M67001-13-Q-0120_Attachment_4_QASP.doc

M67001-13-Q-0120

QASP

ATTACHMENT 4

Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Radio Reconnaissance Tactical Operators’ Training 2nd Radio Bn., II MEF, Camp Lejeune, NC

M67001-13-Q-0120

1. Purpose. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) has been developed to provide the standard of surveillance for monitoring the contractor’s performance in providing pre-deployment training for the 2nd Radio Battlion, II MEF of Camp Lejeune, North Carolina (see Paragraph 14, Performance Requirements Summary). The Contracting Officer will appoint a Contracting Officer Representative (COR) for this contract. The designated COR will serve as the Quality Assurance Evaluator (QAE) and will use this QASP to ensure the contractor is conforming to the Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements.

2. Performance Standards. The QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate the service the Contractor is required to furnish. The COR will assess the Contractor’s performance to ensure the Contractor is performing up to the specified standards. The performance standards for this performance work statement are stated in the Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) included in this QASP. The standards are subjective for this requirement.

3. Management and Oversight. The QASP is based on the premise that the Contractor and not the Government, is responsible for the management and any Quality Control action required to meet the terms of the contract. The performance requirements recognize that the Contractor is not a perfect manager and that unforeseen requirements and uncontrollable problems do occur. Good management and use of an adequate Quality Control Plan will allow the Contractor to operate within specific performance requirements. QASPs are designed to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating Contractor Performance against the provided standards. The contractor’s quality control plan will be reviewed and approved prior to contract award.

4. Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs). AQLs have been established in the PRS and provide performance standards that the Contractor will meet in performing the contract. In the event the Contractor does not meet the established AQLs, the Contracting Officer has the right to exercise the negative incentives stated in this QASP.

5. Primary Method of Surveillance / Evaluation. The COR will perform the evaluation based on using one of the various methods outlined in the PRS table included in this QASP. The following methods may be incorporated into the PRS to monitor contract performance:

Periodic Inspection / Planned Sampling: Period inspection, or planned sampling, involves the development of a surveillance plan based on subjective judgment and analysis of available agency resources to determine which tasks to inspect and how frequently to inspect them.

100% inspection: Inspection where specific characteristics of every performance unit are examined and tested to determine conformance with requirements.

Random inspection: Sampling method in which each unit of the population has an equal chance of being selected.

Customer Surveys and Feedback: A review method where customers and end users are surveyed to provide input on specific service levels.

6. Substandard Performance. If any of the performance requirements do not meet the AQL set in the PRS table, the COR shall document the discrepancy(s) and shall notify the Contracting Officer promptly. The Contracting Officer will then take the appropriate action with the contractor to remedy the substandard performance. When the performance is below the AQL standard, the Government may implement increased surveillance, document poor performance history ratings, or begin termination for default procedures.

7. Notification. The COR will notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, of unacceptable quality levels. The Contracting Officer will promptly provide written notification of discrepancies as they occur, or immediately if the situation significantly affects the well-being of the project. The Contractor will be given the opportunity to respond, in writing, to each discrepancy.

8. Response. The Contractor shall provide a written response to the cause and the corrective action to prevent recurrence within two (2) working days after receipt of Contracting Officer’s notification. The Contractor shall cite specific quality assurance program procedures or new procedures instituted to prevent recurrence.

9. Records. The COR will maintain contract surveillance files as directed by the Contracting Officer. Surveillance files will include, at a minimum, the following documentation for this contract:

a. A copy of the contract and all contract modifications.

b. QASP, Quality Control Plan, and any other monitoring tools and checklists.

c. All correspondence including Contracting Officer notifications and the Contractor’s response.

d. Contractor reports, i.e., training plans, course outlines, maintenance and training anomalies.

e. Surveillance reports and a summary of the surveillance logs prepared by the COR and submitted to the Contracting Officer.

f. Copies of deficiency reports that may be submitted in support of unacceptable performance identified during the performance period by the COR, or when there is a significant change in the assessment in one or more evaluation areas.

10. Ratings. The following criteria will be used for performance evaluations: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory. Upward or downward arrows may be used to indicate an improving or worsening trend insufficient to change the assessment status.

a. Exceptional. Indicates performance clearly exceeds contractual requirements. There were no problems requiring corrective action.

b. Very Good. Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the tasks and sub-task being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

c. Good. Indicates performance clearly meets contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains some minor problems for which the corrective actions appear satisfactory.

d. Marginal. Indicates performance meets contractual requirements. The area of evaluation contains one or more serious problems for which corrective actions have not yet been identified, appear only marginally effective, or have not been fully implemented.

e. Unsatisfactory. Indicates the Contractor is in danger of not being able to satisfy contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The area of evaluation contains one or more serious problems for which the corrective actions appear ineffective.

11. Documentation. Documentation used and referenced to perform surveillance will consist of contractor procedures, customer feedback and contract data requirements.

a. Recording Observations. Surveillance Logs will be used to record information on scheduled observations and deficiencies noted. Each observation is recorded on the log. The documents then become a formal record for reference. The Contractor is to be told each time that a deficiency is found during scheduled observations. The COR makes a notation on the Surveillance Log of the date and the time the deficiency was discovered, then, the COR asks a contractor task leader to initial the notation, documenting notification of the deficiency only.

b. Potential Unacceptable Performance. The COR must identify the specific service that is unacceptable and the possible causes, and ask a number of questions which if answered, are intended to pinpoint the source of the problem.

c. Documenting Unacceptable Performance. The COR should make every attempt to resolve the problem with the Contractor. The original log and the attempted solution (along with an evaluation of results) shall be forwarded to the Contracting Officer through the COR.

Based on the severity of the discrepancy and the success of the solution, the COR will notify the Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall complete a response to the unacceptable condition if requested by the Contracting Officer.

12. Taking Action.

a. The COR shall evaluate the contractor’s performance and document any non-compliance, and report it to the Contracting Officer to take action against the contractor for an unacceptable rating.

b. When the Contractor’s performance is unacceptable and a formal action is indicated, the COR will determine what action is appropriate for the specific circumstances and make a recommendation to the Contracting Officer.

13. Documentation. The COR shall retain a copy of all inspection schedules and surveillance activity logs during the course of the contract, and shall forward them for inclusion in the contract file at the end of the surveillance period. However, when a specific service becomes unsatisfactory during a surveillance period, the inspection documentation supporting the contract discrepancy report shall be forwarded to the Contracting Officer at the earliest opportunity.

When performance does not meet the specifications and requirements of this contract, written (letter, fax, or email) documentation will be furnished explaining how performance is considered unacceptable. This documentation should state what specification(s) is not being performed (reference contract paragraph number(s), date and time observed) and submit to the CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR within two work days of each occurrence.

14. Performance Requirements Summary (PRS). The performance standards for this SOW are stated in the PRS below.

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PWS para. 4.0)

· Adhere to training schedules

· Provide accurate and current instruction tailored to the individual needs of each student

· Student Survey and Feedback

· Periodically monitor training course

· Review complaint logs

· Zero major & less than 3 minor defects per course

· Schedule course dates met Government requirements 100% of the time

· Receive no valid complaints* from students concerning method & delivery of instruction

Option Exercise

Favorable Past Performance Reporting

· Adhere to training schedules

· Provide accurate and current instruction tailored to the individual needs of each student

· Student Survey and Feedback

· Periodically monitor training course

· Review complaint logs

· Zero major & less than 3 minor defects per course

· Schedule course dates met Government requirements 100% of the time

· Receive no valid complaints* from students concerning method & delivery of instruction

Option Exercise

Favorable Past Performance Reporting

* A valid complaint is one that has been investigated by the COR and has been determined to relate to the efficacy of instruction.