DECISION: If defect is found, continue. If not, jump to Step 12.

Step 3: Document and Notify Contractor – Document instances of value-added performance that exceeds contract performance standards, and negative performance that fails to meet contract performance standards, with supporting narrative on the Performance Assessment Worksheet (PAW). If defects are found the PAR will forward a copy of the PAW to the Contractor. The Contractor shall sign and return the PAW within the specified timeframe to acknowledge receipt of the document. The Contractor’s signature does not constitute agreement with the Government’s assessment, it merely acknowledges that the Contractor has been notified of a Government observed defect. Should the Contractor disagree with the Government’s observations, discussions should be conducted to reach a common understanding of performance objectives and standards.

Step 4: Rework if Necessary – In the case of unsatisfactory or non-performed work, the Government may, at its option, allow the Contractor an opportunity to correct by re-performance at no additional cost to the Government. Rework shall be completed within the timeframe specified in Section E, Consequences of Contractor’s Failure to Perform Required Services clause of the contract.

Step 5: Defect(s) Warrant Evaluation of QMS? – Defects warrant evaluation of QMS if 1) they are “Significant”, 2) a “Trend” has been established, or 3) the work is not considered “Substantially Complete”. Significant defects include the Contractor’s failure to meet performance objectives and standards that result in damage to the Government, or incomplete major or critical work items.

Significant defects are subjective and should be discussed in initial partnering sessions with the Contractor. Trends are defects that may be considered minor but are recurring and have not been corrected through the Contractors QMS. Substantially complete means that the performance standard is fully met except for minor or trivial non-conformances per FAR 46.407. A service will be judged to be fully conforming to the contract performance standards if the nonconformance is minor or trivial and there is no omission of essential work, and approximately 95% of the total work

ATTACHMENT A

(population) assessed meets the performance standard. DECISION: If QMS evaluation is warranted, continue. If not, jump to Step 14.

Step 6: Re-evaluate QMS – The PAR should reevaluate the Contractors QMS to verify proper controls are in place to ensure the delivery of quality services. This review should be limited to the Spec Items and/or location where defects have been found as opposed to a complete audit of the Contractor’s QMS. The evaluation should identify corrective actions the Contractor is taking for specific discrepancies, and identify any QMS changes the Contractor is implementing to preclude systemic problems, avoid repeat discrepancies, and regain Quality Control (QC).

Step 7: Is QMS Acceptable? – The Contractor must demonstrate to the Government that they have taken corrective actions and identified QMS changes to preclude systemic problems, avoid repeat discrepancies, and regain QC. QMS is considered “Acceptable” if the Contractor’s actions will satisfactorily reduce the risk of continued failure to meet performance standards. DECISION: If QMS is unacceptable, continue. If QMS is acceptable, jump to Step 10.

Step 8: Recommend appropriate administrative action – The PAR should make recommendations to the Contracting Officer via the SPAR/COR/FSCM for appropriate administrative actions. Administrative actions may include additional performance review meetings, issuance of a Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), Attachment F, withholding of payment including liquidated damages, or interim CPARS rating. The PAR should also document recommendations for withholding of payment on the PAW for non-conforming services when defects cannot be corrected by re-performance.

Step 9: Continue Current Assessment Level or go to lower Assessment Level if applicable – The PAR shall continue sampling at the size and frequency identified in the FAP at the appropriate assessment level or can move to a lower level of assessment if applicable. Additionally, if there is a negative trend in Contractor performance, the PAR should consider modification of the MOAs, sample sizes, and frequencies included in the FAP.

Step 10: Recommend withholding if necessary – If the Contractor’s QMS is acceptable, then the PAR may still consider recommending withholding of payment for non-conforming services when defects cannot be corrected by re-performance by documenting on the PAW.

Step 11: Document Performance Assessment Rating as Unacceptable – The PAR shall document all findings, including findings associated with the Contractor’s QMS, which justify rating the Contractor’s performance as Unacceptable. The PAR shall continue sampling the size identified in the FAP at the current assessment level. [End of this assessment] Step 12: Document Assessment – Document results of assessment with supporting narrative on the PAW, particularly noting how it was validated that performance complied with contract requirements.

Step 13: Document Performance Assessment Rating as Acceptable at appropriate assessment level – The PAR shall document all findings which justify rating the Contractor’s performance as Acceptable. Jump to Step 15.

Step 14: Document Performance Assessment Rating as Unacceptable – The PAR shall document all findings which justify rating the Contractor’s performance as Unacceptable. The PAR shall

ATTACHMENT A

continue sampling the size identified in the FAP at the current assessment level. [End of this assessment] Step 15: Positive Trend Established? – If the Contractor has established a trend of acceptable performance over a period of time, e.g., three months, the PAR should return to a higher assessment level (Jump to Step 17). If a positive trend has not yet been established the PAR should continue at the current assessment level.

Step 16: Continue Current Assessment Level – The PAR should continue sampling at the size and frequency identified in the FAP at the appropriate assessment level. [End of this assessment] Step 17: Return to Higher Assessment Level – The PAR should discontinue the additional lower level assessment and move to a higher assessment level or reduce to normal AL1 assessment. [End of this assessment]

1.10.4 Safety Assessment

As detailed in BMS B-14.18, FSC Safety, proper oversight of Contractor safety is an integral part of effective performance assessment. There are two preferred methods for assessing a Contractor’s safety performance: 1) Assessing safety while conducting regular periodic sampling; and 2) Documenting “unscheduled visits” to specifically assess safety anytime the performance of work can be observed.

Note: Anytime a safety issue is observed, the PAR should take appropriate immediate action to stop work as necessary until the unsafe practices are properly corrected.

The PAR shall record all safety assessments on the PAW including a supporting narrative regarding the safety issues observed in the comments block. The FSC Safety Assessment Checklist, Attachment G, should be used to identify the specific areas where safety issues were noted and attached to the PAW. Similar to the assessment process detailed above, the PAR should consider the significance of safety issues and any trends observed in evaluating the need for further review of the Contractor’s safety program and the addition of more scheduled assessments.

If a detailed review of the Contractor’s safety program is deemed necessary, the PAR should evaluate the Contractor’s Accident Prevention Plan (APP)/Activity Hazard Analysis (AHA) to verify proper safety controls are in place to ensure their employees are performing work in accordance with EM 385-1-1. This review shall ensure the APP/AHA is site specific and relevant to the service process. The safety program review should identify discrepancies between the Contractor’s APP/AHA with the EM 385-1-1 and identify any corrective actions the Contractor is implementing to preclude systemic problems and avoid repeat safety issues. The PAR should coordinate with the local command Safety Representative for assistance in review of Contractor’s APP.

The PAR must also be familiar with other safety responsibilities detailed in BMS B-14.18, including assisting with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspections and ensuring Contractors follow the proper procedure for mishap notification.

ATTACHMENT A

1.11 Assessment Summary and Evaluation Procedures

1.11.1 Monthly Performance Assessment Summary (MPAS)

The PAR and SPAR will collect, review, and evaluate the results of all performance assessments including PAW documentation, safety assessments, validated customer complaints, customer evaluations, trend data, and Contractor QMS corrective and preventive actions. The PAR summarizes PA information and completes the comments block on the MPAS for each annex/sub-annex. The MPAS for each annex/sub-annex is included with the applicable FAP, Attachment A.

The SPAR reviews completed annex/sub-annex MPAS, provides recommended actions as applicable, assigns an overall technical rating for the function, and validates the MPAS by signing it.

Supporting information (e.g. copies of completed PAWs, VCCs, Customer Evaluation forms, and other assessment documentation) should be made available with the MPAS.

1.11.2 Invoice Validation and Withholdings

Results of performance assessments and other PA information should also be used as part of the validation of the Contractor’s monthly invoice amount. The PAR and SPAR will determine the value of the estimated damages to the Government for non-conforming or non-performed work and recommend to the KO the appropriate withholding including liquidated damages (LDs).

Documentation must be provided to support the reduced value of services and/or the estimated cost and related profit to correct deficiencies and complete unfinished work.

1.11.3 Performance Assessment Board (PAB)

The Performance Assessment Board membership consists of the following:

PAB Chairperson – SPAR PAB Member –COR PAB Member – KO The PAB will convene to review and evaluate Contractor performance. The date, time, and location of PAB meetings will be established by the PAB Chairperson and communicated to all PAB members.

Additional participants may include as specifically requested or approved by the PAB Chairperson.

The personnel may participate in the discussion of Contractor performance, but will have no vote on consensus ratings.

The PAR/SPAR should be prepared to brief the PAB on the monthly summary information and trend data and offer a recommended consensus rating to the PAB based on assessment results. Each PAB member should consider the information presented and individually document ratings with supporting comments for each area defined in CPARS on the PAB Rating Summary form, Attachment I. The PAB Chairperson should develop a consensus rating for each factor and document comments relevant to each rating factor from the PAB review. At, or near, the end of each performance period, the PAB should review previous PAB Rating Summaries in addition to performance during the most recent evaluation period to develop overall input for official CPARS

ATTACHMENT A

ratings and relevant comments. This final PAB report should be used by the Assessing Official Representative (AOR) for entry into CPARS for the performance period.

Specific details of the PAB process are provided in BMS B-14.26, Performance Assessment Board.

1.12 Summary

The PAP is based on the premise that the Contractor is responsible for managing and ensuring that quality controls meet the terms of the contract. The PAP facilitates consistent and effective tiered PA to verify the accuracy and completeness of the Contractor’s QMS and to assess overall compliance with performance objectives and standards. The Government will evaluate Contractor performance through appropriate assessment methods to ensure payments are made only for services that comply with contract requirements. This PAP is a “living” document that will be revised or modified as circumstances warrant.

Attachment A

Attachment A: Functional Assessment Plan (FAP)

FACILITY INVESTMENT FAP

Assessment Levels (AL) Assessment Frequency (Freq) A – Annually Q – Quarterly M – Once per month BW – Once every 13-16 days W – Once per week R – As required SA – Semiannually

Method of Assessment (MOA) PS – Periodic Sampling RS – Random Sampling VCC – Validated Customer Complaints UV – Unscheduled Visits CE – Customer’s Evaluation

AL1 Start assessment at this Level

AL2

Add this Level if Contractor performance for AL1 is Unsatisfactory

AL3

Add this Level if Contractor performance at AL1 or AL2 is Unsatisfactory

Note: Return to appropriate Assessment Level when performance improves.

Note: The first method listed in the MOA column below is the primary assessment method.

Spec Item Performance Objective Performance Standard MOA

Assessment Level Sample Size Freq

AL1 AL2 AL3 Normal Reduced

3. Recurring Work The contractor is required to perform weekly operation and maintenance of bullet traps on-site during normal working hours

PS N/A N/A 100% N/A W

3.1 Operation and Maintenance

The Contractor shall perform system maintenance of bullet traps to ensure proper operation, to minimize breakdowns, and to maximize useful life.

Maintenance is accomplished in accordance with the Contractor’s maintenance program plan and work schedule.

Maintenance is performed in accordance with manufacturers’ recommended procedures and standards.

PS N/A N/A 100% N/A M

Attachment A

Spec Item Performance Objective Performance Standard MOA

Assessment Level Sample Size Freq

AL1 AL2 AL3 Normal Reduced

Work includes modifications, repairs, bullet recovery, and other related tasks to the existing system.

3.1.1 Service Trouble Calls

The Contractor shall respond to any maintenance issues discovered during the weekly site visit that requires immediate attention, or generate from the weekly site visit.

Maintenance identified responded to within 24 hours.

All work accomplished with adequate internal controls and review procedures to eliminate conflicts, errors, and omissions.

PS N/A N/A 100% N/A R

3.1.2 Rubber Berm Traps

Semi-annual maintenance required on the Rubber Berm Traps.

Bullet fragments removed and adhesion compound applied. PS N/A N/A 100% N/A M

3.1.3 Screw Conveyor System

Periodic maintenance required on the screw conveyor system of some bullet traps.

Maintenance is performed in accordance with the scope of work and work schedule. PS N/A N/A 100% N/A M

3.1.4 Dust Collection Units

Routine maintenance required on the dust collections units.

Maintenance is accomplished weekly in accordance with the scope of work and the manufacturer’s maintenance checklist included as an attachment to the contract.

PS N/A N/A 100% N/A M

3.1.5 TCT-2 Systems

The Contractor shall perform weekly inspections and maintenance on the Trap Containment systems to ensure proper operation, to minimize breakdowns, and to maximize useful life.

TCT-2 system maintained according to the operations and maintenance manual included as an attachment to the contract.

3.2 Minor Modifications/Repairs

The Contractor shall perform system modifications identified by the Government representative that can be

Tasks such as repairing deflectors, deceleration chambers, painting, dry lead cleanup, wet lead cleanup, and canister inspections.

Attachment A

Spec Item Performance Objective Performance Standard MOA

Assessment Level Sample Size Freq

AL1 AL2 AL3 Normal Reduced accomplished during nor mal working hours.

3.3 Air Filtration Filters Exchange Remove Lead Contaminated filters replace with new Filters, Transport Contaminated Filters to Bldg. 978 EMD Hazmat facility

PS N/A N/A 100% N/A A/SA

3.4 Storage, Transporting, Disposal and

Shipping Documents

All applicable storage, transportation, and disposal requirements of Federal, State, DoD, and local hazardous waste statutes, regulations, directives and orders must be strictly adhered to when executing this task

PS N/A N/A 100% N/A A

4 Non-recurring Work Non-recurring work may be ordered utilizing DoD EMALL in accordance with Section H or on a task order in accordance with the PROCEDURES FOR ISSUING ORDERS clause in Section G. The order will specify the exact locations and types of work to be accomplished. The period of performance will be specified in each order.

PS N/A N/A As Required

N/A R

Attachment A

MONTHLY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Annex/sub-annex: 1502000 Facility Investment Month/Year:

Spec Title

AL1 Rating AL2/AL3 Rating Item E VG S M U # Samples A U # Samples VCC

3. Recurring

3.1 Operation and Maintenance

3.1.1 Service Trouble Calls

3.1.2 Rubber Berm Traps

3.1.3 Screw Conveyor System

3.1.4 Dust Collection Units

3.1.5 TCT-2 Systems

3.2 Minor Modifications/Repairs

3.3 Air Filtration Filters exchange

3.4 Storage, Transporting, Disposal and

Shipping Documents

Attachment A

MONTHLY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Annex/sub-annex: 1502000 Facility Investment (cont) Month/Year:

Comments:

Recommended Actions:

SPAR Signature: Date:

Attachment B

Attachment B: Performance Assessment Worksheet (PAW)

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ANNEX/SUB-ANNEX:

PAW (Indicate Level) � 1 � 2 � 3 � Non-recurring

CONTRACT NO: PAR NAME:

SAMPLE ID: DATE:

SAMPLE LOCATION:

SPEC ITEM / TO #: TITLE:

SAFETY ASSESSMENT: Issues found? � No � Yes (document details below)

COMMENTS: (Document findings/observations of how performance complies with contract requirements and detail any value-added or negative performance, and trends)

RATING:

(For AL-2/3) � Acceptable � Unacceptable

PAR (signature): DATE:

CONTRACTOR (signature): DATE: ______________

REWORK: � Acceptable � Unacceptable � N/A

QMS EVALUATION: (Document effectiveness of contractor’s QMS to detect/correct negative performance and reverse trends. Attach QMS review checklist.)

Attachment B

QMS RATING: � Acceptable � Unacceptable � N/A

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT RATING: (FOR AL-1 or Non-recurring)

� Exceptional � Very Good � Satisfactory � Marginal � Unsatisfactory

Attachment C

Attachment C: QMS Pre-performance Checklist

QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

PRE-PERFORMANCE REVIEW CHECKLIST

GENERAL INFORMATION

NAME PHONE EMAIL

CONTRACTOR Project Manager CONTRACTOR Quality Manager

SUB-CONTRACTOR QC

SUB-CONTRACTOR QC

SUB-CONTRACTOR QC

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

REPRESENTATIVE (PAR)

SUPERVISORY PAR

CONTRACT INFORMATION

TITLE:

Contract #: TO# LOCATION:

START: END: CONTRACT PRICE:

ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACTOR’S QUALITY APPROACH DOES NOT LIMIT CONTRACTING

OFFICER FROM REQUIRING ADDITIONAL MEASURES IF PERFORMANCE IS

UNACCEPTABLE.

QUALITY MANAGEMENT BRIEFING CHECKLIST

CHECKPOINT (Y/N) COMMENTS

QUALITY ORGANIZATION:

Is the QM plan submitted in accordance with Annex 0200000 and Section F requirements?

Is the Quality organization clearly identified (e.g., org chart) and a list of all Quality personnel provided?

Are the responsibilities of Quality personnel detailed and lines of authority explained (e.g., Quality staff and Quality Manager reports directly to Prime Contractor management)?

Are the training and qualification requirements for Quality staff specified and does the Contractor’s staff meet these requirements?

Does the Quality organization show relationship between the Prime Contractor’s Quality staff and Subcontractor’s management or Quality?

Attachment C

QUALITY APPROACH:

Is the QM plan current and specifically tailored for this contract?

Does the Contractor’s Quality Management System and management approach indicate a clear understanding of the contract requirements?

METHODS AND PROCEDURES FOR PERFORMANCE OF WORK:

Does the Contractor provide detail of their work planning and control to ensure first time quality?

This could include:

a. Proper selection and training of personnel

b. Tracking and verification of training and certification requirements

c. Work center supervisor/lead personnel oversight of work performance

d. Detailed SOPs and procedures for work requirements

e. Routine training and meetings

f. Selection procedures for subcontractors

g. Management control of subcontracted work

SURVEILANCE AND INSPECTION PROCEDURES:

Does the Contractor provide detailed procedure for the selection of samples (e.g., percentage of work inspected, process for selection of samples, in-process

vs. completed work.)?

Does the QM plan detail procedures for the collection, recording, and analysis of inspection and surveillance results?

Does the QM plan include processes for utilization analysis of inspection and surveillance results to determine cause and implement corrective actions?

Does the QM plan provide a process for preventing recurrence of quality issues and continuous improvement of work performance?

Does the QM plan detail specific procedures for the oversight of subcontracted work or the review and analysis of subcontractor quality?

Attachment C

DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT:

Does the Contractor have a process for the control and retention of Quality documentation and records?

Does the Contractor provide the controls in place to ensure all Quality records are documented, maintained reviewed and properly filed?

Does the QM plan have a process for the review of documentation for completeness, accuracy, and consistency? (This may include management reviews or internal audit plan.)

Does the QM Plan provide a process for tracking and ensuring all submittal requirements are met?

COMMUNICATION WITH GOVERNMENT:

Does the QM plan address the level, format, and frequency of communications with the government?

This could include:

a. Routine, yet informal communications between contractor, quality staff, and Government PARs

b. Established meeting requirements between Contractor Quality and/or management staff with Government PA and/or contracting personnel.

c. Progressive reporting and communication based on the frequency or severity of the issue being addressed (e.g., Quality staff to PAR, Quality Manager to SPAR/FSCM, Project Manager to

PWO

d. Details of protocol for attendance at meetings required by contract, including partnering sessions.

REVIEW SIGNATURES

PAR: DATE:

SPAR: DATE:

CONTRACTOR QUALITY MANAGER: DATE:

CONTRACTOR PROJECT MANAGER: DATE:

SUBCONTRACTOR: DATE:

Attachment C

Attachment E

Attachment D: FSC Safety Assessment Checklist

CONTRACT NO: PAR NAME:

SAMPLE ID: DATE:

SAMPLE LOCATION:

SPEC ITEM / TO #: TITLE:

SAFETY ASSESSMENT: Issues found? � No � Yes (indicate area of safety deficiency below) Administrative Issue No

Issue N/A Is the Contractor staff knowledgeable of Activity Hazard Analyses (AHAs) and Occupational Risk and Compliance Plans and Programs related to the work performed?

Is the Contractor Site Safety Plan (AHA) on site?

Have all potential hazards been identified and appropriate controls implemented?

Are there Emergency Planning/Communication procedures in place?

Are there First Aid and CPR Trained personnel on site as required?

Safety Hazards Issue No Issue N/A Safety Hazards Issue No

Issue N/A

Chemical hazards/MSDS Accident Prevention (signs, tags, barricades, covers, etc)

Site Cleanliness (floor care, signage removal, etc) Hot Work (Welding/Grinding)

Environmental Conditions (Heat/Cold stress, weather)

Fall Protection/Working at Heights (Ladder Safety, Scaffolding/Staging, Aerial Lifts, etc)

Lead Paint/Asbestos Slips, Trips, and Falls Biological Hazards (Animals, insects, etc)

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

Soil Disturbance Respirator Protection Underground Utilities/Utility Clearance

Confined and Enclosed Space

Vehicle Operation and Condition Trenching/Excavations

Weight Handling Equipment Safety Electrical Safety

Crane Safety Lockout/Tagout (Control of Hazardous Energy)

Traffic Control Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Hazards

Equipment Use and Condition Fire Safety Material Handling Compressed Gas

Note: Include detailed comments related to Safety assessment on the PAW

Attachment E

Attachment E

Attachment E: Customer Complaint Record

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

ANNEX/SUB-ANNEX:

CONTRACT NO:

DATE/TIME RECEIVED:

RECEIVED BY:

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION: INDIVIDUAL: PHONE:

LOCATION:

SPEC ITEM: TITLE:

DETAILS OF COMPLAINT:

COMMENTS:

Complaint Validation: � Valid � Non-valid

PAR (signature): DATE:

CONTRACTOR (signature): DATE:

REWORK: � Acceptable � Unacceptable � N/A

PAR (signature): DATE:

Attachment F

Attachment F: QMS In-process Review Checklist

QMS IN-PROCESS REVIEW CHECKLIST

CONTRACT #: TITLE:

PAR NAME: DATE:

ANNEX/SUB-ANNEX:

SPEC ITEM: TITLE:

QMS REVIEW CHECKLIST

If observed defects warrant evaluation of QMS, the initial review should be limited to the Spec Items and/or location where defects have been found. This process begins with Part A & B below.

CHECKPOINT (Y/N) COMMENTS

A. QUALITY SURVEILLANCE AND INSPECTION SCHEDULES

1.