(2nd dRFP) Attachment 5 PRS_QASP SECREP.doc

July 16, 2020 Quality Assurance Surveillance Program (QASP) and Performance Matrix

1. Purpose. This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a Government developed and applied document used to make sure that systematic quality assurance methods are used in the administration of the Performance Based Service Contract (PBSC) standards included in this contract. The intent is to ensure that the Contractor performs in accordance with performance metrics set forth in the contract documents, that the Government receives the quality of services called for in the contract and that the Government only pays for the acceptable level of services received. This QASP has been developed to provide the standard of surveillance for monitoring the Supply Chain Management Center (SCMC) Logistics Integration Support (LIS) contract. The Contracting Officer (KO) has appointed the COR and COTRs to serve as the Quality Assurance Evaluators (QAEs) and will use this QASP to ensure the standards of the contract are being met. The COR/COTR/QAEs will be referred to as CORs throughout this QASP;

2. Authority: The authority for issuance of this QASP is provided under FAR 52-212-4(a), Inspection/Acceptance, which provides for inspections and acceptance of the articles, services, and documentation called for in the contract to be accomplished by the Contracting Officer or their duly authorized representative.

3. Scope: The Contractor, and not the Government, is responsible for management and quality control actions necessary to meet quality standards set forth by the contract. The QASP is put in place to provide Government surveillance oversight of the Contractor's quality control efforts to assure that they are timely, effective and are delivering the results specified in the contract. The QASP is not a part of the contract nor is it intended to duplicate the Contractor's Management Plan. The Government may provide the Contractor an information copy of the QASP as an Attachment to the solicitation to support the Contractor's efforts in developing its plan for maintaining the levels of quality anticipated to be delivered under the terms of the contract.

4. Responsibilities: The Government resources shall have responsibilities for the implementation of this QASP as follows:

· Contracting Officer - The Contracting Officer ensures performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensures compliance with the terms of the contract and safeguards the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. It is the Contracting Officer that assures the Contractor receives impartial, fair and equitable treatment under the contract. The Contracting Officer is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the Contractor's performance.

· Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR) - An individual designated in writing by the Contracting Officer to act as his authorized representative to assist in administering a contract. The source and authority for the COR is the Contracting Officer. COR limitations are contained in the written letter of appointment.

5. Performance Standards. The QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate the level of services the Contractor is required to furnish pursuant to the contract. The COR will assess the Contractor’s performance to ensure the Contractor is performing up to the specified standards identified in the contract. The performance standards for the Performance Work Statement (PWS) are stated in the Performance Requirements Summary (PRS), appendix 1, included in this QASP. Additional surveillance will be applied to topics listed in the request for proposal (RFP) and affirmed in the subsequent proposal. The standards for this contract are objective since specific metric-driven standards are provided.

6. Management and Oversight. This 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 allow for sufficient unforeseen and uncontrollable issues. Good management and use of an adequate Quality Control Plan (QCP) will allow the Contractor to operate within specific performance requirements.

7. Acceptable Quality Levels (AQLs). AQLs have been established in the attached PRS table (appendix 1) 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 KO has the right to exercise the negative incentives stated in this QASP.

8. Primary Method of Surveillance/Evaluation. The COR will perform evaluation based on using one of the methods outlined below and included in the attached table of this QASP. The COR will have at their disposal Government site employees at each site to assist in these evaluations. If more in depth assistance, equipment specialists can be sent to the each site as need to further evaluate discrepancies/complaints or perform samplings.

· Random inspection: Simple random sampling method in which each unit of the population has an equal chance of being selected. If additional effort is required, local Government employees or equipment specialists can be sent to increase the detail of the sampling. Details of random inspection are included in QASP table on pages 6.

· Defense Contracting Management Agency (DCMA): DCMA may be used to conduct inspection on selective NSNs.

· Customer Surveys and Feedback: Customer feedback may be obtained either from the results of formal customer satisfaction surveys or from random customer complaints. Customer complaints, to be considered valid, must set forth clearly and in writing the detailed nature of the complaint, must be signed and must be forwarded to the Contractor. The Contractor shall maintain a summary log of all formally received customer complaints as well as a copy of each complaint in a documentation file

· Data analysis: Using the Integrators IS, COR records, GCSS-MC, Finance, O&A and Warranty records.

· Product Quality Deficiency Report (PQDR): Review of PQDRs submitted for items repaired on this contract for quality and performance.

9. Negative Incentives. 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 KO promptly for appropriate action. When the performance is below the AQL standard, the Government may implement a negative incentive that includes increased surveillance and/or Contractor reporting, as well as, documentation on the Contractor’s Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). For a missed TAT with no excused acceptable justification, at the time of reconciliation for invoicing, the COR will reduce the cost of repair by a one-time penalty of 1% for each item that missed the contractual TAT. The invoiced amount will be agreed to at that time and reflected in the invoice report.

10. Notification. The COR will notify the KO, in writing, of unacceptable quality levels. The KO will promptly provide written notification of discrepancies on a monthly basis to the Contractor, 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.

11. Response. Upon notification of failure to meet contractually specified quality levels, the Contractor shall provide a written response to the cause and the corrective action to prevent recurrence within 5 working days after receipt of KO’s notification. The Contractor should cite specific quality assurance program procedures or new procedures instituted to prevent recurrence.

12. Records. The COR will maintain contract surveillance files as directed by the KO. Surveillance files will include, in part, the following documentation for this Firm Fixed Price contract:

a. COR designation and appointment letters

b. A copy of the contract and all contract modifications

c. QASP and any other tools, checklists, etc.

d. All correspondence including KO notifications and the Contractor’s responses

e. Contractor monthly status reports

f. Evidence of cost monitoring: invoices certified and tracked against any contract and/or order ceilings

g. Evidence that all materials/equipment obtained under any task order is accounted for and remains in Government possession.

h. Surveillance reports and a summary of the Surveillance Logs will be prepared by the COR, and submitted to the Contracting Officer annually.

i. Out-of-cycle reports may be submitted in support of unacceptable performance identified during the performance period by the COR, or when there is a significant change in performance that alters the assessment in one or more evaluation areas.

j. Annual in-progress reviews will be conducted and entered into CPARS.

13. Ratings. The following criteria will be used for performance evaluations: Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unacceptable. Upward arrow may be used to indicate exceeding AQL and downward arrows may be used to indicate performance below AQL. If performance meets acceptable levels, it will be considered to be satisfactory. If not, overall performance may be considered unsatisfactory.

a. Exceptional: Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

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

c. Satisfactory: Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory..

d. Marginal: Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

e. Unsatisfactory: Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

14. Documentation. Documentation used and referenced to perform surveillance will consist of monthly reports, monthly program review, Contractor plans and procedures, schedules, customer feedback and contract deliverables.

a. Recording Observations. Use Surveillance Logs 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 time the deficiency was discovered, and subsequently requests that the Contractor initial the notation, documenting notification of the deficiency only. (Program Monthly Review serves as a form of surveillance documentation)

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, will probably pinpoint the source of the problem.

c. Documenting Unacceptable Performance. The COR must attempt to resolve the problem with the Contractor. The original log and the attempted solution (along with an evaluation of results) are 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 KO. The Contractor shall complete a response to the unacceptable evaluation if requested by the KO or by its own choice.

15. Taking Action.

a. The COR may evaluate the Contractor’s performance and document any non-compliance, but only the KO may 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 report such to the KO and the program officer make a recommendation to them on appropriate action to take.

16. Documentation. The COR retains a copy of all inspection schedules and surveillance activity logs during the course of the contract, and forwards 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 is promptly forwarded to the KO.

17. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY (PRS). The performance standards are included as an attachment in the PWS.

Objective

(Outcomes)

Responsible

Inspection Incentive/ Disincentive

PQDRs Contract Performance and Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) entry.

FAR Clause 52.212-4

Onetime 1% reduction in cost for a verified missed TAT.

notifications are submitted to COR on time (contract year)

visibility of GFP in contractor possession per contract year

sample of DD1348 delivery and return dates checked against IS transaction input dates CPARS Evaluation

95% system availability

(per contract year)

sample of DD1348 delivery and return dates checked against IS data elements CPARS Evaluation

100% Transfer of GFP using the GFP module on the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) w/in two (2) business days of the transfer date from the Government per contract year

98% w/in 2 business days of transfer from the Government. (contract year)

PIEE GFP module IS COR Calculation CPARS Evaluation

(or higher)

(or higher)

Objective

(Outcomes)

Responsible

Inspection Incentive/ Disincentive

Continuous Process Improvements (CPI)

Report/Present Process Improvement Opportunities as identified and Provide Advice on Recommended Improvements

100% of Quarterly CPI Reports submitted on time per contract year

100% Compliance if a process improvement substantiated by the Government.

Inspection by COR

Quarterly

CDRL Report

Submitted 1st week of the months quarterly

Report submitted on time

CPARS Evaluation