Attachment_2NOTM_FSR_QASP_FINAL_12_OCT_2016.pdf

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN

Version – 12 October 2016

For Network-On-The-Move (NOTM) Field Support Representative (FSR) Suport

Contract Number: TBD

Contractor’s name: < upon award, enter contractor name > (hereafter referred to as the contractor).

1. PURPOSE.

This Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (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. However, the Government shall coordinate changes with the contractor. 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.

The following FAR clauses may apply depending on contract type:

52.246-4 Inspection of Services – Fixed-Price

52.246-5 Inspection of Services – Cost-Reimbursement

2. GOVERNMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

a. 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 assure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. The KO is ultimately responsible for the final determination of the adequacy of the contractor’s performance.

Assigned KO: Jodie Shifflett

Organization or Agency: Marine Corps Systems Command

Telephone: (703) 432-9908

Email: Jodie.Shifflett@usmc.mil

Assigned Contract Specialist: Courtney Pruitt

Telephone: (703) 432-9907

Email: Courtney.Pruitt@usmc.mil

c. Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) - The COR is responsible for technical administration of the contract and shall assure proper Government surveillance of the contractor’s performance. The COR shall keep a quality assurance file. At the conclusion of the contract or when requested by the KO, the COR shall provide documentation to the KO. The

COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual changes on the Government’s behalf. The contractor shall refer any changes they deem may affect contract price, terms, or conditions to the KO for action.

Assigned COR: Sam Pitts

Telephone: (703) 432-9892

Email: Sam.C.Pitts@usmc.mil

3. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVES:

The following employees of the contractor serve as the contractor’s Program Manager and Task

Manager for this contract.

a. Program Manager - <upon award, enter name>

Telephone: <enter number>

Email: <enter address>

b. Task Manager - <upon award, enter name>

c. Other Contractor Personnel - <upon award, enter name or delete these lines if not applicable>

Title: <enter title>

4. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Performance standards define desired services. The Government performs surveillance to determine if the contractor exceeds, meets or does not meet these standards.

The Performance Requirements Summary Matrix includes performance standards. The

Government shall use these standards to determine contractor performance and shall compare contractor performance to the Acceptable Quality Level (AQL).

mailto:Courtney.Pruitt@usmc.mil

Desired Outcomes

Performance

Standard

Monitoring

Method

Incentives/Disincentives

(for meeting or not meeting the Performance Standard)

1) CDRLs delivered on time and without error.

(PWS 6.0)

90% of Data Deliverables shall be delivered “on time” by meeting the delivery dates with no flawed information, analysis, assumptions or conclusions; and have a minimum number of minor grammatical errors (i.e., errors on less than 10% of the pages)

COR will review within 30 working days of receipt and log results of all reviews (i.e. CDRL Documents accepted and if rejected, reason for rejection); 100% inspection.

CPARS rating will reflect actual performance.

Corrective Action Report

Contract Discrepancy Report

Positive /Negative

Performance Assessment or

Customer Complaints

2) Sufficient numbers of staff members are available to resolve day-to-day issues. The contractor shall provide qualified employees to adequately staff the FSR Team. (PWS 2.0,4.0,5.0, 6.0, 7.0)

Average staffing levels shall not fall below 85%.

Invoices, reports, and other records will be reviewed to determine staffing levels on a quarterly basis.

CPARS rating will reflect actual performance.

Positive/Negative

Customer Complaints

3) Customer problems shall be resolved as quickly and efficiently as possible. Requests for service shall be efficiently logged and tracked, and the customer shall be notified as to the expected completion time. (PWS 5.0)

90% of Service Requests are resolved within two business days.

Holidays excluded.

NOTM Service Request Forms will be sent to

MCTSSA the same day it is received from the user noting time submitted.

Updates to service requests sent to

MCTSSA the same day as status changes

(i.e. time completed);

random sampling.

Government caused delays shall not be counted against the contractor in evaluating the standard.

CPARS rating will reflect actual performance.

Positive/Negative

Customer Complaints

5. INCENTIVES.

The Government shall use past performance as an incentive. Incentives shall be based on exceeding, meeting, or not meeting performance standards. Incentives shall be in the form of performance ratings documented as exceptional, very good, satisfactory, marginal, and unsatisfactory in the Contractor Performance Rating System (CPARS) as interim and annual reports. CPARS information will be posted into the Past Performance Information Retrieval

System (PPIRS) per the Federal Acquisition Regulation. Remedies will be applied for marginal and unsatisfactory ratings; these may include re-performance at no additional cost, increased surveillance, increased contractor reporting and termination.

6. METHODS OF QA SURVEILLANCE.

Various methods exist to monitor performance. The COR shall use the surveillance methods listed below in the administration of this QASP.

Regardless of the surveillance method, the COR shall always contact the contractor's task manager or on-site representative when a defect is identified and inform the manager of the specifics of the problem. The COR shall be responsible for monitoring the contractor’s performance in meeting a specific performance standard/AQL.

a. DIRECT OBSERVATION. (Can be performed periodically or through 100% surveillance.)

b. PERIODIC INSPECTION. (Uses a comprehensive evaluation of selected outputs.

Inspections may be scheduled [Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or annually] or unscheduled, as required.)

c. USER SURVEY. (Combines elements of validated user complaints and random sampling.

Random survey is conducted to solicit user satisfaction. Appropriate for high quantity activities that have historically been satisfactory. May also generate periodic and 100% inspections.)

d. VALIDATED USER/CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS. (Relies on the user of the service to identify deficiencies. Complaints are then investigated and validated. Highly applicable to services provided in quantity and where quality is highly subjective.)

e. 100% INSPECTION. (Evaluates all outputs. Most applicable to small quantity, but highly important services. May be used where there are written deliverables and stringent requirements such as tasks required by law, safety, or security.)

f. Progress or status meetings.

g. Analysis of contractor's progress reports. (Evaluate cost, schedule, etc.)

Surveillance results may be used as the basis for actions (to include payment deductions) against the contractor. In such cases, the Inspection of Services clause in the Contract becomes the basis for the KO’s actions.

7. RATINGS.

Metrics and methods are designed to determine if performance exceeds, meets, or does not meet a given standard and acceptable quality level. A rating scale shall be used to determine a positive, neutral, or negative outcome. The following ratings shall be used:

EXCEPTIONAL:

Performance significantly exceeds contract requirements to the Government’s benefit.

SATISFACTORY: Performance meets contractual requirements.

UNSATISFACTORY: Performance does not meet contractual requirements.

8. DOCUMENTING PERFORMANCE.

a. ACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.

The Government shall document positive performance. A report template is attached. Any report may become a part of the supporting documentation for CPARs reporting.

b. UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE.

When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. In any case the

COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a

Contract Discrepancy Report (CDR), and present it to the contractor's task manager or on-site representative with a copy to the Contracting Officer. A CDR template is attached to this QASP.

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CDR in writing within 3 days of receipt. The

CDR 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 CDR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the COR. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability.

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

Prepared by: <Enter name>

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative

PERFORMANCE REPORT

1. CONTRACT NUMBER: <insert number>

2. Prepared by: (Name of COR) <insert name>

3. Date and time of observation:

4. Observation:

<Examples of items to include in a report are:

- Method of surveillance.

- How frequently you conducted surveillance.

- Surveillance results.

- Number of observations.>

Prepared by: <Enter COR’s name>

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative Date

CONTRACT DISCREPANCY REPORT (CDR)

1. Contract Number: <insert number>

2. TO: (Contractor Task Manager or on-site representative) <insert name>

3. FROM: (Name of COR) <insert name>

4. Date and time observed discrepancy:

5. DISCREPANCY OR PROBLEM:

<Describe in detail. Identify any attachments.>

5. Corrective action plan:

A written corrective action plan < is / is not > required.

< If a written corrective action plan is required include the following. > The written Corrective

Action Plan will be provided to the undersigned not later than < # days after receipt of this

CDR. >

Prepared by: <Enter COR’s name>

Signature – Contracting Officer’s Representative Date

Received by:

Signature - Contractor Task Manager or on-site representative Date